|Authors||Sackett SD, Brown ME, Tremmel DM, Ellis T, Burlingham WJ, Odorico JS|
|Journal||Transplant Rev (Orlando) Volume: 30 Issue: 2 Pages: 61-70|
|Publish Date||2016 Apr|
Tissues derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are a promising source of cells for building various regenerative medicine therapies; from simply transplanting cells to reseeding decellularized organs to reconstructing multicellular tissues. Although reprogramming strategies for producing iPSCs have improved, the clinical use of iPSCs is limited by the presence of unique human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes, the main immunologic barrier to transplantation. In order to overcome the immunological hurdles associated with allogeneic tissues and organs, the generation of patient-histocompatible iPSCs (autologous or HLA-matched cells) provides an attractive platform for personalized medicine. However, concerns have been raised as to the fitness, safety and immunogenicity of iPSC derivatives because of variable differentiation potential of different lines and the identification of genetic and epigenetic aberrations that can occur during the reprogramming process. In addition, significant cost and regulatory barriers may deter commercialization of patient specific therapies in the short-term. Nonetheless, recent studies provide some evidence of immunological benefit for using autologous iPSCs. Yet, more studies are needed to evaluate the immunogenicity of various autologous and allogeneic human iPSC-derived cell types as well as test various methods to abrogate rejection. Here, we present perspectives of using allogeneic vs. autologous iPSCs for transplantation therapies and the advantages and disadvantages of each related to differentiation potential, immunogenicity, genetic stability and tumorigenicity. We also review the current literature on the immunogenicity of syngeneic iPSCs and discuss evidence that questions the feasibility of HLA-matched iPSC banks. Finally, we will discuss emerging methods of abrogating or reducing host immune responses to PSC derivatives.
|Full Text||Full text available on PubMed Central|