Memorandum 67
Supplementary memorandum from Dr Stephen
Minger, Director, Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, Wolfson Centre
for Age-Related Disease, King's College London
ADDITIONAL DETAILS REGARDING THE TESTING
OF HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL LINES FOR PLURIPOTENCY
It will be necessary to test all human embryonic
stem cell lines, those derived from both SCNT- and IVF-derived
embryos, to ensure that the cells lines are pluripotent, that
is capable of differentiating into cells of all three germ layers
and thus into a wide range of cell types. The general methods
for determining pluripotency are to:
a) allow embryonic stem cells to spontaneously
differentiate or to use published differentiation protocols and
then look for the generation of a number of different cell types
across the three germ layers using markers that recognise specific
cell types. The cells can thus be screened using immunocytochemistry
against proteins expressed on various cells and tissue types or
molecular teachniques (eg PCR) to look for the expression of very
specific genes. This is the most standard and easiest test and
one that every group uses.
b) to inject undifferentiated cells into
the kidney capsule, testes or subcutaneously into mice lacking
an immune system (SCIDs), where they will not be rejected by the
mouse as foreign tissues. The hES cells will slowly differentiate
into a wide variety of somatic stem cell populations, but will
continue to grow as a disorganised mass of cells (referred to
as teratomas which are benign tumours) representative of all three
germ layers. Once the tumours are large enough to be felt, the
mice are killed and the tumours are examined histologically for
the presence of tissues representative of all three germ layers.
The advantage of this test is that the differentiation patterns
of the cells are more complex due to the influence of the in vivo
environment and one observes more complex structured tissues such
as glands, neural tube-like formation, gut and epithelium. This
process however, is more expensive, time consuming and requires
Home Office approval and licensing, but many researcher believe
that this is a more rigorous test of pluripotency and should be
required for all published cell lines.
c) inject labelled undifferentiated stem
cells back into the environment from which they were derived,
that is back into the inner cell mass of a developing blastocyst
which is then implanted into a surrogate uterus. The resultant
chimeric embryo can either be killed at mid-gestation when most
of the organs have already been generated or the chimera could
be allowed to proceed to term or adulthood. In either case, the
chimera is then analysed for the presence of the labelled human
cells in all major tissue types, such as the heart, brain, lungs,
liver, bone marrow, skeletal muscle, and reproductive organs.
If hES cells are truly pluripotent one would expect to find that
the cells have been incorporated into all tissues, assuming that
the gestational period is adequate for differentiation and integration
to have occurred. To the best of my knowledge, this has only been
performed in the US using mouse blastocysts. I was told confidentially
that the mice has been killed on embryonic day 15 (normal gestation
takes about 21 days) and the cells had not integrated into the
mouse in a developmentally coherent fashion but had remained as
an isolated clump of cells. There is also a published report (James
et al., 2006, Devel Biol, 295, 90-102) where hES cells were injected
into mouse blastocysts and the embryo were killed on gestation
day eight which is very early in development and most of the tissues
would not have formed. The majority of the embryo either did not
contain cells or were developmentally abnormal. Only one of out
28 embryos appeared to be phenotypically normal and only had 10
visible human ES cells within the foregut and primordial brain.
As you've already heard from Professor Austin
Smith, very few of us in the scientific community think this last
set of experiments are required or necessary to prove pluripotency.
However, it could be that there are fundamental biological or
therapeutic questions that might be answered in the future using
this approach. I would recommend that the generation of chimeric
embryos not be banned but rather regulated by the Home Office
like all forms of animal experimentation. If and when applications
to generate chimeric animals are received by the Home Office,
I would recommend that specialist scientists and bioethicists
be recruited and asked to provide peer review and a clear demonstration
that this is necessary and important research before a license
to generate chimera is granted.
February 2007
|