4.8 Article

Human muscle-derived CLEC14A-positive cells regenerate muscle independent of PAX7

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 10, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13650-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG SP 1152/12-1, DFG RA 838/8-2, ANR-15-OE13-0011-SATNET]
  2. International Research Training Program MyoGrad (DFG) [IGK1631]
  3. Clinician Scientist Program of the Berlin Institute of Health
  4. Berlin Institute of Health through the Helmholtz Society through Helmholtz Excellence Network for Neurocure [BIH CRG2aTP7, HFG ExNet-0036-phase2-3]
  5. Duchenne Parents Project France
  6. Association Monegasque Contre les Myopathies
  7. Foundation Gisela Krebs at the Max Delbruck Center for Molecular Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Skeletal muscle stem cells, called satellite cells and defined by the transcription factor PAX7, are responsible for postnatal muscle growth, homeostasis and regeneration. Attempts to utilize the regenerative potential of muscle stem cells for therapeutic purposes so far failed. We previously established the existence of human PAX7-positive cell colonies with high regenerative potential. We now identified PAX7-negative human muscle-derived cell colonies also positive for the myogenic markers desmin and MYF5. These include cells from a patient with a homozygous PAX7 c.86-1G > A mutation (PAX7null). Single cell and bulk transcriptome analysis show high intra- and inter-donor heterogeneity and reveal the endothelial cell marker CLEC14A to be highly expressed in PAX7null cells. All PAX7-negative cell populations, including PAX7null, form myofibers after transplantation into mice, and regenerate muscle after reinjury. Transplanted PAX7neg cells repopulate the satellite cell niche where they re-express PAX7, or, strikingly, CLEC14A. In conclusion, transplanted human cells do not depend on PAX7 for muscle regeneration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available