Figure 1. Blood Cell Reprogramming Efficiencies Are Higher in ReproTeSR™ Medium Compared to in hESC Medium

Efficiency of reprogramming (A) erythroid cells or (B) CD34+ cells using episomal reprogramming vectors is higher in ReproTeSR™ medium compared to in KOSR-containing hESC medium. Data shown are mean /- SEM; erythroid cells, n=4; CD34 cells, n=5.

Figure 2. ReproTeSR™ Efficiently Reprograms Fibroblasts

Dermal fibroblasts were transfected with the ReproRNA™-OKSGM vector and reprogrammed under feeder-dependent (standard KOSR-containing hES cell medium on inactivated mouse embryonic fibroblasts (iMEFs)) or feeder-independent conditions (ReproTeSR™ on Corning® Matrigel®). Fibroblasts (passage 4) were reprogrammed with average efficiencies of 0.10 ± 0.06% (hES cell medium) and 0.20 ± 0.07% (ReproTeSR™). Reprogramming efficiency of fibroblasts with ReproRNA™ and ReproTeSR™ is comparable to that reported with Sendai virus. (Schlaeger TM, et al. (2015) Nat Biotechnol 33(1): 58-63.) (n ≥ 6; Data shown are mean ± SD).

Figure 3. Feeder-Free Reprogramming with ReproRNA™-OKSGM Vector and ReproTeSR™ Generates iPS Cell Colonies with Superior Colony Morphology

Representative images of iPS cell colonies were generated using ReproRNA™‑OKSGM and cultured in (A) standard hES cell medium on irradiated mouse embryonic fibroblasts (iMEFs) or (B) ReproTeSR™ on Corning® Matrigel®. iPS cell colonies derived using ReproTeSR™ exhibit more defined borders, compact morphology, and reduced differentiation as compared to the ES cell medium.