Extracellular matrix (ECM) plays a critical role in cell behavior and development. Organoids generated from human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) are in the spotlight of many research areas. However, the lack of physiological cues in classical cell culture materials hinders efficient iPSC differentiation. Incorporating commercially available ECM into stem cell culture provides physical and chemical cues beneficial for cell maintenance. Animal-derived commercially available basement membrane products are composed of ECM proteins and growth factors that support cell maintenance. Since the ECM holds tissue-specific properties that can modulate cell fate, xeno-free matrices are used to stream up translation to clinical studies. While commercially available matrices are widely used in hiPSC and organoid work, the equivalency of these matrices has not been evaluated yet. Here, a comparative study of hiPSC maintenance and human intestinal organoids (hIO) generation in four different matrices: Matrigel (Matrix 1-AB), Geltrex (Matrix 2-AB), Cultrex (Matrix 3-AB), and VitroGel (Matrix 4-XF) was conducted. Although the colonies lacked a perfectly round shape, there was minimal spontaneous differentiation, with over 85% of the cells expressing the stem cell marker SSEA-4. Matrix 4-XF led to the formation of 3D round clumps. Also, increasing the concentration of supplement and growth factors in the media used to make the Matrix 4-XF hydrogel solution improved hiPSC expression of SSEA-4 by 1.3-fold. Differentiation of Matrix 2-AB -maintained hiPSC led to fewer spheroid releases during the mid-/hindgut stage compared to the other animal-derived basement membranes. Compared to others, the xeno-free organoid matrix (Matrix 4-O3) leads to larger and more mature hIO, suggesting that the physical properties of xeno-free hydrogels can be harnessed to optimize organoid generation. Altogether, the results suggest that variations in the composition of different matrices affect stages of IO differentiation. This study raises awareness about the differences in commercially available matrices and provides a guide for matrix optimization during iPSC and IO work.
Read full abstract