Faculty Opinions recommendation of Live cell imaging distinguishes bona fide human iPS cells from partially reprogrammed cells.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Somatic cells can be reprogrammed into induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells by enforced expression of transcription factors. Using serial live imaging of human fibroblasts undergoing reprogramming, we identified distinct colony types that morphologically resemble embryonic stem (ES) cells yet differ in molecular phenotype and differentiation potential. By analyzing expression of pluripotency markers, methylation at the OCT4 and NANOG promoters and differentiation into teratomas, we determined that only one colony type represents true iPS cells, whereas the others represent reprogramming intermediates. Proviral silencing and expression of TRA-1-60, DNMT3B and REX1 can be used to distinguish the fully reprogrammed state, whereas alkaline phosphatase, SSEA-4, GDF3, hTERT and NANOG are insufficient as markers. We also show that reprogramming using chemically defined medium favors formation of fully reprogrammed over partially reprogrammed colonies. Our data define molecular markers of the fully reprogrammed state and highlight the need for rigorous characterization and standardization of putative iPS cells. PMID: 19826408 Funding information This work was supported by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canada
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.063 | 0.038 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".