ABSTRACT
There is a need for comparative studies to determine which cell types are better candidates to remedy ischemia. Here, we compared human AC133(+) cells and multipotent adult progenitor cells (hMAPC) in a mouse model reminiscent of critical limb ischemia. hMAPC or hAC133(+) cell transplantation induced a significant improvement in tissue perfusion (measured by microPET) 15 days posttransplantation compared to controls. This improvement persisted for 30 days in hMAPC-treated but not in hAC133(+)-injected animals. While transplantation of hAC133(+) cells promoted capillary growth, hMAPC transplantation also induced collateral expansion, decreased muscle necrosis/fibrosis, and improved muscle regeneration. Incorporation of differentiated hAC133(+) or hMAPC progeny into new vessels was limited; however, a paracrine angio/arteriogenic effect was demonstrated in animals treated with hMAPC. Accordingly, hMAPC-conditioned, but not hAC133(+)-conditioned, media stimulated vascular cell proliferation and prevented myoblast, endothelial, and smooth muscle cell apoptosis in vitro. Our study suggests that although hAC133(+) cell and hMAPC transplantation both contribute to vascular regeneration in ischemic limbs, hMAPC exert a more robust effect through trophic mechanisms, which translated into collateral and muscle fiber regeneration. This, in turn, conferred tissue protection and regeneration with longer term functional improvement.
Subject(s)
Adult Stem Cells/cytology , Antigens, CD/metabolism , Glycoproteins/metabolism , Hindlimb/blood supply , Ischemia/therapy , Multipotent Stem Cells/cytology , Peptides/metabolism , Stem Cell Transplantation , AC133 Antigen , Animals , Apoptosis , Blood Vessels/growth & development , Cell Proliferation , Cytoprotection , Hindlimb/pathology , Humans , Ischemia/pathology , Male , Mice , Mice, Nude , Muscles/physiopathology , Neovascularization, Physiologic , Regeneration , Reperfusion , Tissue SurvivalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The therapeutic use of multipotent stem cells depends on their differentiation potential, which has been shown to be variable for different populations. These differences are likely to be the result of key changes in their epigenetic profiles. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: to address this issue, we have investigated the levels of epigenetic regulation in well characterized populations of pluripotent embryonic stem cells (ESC) and multipotent adult stem cells (ASC) at the trancriptome, methylome, histone modification and microRNA levels. Differences in gene expression profiles allowed classification of stem cells into three separate populations including ESC, multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPC) and mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC). The analysis of the PcG repressive marks, histone modifications and gene promoter methylation of differentiation and pluripotency genes demonstrated that stem cell populations with a wider differentiation potential (ESC and MAPC) showed stronger representation of epigenetic repressive marks in differentiation genes and that this epigenetic signature was progressively lost with restriction of stem cell potential. Our analysis of microRNA established specific microRNA signatures suggesting specific microRNAs involved in regulation of pluripotent and differentiation genes. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study leads us to propose a model where the level of epigenetic regulation, as a combination of DNA methylation and histone modification marks, at differentiation genes defines degrees of differentiation potential from progenitor and multipotent stem cells to pluripotent stem cells.
