iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Scientists Trick Cells Into Switching Identities

MALCOLM RITTER   11/29/10 01:59 PM ET   AP

Cells

NEW YORK — Scientists are reporting early success at transforming one kind of specialized cell into another, a feat of biological alchemy that doctors may someday perform inside a patient's body to restore health.

So if a heart attack damages muscle tissue in the heart, for example, doctors may someday be able to get other cells in that organ to become muscle to help the heart pump.

That's a futuristic idea, but researchers are enthusiastic about the potential for the new direct-conversion approach.

"I think everyone believes this is really the future of so-called stem-cell biology," says John Gearhart of the University of Pennsylvania, one of many researchers pursuing this approach.

The concept is two steps beyond the familiar story of embryonic stem cells, versatile entities that can be coaxed to become cells of all types, like brain and blood. Scientists are learning to guide those transformations, which someday may provide transplant tissue for treating diseases like Parkinson's or diabetes.

It's still experimental. But at its root, it's really just harnessing and speeding up what happens in nature: a versatile but immature cell matures into a more specialized one.

The first step beyond that came in 2007, when researchers reversed the process. They got skin cells to revert to a state resembling embryonic stem cells. That opened the door to a two-part strategy: turn skin cells from a person into stem cells in the lab, and then run the clock forward to get whatever specialized cell you want for transplant.

The new direct-conversion approach avoids embryonic stem cells and the whole notion of returning to an early state. Why not just go directly from one specialized cell to another? It's like flying direct rather than scheduling a stopover.

Even short of researchers' dreams of fixing internal organs from within, Gearhart says direct conversion may offer some other advantages over more established ways of producing specialized cells. Using embryonic stem cells is proving to be inefficient and more difficult than expected, scientists say. For example, the heart muscle cells developed from them aren't fully mature, Gearhart noted.

And there's no satisfactory way yet to make mature insulin-producing cells of the pancreas, which might be useful for treating diabetes, says George Daley of Children's Hospital Boston and the Harvard Stem Cell Institute.

So direct conversion might offer a more efficient and faster way of getting the kinds of cells scientists want.

A glimpse of what might be possible through direct conversion emerged in 2008. Researchers got one kind of pancreatic cell to turn into another kind within living mice.

But far more dramatic changes have been reported in the past year in lab dishes, with scientists converting mouse skin cells into nerve cells and heart muscle cells. And just this month came success with human cells, turning skin cells into early stage blood cells.

The secret to these transformations is the fact that all cells of a person's body carry the same DNA code. But not all the genes are active at any one time. In fact, a cell's identity depends on its lineup of active genes. So, to convert a cell, scientists alter that combination by inserting chemical signals to activate particular genes.

"This is something that's really caught fire because it's an easy strategy to use," Gearhart said. "Everyone's out there trying their different combinations (of chemical signals) to see if they can succeed."

But success is not so easy. "There's a lot of experiments failing," Daley said. "A lot of people are just taking a trial-and-error approach, and that's fundamentally inefficient. And yet, it may create a breakthrough."

Even when the experiments work, there are plenty of questions to answer. Can this technique reliably produce transformed cells? Are these new cells normal? Or do they retain some hidden vestiges of their original identity that might cause trouble later on?

"When we make a duck look like a cat, it may look like a cat and meow, but whether it still has feathers is an issue," Daley said.

And ultimately: Would it be safe to transplant these cells into patients?

"We're a long way from showing safety and efficacy for any of these things," Gearhart said. "This stuff is all so new that we have a lot of work to do."

In any case, he and Daley said, scientists will still work with embryonic stem cells and the man-made versions first produced in 2007, called iPS cells. Those technologies clearly have places in various kinds of research, and it's not yet clear whether they or direct conversion will eventually prove best for manufacturing replacement cells for people.

That question, Daley said, "is way, way open."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 745
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
04:47 PM on 12/07/2010
I was surprised, and a little disappointed, that the article didn't mention the branch of science that this research falls under.

It's epigenetics, folks. DNA stretched out is VERY long and all coiled up it can't be read for transcriptions (eventually) into protiens. So, some molecules help keep some sections of DNA unwound and available for transcription, and understanding this mechanism is the focus of of epigenetics...
07:48 PM on 12/06/2010
This is really cool!
12:26 PM on 12/03/2010
What if this leads to science treating diseases in a new way? For example: instead of anti-viral meds, which are expensive to produce and to purchase, or some forms of really dangerous cancer treatments, why not "teach" the actual disease to become a functioning, healthy part of the human system it is affecting? If a cancer cell mutates, and attacks healthy cells, why can't we tell it to stop attacking? What if we were able to alter the genetic coding in viral entities, and could make them start working for the person, instead of against?

Stem Cell research, organ regeneration and overall health for the human race could benefit immensely from this type of scientific research! In this era of AIDS, cancer of all kinds, Alzheimer's and many, many more debilitating diseases, breakthroughs of this kind should absolutely be applauded. The potential to reduce medical costs, and our society's reliance on prescription meds should be a primary concern, as well as quality of life!
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
04:36 PM on 12/07/2010
"If a cancer cell mutates, and attacks healthy cells"

...Cancer is the unregulated - or insufficiently regulated - growth (replication) of a cell. Cancer cells do not "attack," they're just "extra."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Velvettazz
Finer than frog hair split three ways
11:20 AM on 12/01/2010
Just because we can do it, should we be doing it? As long as greed prevails, the purity of science will be futile.
05:39 PM on 12/01/2010
Why shouldn't we?
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
04:37 PM on 12/07/2010
Velvettazz is clearly just a ludite - a ludite who uses a computer. Yes, oxymoronic, but apparently true!
10:42 AM on 12/01/2010
This is a great breakthough. It's one step closer to recreating failed organs instead of transplanting them. No rejection complications and long waits in line for limited organ supplies.
12:23 AM on 12/01/2010
To advance this study, sample John McCain's cells...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
disgustedwithall
USA not free/safer if citizen requires gun for it.
02:47 PM on 11/30/2010
What wonderful sciences we have, if only the leaders told their people's of them and the people's demanded more sciences, and less greed and power mongering. But then one can dream of integrity and moral honesty of leaders, demanding and getting it is quite another state. Anyway, this science thing across the board, from this to space, is simply amazing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kris Bui
01:20 PM on 11/30/2010
What's so impressive? Politicians have been doing that for years!
photo
PathofTotality
Who is Watching the Watchers
12:34 PM on 11/30/2010
Good stuff and though I doubt I'll see the end result maybe my kids or grand kids will. I think I'll start keeping a journal for them of things to check on in the future.

As for the religious aspect, based on the Bible, God made man in his own image which IMO uncludes the brain. Also the 10 rules or Commandments to love by didn't have "Thou shalt remain ignorant".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MaybeMilo
"You can't fight in here. This is the War room!"
07:10 AM on 11/30/2010
"If God wanted people to live forever, He would have made them immortal."

?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
a space alien
06:16 AM on 11/30/2010
theubermensch posted this below: "Just like a religious fanatic you feel superior to all and ignore the truth of your death. Instead of god, you pray to the men in white coats to keep you around a little longer. How pathetic."

But I thought I'd respond in a separate post so to share with more of you. An excerpt from my blog about religion:

"Science was never meant to be God. Instead science discovers truths that were previously thought to be the work of God because we didn't know anything yet other than whatever explanations we made up from lack of scientific knowledge. Science doesn't demand worship or respect like any god does. You don't pray to science, you don't offer it sacrificial lambs or burn incense for it. And you certainly don't hijack and fly planes into skyscrapers in the name of science, or blow up abortion clinics and mur der doctors in the name of science."
05:52 PM on 12/01/2010
Another difference: If (say) the Inquisition had succeeded in forcing Martin Luther to recant, that would have meant the end of the movement he founded. But when the Inquisition forced Galileo to recant, nobody paid any attention. It was his logic and data that carried the day, not the fact that an old man could be forced to deny the truth under threat of torture. Probably Galileo knew this. Similarly, under Stalin, many biologists were forced to repudiate Mendel in favor of the Lysenkoist claptrap. Today, in Russia they teach Mendelian genetics. In the end, the human creature is irrelevant; the truth lives on.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fishnetdiver
God hates facts!
02:31 AM on 11/30/2010
Science is so freakin' cool.
04:29 AM on 11/30/2010
That it is ...................
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wvprogressive2011
communist & utterly hopeless idealist :)
01:54 AM on 11/30/2010
There is no excuse for opposing stem cell research. No excuse, no justification, no reason whatsoever. And I am absolutely ecstatic with this development and hope more come quickly! It may be too late for my father, who has Parkinson's, but eventually millions of lives will be saved and radically altered for the better of humanity.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
disgustedwithall
USA not free/safer if citizen requires gun for it.
02:49 PM on 11/30/2010
For now, you forgot the part about "if they can afford it" as that is the morality of our current god, greed/
01:34 AM on 11/30/2010
Science. It works bitches!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Katzencats
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
01:01 AM on 11/30/2010
This is splendid news & I'm glad I'm alive to see the beginnings of the research into applications.

I remember the first heart transplant (Louis Washkansky), how miraculous it was. Of course, the God-Squad around the world thought it was messing with G o d's Will, the devil's work, blah, blah, blah. However, Science & Medicine persevered & now nobody thinks anything about transplants.

I hope I'm still alive when cell manipulation is as ordinary. Imagine no longer having to hope/wait for used parts, but using the body's own resources to heal itself.