Please wait a minute...
Protein & Cell

ISSN 1674-800X

ISSN 1674-8018(Online)

CN 11-5886/Q

Postal Subscription Code 80-984

2018 Impact Factor: 7.575

Protein Cell    2017, Vol. 8 Issue (10) : 724-734    https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-017-0402-x
REVIEW
Molecular barriers to direct cardiac reprogramming
Haley Vaseghi, Jiandong Liu, Li Qian()
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, McAllister Heart Institute, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
 Download: PDF(506 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Myocardial infarction afflicts close to three quarters of a million Americans annually, resulting in reduced heart function, arrhythmia, and frequently death. Cardiomyocyte death reduces the heart’s pump capacity while the deposition of a non-conductive scar incurs the risk of arrhythmia. Direct cardiac reprogramming emerged as a novel technology to simultaneously reduce scar tissue and generate new cardiomyocytes to restore cardiac function. This technology converts endogenous cardiac fibroblasts directly into induced cardiomyocyte-like cells using a variety of cocktails including transcription factors, microRNAs, and small molecules. Although promising, direct cardiac reprogramming is still in its fledging phase, and numerous barriers have to be overcome prior to its clinical application. This review discusses current findings to optimize reprogramming efficiency, including reprogramming factor cocktails and stoichiometry, epigenetic barriers to cell fate reprogramming, incomplete conversion and residual fibroblast identity, requisite growth factors, and environmental cues. Finally, we address the current challenges and future directions for the field.

Keywords cardiac reprogramming      myocardial infarction      epigenetics      heart regeneration     
Corresponding Author(s): Li Qian   
Issue Date: 06 November 2017
 Cite this article:   
Haley Vaseghi,Jiandong Liu,Li Qian. Molecular barriers to direct cardiac reprogramming[J]. Protein Cell, 2017, 8(10): 724-734.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/pac/EN/10.1007/s13238-017-0402-x
https://academic.hep.com.cn/pac/EN/Y2017/V8/I10/724
1 AbadMet al. (2017) Notch inhibition enhances cardiac reprogramming by increasing MEF2C transcriptional activity.Stem Cell Rep. doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.01.025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.01.025
2 AddisRCet al. (2013) Optimization of direct fibroblast reprogramming to cardiomyocytes using calcium activity as a functional measure of success.J Mol Cell Cardiol60:97–106
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjmcc.2013.04.004
3 ChenHPet al. (2011) HDAC inhibition promotes cardiogenesis and the survival of embryonic stem cells through proteasome-dependent pathway.J Cell Biochem112:3246–3255
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcb.23251
4 ChopraAet al. (2012) Reprogramming cardiomyocyte mechanosensing by crosstalk between integrins and hyaluronic acid receptors.J Biomech45:824–831
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.11.023
5 ChristoforouNet al. (2013) Transcription factors MYOCD, SRF, Mesp1 and SMARCD3 enhance the cardio-inducing effect of GATA4, TBX5, and MEF2C during direct cellular reprogramming.PloS One8:e63577
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063577
6 Dal-PraS, HodgkinsonCP, MirotsouM, KirsteI, DzauVJ (2017) Demethylation of H3K27 is essential for the induction of direct cardiac reprogramming by miR combo.Circ Res. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.308741
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.308741
7 FuYet al. (2015) Direct reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes with chemical cocktails.Cell Res25:1013–1024
https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2015.99
8 Heart Attack Facts & Statistics|cdc.gov (2016) . Accessed 7 Nov 2016
9 Heart Disease Fact Sheet|Data & Statistics|DHDSP|CDC (2016) . Accessed 7 Nov 2016
10 HiraiH, KikyoN (2014) Inhibitors of suppressive histone modification promote direct reprogramming of fibroblasts to cardiomyocytelike cells.Cardiovasc Res102:188–190
https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvu023
11 IedaMet al. (2010) Direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into functional cardiomyocytes by defined factors.Cell142:375–386
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.07.002
12 IfkovitsJL, AddisRC, EpsteinJA, GearhartJD (2014) Inhibition of TGFβ signaling increases direct conversion of fibroblasts to induced cardiomyocytes.PloS One9:e89678
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089678
13 InagawaKet al. (2012) Induction of cardiomyocyte-like cells in infarct hearts by gene transfer of Gata4, Mef2c, and Tbx5.Circ Res111:1147–1156
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.112.271148
14 JayawardenaTMet al. (2012) MicroRNA-mediated in vitro and in vivo direct reprogramming of cardiac fibroblasts to cardiomyocytes.Circ Res110:1465–1473
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.112.269035
15 JayawardenaTMet al. (2015) MicroRNA induced cardiac reprogramming in vivo: evidence for mature cardiac myocytes and improved cardiac function.Circ Res116:418–424
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.304510
16 KaramboulasCet al. (2006) HDAC activity regulates entry of mesoderm cells into the cardiac muscle lineage.J Cell Sci119:4305–4314
https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.03185
17 KongYP, CarrionB, SinghRK, PutnamAJ (2013) Matrix identity and tractional forces influence indirect cardiac reprogramming.Sci Rep3:3474
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03474
18 LiYet al. (2016) Tissue-engineered 3-dimensional (3D) microenvironment enhances the direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes by microRNAs.Sci Rep6:38815
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38815
19 LinZ, PuWT (2014) Strategies for cardiac regeneration and repair.Sci Transl Med6(239):239rv1
https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3006681
20 LiuZet al. (2016a) Re-patterning of H3K27me3, H3K4me3 and DNA methylation during fibroblast conversion into induced cardiomyocytes.Stem Cell Res16:507–518
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scr.2016.02.037
21 LiuLet al. (2016b) Targeting Mll1 H3K4 methyltransferase activity to guide cardiac lineage specific reprogramming of fibroblasts.Cell Discov2:16036
https://doi.org/10.1038/celldisc.2016.36
22 MaH, WangL, YinC, LiuJ, QianL (2015) In vivo cardiac reprogramming using an optimal single polycistronic construct.Cardiovasc Res108:217–219
https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvv223
23 MathisonMet al. (2012) In vivo cardiac cellular reprogramming efficacy is enhanced by angiogenic preconditioning of the infarcted myocardium with vascular endothelial growth factor.J Am Heart Assoc1:e005652
https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.112.005652
24 MathisonMet al. (2014) ‘Triplet’ polycistronic vectors encoding Gata4, Mef2c, and Tbx5 enhances postinfarct ventricular functional improvement compared with singlet vectors.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg148(1656):1664.e2
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.03.033
25 McKinseyTA, OlsonEN (2004) Cardiac histone acetylation–therapeutic opportunities abound.Trends Genet TIG20:206–213
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2004.02.002
26 MiskaEAet al. (1999) HDAC4 deacetylase associates with and represses the MEF2 transcription factor.EMBO J18:5099–5107
https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/18.18.5099
27 MohamedTMAet al. (2016) Chemical enhancement of in vitro and in vivo direct cardiac reprogramming.Circulation. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024692
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024692
28 MorezCet al. (2015) Enhanced efficiency of genetic programming toward cardiomyocyte creation through topographical cues.Biomaterials70:94–104
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.07.063
29 MuraokaNet al. (2014) MiR-133 promotes cardiac reprogramming by directly repressing Snai1 and silencing fibroblast signatures.EMBO J33:1565–1581
https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201387605
30 ProtzeSet al. (2012) A new approach to transcription factor screening for reprogramming of fibroblasts to cardiomyocyte-like cells.J Mol Cell Cardiol53:323–332
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjmcc.2012.04.010
31 QianLet al. (2012) In vivo reprogramming of murine cardiac fibroblasts into induced cardiomyocytes.Nature485:593–598
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11044
32 SiaJ, YuP, SrivastavaD, LiS (2016) Effect of biophysical cues on reprogramming to cardiomyocytes.Biomaterials103:1–11
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.06.034
33 SongKet al. (2012) Heart repair by reprogramming non-myocytes with cardiac transcription factors.Nature485:599–604
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11139
34 TakeuchiJK, BruneauBG (2009) Directed transdifferentiation of mouse mesoderm to heart tissue by defined factors.Nature459:708–711
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08039
35 VaseghiHRet al. (2016) Generation of an inducible fibroblast cell line for studying direct cardiac reprogramming.Genesis2000 (54):398–406
https://doi.org/10.1002/dvg.22947
36 WangHet al. (2014) Small molecules enable cardiac reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts with a single factor, Oct4.Cell Rep6:951–960
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2014.01.038
37 WangLet al. (2015a) Stoichiometry of Gata4, Mef2c, and Tbx5 influences the efficiency and quality of induced cardiac myocyte reprogramming.Circ Res116:237–244
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.305547
38 WangLet al. (2015b) Improved generation of induced cardiomyocytes using a polycistronic construct expressing optimal ratio of Gata4, Mef2c and Tbx5.J Vis Exp JoVE. doi:10.3791/53426
https://doi.org/10.3791/53426
39 YamakawaHet al. (2015) Fibroblast growth factors and vascular endothelial growth factor promote cardiac reprogramming under defined conditions.Stem Cell Rep5:1128–1142
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2015.10.019
40 ZhaoYet al. (2015) High-efficiency reprogramming of fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes requires suppression of pro-fibrotic signalling.Nat Commun6:8243
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9243
41 ZhouH, DicksonME, KimMS, Bassel-DubyR, OlsonEN (2015) Akt1/protein kinase B enhances transcriptional reprogramming of fibroblasts to functional cardiomyocytes.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA112:11864–11869
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516237112
42 ZhouYet al. (2016) Bmi1 is a key epigenetic barrier to direct cardiac reprogramming.Cell Stem Cell18:382–395
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2016.02.003
[1] Mona Teng, Stanley Zhou, Changmeng Cai, Mathieu Lupien, Housheng Hansen He. Pioneer of prostate cancer: past, present and the future of FOXA1[J]. Protein Cell, 2021, 12(1): 29-38.
[2] Qingfei Zheng, Igor Maksimovic, Akhil Upad, Yael David. Non-enzymatic covalent modifications: a new link between metabolism and epigenetics[J]. Protein Cell, 2020, 11(6): 401-416.
[3] Lin-Yong Zhao, Jinghui Song, Yibin Liu, Chun-Xiao Song, Chengqi Yi. Mapping the epigenetic modifications of DNA and RNA[J]. Protein Cell, 2020, 11(11): 792-808.
[4] Lili Yu, Kai-yuan Ji, Jian Zhang, Yanxia Xu, Yue Ying, Taoyi Mai, Shuxiang Xu, Qian-bing Zhang, Kai-tai Yao, Yang Xu. Core pluripotency factors promote glycolysis of human embryonic stem cells by activating GLUT1 enhancer[J]. Protein Cell, 2019, 10(9): 668-680.
[5] Xiangxian Zhang, Li Liu, Xia Yuan, Yuquan Wei, Xiawei Wei. JMJD3 in the regulation of human diseases[J]. Protein Cell, 2019, 10(12): 864-882.
[6] Donglu Wu, Yong Cai, Jingji Jin. Potential coordination role between O-GlcNAcylation and epigenetics[J]. Protein Cell, 2017, 8(10): 713-723.
[7] David M. Roy,Logan A. Walsh,Timothy A. Chan. Driver mutations of cancer epigenomes[J]. Protein Cell, 2014, 5(4): 265-296.
[8] Yeqing Angela Yang, Jindan Yu. EZH2, an epigenetic driver of prostate cancer[J]. Prot Cell, 2013, 4(5): 331-341.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed