Human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cell lines are being generated at a rapid pace and now number in the thousands. We propose a standard nomenclature and suggest the use of a centralized database for all cell line names and a minimum set of information for reporting new derivations

Auerbach, Jonathan

Crook, Jeremy M

Daheron, Laurence

Hei, Derek

Lomax, Geoffrey

Loring, Jeanne F

Ludwig, Tenneille

Luong, Mai X

Schlaeger, Thorsten M

Smith, Kelly P

Stacey, Glyn N

Xu, Ren-He

Zeng, Fanyi

Luong, Mai X.

Crook, Jeremy M.

Loring, Jeanne F.

Schlaeger, Thorsten M.

Smith, Kelly P.

Stacey, Glyn

Elsevier - Publisher Connector 

A Call for Standardized Naming and Reporting of Human ESC and iPSC Lines 

Cell Stem Cell
ForumA Call for Standardized Naming and Reporting
of Human ESC and iPSC LinesMai X. Luong,1,* Jonathan Auerbach,2 Jeremy M. Crook,3 Laurence Daheron,4 Derek Hei,5 Geoffrey Lomax,6
Jeanne F. Loring,7 Tenneille Ludwig,8 Thorsten M. Schlaeger,9 Kelly P. Smith,1 Glyn Stacey,10 Ren-He Xu,11
and Fanyi Zeng12
1International Stem Cell Registry, Department of Cell Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Shrewsbury, MA 01545, USA
2GlobalStem, Rockville, MD 20850, USA
3Stem Cell Medicine, O’Brien Institute and Department of Surgery, St. Vincent’s Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne,
VIC 3065, Australia
4Harvard iPSC Core Facility, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
5Waisman Clinical Biomanufacturing Facility, Madison, WI 53705, USA
6California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), San Francisco, CA 94107, USA
7Center for Regenerative Medicine, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
8WiCell Research Institute (WISC Bank), Madison, WI 53705, USA
9Children’s Hospital Boston Human Embryonic Stem Cell Core Facility, Boston, MA 02115, USA
10UK Stem Cell Bank, National Institute for Biological Standards and Control-HPA, Herts, EN63QG, UK
11University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA
12Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
*Correspondence: mai.luong@umassmed.edu
DOI 10.1016/j.stem.2011.03.002
Human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cell lines are being generated at a rapid pace and now
number in the thousands. We propose a standard nomenclature and suggest the use of a centralized
database for all cell line names and a minimum set of information for reporting new derivations.Table 1. Advantages of Proposed Nomenclature
Unique identifier avoids confusion between cell lines
Intuitive naming strategy provides recognizable information about the cell lines
Similar format to many existing names (e.g., CT4, B124-2)
Easy to distinguish between different sets of lines (TSRI68i-YF versus SHEF4e-ALS), and
different cell lines within a set (SHEF3 versus SHEF5)
Flexible and does not require a consensus on the types of information to be includedStem cell research would benefit from
precise cell line identification by standard-
ized nomenclature andminimum standards
for reporting cell line provenance, deriva-
tion, culture, and characterization. To date,
confusion has arisen from multiple names
being applied to individual human embry-
onicstemcell (ESC)and inducedpluripotent
stem cell (iPSC) lines, as well as use of the
same name for different cell lines. In addi-
tion, publications of methods for deriving,
culturing, and characterizing cell lines do
not always provide sufficient information to
permit the repetition or thorough assess-
ment of the work. To address these issues,
we have devised a proposal for a standard
nomenclature for human iPSC and ESC
lines and a suggestion for a minimum set
of criteria for reporting new cell lines. Fur-
thermore,wepropose that it would be help-
ful to establish a centralized database for all
cell line names. This article is the culmina-
tion of workshops held at the International
Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR)
satellite symposium on Stem Cell Facilities
and Resources on June 15, 2010 and the
International Stem Cell Initiative (ISCI)
meeting on September 15, 2010.
Naming of Cell Lines
Thecurrent lackof anamingconvention for
human ESC and iPSC lines has resulted ina broad spectrum of names ranging from
asinglenumber tomanyandvariedcombi-
nations of letters, numbers, and hyphens
(e.g., ‘‘60’’ and ‘‘DH1CF32-IPS2’’) (Woltjen
et al., 2009;Park et al., 2008). Furthermore,
cell line names are not used consistently in
different publications and sometimes not
even within the same publication. These
inconsistencies make literature searches
difficult, as a whole body of work may be
missed because of a different placement
of a hyphen or inconsistent inclusion of a
zero (e.g., ‘‘ABC2,’’ ‘‘ABC 2,’’ ‘‘ABC-2’’ or
‘‘XYZ3,’’ ‘‘XYZ03,’’ ‘‘XYZ003’’). Inconsis-
tent naming makes it difficult to accurately
count existing cell lines and can cause
confusion about the identity of certain cell
lines.
In the absence of a standardized system
for unique naming and reporting cell lines,
duplication of names is inevitable andprob-
lematic. For example, two iPSC linesCell Stem Cderived from amniotic fluid (AF) samples
are named ‘‘AF-iPS’’ even though they are
from different patients in separate studies
(Ye et al., 2009; Galende et al., 2010). Other
examples include linesnamed ‘‘DMD-iPS1’’
that are generated from two Duchenne
Muscular Dystrophy patients with different
mutations in the dystrophin gene (Park
et al., 2008; Kazuki et al., 2010). Lastly,
more simplistic names such as ‘‘iPS-1’’
and ‘‘iPS-WT’’ have also been duplicated
(Lowry et al., 2008; Zhou and Freed, 2009).
Ambiguity about cell line identity is
likely to hamper evaluation of the validity
and reproducibility of research findings.
While we do not advocate the renaming
of existing cell lines, the adoption of
a convention for naming new human
ESC and iPSC cell lines is advisable and
recommended based on the combined
workshop discussions. Scientific nomen-
clatures currently in use range from theell 8, April 8, 2011 ª2011 Elsevier Inc. 357
iPSC A B C D 1 2 3 4 i  -  _  _  _  _
ESC A B C D 1 2 3 4 e -  _  _  _  _
1   2    3   4    5  6  7   8   9 10 11  12  13  14
Figure 1. Proposed Nomenclature for Cell Line Names
Blue box: contains a group of letters to represent source refer-
ence, such as laboratory (for iPSC lines) or institution (for hESC
lines). Yellow box: may contain a sequential number to identify
specific cell lines. Green box: contains an ‘‘i’’ or ‘‘e’’ to repre-
sent ‘‘iPSC’’ or ‘‘ESC,’’ respectively. Orange box: begins
with a dash and is followed by up to 12 letters and/or numbers.
This box can be used to note specific characteristics such as
disease, reporter genes, patient number and clone number.
The green and orange boxes are optional. Total number of
characters (including dash) should be limited to 14.
Cell Stem Cell
Forumsimple CD nomenclature (e.g.,
‘‘CD8,’’ ‘‘CD42a,’’ ‘‘CD42b’’) to the
extremely complex mouse strain
and mutation nomenclature (e.g.,
‘‘B6-Apoa1tm1Unc/J’’). We put
forward a proposal for a hybrid
naming system, drawing from
accepted nomenclatures of other
fields (Table 1).
Our proposed system contains
four elements in the following order
(Figure 1): a group of letters, a serial
number, an ‘‘i’’ or ‘‘e’’ to represent
‘‘iPSC’’ or ‘‘ESC,’’ and a descriptor
that is preceded by a dash. The
‘‘i/e’’ and descriptor are optional.The group of letters would indicate the
source, which could be an abbreviation
for an institute or laboratory (e.g.,
‘‘SHEF’’ or ‘‘HUES’’). While the exact
number of characters for any element
can vary, we recommend that names
have no spaces and be limited to 14
characters. However, it is strongly recom-
mended that the shortest possible cell line
names be used in order to avoid laborious
labeling of cell culturedishesor cryotubes.
In making these recommendations, we
are not proposing to rename existing cell
lines. The owner of the cell line could, of
course, opt to change the name to the
new format and inform registries.
Although the nomenclature proposal
described in Figure 1 aims to standardize
cell line naming, it will not completely
prevent name duplication on its own,
whichminimally requires that investigators
have access to a listing of all published cell
lines. To address this issue, we envisionTable 2. Recommended Minimal Set of Infor
Source Derivation Method
Patient-derived
or cell bank
hESC (e.g., zona pelluci
removal, cell isolation
and seeding, culture
conditions)
Cell type,
tissue source and
passage number
reprogramming method
(e.g., vector system,
small molecules, protein
mRNA, or miRNA
transduction/transfectio
Age (a range,
if specific age cannot
be disclosed)
Ethnicity (self-reported
and/or determined
by analysis)
358 Cell Stem Cell 8, April 8, 2011 ª2011 Elsthat an online process that allows investi-
gators to quickly submit all their cell line
names to a centralized database, which
hasyet tobe identified,will bean important
asset to the field. We suggest an interna-
tional committee be convened to discuss
the implementation of this process. Estab-
lishment and adoption of a central data-
base for all cell line names involve many
challenges and would require support
from journals and broad agreement from
the stem cell field. However, we believe
that such a database is the best possible
solution to name duplication.
Reporting Derivations
Traceability, interpretation, and repetition
of reported human ESC and iPSC studies
require clear communication of the sys-
tems used, the procedures followed, and
theoutcomes (Coecke et al., 2005). Trace-
ability is especially important information
for manuscripts concerning human plurip-mation for Publishing New Lines
Characterization Genetic Identity an
da undifferentiated state
(e.g., immunocytochemistry,
FACS, molecular profiling)
identity profile (e.g
SNP): not necessa
published fully, bu
for matching.
,
n)
pluripotency (e.g., in vitro
differentiation, teratoma
assay, molecular profiling)
mycoplasma
(recommended ro
practice, include s
test used)
genetic characterization
(e.g., karyotype,
SNP genotype)
disease history,
if applicable
evier Inc.otent stem cell lines becausemultiple
laws, regulations and guidelines
govern the use of cell lines. Thus, we
describe a proposed set of minimal
information be included in reports of
cell line derivation: provenance,
source, derivation method, charac-
terization, genetic identity, and
sterility (Table 2). Important details
to include are as follows: process of
donor consent, whether the source
or starting material is patient-derived
or obtained from a cell bank, an
accession number if the cell source
is commercially available, method
used for embryo handling and isola-tion of inner cell mass for human ESCs or
reprogramming for iPSCs, characteriza-
tion of the undifferentiated state and
demonstration of pluripotency, cell line
verification by identity profile, and myco-
plasma testing (International Stem Cell
Banking Initiative, 2009).
Conclusion
In summary, we advocate standardized
reporting, naming, and listing of human
ESC and iPSC lines at a centralized data-
base to facilitate effective and accurate
evaluation and application of research
using these cell lines. Our recommenda-
tions have been developed through con-
sultation with a large, although still incom-
plete, subset of the international stem cell
community and have been approved by
the Steering Committee of the Interna-
tional Stem Cell Initiative. Thus discus-
sions are ongoing and will likely require
further debate and input from the field.d Sterility Provenance
., STR,
rily
t held
consent (statement about
consenting process and
evidence of human subjects
oversight)
utine
pecific
conflict of interest disclosure
Cell Stem Cell
ForumACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are grateful for the support of this workshop
at the annual ISCI meeting that was funded by the
International Stem Cell Forum. We would also like
to thank the ISSCR for providing a venue for this
nomenclature discussion. In addition, the authors
would like to thank the following organizations for
their support: the Massachusetts Life Sciences
Center (M.X.L. and K.P.S.), the Helen Macpherson
Smith Trust (J.M.C.), CIRM, NIH, Esther O’Keefe
Foundation, and Millipore Foundation (J.F.L.).
REFERENCES
Coecke, S., Balls, M., Bowe, G., Davis, J.,
Gstraunthaler, G., Hartung, T., Hay, R., Merten,O.W., Price, A., Schechtman, L., et al; Second
ECVAM Task Force on Good Cell Culture Practice.
(2005). Altern. Lab. Anim. 33, 261–287.
Galende, E., Karakikes, I., Edelmann, L., Desnick,
R.J., Kerenyi, T., Khouiery, G., Lafferty, J., McGinn,
J.T., Brodman, M., Fuster, V., et al. (2010). Cell
Reprogram. 12, 117–125.
Kazuki, Y., Hiratsuka, M., Takiguchi, M., Osaki, M.,
Kajitani, N., Hoshiya, H., Hiramatsu, K., Yoshino,
T., Kazuki, Ishihara, C., et al. (2010). Mol. Ther.
18, 386–393.
International Stem Cell Banking Initiative. (2009).
Stem Cell Rev. 5, 301–314.
Lowry, W.E., Richter, L., Yachechko, R., Pyle,
A.D., Tchieu, J., Sridharan, R., Clark, A.T., andCell Stem CPlath, K. (2008). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
105, 2883–2888.
Park, I.H., Arora, N., Huo, H., Maherali, N., Ahfeldt,
T., Shimamura, A., Lensch, M.W., Cowan, C.,
Hochedlinger, K., and Daley, G.Q. (2008). Cell
134, 877–886.
Woltjen, K., Michael, I.P., Mohseni, P., Desai, R.,
Mileikovsky, M., Ha¨ma¨la¨inen, R., Cowling, R.,
Wang, W., Liu, P., Gertenstein, M., et al. (2009).
Nature 458, 766–770.
Ye, L., Chang, J.C., Lin, C., Sun, X., Yu, J., and Kan,
Y.W. (2009). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 9826–
9830.
Zhou, W., and Freed, C.R. (2009). Stem Cells 27,
2667–2674.ell 8, April 8, 2011 ª2011 Elsevier Inc. 359


Research Online

A call for standardized naming and reporting of human ESC and iPSC lines

Mai X. Luong

Jonathan Auerbach

Jeremy M. Crook

Laurence Daheron

Derek Hei

Geoffrey Lomax

Jeanne F. Loring

Tenneille Ludwig

Thorsten M. Schlaeger

Kelly P. Smith

Glyn Stacey

Ren-He Xu

Fanyi Zeng

Crossref

Cell Stem Cell

A Call for Standardized Naming and Reporting of Human ESC and iPSC Lines

file:///data/core-remote/dit/data/elsevier/pdf/64d/aHR0cDovL2FwaS5lbHNldmllci5jb20vY29udGVudC9hcnRpY2xlL3BpaS9zMTkzNDU5MDkxMTAwMTEyMw==.pdf

A call for standardized naming and reporting of human ESC and iPSC lines

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Research Online

Crossref