I'm very familiar with neuroblastoma cell lines, both general culturing, and differentiating. However, I've been considering transfecting my gene of interest into a non-cancer cell line.
What are the disadvantages in using NPCs compared to that of a neroblastoma cell line? Can they be passaged to high numbers? What are limitations with this platform as an experimental model?
Hello Martin.
Neuroblastoma cell lines are reliable platform to look at many aspects of cell differentiation in vitro. However, once you have accomplished certain analyses, you wonder whether normal cell-derived neural stem cells (NSCs) from either fetal and neonate brains or ES cell-derived NSCs have similar aspects or final cell fates of transplanted cells into damaged CNS.
Most of neuroblastoma are derived from glia lineages, thus having a NSCs that may have clinging tendency to glia cell fates unless overhelmingly inductive signals (kinds of abrupt differentiation), but not by interacting signals and cell-autonomous signals of the stem cell properties.
Therefore, it is a solid thought to consider NSCs above as platform. They are not like neuroblastoma cell lines, but many established ways of culturing neurospheres are available from any origins. Needs more attention to eliminate non-NSCs and mintaining NSCs while inhibiting cell differentiation for maintenance. There are also variations among the collected cell batches from the brains or derived from ES cells, unlike neuroblastoma cell line cells to some extents.
However, once familiarize yourself with the system, you will be fine to see any possible subtle differences between neuroblastoma and non-cancerous NSCs.
Best wishes.
Dear Martin: In my opinion, most of ES cell-derived NSCs did not functionally express NaV channels, while majority of neuroblastoma cell lines can clearly record sodium currents and action potentials, if they are appropriately differentiated with specific agents (e.g., dibutyryl cyclic AMP).
- Badges
- Science method