Review Open Access Logo

The Potential of Stem Cells in the Treatment of Diabetes: An Up-to-Date Review

Soumok Sadhu 1 ORCID logo
Bhanumati Sarkar 2 ORCID logo
Tania Paul 3
Tanmay Sanyal 4 ORCID logo
Abhijit Mitra 5 ORCID logo
Nithar Ranjan Madhu 6, * ORCID logo
  1. Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA
  2. Department of Botany, Acharya Prafulla Chandra College, New Barrackpore, West Bengal, India
  3. Department of Microbiology, Swami Vivekananda Institute of Modern Sciences, Garia, West Bengal, India
  4. Department of Zoology, Krishnagar Government College, Krishnagar, West Bengal, India
  5. Medical Biotechnology lab, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute (CHRI), Chettinad Academy of Research and Education (CARE), Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR), Kelambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  6. Department of Zoology, Acharya Prafulla Chandra College, New Barrackpore, West Bengal, India
Correspondence to: Nithar Ranjan Madhu, Department of Zoology, Acharya Prafulla Chandra College, New Barrackpore, West Bengal, India. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4198-5048. Email: [email protected].
Volume & Issue: Vol. 12 No. 8 (2025) | Page No.: 7680-7696 | DOI: 10.15419/m7mc9595
Published: 2025-08-31

Online metrics


Statistics from the website

  • HTML Views: 0
  • PDF Views: 0
  • XML Views: 0

Statistics from Dimensions

This article is published with open access by BioMedPress. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0) which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. 

Abstract

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus comprises a spectrum of metabolic disorders in which the body cannot adequately regulate blood glucose. In 2019, it ranked sixth among global causes of death, accounting for approximately 1.5 million fatalities. Current therapies rely on exogenous insulin or replacement of insulin-producing β-cells through whole-pancreas or isolated islet transplantation. Pluripotent stem cell (PSC)–based therapy offers a renewable source of patient-specific β-cells capable of restoring endogenous insulin production.

Areas Covered: Recent breakthroughs in directing PSCs—both embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)—toward pancreatic lineages are summarized in this review. PSCs efficiently differentiate into functional, glucose-responsive β-cells as well as supportive islet cell types, broadening their therapeutic scope. Notably, patient-derived iPSCs created from diverse diabetic phenotypes can be gene-corrected and matured into insulin-secreting cells, paving the way for personalized medicine. Coupling PSC technology with CRISPR gene editing, 3-D organoid culture, and immune-evasive encapsulation devices is now moving first-in-human trials toward durable, insulin-independent outcomes.

Expert Opinion: Autologous PSC models not only enable mechanistic studies of diabetes pathogenesis but also guide precision drug discovery and cell-replacement strategies. To translate PSC therapy from bench to bedside, the field must still optimize differentiation yield, verify long-term safety, resolve immunogenic and ethical issues, and standardize manufacturing under Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) conditions.

Introduction

Diabetes mellitus affected an estimated 537 million people worldwide in 2021 and, according to the International Diabetes Federation, this number could rise to 783 million by 20451. It imposes substantial premature morbidity and mortality. The disease is primarily divided into type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D). T1D is an autoimmune disease in which autoreactive lymphocytes destroy pancreatic β-cells, eliminating endogenous insulin secretion2.

Individuals with T1D therefore depend on lifelong exogenous insulin. By contrast, T2D represents ~90 % of all diabetes cases and results from a combination of peripheral insulin resistance and insufficient compensatory insulin secretion by β-cells. Ongoing research continues to clarify the molecular mechanisms that drive T2D onset and progression3.

Monogenic forms of diabetes also exist, most notably neonatal diabetes mellitus (NDM) and maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY)4. NDM presents within the first six months of life and affects approximately 1 in 300 000–400 000 live births5, 6. MODY, an autosomal-dominant β-cell disorder that typically manifests in adolescence or early adulthood, accounts for <5 % of all diabetes cases7, 8. Molecular testing has so far delineated 14 MODY subtypes9.

Because stem cells can modulate immune responses and differentiate into insulin-producing β-like cells, they are being explored as innovative therapies for diabetes10, 11, 12. Stem cells are classically categorized as totipotent, pluripotent, multipotent, oligopotent, or unipotent, depending on their developmental potential13. In a pioneering trial, Voltarelli . (2007) infused autologous hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) into patients with recent-onset T1D and reported partial remission14. Subsequently, Bhansali . (2009) showed that bone-marrow-derived stem cells can safely improve β-cell function in T2D15. Numerous trials have since evaluated various stem-cell sources; however, the optimal cell type, dose, and delivery route remain to be defined, and severe infections have occasionally been observed16. Advances in stem-cell derivation and bioprocessing aim to provide an unlimited, donor-independent supply of transplantable β-cells for regenerative medicine17 (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Stem cell lineages have the potential to differentiate into β-cell lineages.

Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are derived from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, whereas induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are reprogrammed from somatic cells by ectopic expression of factors such as OCT3/4, SOX2, KLF4, and c-MYC. Both ESCs and iPSCs are pluripotent, meaning they can give rise to virtually any cell type, including cardiomyocytes, neurons, and pancreatic β-cells18, 19 (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Markers specific to lineage and ESC-iPSC Differentiation Pathways.

Precision genome-editing, particularly CRISPR–Cas9, now allows targeted modification of transcription factors and signaling pathways in human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs). Knockout of ARX, NKX6-1, or NEUROD1 clarifies endocrine lineage specification, whereas knock-in reporters such as PDX1-GFP or INS-mCherry permit real-time monitoring of β-cell maturation. Correction of pathogenic variants (., HNF1A, INS) in patient-specific iPSCs paves the way for personalised cell-replacement therapies20. Single-cell RNA-seq and ATAC-seq provide high-resolution atlases of in-vitro differentiation, revealing rare progenitors, off-target populations, and regulators of β-cell maturation; only a fraction of derived cells fully resembles fetal or adult islets21. Engineering 3D microenvironments—vascularised islet organoids, hydrogel scaffolds, organ-on-a-chip systems—improves glucose responsiveness, endocrine maturity, and cell survival by recapitulating paracrine cues, extracellular-matrix signals, and biomechanical stiffness22. Together, these innovations are propelling stem-cell science from proof-of-concept studies toward robust, scalable, and clinically translatable regenerative therapies for diabetes.

Pathophysiology of Diabetes

Diabetes mellitus (DM) comprises a spectrum of metabolic disorders characterized by persistent hyperglycemia, yet the etiology and underlying mechanisms differ among subtypes. Appreciating these distinctions is critical to targeted prevention, accurate diagnosis, and effective therapy. The principal forms are type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D), gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and monogenic variants such as neonatal diabetes and maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY).

Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1D)

T1D is a prototypic autoimmune disease in which autoreactive T lymphocytes progressively destroy pancreatic β-cells within the islets of Langerhans, culminating in absolute insulin deficiency. Both genetic susceptibility—particularly HLA-DR/DQ alleles—and environmental triggers (., viral infections) initiate the immune assault. Pathological hallmarks include insulitis, β-cell apoptosis, and dense CD8⁺ cytotoxic T-cell infiltration23, 24, 25. Circulating islet-autoantibodies (against GAD65, IA-2, ZnT8,.) often precede clinical presentation and serve as predictive biomarkers. Oxidative stress and pro-inflammatory cytokine cascades further accelerate β-cell loss26. Because autoimmune activity usually persists after diagnosis despite intensive glycemic control, adjunctive immunomodulatory strategies are being explored.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2D)

T2D arises from the synergy of peripheral insulin resistance and progressive β-cell dysfunction. Initially, skeletal muscle, liver, and adipose tissue become less responsive to insulin, prompting compensatory hyperinsulinemia. Hyperglycemia develops once β-cells can no longer sustain this output27, 28. Thus, T2D is defined by the dual defects of insulin resistance and relative insulin deficiency. Obesity-related inflammation, lipotoxicity, and mitochondrial dysfunction drive resistance; adipose-derived cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6 impair insulin signalling, whereas chronic glucotoxicity induces β-cell exhaustion and epigenetic alterations29, 30.

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM)

GDM manifests when maternal β-cells cannot counterbalance the insulin-resistant milieu created by placental hormones (., progesterone, human placental lactogen)31. Screening typically occurs at 24–28 weeks’ gestation32. Women with pre-existing β-cell impairment or risk factors—obesity, advanced maternal age, positive family history—are especially susceptible. Although glucose tolerance usually normalises postpartum, GDM unmasks an underlying metabolic vulnerability and substantially elevates future T2D risk33.

Monogenic Diabetes (MODY and Neonatal Diabetes)

Monogenic forms result from single-gene mutations that disrupt β-cell development, glucose sensing, insulin synthesis, or secretion, and are unrelated to autoimmunity or insulin resistance. In MODY, which is typically autosomal-dominant and presents in adolescence or early adulthood, hyperglycaemia is non-ketotic and non-insulin-resistant8. Common subtypes include GCK-MODY, characterised by mild, stable fasting hyperglycaemia due to impaired glucose sensing, and HNF1A-MODY, which shows progressive β-cell failure yet responds well to low-dose sulfonylureas34. Neonatal diabetes mellitus (NDM) appears within the first six months of life; mutations in KCNJ11 or ABCC8 blunt ATP-sensitive K⁺ channel closure, suppressing insulin release35. When such mutations are confirmed, high-dose sulfonylureas can replace insulin therapy36.

Secondary Diabetes

Secondary diabetes denotes hyperglycaemia caused by disorders or treatments that disturb glucose homeostasis rather than primary defects in insulin action or secretion. Examples include chronic pancreatitis37, haemochromatosis38, Cushing’s syndrome39, and prolonged exposure to glucocorticoids40 or atypical antipsychotics41. Mechanisms range from direct β-cell injury to severe insulin resistance at the receptor or post-receptor level.

The Vitality of β-Cells

Pancreatic β-cells within the islets of Langerhans orchestrate insulin secretion and are therefore central to glucose homeostasis. In diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, hyper-glycaemia and chronic inflammation converge to provoke endoplasmic-reticulum (ER) stress, oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction, ultimately driving β-cell death and de-differentiation. Although ER and mitochondrial stress individually impair β-cell viability, recent work highlights their synergistic amplification of reactive oxygen-species (ROS) generation42, 43. β-cells inherently produce high ROS yet possess only modest antioxidant defences, rendering them exceptionally vulnerable to oxidative injury and functional collapse44, 45.

In type 1 diabetes (T1D) the immune system eliminates ≈90 % of β-cells, causing an early fall in insulin output that precedes overt hyper-glycaemia. Intriguingly, residual β-cells often persist in people with long-standing T1D46, implying that low-level endogenous insulin secretion can continue47, 48. In type 2 diabetes (T2D) approximately half of the original β-cell mass remains at diagnosis49, 50. Butler analysed 124 human pancreata and found β-cell apoptosis was elevated ten-fold in lean T2D and three-fold in obese T2D, independent of auto-immunity51. These observations underscore the importance of preserving or restoring β-cell mass to maintain euglycaemia, making β-cell replacement a rational strategy for both T1D and T2D52. Whole-pancreas or islet transplantation can normalize glycaemia but is limited by donor scarcity, surgical risk and lifelong immuno-suppression. Consequently, stem-cell-derived β-cells have emerged as an attractive, potentially unlimited alternative source53, 54.

Key Features of Pluripotent Stem Cells (PSCs)

PSC populations—embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)—combine unlimited self-renewal with the capacity to generate derivatives of all three germ layers. ESCs originate from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, whereas iPSCs arise when somatic cells are reprogrammed by OCT4, SOX2, KLF4 and c-MYC expression (the Yamanaka factors)55. Pluripotency is sustained by interconnected transcription-factor networks, epigenetic regulators and signalling cascades including WNT, TGF-β/Activin/Nodal and FGF. This developmental plasticity underpins applications in regenerative medicine, disease modelling and high-throughput drug discovery. Nonetheless, genetic instability, tumourigenicity and line-to-line variability mandate rigorous quality control.

The 2006 discovery of iPSCs by Takahashi & Yamanaka revolutionised the field by providing an ethically acceptable ESC surrogate56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61. Advances in vector design—from integrating retroviruses to non-integrating episomes, Sendai virus and mRNA—have enhanced reprogramming safety and efficiency62, 63, 64. Today, patient-specific iPSC lines enable precise disease modelling and personalised cell-based therapies, underscoring PSCs’ transformative potential65.

Directed Differentiation of PSCs

To generate functional cell types, researchers recapitulate embryogenesis in vitro using serum-free media, defined growth factors and stepwise signalling cues. For example, VEGF plus other angiogenic factors yield endothelial cells66; multistage Activin-A/retinoic-acid/Notch modulation directs PSCs to pancreatic β-like cells67; BMP4, FGF and HGF drive hepatic specification toward hepatocyte-like cells68; and 3-D culture of porcine iPSCs with retina-specific factors forms laminated retinal organoids69. Ongoing protocol optimisation is boosting purity, scalability and reproducibility, accelerating deployment of PSC-derived cells in drug screening, disease modelling and regenerative therapy.

Ethical and Clinical Issues in Pluripotent Stem Cell Technologies

Research involving pluripotent stem cells, including embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), holds tremendous promise for regenerative medicine and disease modeling; however, it is also accompanied by significant ethical and clinical challenges that demand careful analysis and innovative solutions70. The main ethical controversy surrounding ESCs arises from the need to destroy embryos during derivation, prompting intense debate over the moral status of the embryo and leading to diverse regional regulations that, in turn, shape funding, research priorities, and clinical translation71. Although iPSCs circumvent embryo destruction and have revolutionized the field, they introduce fresh ethical and safety concerns that likewise require rigorous oversight72.

Early‐generation iPSC protocols relied on oncogenic transcription factors, raising fears of tumorigenesis and underscoring the necessity for safer reprogramming methods that preserve genomic integrity73. Integration-free techniques now mitigate many of these risks, yet confirming both genomic and epigenetic stability in patient-derived iPSC lines remains a critical bottleneck before clinical deployment74. Because undifferentiated PSCs can form teratomas, transplantation therapies must meet stringent safety thresholds and demonstrate robust efficacy75. Even autologous iPSC-based therapies face variability in line-to-line quality, complicating standardization and quality control76, 77.

Transformation of Pluripotent Stem Cells into β-Cells that Secrete Insulin

Successful differentiation of PSCs into insulin-producing β-cells hinges on precise control of the culture microenvironment and a deep understanding of developmental signaling cues. Human ESCs, derived from the inner cell mass of blastocysts, possess unique epigenetic landscapes that preserve pluripotency; establishing stable hESC lines that faithfully recapitulate primary ESC characteristics is therefore essential for an unlimited cell supply78, 79.

Step-wise protocols have converted hESCs into insulin-secreting cells, initially achieving ~12 % efficiency but with limited glucose responsiveness. Subsequent optimization—such as fine-tuning in-vitro glucose levels and modulating growth factors like Transforming Growth Factor (TGF)—has boosted yields to ~25 %80, 81. These findings underscore the need for early-stage interventions that protect or regenerate endogenous β-cell mass, or for replacement strategies using engineered stem-cell-derived islet-like clusters82.

Standard differentiation proceeds through definitive endoderm (SOX17⁺), pancreatic progenitor (PDX1⁺), endocrine progenitor (NGN3⁺), and finally mature β-cell stages. At each step, specific factors are applied, and stage-specific markers confirm proper lineage progression83.

Stem cell transplantation and treatment

Transplantation studies indicate that the in-vitro microenvironment strongly affects pancreatic progenitor expansion and maturation. Using immature pancreatic progenitors rather than fully differentiated cells consistently enhances in-vivo β-cell development. For example, pancreatic precursors derived from hESCs become glucose-responsive, insulin-secreting β-cells after implantation under the kidney capsule or into adipose tissue of streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic mice84. Likewise, iPSC-derived grafts placed in both T1D and T2D mouse models acquire glucose-regulated insulin secretion and reduce hyperglycaemia85. Transplantation of non-human-primate iPSCs achieves comparable glycaemic improvement in murine diabetes models86. In the NOD mouse, iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells transplanted into the kidney respond appropriately to rising glucose concentrations87. Collectively, these findings show that extensive pre-transplant in-vitro patterning is essential, whereas site-specific in-vivo cues complete endocrine maturation.

Differentiation of PSCs

β-cell differentiation from PSCs starts with induction of definitive endoderm (DE). Current protocols drive 60–80 % of hESCs toward DE that co-express SOX17, FOXA2, CXCR4, and GSC88. Activin-A–mediated Nodal signalling and canonical Wnt are the two dominant pathways. High-dose activin A (50–100 ng ml-1) in serum-free medium reliably generates DE and simultaneously exerts paracrine/autocrine survival effects on adult human islets89. Addition of sodium butyrate or PI3K inhibitors further boosts DE yield90.

Supplementing activin A with Wnt3A, CHIR99021 (a GSK3 inhibitor), or BMP4 can further improve DE induction, with CHIR99021 generally outperforming Wnt3A for SOX17/FOXA2 expression. Growth-and-differentiation-factor-8 (GDF-8, myostatin) as well as the small molecules IDE1/IDE2 can each convert ≈ 80 % of hESCs into DE cells91.

To steer DE away from hepatic fate and toward pancreatic lineage, BMP and FGF signals are usually blocked with Noggin and SU5402, respectively92. Cyclopamine (a HEDGEHOG inhibitor), FGF10, and Notch modulation (transient FGF10 followed by the γ-secretase inhibitor DAPT) are then sequentially applied to expand PDX1⁺ pancreatic progenitors and initiate endocrine commitment93.

Dorsomorphin (a BMP type-I receptor blocker) plus retinoic acid (RA) robustly induces PDX1⁺ progenitors, whose proliferation is sustained by epidermal growth factor (EGF). Indolactam V further enriches this population94, 95. Transition from PDX1⁺ to NGN3⁺ endocrine precursors is facilitated by SB431542 (a TGF-β receptor inhibitor) and VMAT2 inhibitors such as reserpine or tetrabenazine, ultimately yielding glucose-responsive β-like cells96.

Final maturation is promoted with forskolin, dexamethasone, hepatocyte growth factor, IGF-1, and GLP-1 analogues. Expression of NKX6.1 is mandatory: grafts with high NKX6.1 reverse hyperglycaemia in diabetic mice, whereas NKX6.1-low grafts do not97. Mature hESC/hiPSC-derived β-like cells co-express C-peptide, insulin, PDX1, MAFA, NKX6.1, NEUROD1, ISL1, and GLUT298, 99, 100.

Forced expression of key transcription factors can further enhance efficiency. PAX4 over-expression, for example, elevates INS, PDX1, GLUT2, and C-peptide transcripts101, whereas PDX1 or FOXA2 alone provide minimal additional benefit102, 103, 104. Despite these advances, fully mature, glucose-responsive β-cells remain difficult to obtain , and most protocols still yield cells with sub-optimal dynamic insulin secretion.

Differentiation of human-induced PSCs

hiPSCs follow a similar five-stage trajectory—SOX17⁺ DE → PDX1⁺ progenitor → NGN3⁺ endocrine precursor → NKX6.1⁺ immature β-cell → functionally mature β-cell105, 106, 107, 108. The first demonstration in 2008 used a four-step protocol to convert dermal fibroblast–derived hiPSCs into glucose-sensitive insulin-secreting cells109. Nevertheless, hiPSCs exhibit clone-to-clone heterogeneity: lines from T1D donors generate DE efficiently but diverge markedly at later pancreatic stages110, 111, 112.

Comparison of hESC- and hiPSC-based protocols

Both cell types rely on sequential modulation of Notch, BMP, Wnt, and TGF-β signalling and on core transcription factors PDX1, NGN3, and NKX6.1. However, hiPSCs often show variable NGN3 induction, greater signalling-pathway noise, and residual somatic epigenetic memory that can skew differentiation away from pancreatic fate113, 114, 115. Consequently, hESCs generally achieve higher C-peptide/insulin co-expression and superior glucose responsiveness, whereas hiPSC-derived β-like cells usually require extended in-vitro culture or in-vivo maturation to reach comparable function116, 117.

Succession Rate of β-cells

Efficient expansion of β-cell mass from endogenous sources requires simultaneously limiting β-cell apoptosis and stimulating new-cell formation. Finegood (1995) quantitatively analysed β-cell turnover by BrdU/thymidine labelling in rat pancreas118. They calculated a daily turnover of ~2 % of β-cells in adult rodents. Extended BrdU exposure in adult mice showed that roughly 1 in 1,400 β-cells divides each day. Assuming no input from neogenesis, trans-differentiation or other sources, the daily growth rate equals 0.070 %119, 120. Even with zero β-cell death, replacing one-half of lost β-cell mass would therefore require ≈1,429 days—far longer than the average mouse life span. Human calculations are limited, as BrdU cannot be used ethically; Ki67 staining nevertheless indicates an even slower turnover that can rise several-fold during pregnancy121, 122.

An alternative strategy for diabetes therapy is to enhance endogenous β-cell renewal. Evidence shows that β-cell mass is plastic and adapts to changing secretory demand. Two main mechanisms are proposed: (i) replication of existing β-cells and (ii) differentiation of progenitors, possibly within the ductal epithelium. Replication has been documented in mice, rats and humans, and lineage-tracing in postnatal mice demonstrates that most new β-cells derive from pre-existing ones. The close anatomical relationship between β-cells and pancreatic ducts suggests a potential ductal progenitor source, but cross-sectional studies cannot yet pinpoint the exact origin of mature β-cells118, 119, 120 (Figure 3). Thus, insulin-positive cells observed near ducts in adult tissue may simply reflect residual patterns of fetal pancreas development rather than active duct-derived neogenesis119, 121, 122.

Figure 3

The regeneration of β-cells for treating diabetes mellitus.

Derivation of Patient-Specific Pluripotent Stem Cells for the Treatment of Diabetes

The pathogenesis of different diabetes subtypes is not fully understood. To address this gap, researchers generate patient-specific pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) from diabetic individuals as versatile in-vitro disease models. These cells can be differentiated into pancreatic lineages for mechanistic studies or transplantation, thereby providing new insights and enabling improved therapeutic strategies123.

Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells

Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT), also known as therapeutic cloning, is used to create patient-specific embryonic stem cells (ESCs) from a patient’s somatic cells. In SCNT, a somatic-cell nucleus is transferred into an enucleated oocyte, producing an embryo that is nearly genetically identical to the donor123. Although SCNT first produced the cloned sheep Dolly in 1997, it is still not a routine method for generating patient-specific ESC lines. Recent breakthroughs have finally demonstrated successful reprogramming of human somatic cells into ESCs, after many unsuccessful attempts124. Notably, both hESCs and hiPSCs appear non-immunogenic after transplantation, supporting the concept of diabetes-specific ESC therapies123, 124. Nevertheless, SCNT is limited by ethical concerns and the scarcity of human oocytes. An alternative source of hESCs is embryos classified as abnormal during pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)123, 124, 125. PGD-derived hESCs have been exploited to model monogenic diseases , but they cannot yield patient-specific ESCs for polygenic or idiopathic diabetes. Consequently, ethical restrictions and technical hurdles continue to hamper the broad use of SCNT and PGD for diabetes research123, 124, 125, 126.

Methods for Generation of Patient-Specific Pluripotent Stem Cells

Because hESCs face ethical, immunological, and logistical constraints, investigators increasingly focus on induced pluripotent stem-cell (iPSC) technology. Generating hiPSCs from diabetic patients and differentiating them into insulin-secreting cells provides a powerful platform for dissecting the earliest mechanisms of diabetes pathophysiology109, 127.

In the first study, hiPSCs were produced from skin fibroblasts of type-1-diabetes (T1D) patients using three transcription factors—OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4. More recently, hiPSCs were derived from participants with maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) to model the disease in vitro. After identifying a heterozygous glucokinase (GCK) mutation, investigators generated MODY2-specific hiPSCs; their efficiency to form insulin-secreting cells was comparable to control lines because the mutation is hypomorphic127. In contrast, iPSCs harboring biallelic GCK inactivation showed markedly reduced β-cell differentiation128.

MODY2 patients possess β-cells with diminished glucose sensitivity. Correcting the GCK mutation in MODY2-hiPSCs restores normal β-cell glucose responsiveness, highlighting the utility of genome editing. Using a polycistronic lentiviral vector, other groups have derived hiPSCs from additional MODY subtypes without karyotypic abnormalities, facilitating the study of gene-specific contributions to pancreatic development and diabetes128.

Inter- and intra-patient variability in reprogramming efficiency and differentiation potential has been documented. For example, iPSCs from non-obese diabetic mice exhibited a compromised pluripotent state, underscoring the influence of genetic background16. Therefore, analysing multiple patient-derived lines alongside clinical data is essential to pinpoint disease-predisposing factors.

Traditional iPSC generation relies on integrating viral vectors that permanently insert reprogramming transgenes, raising risks of insertional mutagenesis and tumorigenicity. Non-integrating strategies—adenoviral delivery, Cre/LoxP excision, PiggyBac transposition, episomal plasmids, Sendai virus, synthetic mRNA and direct protein transduction—have been developed to overcome these issues129. Notably, integration-free hiPSCs have been produced from T1D and type-2-diabetes (T2D) patients; the Sendai viral genome is spontaneously lost after 8–12 passages while pluripotency is maintained127.

Eliminating viral transgenes reduces genomic alterations and makes iPSCs safer for cell therapy and disease modelling. Because some reprogramming factors (., MYC) are oncogenic, protocols omitting them have been devised; for instance, hiPSCs from T1D patients were generated using OCT4, SOX2 and KLF4 without MYC130.

Utilising PSC-Derived Cells in Diabetic Mouse Models: A Treatment Strategy

Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) possess the remarkable ability to differentiate into almost any cell type, making them indispensable tools for diabetes research65. Accordingly, diabetic mouse models are essential for dissecting disease mechanisms and testing emerging therapies. Through controlled differentiation, investigators can generate insulin-producing pancreatic β-cells, endothelial cells, and immunomodulatory mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from PSCs131. When these PSC-derived cells are transplanted into diabetic mice, their effects on tissue regeneration, glycaemic control, and immune modulation can be quantified with precision132.

Transplantation of PSC-derived pancreatic β-cells offers the possibility of restoring endogenous insulin production and alleviating the consequences of insulin deficiency. Outcomes are monitored by evaluating cell survival, engraftment within host pancreatic tissue, and the re-establishment of normoglycaemia133. Such analyses are critical, as loss of functional β-cells is central to diabetes pathophysiology134.

PSC-derived endothelial cells additionally target the vascular complications of diabetes, supporting vascular repair and restoring blood flow to damaged tissues and organs135. Likewise, PSC-derived MSCs exert potent anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects that counter the inflammatory milieu associated with diabetes. Mouse models allow researchers to quantify their capacity to dampen immune dysregulation, protect pancreatic cells, and accelerate tissue repair136.

Collectively, PSC-based interventions in diabetic mouse models refine our understanding of the disease and accelerate the development of next-generation therapies for patients.

Latest Advances in the Use of Pluripotent Stem Cells (PSCs) to Treat Diabetes

With its ability to precisely fix disease-causing mutations and improve cell function, CRISPR-Cas9 technology has become a cornerstone in the genetic engineering of PSCs. To restore normal insulin expression in iPSC-derived β-cells, CRISPR has been used to correct mutations in genes such as HNF1A and GCK, thereby restoring normal insulin expression in monogenic diabetes forms like MODY (Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young)137. Additionally, CRISPR is being investigated to generate universal, immune-evasive β-cell grafts for allogeneic transplantation by deleting immune-recognition molecules such as HLA.

PSC-derived three-dimensional (3D) pancreatic organoids have revolutionized both modeling and transplantation. These organoids mimic native islet architecture and function, including vasculature formation, cell-cell communication, and glucose-stimulated insulin release. Stepwise development of PSCs into mature β-cells within organoids is now possible thanks to protocols guiding differentiation through definitive endoderm, pancreatic progenitors, and endocrine precursors. To further enhance vascular integration and insulin-release kinetics, these organoids can be co-cultured with endothelial cells or embedded in extracellular-matrix hydrogels138.

The field is now entering the clinic, with multiple stem-cell-derived products in human trials. ESC-derived pancreatic islet cells are used in Vertex Pharmaceuticals’ VX-880 program, which has successfully restored insulin production in type 1 diabetes patients with undetectable C-peptide levels139. Similarly, ViaCyte’s PEC-Direct and PEC-Encap systems administer PSC-derived β-cell progenitors in encapsulated devices, aiming to achieve long-term insulin independence in early-phase trials and preclinical models140. However, foreign-body responses impaired graft vascularization and function in PEC-Encap (VC-01). In Phase 1/2 trials, PEC-Direct—an open device that permits vascularization but requires systemic immunosuppression—generated partial C-peptide and insulin secretion yet did not fully restore glycaemic control.

Patient-specific iPSC-derived β-cells are now being integrated into high-throughput drug-screening platforms to identify compounds that enhance insulin secretion or promote β-cell survival, creating a rapid feedback loop to clinical observation. The convergence of PSCs, CRISPR editing, and organoid technology is enabling high-throughput modeling of both monogenic and complex polygenic diabetes. Researchers now generate patient-specific, CRISPR-edited islet organoids to dissect gene function, predict therapeutic response and validate candidate drugs. These models recapitulate immune infiltration, ER stress, and β-cell dysfunction—hallmarks of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Addressing Cell-Production Guidelines for PSC- and iPSC-Based Therapies

Strict adherence to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) is the cornerstone for translating pluripotent stem cell (PSC) and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) products from the laboratory to the clinic. By controlling cell sourcing, scale-up, contamination risk, and batch-to-batch consistency, GMP safeguards product safety, reproducibility, and regulatory acceptance.

Recent literature therefore centres on the transition from bench-scale PSC cultures to pilot- and full-scale manufacturing. Huang . (2020) present a comprehensive GMP-compatible suspension-bioreactor workflow, detailing media optimisation, shear-stress management, and process automation required for clinical-grade expansion141. Similarly, Martins and Ribeiro (2025) describe the creation of GMP Master and Working Cell Banks, highlighting donor eligibility, traceability, and high-throughput quality control under EU and U.S. regulations142.

Thon and Karlsson (2017) show that feeder-free, xeno-free, closed-system bioreactors markedly improve reproducibility of platelet-producing PSC derivatives and facilitate regulatory approval143. Nath (2020) further refine stirred-tank designs with in-line sensors, automated batch records, and continuous environmental monitoring, fully embedding GMP in iPSC expansion and differentiation144.

To minimise lot variability, Wong (2017) introduced the CryoPause® workflow, which cryopreserves fully characterised PSCs in a ready-to-use format, enabling immediate and parallel differentiation across GMP sites145.

Demonstrating clinical relevance, Surendran (2025) report a scalable, allogeneic retinal-pigment-epithelium (RPE) manufacturing process that meets FDA Investigational New Drug criteria via GMP-aligned cryopreservation, sterility, and endotoxin removal146. Likewise, Couture . (2014) provide detailed standard operating procedures (SOPs) for spinner-flask suspension culture that reliably generate undifferentiated PSCs at pilot scale147.

Difficulties and Challenges in Stem Cell Therapy for Diabetes

Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) now allow researchers to reproduce diabetic pathology and to design cell-replacement strategies that were unthinkable a decade ago. Recent work has shown that patient-specific PSC lines can be differentiated into pancreatic lineages, providing platforms both for mechanistic studies and for the development of autologous therapies148, 149. Before these advances can reach the clinic, however, several obstacles must be overcome. First, robust, tumor-safe differentiation protocols are required to minimize the risk of teratoma formation149. Human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) additionally raise ethical concerns and problems of immune incompatibility, which currently restrict their clinical use. Somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) has recently been used to create hESC lines that are human-leukocyte-antigen (HLA) matched to individual patients, potentially reducing rejection150.

Although induced PSCs (iPSCs) represent a landmark step toward autologous β-cell replacement, important challenges remain. Comprehensive in-vitro assays and long-term transplantation studies are still needed to confirm the function, safety and durability of iPSC-derived β-cells. Genomic integrity is a key issue because some reprogramming methods employ integrating viral vectors that can introduce oncogenic or disruptive mutations150, 151. Even non-viral techniques can generate copy-number variations or point mutations that confound disease modelling; therefore, integration-free reprogramming and rigorous genomic screening should be standard practice.

Another hurdle is incomplete maturation. Cells produced in most differentiation protocols still express early developmental markers such as DPPA4, LIN28A and LIN28B, indicating a stage equivalent to < 6.5-week human embryos and explaining their poor glucose responsiveness152, 153. Refinement of stage-specific cues and 3-D culture systems is required to obtain fully mature, glucose-sensitive β-cells. Patient-to-patient and clone-to-clone variability further complicate individualized therapies; future work must elucidate and minimise these clonal differences.

Emerging evidence also overturns the assumption that autologous iPSC derivatives are intrinsically immune-privileged. Deuse . (2019) demonstrated that de-novo mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations can provoke T-cell-mediated rejection in syngeneic hosts154; similar observations were made by Sercel . (2021) and Bogomazova (2024)155, 156. Hence, routine immunogenomic screening—especially of mtDNA—should precede any iPSC-based transplantation, even in autologous settings.

Whether iPSCs can fully replace hESCs remains unresolved, and the limited comparative data published so far underline the value of continuing hESC research alongside iPSC efforts127.

Conclusion and Future Prospects

PSC research continues to attract intense interest because these cells can generate isogenic models of diabetes and theoretically provide unlimited supplies of patient-matched β-cells. To translate this promise into therapy, investigators must eliminate undifferentiated contaminants, perfect maturation protocols, and address ethical and immunological barriers. The creation of SCNT-derived, HLA-matched hESCs and the advent of footprint-free iPSC technologies offer encouraging solutions. Combined with clinical-grade differentiation, 3-D islet-organoid platforms and precise CRISPR editing, PSC technology is progressing from glucose-control adjuncts toward durable, potentially curative interventions. Multiple allogeneic islet products are already in human trials, and genetically engineered, patient-specific β-cells are close behind. With continued multidisciplinary effort, PSC-based precision therapies are expected to transform diabetes management in the near future.

Abbreviations

3D: Three-Dimensional, ARX: Aristaless Related Homeobox, ATAC-seq: Assay for Transposase-Accessible Chromatin with sequencing, BMP4: Bone Morphogenetic Protein 4, BrdU: Bromodeoxyuridine, Cas9: CRISPR-associated protein 9, CD8⁺: Cluster of Differentiation 8 Positive, CRISPR: Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, CXCR4: C-X-C Motif Chemokine Receptor 4, DE: Definitive Endoderm, DM: Diabetes Mellitus, DPPA4: Developmental Pluripotency Associated 4, EGF: Epidermal Growth Factor, ER: Endoplasmic Reticulum, ESCs: Embryonic Stem Cells, FDA: Food and Drug Administration, FGF: Fibroblast Growth Factor, FOXA2: Forkhead Box A2, GAD65: Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase 65, GCK: Glucokinase, GDM: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus, GDF-8: Growth and Differentiation Factor-8, GFP: Green Fluorescent Protein, GMP: Good Manufacturing Practice, GSC: Goosecoid Homeobox, GSK3: Glycogen Synthase Kinase 3, HEDGEHOG: a signaling pathway, HGF: Hepatocyte Growth Factor, HLA: Human Leukocyte Antigen, HNF1A: Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 1 Alpha, hPSCs: Human Pluripotent Stem Cells, HSCs: Hematopoietic Stem Cells, IA-2: Insulinoma-Associated protein 2, IDE1/IDE2: Inducers of Definitive Endoderm 1 and 2, IGF-1: Insulin-like Growth Factor 1, IL-6: Interleukin-6, INS: Insulin, iPSCs: Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells, ISL1: ISL LIM Homeobox 1, KLF4: Krüppel-like factor 4, MAFA: MAF BZIP Transcription Factor A, MODY: Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young, MSCs: Mesenchymal Stem Cells, mtDNA: Mitochondrial DNA, MYC: Myelocytomatosis oncogene, NDM: Neonatal Diabetes Mellitus, NEUROD1: Neuronal Differentiation 1, NGN3: Neurogenin 3, NKX6-1: NK6 Homeobox 1, NOD: Non-Obese Diabetic, OCT3/4: Octamer-Binding Transcription Factor 3/4, PAX4: Paired Box 4, PDX1: Pancreatic And Duodenal Homeobox 1, PGD: Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis, PI3K: Phosphoinositide 3-Kinase, PSCs: Pluripotent Stem Cells, RA: Retinoic Acid, RNA-seq: RNA sequencing, ROS: Reactive Oxygen Species, RPE: Retinal Pigment Epithelium, SCNT: Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, SOPs: Standard Operating Procedures, SOX2: SRY-Box Transcription Factor 2, SOX17: SRY-Box Transcription Factor 17, STZ: Streptozotocin, T1D: Type 1 Diabetes, T2D: Type 2 Diabetes, TGF-β: Transforming Growth Factor Beta, TNF-α: Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha, VEGF: Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor, VMAT2: Vesicular Monoamine Transporter 2, Wnt: Wingless-related integration site, ZnT8: Zinc Transporter 8

Acknowledgments

None.

Author’s contributions

All the authors have contributed substantially to the work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

None.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process

The authors declare that they have used generative AI and/or AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. D. Magliano, E.J. Boyko. IDF diabetes atlas. 10th edition. International Diabetes Federation; 2021. Available from: https://diabetesatlas.org/atlas/tenth-edition/ 2021; :
  2. L. Szablewski. Role of immune system in type 1 diabetes mellitus pathogenesis. International Immunopharmacology 2014; 22(1): 182-91.
  3. P.V. Dludla, S.E. Mabhida, K. Ziqubu, B.B. Nkambule, S.E. Mazibuko-Mbeje, S. Hanser. Pancreatic β-cell dysfunction in type 2 diabetes: implications of inflammation and oxidative stress. World Journal of Diabetes 2023; 14(3): 130-46.
  4. K. Siddiqui, M. Musambil, N. Nazir. Maturity onset diabetes of the young (MODY)\textemdashhistory, first case reports and recent advances. Gene 2015; 555(1): 66-71.
  5. T. Chisnoiu, A.L. Balasa, L. Mihai, A. Lupu, C.E. Frecus, I. Ion. Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Transient Neonatal Diabetes Mellitus-2 Case Reports and Literature Review. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13(13): 2271.
  6. M. Polak, H. Cavé. Neonatal diabetes mellitus: a disease linked to multiple mechanisms. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 2007; 2(1): 12.
  7. D.E. Ivanoshchuk, E.V. Shakhtshneider, O.D. Rymar, A.K. Ovsyannikova, S.V. Mikhailova, V.S. Fishman. The Mutation Spectrum of Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY)-Associated Genes among Western Siberia Patients. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2021; 11(1): 57.
  8. L.S. Hoffman, T.J. Fox, C. Anastasopoulou. Maturity Onset Diabetes in the Young. [Updated 2023 Aug 14]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532900 2024; :
  9. K.M. Nkonge, D.K. Nkonge, T.N. Nkonge. The epidemiology, molecular pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY). Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology 2020; 6(1): 20.
  10. P. Chhabra, K.L. Brayman. Stem cell therapy to cure type 1 diabetes: from hype to hope. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2013; 2(5): 328-36.
  11. D. Hess, L. Li, M. Martin, S. Sakano, D. Hill, B. Strutt. Bone marrow-derived stem cells initiate pancreatic regeneration. Nature Biotechnology 2003; 21(7): 763-70.
  12. M.F. Pera, P.P. Tam. Extrinsic regulation of pluripotent stem cells. Nature 2010; 465(7299): 713-20.
  13. H. Jiang, F.X. Jiang. Human pluripotent stem cell-derived β cells: truly immature islet β cells for type 1 diabetes therapy?. World Journal of Stem Cells 2023; 15(4): 182-95.
  14. J.C. Voltarelli, C.E. Couri, A.B. Stracieri, M.C. Oliveira, D.A. Moraes, F. Pieroni. Autologous nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes mellitus. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; 297(14): 1568-76.
  15. A. Bhansali, V. Upreti, N. Khandelwal, N. Marwaha, V. Gupta, N. Sachdeva. Efficacy of autologous bone marrow-derived stem cell transplantation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Stem Cells and Development 2009; 18(10): 1407-16.
  16. F. D'Addio, A. Valderrama Vasquez, M. Ben Nasr, E. Franek, D. Zhu, L. Li. Autologous nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in new-onset type 1 diabetes: a multicenter analysis. Diabetes 2014; 63(9): 3041-6.
  17. J. Hipp, A. Atala. Sources of stem cells for regenerative medicine. Stem Cell Reviews 2008; 4(1): 3-11.
  18. Z.N. Zhang, S.K. Chung, Z. Xu, Y. Xu. Oct4 maintains the pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells by inactivating p53 through Sirt1-mediated deacetylation. Stem Cells (Dayton, Ohio) 2014; 32(1): 157-65.
  19. M.H. Chin, M.J. Mason, W. Xie, S. Volinia, M. Singer, C. Peterson. Induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells are distinguished by gene expression signatures. Cell Stem Cell 2009; 5(1): 111-23.
  20. Z. Zhang, Y. Zhang, F. Gao, S. Han, K.S. Cheah, H.F. Tse. CRISPR/Cas9 Genome-Editing System in Human Stem Cells: Current Status and Future Prospects. Molecular Therapy. Nucleic Acids 2017; 9: 230-41.
  21. A. Veres, A.L. Faust, H.L. Bushnell, E.N. Engquist, J.H. Kenty, G. Harb. Charting cellular identity during human in vitro β-cell differentiation. Nature 2019; 569(7756): 368-73.
  22. H. Wang, X. Ning, F. Zhao, H. Zhao, D. Li. Human organoids-on-chips for biomedical research and applications. Theranostics 2024; 14(2): 788-818.
  23. M. Delvecchio, M. Liu, N. Rapini, F. Barbetti. Editorial: personalized therapies for monogenic diabetes. Frontiers in Genetics 2024; 15: 1496367.
  24. A. Pugliese. Insulitis in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes. Pediatric Diabetes 2016; 17(Suppl): 31-6.
  25. P. In't Veld. Insulitis in human type 1 diabetes: a comparison between patients and animal models. Seminars in Immunopathology 2014; 36(5): 569-79.
  26. M.A. Atkinson, G.S. Eisenbarth, A.W. Michels. Type 1 diabetes. Lancet 2014; 383(9911): 69-82.
  27. P. Benny, Q. Yang, B.W. Wong, C. Zhang, E.L. Yong, L.J. Li. Exploring the link between age at menarche, anthropometry and body fat composition with type II diabetes in a Singapore multi-ethnic cohort. BMC Medicine 2025; 23(1): 306.
  28. C.J. Lee, L.B. Kosyakovsky, M.S. Khan, F. Wu, G. Chen, J.A. Hill. Cardiovascular, Kidney, Liver, and Metabolic Interactions in Heart Failure: Breaking Down Silos. Circulation Research 2025; 136(11): 1170-207.
  29. S. Ayoub, M. Arabi, Y. Al-Najjar, I. Laswi, T.F. Outeiro, A. Chaari. . Glycation in Alzheimer’s Disease and Type 2 Diabetes: The Prospect of Dual Drug Approaches for Therapeutic Interventions. Molecular Neurobiology 2025; 22: 1-24.
  30. A. Mohammad, J. Abubaker, S.K. Marafie, E. AlShawaf, H. Ali, F. Al-Mulla. Structural Modelling of Krüppel-Like Factor 15 Zinc Finger Binding Domain to DNA Using AlphaFold 3.0: Potential Therapeutic Target for Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 2025; 29(10): e70565.
  31. R. Mittal, K. Prasad, J.R. Lemos, G. Arevalo, K. Hirani. Unveiling Gestational Diabetes: An Overview of Pathophysiology and Management. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2025; 26(5): 2320.
  32. A. Shamsad, A.S. Kushwah, R. Singh, M. Banerjee. Pharmaco-epi-genetic and patho-physiology of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM): An overview. Health Sciences Review 2023; 7: 100086.
  33. E. Noctor, F.P. Dunne. Type 2 diabetes after gestational diabetes: the influence of changing diagnostic criteria. World Journal of Diabetes 2015; 6(2): 234-44.
  34. M.D. Ortega. Precision Diagnostics for Monogenic Diabetes in Children. SMART-MD Journal of Precision Medicine 2025; 2(2): e119-28.
  35. G. Gaidamaviciene, R. Traberg, G. Mockeviciene, I. Aldakauskiene. Neonatal diabetes due to KCNJ11 pathogenic variant and its associated late risks. Journal of Rare Diseases 2024; 3(1): 37.
  36. S.W. Poon, B.H. Chung, M.H. Tsang, J.Y. Tung. Poon SW yiu, Chung BH yin, Tsang MH yin, Tung JY ling. Successful transition from insulin to sulphonylurea in a child with neonatal diabetes mellitus diagnosed beyond six months of age due to C42R mutation in the KCNJ11 gene. Clinical Pediatric Endocrinology : Case Reports and Clinical Investigations : Official Journal of the Japanese Society for Pediatric Endocrinology 2022; 31(3): 2022-0013.
  37. N. Ewald, P.D. Hardt. Diagnosis and treatment of diabetes mellitus in chronic pancreatitis. World Journal of Gastroenterology 2013; 19(42): 7276-81.
  38. H.J. Kim, Y.M. Kim, E. Kang, B.H. Lee, J.H. Choi, H.W. Yoo. Diabetes mellitus caused by secondary hemochromatosis after multiple blood transfusions in 2 patients with severe aplastic anemia. Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology {&amp;}amp; Metabolism 2017; 22(1): 60-4.
  39. M. Barbot, F. Ceccato, C. Scaroni. Diabetes Mellitus Secondary to Cushing's Disease. Frontiers in Endocrinology 2018; 9: 284.
  40. K.T. Bauerle, C. Harris. Glucocorticoids and Diabetes. Missouri Medicine 2016; 113(5): 378-83.
  41. R.I. Holt. Association Between Antipsychotic Medication Use and Diabetes. Current Diabetes Reports 2019; 19(10): 96.
  42. N. Eguchi, N.D. Vaziri, D.C. Dafoe, H. Ichii. The Role of Oxidative Stress in Pancreatic β Cell Dysfunction in Diabetes. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2021; 22(4): 1509.
  43. S.Z. Hasnain, J.B. Prins, M.A. McGuckin. Oxidative and endoplasmic reticulum stress in β-cell dysfunction in diabetes. Journal of Molecular Endocrinology 2016; 56(2): 33-54.
  44. E. Gurgul-Convey, I. Mehmeti, T. Plötz, A. Jörns, S. Lenzen. Sensitivity profile of the human EndoC-βH1 beta cell line to proinflammatory cytokines. Diabetologia 2016; 59(10): 2125-33.
  45. M. Löhr, G. Klöppel. Residual insulin positivity and pancreatic atrophy in relation to duration of chronic type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus and microangiopathy. Diabetologia 1987; 30(10): 757-62.
  46. J. Hanna, S. Markoulaki, M. Mitalipova, A.W. Cheng, J.P. Cassady, J. Staerk. Metastable pluripotent states in NOD-mouse-derived ESCs. Cell Stem Cell 2009; 4(6): 513-24.
  47. J.J. Meier, A. Bhushan, A.E. Butler, R.A. Rizza, P.C. Butler. Sustained beta cell apoptosis in patients with long-standing type 1 diabetes: indirect evidence for islet regeneration?. Diabetologia 2005; 48(11): 2221-8.
  48. J.L. Larsen. Pancreas transplantation: indications and consequences. Endocrine Reviews 2004; 25(6): 919-46.
  49. T. Morris, F. Aspinal, J. Ledger, K. Li, M. Gomes. The Impact of Digital Health Interventions for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes on Health and Social Care Utilisation and Costs: A Systematic Review. PharmacoEconomics Open 2023; 7(2): 163-73.
  50. H.I. Marrif, S.I. Al-Sunousi. Pancreatic β Cell Mass Death. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2016; 7: 83.
  51. A.E. Butler, J. Janson, S. Bonner-Weir, R. Ritzel, R.A. Rizza, P.C. Butler. β-cell deficit and increased β-cell apoptosis in humans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 2003; 52(1): 102-10.
  52. T. Sun, X. Han. Death versus dedifferentiation: the molecular bases of beta cell mass reduction in type 2 diabetes. Seminars in Cell {&amp;}amp; Developmental Biology 2020; 103: 76-82.
  53. M.J. Evans, M.H. Kaufman. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 1981; 292(5819): 154-6.
  54. G.R. Martin. Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1981; 78(12): 7634-8.
  55. K. Takahashi, S. Yamanaka. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 2006; 126(4): 663-76.
  56. S.P. Medvedev, A.I. Shevchenko, S.M. Zakian. Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: Problems and Advantages when Applying them in Regenerative Medicine. Acta Naturae 2010; 2(2): 18-28.
  57. C.L. Lin, Y. Ho. A bibliometric analysis of publications on pluripotent stem cell research. Cell Journal (Yakhteh) 2015; 17(1): 59.
  58. T. Sugawara, K. Nishino, A. Umezawa, H. Akutsu. Investigating cellular identity and manipulating cell fate using induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Research {&amp;}amp; Therapy 2012; 3(2): 8.
  59. D.A. Robinton, G.Q. Daley. The promise of induced pluripotent stem cells in research and therapy. Nature 2012; 481(7381): 295-305.
  60. A. Alciati, A. Reggiani, D. Caldirola, G. Perna. Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Technology: Toward the Future of Personalized Psychiatry. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2022; 12(8): 1340.
  61. A. Neaverson, M.H. Andersson, O.A. Arshad, L. Foulser, M. Goodwin-Trotman, A. Hunter. Differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells into cortical neural stem cells. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 2023; 10: 1023340.
  62. N. Maherali, K. Hochedlinger. Guidelines and techniques for the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2008; 3(6): 595-605.
  63. D. Dey, G.R. Evans. Generation of Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) Cells by Nuclear Reprogramming. Stem Cells International 2011; 2011: 619583.
  64. A.S. Smith, J. Macadangdang, W. Leung, M.A. Laflamme, D.H. Kim. Human iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes and tissue engineering strategies for disease modeling and drug screening. Biotechnology Advances 2017; 35(1): 77-94.
  65. P. Pratumkaew, S. Issaragrisil, S. Luanpitpong. Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells as a Tool for Modeling Hematologic Disorders and as a Potential Source for Cell-Based Therapies. Cells 2021; 10(11): 3250.
  66. M. Azhdari, A.Z. Hausen, N. Aghdami, M. Baghaban-Eslaminejad. Efficient and Reproducible Differentiation Protocol for Pluripotent Stem Cells into Functional Endothelial Cells: Unveiling the Path to Vascular Regeneration. Archives of Medical Research 2025; 56(3): 103142.
  67. P. Tornabene, J.M. Wells. Exploring optimal protocols for generating and preserving glucose-responsive insulin-secreting progenitor cells derived from human pluripotent stem cells. European Journal of Cell Biology 2024; 103(4): 151464.
  68. Z. Heydari, R. Gramignoli, A. Piryaei, E. Zahmatkesh, P. Pooyan, H. Seydi. Standard Protocols for Characterising Primary and In Vitro-Generated Human Hepatocytes. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 2025; 29(3): e70390.
  69. K.L. Edwards, B.M. Moore, T.S. Ganser, P.J. Susaimanickam, K. Sovell, Y. Martin. Robust generation of photoreceptor-dominant retinal organoids from porcine induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Reports 2025; 20(4): 102425.
  70. I. de Miguel-Beriain. The ethics of stem cells revisited. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 2015; 82-83: 176-80.
  71. A.E. Omole, A.O. Fakoya. Ten years of progress and promise of induced pluripotent stem cells: historical origins, characteristics, mechanisms, limitations, and potential applications. PeerJ 2018; 6: e4370.
  72. M.A. Aboul-Soud, A.J. Alzahrani, A. Mahmoud. Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs)-Roles in Regenerative Therapies, Disease Modelling and Drug Screening. Cells 2021; 10(9): 2319.
  73. N.M. King, J. Perrin. Ethical issues in stem cell research and therapy. Stem Cell Research & Therapy 2014; 5(4): 85.
  74. J. Lowenthal, S. Lipnick, M. Rao, S.C. Hull. Specimen collection for induced pluripotent stem cell research: harmonizing the approach to informed consent. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2012; 1(5): 409-21.
  75. V. Volarevic, B.S. Markovic, M. Gazdic, A. Volarevic, N. Jovicic, N. Arsenijevic. Ethical and Safety Issues of Stem Cell-Based Therapy. International Journal of Medical Sciences 2018; 15(1): 36-45.
  76. T. Yamaguchi, S. Hamanaka, A. Kamiya, M. Okabe, M. Kawarai, Y. Wakiyama. Development of an All-in-One Inducible Lentiviral Vector for Gene Specific Analysis of Reprogramming. PLoS One 2012; 7(7): e41007.
  77. V.K. Singh, M. Kalsan, N. Kumar, A. Saini, R. Chandra. Induced pluripotent stem cells: applications in regenerative medicine, disease modeling, and drug discovery. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 2015; 3: 2.
  78. D. Zhang, W. Jiang, M. Liu, X. Sui, X. Yin, S. Chen. Highly efficient differentiation of human ES cells and iPS cells into mature pancreatic insulin-producing cells. Cell Research 2009; 19(4): 429-38.
  79. K.A. D'Amour, A.G. Bang, S. Eliazer, O.G. Kelly, A.D. Agulnick, N.G. Smart. Production of pancreatic hormone-expressing endocrine cells from human embryonic stem cells. Nature Biotechnology 2006; 24(11): 1392-401.
  80. W. Jiang, Y. Shi, D. Zhao, S. Chen, J. Yong, J. Zhang. In vitro derivation of functional insulin-producing cells from human embryonic stem cells. Cell Research 2007; 17(4): 333-44.
  81. J. Siehler, A.K. Blöchinger, M. Meier, H. Lickert. Engineering islets from stem cells for advanced therapies of diabetes. Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 2021; 20(12): 920-40.
  82. S. Sheik Abdulazeez. Diabetes treatment: A rapid review of the current and future scope of stem cell research. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal : SPJ : The Official Publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society 2015; 23(4): 333-40.
  83. A. Rezania, J.E. Bruin, M.J. Riedel, M. Mojibian, A. Asadi, J. Xu. Maturation of human embryonic stem cell-derived pancreatic progenitors into functional islets capable of treating pre-existing diabetes in mice. Diabetes 2012; 61(8): 2016-29.
  84. Z. Alipio, W. Liao, E.J. Roemer, M. Waner, L.M. Fink, D.C. Ward. Reversal of hyperglycemia in diabetic mouse models using induced-pluripotent stem (iPS)-derived pancreatic β-like cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2010; 107(30): 13426-31.
  85. F.F. Zhu, P.B. Zhang, D.H. Zhang, X. Sui, M. Yin, T.T. Xiang. Generation of pancreatic insulin-producing cells from rhesus monkey induced pluripotent stem cells. Diabetologia 2011; 54(9): 2325-36.
  86. K. Jeon, H. Lim, J.H. Kim, N.V. Thuan, S.H. Park, Y.M. Lim. Differentiation and transplantation of functional pancreatic beta cells generated from induced pluripotent stem cells derived from a type 1 diabetes mouse model. Stem Cells and Development 2012; 21(14): 2642-55.
  87. M. Hosoya. Preparation of pancreatic β-cells from human iPS cells with small molecules. Islets 2012; 4(3): 249-52.
  88. M. Wang. Association and causality between diabetes and activin A: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Frontiers in Endocrinology 2024; 15: 1414585.
  89. J.E. Bruin, S. Erener, J. Vela, X. Hu, J.D. Johnson, H.T. Kurata. Characterization of polyhormonal insulin-producing cells derived in vitro from human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cell Research 2014; 12(1): 194-208.
  90. H.K. Bone, A.S. Nelson, C.E. Goldring, D. Tosh, M.J. Welham. A novel chemically directed route for the generation of definitive endoderm from human embryonic stem cells based on inhibition of GSK-3. Journal of Cell Science 2011; 124(Pt 12): 1992-2000.
  91. M. Borowiak, R. Maehr, S. Chen, A.E. Chen, W. Tang, J.L. Fox. Small molecules efficiently direct endodermal differentiation of mouse and human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2009; 4(4): 348-58.
  92. E. Wandzioch, K.S. Zaret. Dynamic Signaling Network for the Specification of Embryonic Pancreas and Liver Progenitors. Science 2009; 324(5935): 1707-10.
  93. A.S. Bernardo, C.H. Cho, S. Mason, H.M. Docherty, R.A. Pedersen, L. Vallier. Biphasic induction of Pdx1 in mouse and human embryonic stem cells can mimic development of pancreatic β-cells. Stem Cells (Dayton, Ohio) 2009; 27(2): 341-51.
  94. S. Chen, M. Borowiak, J.L. Fox, R. Maehr, K. Osafune, L. Davidow. A small molecule that directs differentiation of human ESCs into the pancreatic lineage. Nature Chemical Biology 2009; 5(4): 258-65.
  95. T. Thatava, T.J. Nelson, R. Edukulla, T. Sakuma, S. Ohmine, J.M. Tonne. Indolactam V/GLP-1-mediated differentiation of human iPS cells into glucose-responsive insulin-secreting progeny. Gene Therapy 2011; 18(3): 283-93.
  96. Y. Kunisada, N. Tsubooka-Yamazoe, M. Shoji, M. Hosoya. Small molecules induce efficient differentiation into insulin-producing cells from human induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Research 2012; 8(2): 274-84.
  97. F.F. Zhu, P.B. Zhang, D.H. Zhang, X. Sui, M. Yin, T.T. Xiang. Generation of pancreatic insulin-producing cells from rhesus monkey induced pluripotent stem cells. Diabetologia 2011; 54(9): 2325-36.
  98. D. Sakano, N. Shiraki, K. Kikawa, T. Yamazoe, M. Kataoka, K. Umeda. VMAT2 identified as a regulator of late-stage β-cell differentiation. Nature Chemical Biology 2014; 10(2): 141-8.
  99. S. Ohmine, K.A. Squillace, K.A. Hartjes, M.C. Deeds, A.S. Armstrong, T. Thatava. Reprogrammed keratinocytes from elderly type 2 diabetes patients suppress senescence genes to acquire induced pluripotency. Aging 2012; 4(1): 60-73.
  100. A. Rezania, J.E. Bruin, J. Xu, K. Narayan, J.K. Fox, J.J. O'Neil. Enrichment of human embryonic stem cell-derived NKX6.1-expressing pancreatic progenitor cells accelerates the maturation of insulin-secreting cells in vivo. Stem Cells (Dayton, Ohio) 2013; 31(11): 2432-42.
  101. C.G. Liew, N.N. Shah, S.J. Briston, R.M. Shepherd, C.P. Khoo, M.J. Dunne. AX4 enhances beta-cell differentiation of human embryonic stem cells. PLoS One 1783; 3(3): e1783.
  102. P. Blyszczuk, J. Czyz, G. Kania, M. Wagner, U. Roll, L. St-Onge. Expression of Pax4 in embryonic stem cells promotes differentiation of nestin-positive progenitor and insulin-producing cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2003; 100(3): 998-1003.
  103. Y.D. Kwon, S.K. Oh, H.S. Kim, S.Y. Ku, S.H. Kim, Y.M. Choi. Cellular manipulation of human embryonic stem cells by TAT-PDX1 protein transduction. Molecular Therapy : The Journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy 2005; 12(1): 28-32.
  104. B. Soria, E. Roche, G. Berná, T. León-Quinto, J.A. Reig, F. Martín. Insulin-secreting cells derived from embryonic stem cells normalize glycemia in streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice. Diabetes 2000; 49(2): 157-62.
  105. A.K. Teo, A.J. Wagers, R.N. Kulkarni. New opportunities: harnessing induced pluripotency for discovery in diabetes and metabolism. Cell Metabolism 2013; 18(6): 775-91.
  106. O.G. Kelly, M.Y. Chan, L.A. Martinson, K. Kadoya, T.M. Ostertag, K.G. Ross. Cell-surface markers for the isolation of pancreatic cell types derived from human embryonic stem cells. Nature Biotechnology 2011; 29(8): 750-6.
  107. J. Cai, C. Yu, Y. Liu, S. Chen, Y. Guo, J. Yong. Generation of homogeneous PDX1(+) pancreatic progenitors from human ES cell-derived endoderm cells. Journal of Molecular Cell Biology 2010; 2(1): 50-60.
  108. X. Xu, V.L. Browning, J.S. Odorico. Activin, BMP and FGF pathways cooperate to promote endoderm and pancreatic lineage cell differentiation from human embryonic stem cells. Mechanisms of Development 2011; 128(7-10): 412-27.
  109. R. Maehr, S. Chen, M. Snitow, T. Ludwig, L. Yagasaki, R. Goland. Generation of pluripotent stem cells from patients with type 1 diabetes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2009; 106(37): 15768-73.
  110. K. Tateishi, J. He, O. Taranova, G. Liang, A.C. D'Alessio, Y. Zhang. Generation of insulin-secreting islet-like clusters from human skin fibroblasts. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 2008; 283(46): 31601-7.
  111. Z. Alipio, W. Liao, E.J. Roemer, M. Waner, L.M. Fink, D.C. Ward. Reversal of hyperglycemia in diabetic mouse models using induced-pluripotent stem (iPS)-derived pancreatic β-like cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2010; 107(30): 13426-31.
  112. K. Jeon, H. Lim, J.H. Kim, N.V. Thuan, S.H. Park, Y.M. Lim. Differentiation and transplantation of functional pancreatic beta cells generated from induced pluripotent stem cells derived from a type 1 diabetes mouse model. Stem Cells and Development 2012; 21(14): 2642-55.
  113. E.M. Abdelalim, M.M. Emara. Advances and challenges in the differentiation of pluripotent stem cells into pancreatic β cells. World Journal of Stem Cells 2015; 7(1): 174-81.
  114. Y. Kondo, T. Toyoda, R. Ito, M. Funato, Y. Hosokawa, S. Matsui. Identification of a small molecule that facilitates the differentiation of human iPSCs/ESCs and mouse embryonic pancreatic explants into pancreatic endocrine cells. Diabetologia 2017; 60(8): 1454-66.
  115. M. Hashemitabar, E. Heidari. Redefining the signaling pathways from pluripotency to pancreas development: in vitro β-cell differentiation. Journal of Cellular Physiology 2019; 234(6): 7811-27.
  116. S. Sali, L. Azzam, T. Jaro, A.A. Ali, A. Mardini, O. Al-Dajani. A perfect islet: reviewing recent protocol developments and proposing strategies for stem cell derived functional pancreatic islets. Stem Cell Research {&amp;}amp; Therapy 2025; 16(1): 160.
  117. C.G. Liew. Generation of insulin-producing cells from pluripotent stem cells: from the selection of cell sources to the optimization of protocols. The Review of Diabetic Studies ; RDS 2010; 7(2): 82-92.
  118. D.T. Finegood, L. Scaglia, S. Bonner-Weir. Dynamics of β-cell mass in the growing rat pancreas. Estimation with a simple mathematical model. Diabetes 1995; 44(3): 249-56.
  119. L. Bouwens, D.G. Pipeleers. Extra-insular beta cells associated with ductules are frequent in adult human pancreas. Diabetologia 1998; 41(6): 629-33.
  120. M. Teta, S.Y. Long, L.M. Wartschow, M.M. Rankin, J.A. Kushner. Very slow turnover of β-cells in aged adult mice. Diabetes 2005; 54(9): 2557-67.
  121. L. Bouwens, I. Rooman. Regulation of pancreatic beta-cell mass. Physiological reviews 2005; 85(4): 1255-70.
  122. F.A. Van Assche, L. Aerts, F. De Prins. A morphological study of the endocrine pancreas in human pregnancy.. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1978; 85(11): 818-20.
  123. I. Mateizel, N. De Temmerman, U. Ullmann, G. Cauffman, K. Sermon, H. Van de Velde. Derivation of human embryonic stem cell lines from embryos obtained after IVF and after PGD for monogenic disorders. Human Reproduction 2006; 21(2): 503-11.
  124. Y. Verlinsky, N. Strelchenko, V. Kukharenko, S. Rechitsky, O. Verlinsky, V. Galat. Human embryonic stem cell lines with genetic disorders. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 2005; 10(1): 105-10.
  125. R. Eiges, A. Urbach, M. Malcov, T. Frumkin, T. Schwartz, A. Amit. Developmental study of fragile X syndrome using human embryonic stem cells derived from preimplantation genetically diagnosed embryos. Cell Stem Cell 2007; 1(5): 568-77.
  126. G. Lee, L. Studer. Induced pluripotent stem cell technology for the study of human disease. Nature Methods 2010; 7(1): 25-7.
  127. Y.C. Kudva, S. Ohmine, L.V. Greder, J.R. Dutton, A. Armstrong, J.G. De Lamo. Transgene-free disease-specific induced pluripotent stem cells from patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2012; 1(6): 451-61.
  128. M.M. Byrne, J. Sturis, K. Clément, N. Vionnet, M.E. Pueyo, M. Stoffel. Insulin secretory abnormalities in subjects with hyperglycemia due to glucokinase mutations. The Journal of Clinical Investigation 1994; 93(3): 1120-30.
  129. K. Kaji, K. Norrby, A. Paca, M. Mileikovsky, P. Mohseni, K. Woltjen. Virus-free induction of pluripotency and subsequent excision of reprogramming factors. Nature 2009; 458(7239): 771-5.
  130. M. Aguirre, M. Escobar, S. Forero Amézquita, D. Cubillos, C. Rincón, P. Vanegas. Application of the Yamanaka Transcription Factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc from the Laboratory to the Clinic. Genes 2023; 14(9): 1697.
  131. L. Ye, C. Swingen, J. Zhang. Induced pluripotent stem cells and their potential for basic and clinical sciences. Current Cardiology Reviews 2013; 9(1): 63-72.
  132. M.X. Doss, A. Sachinidis. Current Challenges of iPSC-Based Disease Modeling and Therapeutic Implications. Cells 2019; 8(5): 403.
  133. K.F. Leavens, J.R. Alvarez-Dominguez, L.T. Vo, H.A. Russ, A.V. Parent. Stem cell-based multi-tissue platforms to model human autoimmune diabetes. Molecular Metabolism 2022; 66: 101610.
  134. K.L. Wang, M. Tao, T.J. Wei, R. Wei. Pancreatic β cell regeneration induced by clinical and preclinical agents. World Journal of Stem Cells 2021; 13(1): 64-77.
  135. J. Cibelli, M.E. Emborg, D.J. Prockop, M. Roberts, G. Schatten, M. Rao. Strategies for improving animal models for regenerative medicine. Cell Stem Cell 2013; 12(3): 271-4.
  136. X.X. Wan, D.Y. Zhang, M.A. Khan, S.Y. Zheng, X.M. Hu, Q. Zhang. Stem Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: From Insulin Replacement to Beta-Cell Replacement. Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022; 13: 859638.
  137. S.N. Jalali, Z. Fathi, S. Mohebbi. Innovative Platforms in Regenerative Medicine: Bridging Research and Clinical Solutions. Jentashapir Journal of Cellular & Molecular Biology 2025; 16(1): e158285.
  138. J. Candiello, T.S. Grandhi, S.K. Goh, V. Vaidya, M. Lemmon-Kishi, K.R. Eliato. 3D heterogeneous islet organoid generation from human embryonic stem cells using a novel engineered hydrogel platform. Biomaterials 2018; 177: 27-39.
  139. N. Dadheech, M. Bermúdez de León, Z. Czarnecka, N. Cuesta-Gomez, I.T. Jasra, R. Pawlick. Scale up manufacturing approach for production of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived islets using Vertical Wheel\textregistered bioreactors. NPJ Regenerative Medicine 2025; 10(1): 24.
  140. A.M. Shapiro, D. Thompson, T.W. Donner, M.D. Bellin, W. Hsueh, J. Pettus. Insulin expression and C-peptide in type 1 diabetes subjects implanted with stem cell-derived pancreatic endoderm cells in an encapsulation device. Cell Reports Medicine 2021; 2(12): 100466.
  141. S. Huang, A. Razvi, Z. Anderson-Jenkins, D. Sirskyj, M. Gong, A.M. Lavoie. Process development and scale-up of pluripotent stem cell manufacturing. Cell & Gene Therapy Insights 2020; 6(9): 1277-98.
  142. F. Martins, M.H. Ribeiro. Quality and Regulatory Requirements for the Manufacture of Master Cell Banks of Clinical Grade iPSCs: the EU and USA Perspectives. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports 2025; 21(3): 645-79.
  143. J.N. Thon, S.M. Karlsson. Scale-up of platelet production from human pluripotent stem cells for developing targeted therapies: advances &amp;amp; challenges. Cell & Gene Therapy Insights 2017; 3(9): 701-18.
  144. S.C. Nath, L. Harper, D.E. Rancourt. Cell-Based Therapy Manufacturing in Stirred Suspension Bioreactor: thoughts for cGMP Compliance. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2020; 8: 599674.
  145. K.G. Wong, S.D. Ryan, K. Ramnarine, S.A. Rosen, S.E. Mann, A. Kulick. CryoPause: A New Method to Immediately Initiate Experiments after Cryopreservation of Pluripotent Stem Cells. Stem Cell Reports 2017; 9(1): 355-65.
  146. L. Soundararajan, H. Surendran, N. Patlolla, R. Battu, J. Stoddard, S. Arrizabalaga. Allogeneic RPE cell suspension manufactured at scale demonstrating preclinical safety and efficacy led to IND approval. NPJ Regenerative Medicine 2025; 10(1): 19.
  147. V.C. Chen, L.A. Couture. The suspension culture of undifferentiated human pluripotent stem cells using spinner flasks. InStem Cells and Good Manufacturing Practices: Methods, Protocols, and Regulations 2014; 2014: 12-21.
  148. E.A. Kimbrel, R. Lanza. Current status of pluripotent stem cells: moving the first therapies to the clinic. Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 2015; 14(10): 681-92.
  149. E.M. Abdelalim, A. Bonnefond, A. Bennaceur-Griscelli, P. Froguel. Pluripotent stem cells as a potential tool for disease modelling and cell therapy in diabetes. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports 2014; 10(3): 327-37.
  150. H.M. Shahjalal, A. Abdal Dayem, K.M. Lim, T.I. Jeon, S.G. Cho. Generation of pancreatic β cells for treatment of diabetes: advances and challenges. Stem Cell Research & Therapy 2018; 9(1): 355.
  151. E.F. Jacobson, E.S. Tzanakakis. Human pluripotent stem cell differentiation to functional pancreatic cells for diabetes therapies: Innovations, challenges and future directions. Journal of Biological Engineering 2017; 11(1): 21.
  152. R.H. Klein, P.S. Knoepfler. DPPA2, DPPA4, and other DPPA factor epigenomic functions in cell fate and cancer. Stem Cell Reports 2021; 16(12): 2844-51.
  153. J. Zhang, S. Ratanasirintrawoot, S. Chandrasekaran, Z. Wu, S.B. Ficarro, C. Yu. LIN28 Regulates Stem Cell Metabolism and Conversion to Primed Pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 2016; 19(1): 66-80.
  154. T. Deuse, X. Hu, S. Agbor-Enoh, M. Koch, M.H. Spitzer, A. Gravina. De novo mutations in mitochondrial DNA of iPSCs produce immunogenic neoepitopes in mice and humans. Nature Biotechnology 2019; 37(10): 1137-44.
  155. A.J. Sercel, N.M. Carlson, A.N. Patananan, M.A. Teitell. Mitochondrial DNA Dynamics in Reprogramming to Pluripotency. Trends in Cell Biology 2021; 31(4): 311-23.
  156. M.E. Bogomiakova, A.N. Bogomazova, M.A. Lagarkova. Dysregulation of Immune Tolerance to Autologous iPSCs and Their Differentiated Derivatives. Biochemistry. Biokhimiia 2024; 89(5): 799-816.

Comments