Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of springeropenLink to Publisher's site
Stem Cell Reviews
Stem Cell Rev. 2012 March; 8(1): 1–15.
Published online 2011 May 3. doi:  10.1007/s12015-011-9261-7
PMCID: PMC3285761

LIF-Dependent Signaling: New Pieces in the Lego


LIF, a member of the IL6 family of cytokine, displays pleiotropic effects on various cell types and organs. Its critical role in stem cell models (e.g.: murine ES, human mesenchymal cells) and its essential non redundant function during the implantation process of embryos, in eutherian mammals, put this cytokine at the core of many studies aiming to understand its mechanisms of action, which could benefit to medical applications. In addition, its conservation upon evolution raised the challenging question concerning the function of LIF in species in which there is no implantation. We present the recent knowledge about the established and potential functions of LIF in different stem cell models, (embryonic, hematopoietic, mesenchymal, muscle, neural stem cells and iPSC). We will also discuss EVO-DEVO aspects of this multifaceted cytokine.

Keywords: LIF cytokine, IL6, Pleiotropy, Stem cells, Signaling, Chromatin, miRNA, EVO-DEVO, Reprogrammation, p53

Generalities on LIF

LIF cytokine is a glycosylated protein (MW of 37–62 kDa depending on its degree of glycosylation) secreted by extraembryonic part of the embryo at the egg cylinder stage as well as by many cell types in adult organs (e.g.: endometrial cells, fibroblasts, hepatocytes, osteoblasts, monocytes, macrophages, T cells) [1, 2]. Three laboratories simultaneously discovered and cloned the LIF cytokine through its pleiotropic biological activities on i) the proliferation of adult human T cells (HILDA; [3]), ii) the maintenance of ES cells pluripotency (DIF [4]) and iii) the inhibition of leukemic cell differentiation (LIF; [5]). LIF was thus characterized as a pleiotropic cytokine with pro or anti-differentiation, pro or anti-survival effects depending upon cell maturity and cell types [6, 7].

LIF belongs to the “helical type 1” Interleukin 6 family, which includes IL11, IL27, CNTF, CT1, CLC, and OSM [812]. These cytokines interact with homo- or heteromeric receptors, all including the common gp130 subunit (IL6 signaling transducer, (IL6ST)) [13]. LIF receptor is composed of two subunits, gp130 and gp190 (LIF receptor beta). The gp130 common subunit is believed to explain the functional redundancies with several members of the IL-6 family [1]. The gp190 subunit is under ERK MAPK and axotrophin/March7 E3 ligase-dependent degradation pathways, respectively in liver cell models and in T cells [14, 15]. Glycosylated LIF can also hold mannose phosphate residues able to bind the Mannose 6 phosphate receptor to the core gp130/GP190 complex and allowing recycling of LIF ligand [16]. Recently, Sortilin, an intracellular sorting receptor, member of vacuolar protein sorting-10 (Vps10) domain-containing proteins, has been shown to facilitate the signaling of all helical type 1 cytokines which engage the gp130/LIFR beta complex [17].

Studies of LIF Knock-Out (KO) mice revealed that LIF is essential for the implantation process of blastocysts, for the maintenance of hematopoietic stem cell pools and for the not so well understood mechanisms leading to cachectic animals ([1820] and reviewed in [7]). In addition, in LIF rescued KO mice model, it was shown that LIF is essential for mammary gland involution after lactation [21]. More recent studies performed with LIF KO mice challenged for injury responses, demonstrated the importance of LIF at various stages of neurogenesis and for tissue regeneration after brain or spinal cord injury [2224]. Also, LIF is potentially involved in particular contexts of muscle stimulation and regeneration [2527] and analysis of LIF KO newborn mice revealed a 40% decrease in bone volume [28]. Double and triple KO model mice with other members of the IL6 family, as CT1 and CNTF, revealed also the importance of LIF and CNTF for motor neuron functions [29, 30]. The therapeutic potential of LIF in neurodegenerative and autoimmune diseases and in reproduction failure treatments has recently been reviewed stressing the importance to dissect LIF outcomes in the different cell contexts [31, 32]. Exemples of LIF functions in vitro and in muso are presented in Tables 1 and and22.

Table 1
Pleiotropic effects of LIF: in vitro models
Table 2
Pleiotropic effects of LIF revealed by LIF−/− KO mice model analysis

Recent studies have also demonstrated that LIF expression is under the control of the p53 pathway for the implantation process [3335]. This recent finding of a crosstalk between p53 (the so called “guardian of the genome” also recently involved in somatic cell reprogrammation) and LIF opens new perspectives for LIF studies in relation with the resetting of the pluripotent program, from committed or mature differentiated cells [3641].

LIF Signaling and Pleiotropy: As a Lego

We propose to view LIF signaling as a Lego built with different combinations of similar pieces, leading to various outcomes, which range from cell proliferation and survival to differentiation and apoptosis, depending on maturity and cell types [1, 2, 7, 42]. This Lego includes the “ptyr signaling toolkit” described recently by Lim and Pawson [43]. Indeed, major pieces, always present in the core of the Lego, are kinases (as JAKs, SRC members, ZAP70 cytosolic tyrosine kinases and MAPK family members), activated transcription factors (STAT, AP1 (e.g.:JunB/cfos), NFKb, MYC family members) and feedback loop components like SHP1 and SHP2 phosphatases, PIAS (Protein Inhibitor of the Activated STAT) family of proteins and SOCS (Suppressor of cytoking Signaling). In both mouse and human genomes, there are four JAKs (JAK1, 2, 3 TYK2), nine SRC [44], two ERK/MAPK (ERK1 and ERK2), eight STATs, two SHPs (i.e., SHP-1 and SHP-2), eight SOCS (SOCS1 to SOCS7 and CIS) and four PIAS (PIAS1, -3, -x, and -y) proteins [45]. Many combinations of these proteins will result in pleiotropic effects of this cytokine. For example, the LIF/JAK1/ERK1/2/PI3K/STAT3/JunB-cfos/KLF4/5/SOCS3 combination leads to maintenance of the pluripotency in the murine ES cell model, with ERK signaling pushing towards differentiation while STAT3 and its targets allow cells to remain undifferentiated by repressing endoderm and mesoderm differentiation programs [4648]. Epigenetic marks, not yet studied in details, represent an additional level of sophistication required to understand the mechanisms of LIF pleiotropy, in cell models in which LIF mediates opposite effects. Eed protein, a LIF-dependent STAT3 target of the repressive Polycomb complex, has been shown to silence differentiation-associated genes in self-renewing mES cells [49]. We have proposed that the level of expression and/or of activation of chromatin regulators could end up to opened or closed chromatin configuration, leading to accessibility (or not) of STAT3-dependent promoters, helping to explain opposite outcomes of LIF/STAT3 pathway [7]. It might be informative to perform parallel Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-seq analyses with anti-phosphoSTAT3 antibody in mES and in the M1 cell line (a leukemic myeloid cell line in which LIF triggers differentiation) to characterize LIF/STAT3—dependent promoters in two cell models in which LIF drives opposite effects [5054]. The importance of feedback loop control of LIF signaling, almost always including SOCS3, has recently been illustrated in mice engineered to express mutated forms of gp130 lacking the SOCS3-binding site. In those mice, which develop a variety of hematopoietic and immunological defects, STAT signaling is sustained highlighting the critical role of SOCS3 in limiting gp130 signaling [55]. In addition, differential kinetic of inactivation and desensitization of LIF-dependent pathways, which could be mediated by different inhibitory signaling components, as shown for the IL6 cytokine [56], could account for its various cell-dependent effects. The characterization of combinatorial LIF-dependent activated/repressed components (including proteins and also miRNAs, as demonstrated in mES and human mesenchymal cells [5759]) and the set up of tools allowing to understand the mechanisms of action of these proteins and/or miR complexes on cell physiology, is a future challenge in cytokine and stem cell fields.

LIF in Stem Cells

LIF in mES Cells: Highlights on New LIF Targets and of Connections with the Trio OCT4/NANOG/SOX2

Murine ES cell model, strictly depending on LIF for self renewal and maintenance of pluripotency, is a powerful model to study its effects on cells grown at different stages of maturity (from pluripotent to early differentiated cells) and to unravel the mechanisms of pluripotency and pleiotropy (Fig. 1). LIF, in synergy with BMP4 or Wnts protein members (Wnt3a and Wnt5, [60, 61]) induces PI3K and ERK signals which are contradictory signals leading respectively to maintenance of pluripotency (through NANOG) or to differentiation [46, 47, 6266]. ES cells are poised, able to respond shortly and efficiently to differentiation signals. However, a complex pluripotent program locks cells in self renewal and undifferentiated state, at least in cell culture. Years of studies of the mES cell model led to the characterization of master pieces of pluripotent program. This includes. along with the LIF signaling pathway, which represses expression of endoderm and mesoderm markers, the OCT4/SOX2 targets genes, which block differentiation towards trophectoderm lineage. Knowledge of these complementary and intricate pathways led also to the set up of defined medium complemented with specific chemicals which mimic the effects of essential components of stemness, as the 3i medium (a basic serum free medium supplemented with three chemical inhibitors, repressing MEKs, GSK3b and FGFR pathways) or the “pluripotin/LIF” medium [64, 6769] . Recently retinol, the alcohol form of Vitamin A, which is not metabolized in retinoic acid (RA) in ES cells, because of the absence of RALDH and ALDH enzymes, has been shown as a new powerful inducer of NANOG allowing maintenance of ES cell pluripotency in the absence of LIF [70, 71]. In addition, it has been demonstrated that mES cells express some markers in a salt/pepper way, as shown in Inner Cell Mass (ICM) of early blastocysts [72]. Indeed, genes as Rex1, Nanog, Zscan4 and many others have heterogeneous expression in morphologically homogeneous colonies of mES cells, probably allowing cells to respond quickly to differentiation signals [73, 74]. The importance of LIF-dependent components involved in the heterogeneity of mES cells is presently unknown.

Fig. 1
The mES system: the «three in one» cell model to study LIF mechanisms in pluripotent, committed and differentiated cells. Part of this figure has been taken from the Web site:, available under the ...

Genes Involved in Cell Pluripotency: Functional Involvement, One by One

There are at least a hundred of genes individually involved in the maintenance of mES cell pluripotency. Indeed, Knock Down (KD) or Knock Out (KO) of candidate genes, proves to be a powerful way to demonstrate their role in ES cell pluripotency. Proteins in each cell compartment, from the membrane to the nucleus have been shown to be critical for maintenance of pluripotency as shown for Gap junction proteins [7578], CrxOS [79], Yap [80], Pem [81], Zic3 [82, 83], Zfx [84], Pdcd2 [85], Cobra1 [86] and many other genes revealed by high throughput RNAi strategies [8789]. Also chromatin regulators (Jumonji members, [90] and Chd1, [91], which modulate respectively the level of histone methylation and the degree of chromatin compaction, and Ronin [92, 93], all able to regulate many genes together) and miRNAs (controlling cell cycle regulators via c-MYC [57, 94] or Master gene expression [95]) are also key players involved in the maintenance of mES cell pluripotency. The importance of miRNAs was established in previous studies showing that embryos or ES cells lacking proper miRNA synthesis (Dicer and Dgcr8 KO models) are not anymore pluripotent, stressing the importance of miRNA in ES cell plasticity [96101].

It is worth stressing that some of these genes behave as “rheostat” with various level of their expression leading to different (sometimes opposite) cell phenotypes, as first shown for Oct4 and then for Nanog and Sox2 [102104], illustrating the poised state of mES cells.

However, in seeking for the “Holy Grail” of the pluripotency markers, we might attempt to dissociate genes whose repression will lead to slow destruction of cells (which could go through a pseudo-differentiation stage before death, when touching Gap junctions, adhesion or cytoskeleton cell components, for example), to genes having specific effects on the pluripotent machinery, a not easy task.

Novel LIF Signatures

By extensive microarray studies performed in mES cells grown with or without LIF for 24 or 48 h and reinduced with LIF for 30 min, we have defined three types of LIF signatures: Pluri, Spe-Lifind and Pleio-Lifind [105]. Genes from both Pluri and Lifind clusters are essential for the proper self renewal and maintenance of pluripotency in mES cells.

Pluri genes, whose expression is restricted to undifferentiated mES cells, at least up to 10 days of differentiation triggered by LIF withdrawal, includes Esrrb, Gjb3, Krt42, Ak7, Ly6, Susd2, Irak3, Tcfcp2l1, Pim3, Ceacam1 and Mras. This extends the list of known stemness genes [89, 106, 107]. By analyzing the expression profiles of the Pluri genes in Microarray data obtained with the KD of Oct4 or Nanog [108] we concluded that while the expression of Esrrb and Ly6 is repressed in OCT4 or NANOG KD cell lines, expression of Susd2, Ak7, Krt42 and Irak3 is only under OCT4 control. In addition, expression of gap junction protein encoding genes is induced in OCT4 (Gjb3/Connexin 31 and Gjb5/connexin 31.1) or NANOG (Gja1/connexin43) Knock Down cell lines. Individual KD of Irak3, Susd2 and Ly6 leads to weak increase of differentiation markers suggesting their involvement in mES cell pluripotency. Efficient approaches allowing to disrupt the expression of many genes at once should be necessary for further characterization of gene clusters in mES cells [105].

In cells grown without LIF for 24 or 48 h and reinduced with LIF for 30 min, we have identified the Lifind (Lif induced) genes. Some of them are direct targets of STAT3 and a subset of these genes is also regulated by the PI3K/NANOG pathway [48, 109, 110]. Only part of the genes induced after 24 h of LIF withdrawal is also induced after a longer period of starvation. We have made a distinction between Spe-Lifind genes (only induced in restricted time windows of LIF withdrawal, 24 h) and Pleio-Lifind genes (induced by LIF after different periods of LIF starvation, 24 h, 48 h or 10 days after LIF withdrawal, this latter condition corresponding to differentiated cells which re-express LIF and its receptors [4, 7, 105, 111]). Since withdrawal of LIF for 24 h leads to reversible commitment [112114], we postulate that some of the Spe-Lifind genes could be involved in the reversible process.

Klf4 (a well known member of the “Yamanaka” cocktail, involved in reprogrammation of somatic cells to iPSC) and Klf5 are both Spe-Lifind genes shown to be critical actors of maintenance of pluripotency in mES [115120]. Both genes are also direct STAT3 targets and block endoderm (Klf4) or mesoderm (Klf5) differentiation [48]. Klf4 and 5 are also under the control of NANOG expression and a regulatory loop between KLF4 and NANOG has been suggested since KLF4 regulates the expression of NANOG by direct binding to its promoter [120]. Klf4 synergizes with OCT4, definitively connecting master genes (OCT4/SOX2/NANOG) with LIF/STAT3 pathway [48, 117, 120, 121]. Other Spe-Lifind genes, could be essential “ressetors” of pluripotent program during the reversible phase of commitment [7, 114].

LIF in Adult Stem Cells

Hematopoietic Stem Cells (HSC)

Several groups have described similar, different or even contradictory results about the in vitro effects of LIF on cultured normal adult hematopoietic stem cells and progenitors. In articles devoted to its functional effects on normal hematopoietic progenitors it was shown that LIF has a growth stimulating activity on human CFU-Eo and BFU-E [122] while it is ineffective on mouse CFU-GM [123]. LIF also induces the proliferation of very primitive multipotential progenitors (so called CFU-Blast) suggesting that this cytokine could stimulate the cell cycle entry of these mostly quiescent primitive progenitors [124]. Interestingly, LIF is active on CFU-Mix only in serum containing medium and its effect is mostly synergistic or additive to other multi-lineage cytokines (IL-3, IL-6 and GM-CSF) [125]. These data suggest that LIF mostly stimulates the in vitro proliferation of primitive hematopoietic progenitors. In vivo, LIF is active on hematopoietic progenitors and play a role in the regulation of the stem cell pool [20]. Permanently elevated levels of LIF in adult mice induced a polyvisceral and rapidly lethal pathology [126]. The most important hematological modifications are a reduction of bone marrow hematopoiesis related to myelosclerosis that contrasts with a splenomegaly due to an abnormal spleen hematopoiesis, increased levels of progenitors in the spleen and thrombocytosis [126, 127]. However the most informative results concerning the physiological role of LIF in the regulation of hematopoiesis were obtained from KO mouse models. LIF deficient mice are viable. However, when compared to wild type animals the pool of BFU-E and CFU-GM progenitors were reduced in bone marrow and even more in the spleen of LIF−/− mice [20]. More surprising is the fact that the null LIFR beta (gp190) spontaneous mutations in humans and induced by gene targeting in KO mice had no hematological abnormality despite the fact that other LIF target tissues were disturbed [128, 129]. Taken altogether, these in vitro and in vivo results suggest that LIF is not a mandatory cytokine for the physiological regulation of adult hematopoiesis. This is in agreement with its potential role on some basic functions such as effect on chromatin status, for example, for which a degree of redundancy is expected.

Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSC)

Among their numerous biological functions, MSC display immune-modulatory properties. They suppress T cell proliferation induced by various stimuli in vitro and they show similar effect in vivo. Indeed several clinical trials evidenced that injection of MSC to Bone Marrow (BM) allografted patients reduced their graft versus host disease by improving the donor T cells immune tolerance [130]. Interestingly, LIF is produced by human BMMSC [131] and its overexpression and depletion in mouse models led to immune disturbances [132]. Recently, it was suggested that the MSC-induced immune tolerance is due to their production of LIF [133]. However, the cellular and molecular mechanisms (that also involve other identified MSC molecules) leading to this transplantation tolerance remain functionally ignored. Another established ex vivo effect of MSC is to improve the maintenance of HSC in liquid cocultures. Indeed, a positive effect of LIF on the in vitro maintenance of murine HSC was mediated by BM stromal cells in which it upregulates the expression of various hematopoietic cytokines [134]. By using an elegant model of young and old, wild type and LIF−/− mice for cross cocultures of MSC and Lin- Sca1+ hematopoietic progenitors and stem cells, it has been shown that LIF−/− mice had only slight disturbances of hematopoiesis when explored in culture [135] since LIF−/− and WT MSC were not significantly different in their capacity to maintain Lin− Sca1+ hematopoietic progenitors of WT and LIF−/− mice in liquid cocultures. Complementary experiments (including transplantation) should be performed if one wants to conclude about the real direct/indirect effects of LIF on HSC in vivo. However, a novel direct autocrine effect of LIF to maintain the multipotent program of MSC has recently been described. Indeed, down regulation of MSC LIF expression by specific miRNA favors their differentiation towards the osteoblast and adipogenic lineages [59]. In this context, it is worth stressing that in vivo silencing of the gp190 subunit of the LIF receptor leads to major disturbances of the bone and other mesenchymal tissues suggesting a major non redundant role of LIF in the maintenance and commitment of MSC [128, 129].

Muscle Satellite Cells

Muscle satellite cells are the major cell type responsible for post-natal skeletal muscle growth and regeneration. These quiescent cells are located under the basal lamina of muscle fibers, and become activated upon injury. They proliferate and differentiate into new muscle fibers and during regeneration, the satellite cell pool is also reconstituted [136138]. Since the first articles showing a role of LIF in stimulation of myoblast proliferation in culture [139, 140], it has been shown that LIF engages JAK1, STAT1, and STAT3 to promote cell proliferation and to repress myogenic differentiation, in primary myoblasts and in the C2C12 cell models [26, 141]. However, an opposite role for STAT3 in myoblast differentiation was shown by knockdown of endogenous STAT3 which dramatically blocked myogenic differentiation. It was then suggested that, as in the murine ES cell model, LIF/STAT3 might play distinct roles at different stages of muscle differentiation [142]. Further studies are needed to understand how STAT3 coordinates with myoD to control myogenic differentiation and how they cross-talk with other signaling pathways. It has also been demonstrated that LIF expression in skeletal muscle is critical for the development of skeletal muscle hypertrophy in the functional overload model [143]. LIF has also been suggested as being a novel myokine, secreted by muscle cells during exercise in link with activation of calcium-dependent pathway and changes in energy status [27]. However, in this study, the LIF secretion is around 3 pg/ml, which could be considered to be close to background level, based on known physical constant describing cytokine/receptor interactions [144].

Neural Stem Cells

Neural stem cells (NSCs) in the adult brain continuously provide new neurons to the hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG) and the olfactory bulb (OB). The progression from neural precursor cells (NPCs) to mature neurons is tightly controlled by coordination of cell-intrinsic programs and external signals within the neurogenic niche. Understanding signaling in adult neurogenesis is a key challenge to understand the physiological roles of neurogenesis, but also to provide knowledge required to use NSCs as potential therapy for treatment of brain diseases [145147].

Cytokines that signal through the LIFRbeta/gp130 receptor complex, including LIF and CNTF have been suggested to promote the self-renewal of embryonic and adult mouse or rat NPCs [22, 148]. However, with CNTF or LIF KO models, it was shown that while CNTF-induced STAT3 signaling is essential for the formation and/or maintenance of the neurogenic subgranular zone in the adult dentate gyrus, LIF was not required [149]. In addition, in a model of human neural stem cells, which can be expanded under EGF and FGF2, no effect of LIF was observed [150]. In contrast, in a rat model, LIF, and not CNTF, was crucial for the expansion of NPCs in the Sub Ventricular Zone (SVZ) after perinatal brain injury [151]. LIF was also shown to control neural differentiation and maintenance of stem cell-derived murine spiral ganglion neuron precursors, a finding which could be relevant in cell replacement studies with animal models featuring spiral ganglion neuron degeneration [23]. Another study shows that during normal development of mouse optic nerve, there is a defined developmental time window when LIF is required for correct myelination [152].

Understanding of LIF signaling in adult stem cells will still depend on detailed analysis performed in LIF KO model mice, challenged with particular stimuli aiming at increasing or decreasing the natural pool of stem cells in their relevant niche.

LIF in Reprogrammation: Antagonism Between LIF and p53 Pathways. What for?

Somatic cell reprogrammation which leads to the derivation of iPSC is mediated by specific set of genes (Oct4, Sox2, cMyc and Klf4 or Oct4, Sox2, Lin28 and Nanog), including LIF targets [119, 153, 154]. L-Myc has been shown recently to replace c-MYC in the reprogrammation cocktail with the potential advantage to reduce the tumorigenicity of the derived iPSC [155]. In addition, growing cells at low O2 concentration (3%–5% O2), [156], and blocking the p53 pathway [36, 37, 40, 41, 157], are also critical parameters which increase the efficiency of somatic cell reprogrammation.

The expression of the LIF cytokine is under the direct control of p53 (at least in mouse endometrium cells [35]), and of N-MYC (in the neuroblastoma cell model, [158]). Indeed, LIF promoter contains specific binding sites for these regulatory transcription factors. Whether N-MYC and p53 act together or not have not been established so far. LIF-induced genes and repression of p53 pathway seems to be paradoxical effectors for efficient cell reprogramming, unless both signals are not required simultaneously, a hypothesis which will deserve future attention.


A large amount of data has been accumulated on the pleiotropic functions of LIF in mammals, but so far we have little insight on what could be its functions in non mammalian vertebrate with respect to early development and differentiation [159]. A limited number of signaling pathways is operating during metazoan development and most, if not all of them are conserved over a large evolutionary scale [160, 161]. Among them is the JAK/STAT pathway which conveys LIF signals. LIF belongs to class I-helical cytokines family which is considered to constitute a monophyletic group having evolved from a single ancestral gene through successive duplication events mainly in the vertebrate lineage [162]. Indeed, the core signaling elements of the JAK/STAT pathway has been found in invertebrate such as Drosophila with a unique cytokine-like peptide ligand capable of activating the pathway [163]. The knowledge of the conservation of IL6 family members, as LIF, between divergent vertebrate species and the functions of LIF during development can be very informative for understanding its pleiotropic functions. LIF ortholog has been identified through cDNA cloning and in silico analysis in several non mammalian vertebrates. Chicken cDNA LIF has been cloned and shown to be able to maintain blastodermal cells into an undifferentiated state [164]. cDNA encoding LIF ortholog has also been cloned in teleost species as zebrafish, carp and goldfish [165167]. The finding of LIF-like cytokine in fishes indicates that the cytokine already existed before the fish-tetrapod divergence that occurred aproximatively 450 million years ago. LIF ortholog is also present in amphibian and we have cloned, through in silico analysis, a Xenopus LIF cDNA (our unpublished data). Although the amino acid conservation of LIF sequences between mammalian and non mammalian vertebrate species is rather low (20%–40%), those sequences share a conserved tridimensional fold. LIF receptor (LIFR) has been identified in chick and zebrafish and functional analysis performed in both species. In chicken, LIFR is involved in the control of vasoactive intestinal peptide expression in sympathetic neurons [168]. Functional experiments using morpholino based mediated knock down in zebrafish have shown that, unlike LIF, whose knock down has no obvious effects on development, LIFR knock down impairs proper neural development [169]. Although there is no functional data about LIF and LIFR functions in Xenopus development yet, it has been found that STAT3 activation, through gp130 signaling, ventralizes embryo independently of BMP4 [170]. Whether this effect can be related to LIF signaling through its receptor awaits experiments. Since LIF is essential to murine ES cells pluripotency, it is striking to note that STAT3 is able to maintain Xenopus pluripotent neural crest cells in an undifferentiated state downstream of FGF signals [171].

According to the current data and the evolutionary conservation of the components of the LIF signaling pathway, we speculate that LIF can generate distinct responses at different times during development/differentiation in different species. Most of the genes, that we have defined as LIF signatures in the mES model, is conserved in non mammalian vertebrate genomes and their study in the amphibian Xenopus model should allow for a rapid and efficient screening of the functions of the genes that make up the LIF signatures. This should also allow a better understanding of the functions of the LIF pathway during development.


The challenge, when studying LIF, is to catch the proper time window of its effects. Indeed, while LIF is essential for maintenance of pluripotency of murine ES cells (mES), it is not required for human ES cells (hES). It has been elegantly demonstrated that this was due to the fact that murine and human ES cells are respectively derived from early and late epiblast, stressing the differential effects of LIF that might depend on the embryonic stage. In addition, LIF/STAT3 signaling reverts murine EpiSC cells (Epiblast-derived cells, which are similar to human ES cells) to mES cells probably by LIF-dependent expression of KLF4, as suggested by recent reports [172175].

Functions of LIF studied in KO model mice, along with functional tests performed at different time windows in the mES cells model, with new LIF targets, should increase our knowledge on this still fascinating cytokine in the near future.


This work was supported by CNRS, University Bordeaux Segalen and fundings under the sixth Research framework program of the European Union (FungenES, LSHG-CT-2003- 503494), the Association de la Recherche contre le Cancer, the Ligue Nationale contre le cancer (comité Charentes Aquitaine), the Association Française contre les Myopathies, IFR66/SFR Trans Biomed Bordeaux and the Etablissement Français du Sang, Aquitaine.

We thank JF Moreau and P Veschambre for critical reading of the manuscript.

We apologise for LIF-dedicated articles not cited in this review.

Conflicts of interest The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.


Adenylate Kinase 7
AcetaLdehyde DeHydrogenase
Activator Protein 1
Burst Forming Unit Erythroid
Bone Morphogenetic Protein
complementary DeoxyriboNucleic Acid
Carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 1
Colony-Forming Units Blast
Colony-Forming Units Erythroid
Colony-Forming Units Eosinophil
Colony-Forming Units Granulocyte Macrophage
Colony-Forming Units Mix
Chromodomain-helicase-DNA-binding protein 1
Chromatin ImmunoPrecipitation followed by sequencing
Cytokine-Inductible SH2
Ciliary NeuroTrophic Factor
Cardiotrophin-Like Cytokine
cofactor of BRCA1 (breast cancer 1)
Crx Opposite strand
Dual adaptor for PY and PI3K
Dentate Gyrus
Polycomb protein Embryonic Ectoderm Development
Epidermal Growth Factor
epiblast stemcells
Extracellular signal-Regulated Kinases
Embryonic Stem
EStrogen-Related Receptor beta
Fibroblast Growth Factor
Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor
Gap junction membrane channel protein alpha 1
Gap junction membrane channel protein beta 3
Granulocyte Macrophage Colony Stimulating Factor
Glycogen Synthase Kinase 3 beta
human Embryonic Stem
Hematopoietic Stem Cell
Inner Cell Mass
InterLeukin 6, 11, 27
InterLeukin 6 Signal Transducer
induced Pluripotent Stem Cells
Interleukin 1 Receptor-Associated Kinase 3
Janus Kinase
Stress-Jun-activated protein Kinase
Oncogene JUN-B
Knock Down
kilo Dalton
Kruppel-Like Factor 4/5
Keratin 42
Leukemia Inhibitory Factor
LIF Receptor
Avian myelocytomatosis viral oncogene homolog 1, lung carcinoma-derived
Ly6g6e lymphocyte antigen6 complex
Mitogen Activated Protein Kinase
Membrane Associated Ring finger (C3HC4) 7
MAP Kinase Kinase
mES cells
mouse Embryonic Stem cells
micro RNA
Muscle and Microspikes ras
Mesenchymal Stem Cells
Molecular Weight
MYOgenic Differentiation Antigen
Homeobox transcription factor Nanog
Nuclear Factor Kappa-B
v-myc avian myelocytomatosis viral-related oncogene, neuroblastoma-derived
Neural Precursor Cells
Neural Stem Cells
OCTamer 3/4
Oncostatin M
Placenta and embryonic expression protein
PhosphatidylInositol 3-Kinase
Protein Inhibitor of the Activated STAT
Proviral integration site 3
Pleiotropic LIF-Induced
Transforming Growth Factor beta
Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha
RetinALdehyde Deshydrogenase
Reduced expression protein 1 (or Zfp-42, Zinc finger protein 42)
Stem Cell antigen 1
Src Homology
SH2-containing Phosphatase
Specific LIF-Induced
Suppressor Of Cytoking Signaling
Sex-determining region Y-box2
Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription
Sushi domain containing 2
Transcription factor CP2-like 1
Tyrosine Kinase 2
Wild Type
Yes associated protein
Zeta-chain-Associated Protein kinase 70
Zinc finger protein of the cerebellum 3
Zinc finger protein, X-linked
Zinc finger and SCAN domain containing 4


1. Taupin JL, Pitard V, Dechanet J, Miossec V, Gualde N, Moreau JF. Leukemia inhibitory factor: part of a large ingathering family. International Reviews of Immunology. 1998;16(3–4):397–426. doi: 10.3109/08830189809043003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
2. Metcalf D. The unsolved enigmas of leukemia inhibitory factor. Stem Cells. 2003;21(1):5–14. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.21-1-5. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
3. Moreau JF, Donaldson DD, Bennett F, Witek-Giannotti J, Clark SC, Wong GG. Leukaemia inhibitory factor is identical to the myeloid growth factor human interleukin for DA cells. Nature. 1988;336(6200):690–692. doi: 10.1038/336690a0. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
4. Smith AG, Nichols J, Robertson M, Rathjen PD. Differentiation inhibiting activity (DIA/LIF) and mouse development. Developmental Biology. 1992;151(2):339–351. doi: 10.1016/0012-1606(92)90174-F. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
5. Gough NM, Gearing DP, King JA, Willson TA, Hilton DJ, Nicola NA, Metcalf D. Molecular cloning and expression of the human homologue of the murine gene encoding myeloid leukemia-inhibitory factor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1988;85(8):2623–2627. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.8.2623. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
6. Shellard J, Perreau J, Brûlet P. Role of leukemia inhibitory factor during mammalian development. European Cytokine Network. 1996;7(4):699–712. [PubMed]
7. Trouillas M, Saucourt C, Guillotin B, Gauthereau X, Taupin J, Moreau J, Bœuf H. The LIF cytokine: towards adulthood. European Cytokine Network. 2009;20(2):51–62. [PubMed]
8. Heinrich PC, Behrmann I, Haan S, Hermanns HM, Müller-Newen G, Schaper F. Principles of interleukin (IL)-6-type cytokine signalling and its regulation. The Biochemical Journal. 2003;374(Pt 1):1–20. doi: 10.1042/BJ20030407. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
9. Murakami M, Kamimura D, Hirano T. New IL-6 (gp130) family cytokine members, CLC/NNT1/BSF3 and IL-27. Growth Factors. 2004;22(2):75–77. doi: 10.1080/08977190410001715181. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
10. Hermanns HM, Müller-Newen G, Heinrich PC, Haan S. Bow to your partner for signaling. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. 2005;12(6):476–478. doi: 10.1038/nsmb0605-476. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
11. Rousseau F, Chevalier S, Guillet C, Ravon E, Diveu C, Froger J, Barbier F, Grimaud L, Gascan H. Ciliary neurotrophic factor, cardiotrophin-like cytokine, and neuropoietin share a conserved binding site on the ciliary neurotrophic factor receptor alpha chain. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2008;283(44):30341–30350. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M803239200. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
12. Rousseau, F., Basset, L., Froger, J., Dinguirard, N., Chevalier, S., Gascan, H. (2010). IL-27 structural analysis demonstrates similarities with ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) and leads to the identification of antagonistic variants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. [PubMed]
13. Gearing DP. The leukemia inhibitory factor and its receptor. Advances in Immunology. 1993;53:31–58. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2776(08)60497-6. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
14. Blanchard F, Duplomb L, Wang Y, Robledo O, Kinzie E, Pitard V, Godard A, Jacques Y, Baumann H. Stimulation of leukemia inhibitory factor receptor degradation by extracellular signal-regulated kinase. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2000;275(37):28793–28801. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M003986200. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
15. Gao W, Thompson L, Zhou Q, Putheti P, Fahmy TM, Strom TB, Metcalfe SM. Treg versus Th17 lymphocyte lineages are cross-regulated by LIF versus IL-6. Cell Cycle. 2009;8(9):1444–1450. doi: 10.4161/cc.8.9.8348. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
16. Blanchard F, Duplomb L, Raher S, Vusio P, Hoflack B, Jacques Y, Godard A. Mannose 6-Phosphate/Insulin-like growth factor II receptor mediates internalization and degradation of leukemia inhibitory factor but not signal transduction. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1999;274(35):24685–24693. doi: 10.1074/jbc.274.35.24685. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
17. Larsen JV, Hansen M, Møller B, Madsen P, Scheller J, Nielsen M, Petersen CM. Sortilin facilitates signaling of ciliary neurotrophic factor and related helical type 1 cytokines targeting the gp130/leukemia inhibitory factor receptor beta heterodimer. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2010;30(17):4175–4187. doi: 10.1128/MCB.00274-10. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
18. Bhatt H, Brunet LJ, Stewart CL. Uterine expression of leukemia inhibitory factor coincides with the onset of blastocyst implantation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1991;88(24):11408–11412. doi: 10.1073/pnas.88.24.11408. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
19. Stewart CL, Kaspar P, Brunet LJ, Bhatt H, Gadi I, Köntgen F, Abbondanzo SJ. Blastocyst implantation depends on maternal expression of leukaemia inhibitory factor. Nature. 1992;359(6390):76–79. doi: 10.1038/359076a0. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
20. Escary JL, Perreau J, Duménil D, Ezine S, Brûlet P. Leukaemia inhibitory factor is necessary for maintenance of haematopoietic stem cells and thymocyte stimulation. Nature. 1993;363(6427):361–364. doi: 10.1038/363361a0. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
21. Kritikou EA, Sharkey A, Abell K, Came PJ, Anderson E, Clarkson RW, Watson CJ. A dual, non-redundant, role for LIF as a regulator of development and STAT3-mediated cell death in mammary gland. Development. 2003;130:3459–3468. doi: 10.1242/dev.00578. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
22. Bauer S, Patterson PH. Leukemia inhibitory factor promotes neural stem cell self-renewal in the adult brain. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2006;26(46):12089–12099. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3047-06.2006. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
23. Oshima K, Teo DTW, Senn P, Starlinger V, Heller S. LIF promotes neurogenesis and maintains neural precursors in cell populations derived from spiral ganglion stem cells. BMC Developmental Biology. 2007;7:112. doi: 10.1186/1471-213X-7-112. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
24. Simamura E, Shimada H, Higashi N, Uchishiba M, Otani H, Hatta T. Maternal leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) promotes fetal neurogenesis via a LIF-ACTH-LIF signaling relay pathway. Endocrinology. 2010;151(4):1853–1862. doi: 10.1210/en.2009-0985. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
25. Hunt LC, Tudor EM, White JD. Leukemia inhibitory factor-dependent increase in myoblast cell number is associated with phosphotidylinositol 3-kinase-mediated inhibition of apoptosis and not mitosis. Experimental Cell Research. 2010;316(6):1002–1009. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2009.11.022. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
26. Spangenburg EE, Booth FW. Multiple signaling pathways mediate LIF-induced skeletal muscle satellite cell proliferation. American Journal of Physiology. Cell Physiology. 2002;283(1):C204–C211. [PubMed]
27. Broholm C, Pedersen BK. Leukaemia inhibitory factor—an exercise-induced myokine. Exercise Immunology Review. 2010;16:77–85. [PubMed]
28. Bozec A, Bakiri L, Hoebertz A, Eferl R, Schilling AF, Komnenovic V, Scheuch H, et al. Osteoclast size is controlled by Fra-2 through LIF/LIF-receptor signalling and hypoxia. Nature. 2008;454(7201):221–225. doi: 10.1038/nature07019. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
29. Sendtner M, Götz R, Holtmann B, Escary JL, Masu Y, Carroll P, Wolf E, Brem G, Brület P, Thoenen H. Cryptic physiological trophic support of motoneurons by LIF revealed by double gene targeting of CNTF and LIF. Current Biology. 1996;6(6):686–694. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(09)00450-3. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
30. Holtmann B, Wiese S, Samsam M, Grohmann K, Pennica D, Martini R, Sendtner M. Triple knock-out of CNTF, LIF, and CT-1 defines cooperative and distinct roles of these neurotrophic factors for motoneuron maintenance and function. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2005;25(7):1778–1787. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4249-04.2005. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
31. Aghajanova L. Update on the role of leukemia inhibitory factor in assisted reproduction. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010;22(3):213–219. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e32833848e5. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
32. Slaets H, Hendriks JJA, Stinissen P, Kilpatrick TJ, Hellings N. Therapeutic potential of LIF in multiple sclerosis. Trends in Molecular Medicine. 2010;16(11):493–500. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2010.08.007. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
33. Hu W, Feng Z, Teresky AK, Levine AJ. p53 regulates maternal reproduction through LIF. Nature. 2007;450(7170):721–724. doi: 10.1038/nature05993. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
34. Hu W, Feng Z, Atwal GS, Levine AJ. p53: a new player in reproduction. Cell Cycle. 2008;7(7):848–852. doi: 10.4161/cc.7.7.5658. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
35. Stewart CL. Reproduction: the unusual suspect. Nature. 2007;450(7170):619. doi: 10.1038/450619a. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
36. Kawamura T, Suzuki J, Wang YV, Menendez S, Morera LB, Raya A, Wahl GM, Belmonte JCI. Linking the p53 tumour suppressor pathway to somatic cell reprogramming. Nature. 2009;460(7259):1140–1144. doi: 10.1038/nature08311. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
37. Hong H, Takahashi K, Ichisaka T, Aoi T, Kanagawa O, Nakagawa M, Okita K, Yamanaka S. Suppression of induced pluripotent stem cell generation by the p53-p21 pathway. Nature. 2009;460(7259):1132–1135. doi: 10.1038/nature08235. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
38. Liu Y, Hoya-Arias R, Nimer SD. The role of p53 in limiting somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Research. 2009;19(11):1227–1228. doi: 10.1038/cr.2009.121. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
39. Marión RM, Strati K, Li H, Murga M, Blanco R, Ortega S, Fernandez-Capetillo O, Serrano M, Blasco MA. A p53-mediated DNA damage response limits reprogramming to ensure iPS cell genomic integrity. Nature. 2009;460(7259):1149–1153. doi: 10.1038/nature08287. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
40. Menendez S, Camus S, Belmonte JCI. p53: guardian of reprogramming. Cell Cycle. 2010;9(19):3887–3891. doi: 10.4161/cc.9.19.13301. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
41. Li H, Collado M, Villasante A, Strati K, Ortega S, Cañamero M, Blasco MA, Serrano M. The Ink4/Arf locus is a barrier for iPS cell reprogramming. Nature. 2009;460(7259):1136–1139. doi: 10.1038/nature08290. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
42. Hilton DJ. LIF: lots of interesting functions. Trends in Biochemical Sciences. 1992;17(2):72–76. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(92)90505-4. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
43. Lim WA, Pawson T. Phosphotyrosine signaling: evolving a new cellular communication system. Cell. 2010;142(5):661–667. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.08.023. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
44. Ingley E. Src family kinases: regulation of their activities, levels and identification of new pathways. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2008;1784(1):56–65. [PubMed]
45. Yagil Z, Nechushtan H, Kay G, Yang CM, Kemeny DM, Razin E. The enigma of the role of protein inhibitor of activated STAT3 (PIAS3) in the immune response. Trends in Immunology. 2010;31(5):199–204. doi: 10.1016/ [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
46. Smith AG. Embryo-derived stem cells: of mice and men. Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology. 2001;17:435–462. doi: 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.17.1.435. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
47. Niwa H. How is pluripotency determined and maintained? Development. 2007;134(4):635–646. doi: 10.1242/dev.02787. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
48. Bourillot P, Aksoy I, Schreiber V, Wianny F, Schulz H, Hummel O, Hubner N, Savatier P. Novel STAT3 target genes exert distinct roles in the inhibition of mesoderm and endoderm differentiation in cooperation with Nanog. Stem Cells. 2009;27(8):1760–1771. doi: 10.1002/stem.110. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
49. Ura H, Usuda M, Kinoshita K, Sun C, Mori K, Akagi T, Matsuda T, Koide H, Yokota T. STAT3 and Oct-3/4 control histone modification through induction of Eed in embryonic stem cells. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2008;283(15):9713–9723. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M707275200. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
50. Boeuf H, Hauss C, Graeve FD, Baran N, Kedinger C. Leukemia inhibitory factor-dependent transcriptional activation in embryonic stem cells. The Journal of Cell Biology. 1997;138(6):1207–1217. doi: 10.1083/jcb.138.6.1207. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
51. Matsuda T, Nakamura T, Nakao K, Arai T, Katsuki M, Heike T, Yokota T. STAT3 activation is sufficient to maintain an undifferentiated state of mouse embryonic stem cells. The EMBO Journal. 1999;18(15):4261–4269. doi: 10.1093/emboj/18.15.4261. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
52. Minami M, Inoue M, Wei S, Takeda K, Matsumoto M, Kishimoto T, Akira S. STAT3 activation is a critical step in gp130-mediated terminal differentiation and growth arrest of a myeloid cell line. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1996;93(9):3963–3966. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.9.3963. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
53. Yoshida T, Iwamoto T, Adachi K, Yokota T, Miyake Y, Hamaguchi M. Functional analysis of the effect of forced activation of STAT3 on M1 mouse leukemia cells. International Journal of Molecular Medicine. 2005;15(2):269–275. [PubMed]
54. Yamanaka Y, Nakajima K, Fukada T, Hibi M, Hirano T. Differentiation and growth arrest signals are generated through the cytoplasmic region of gp130 that is essential for Stat3 activation. The EMBO Journal. 1996;15(7):1557–1565. [PubMed]
55. Silver JS, Hunter CA. gp130 at the nexus of inflammation, autoimmunity, and cancer. Journal of Leukocyte Biology. 2010;88(6):1145–1156. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0410217. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
56. Fischer P, Lehmann U, Sobota RM, Schmitz J, Niemand C, Linnemann S, Haan S, et al. The role of the inhibitors of interleukin-6 signal transduction SHP2 and SOCS3 for desensitization of interleukin-6 signalling. The Biochemical Journal. 2004;378(Pt 2):449–460. doi: 10.1042/BJ20030893. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
57. Lin C, Jackson AL, Guo J, Linsley PS, Eisenman RN. Myc-regulated microRNAs attenuate embryonic stem cell differentiation. The EMBO Journal. 2009;28(20):3157–3170. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2009.254. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
58. Tarantino C, Paolella G, Cozzuto L, Minopoli G, Pastore L, Parisi S, Russo T. miRNA 34a, 100, and 137 modulate differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells. The FASEB Journal. 2010;24(9):3255–3263. doi: 10.1096/fj.09-152207. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
59. Oskowitz AZ, Lu J, Penfornis P, Ylostalo J, McBride J, Flemington EK, Prockop DJ, Pochampally R. Human multipotent stromal cells from bone marrow and microRNA: regulation of differentiation and leukemia inhibitory factor expression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2008;105(47):18372–18377. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809807105. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
60. Hao J, Li T, Qi X, Zhao D, Zhao G. WNT/beta-catenin pathway up-regulates Stat3 and converges on LIF to prevent differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells. Developmental Biology. 2006;290(1):81–91. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2005.11.011. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
61. Ogawa K, Nishinakamura R, Iwamatsu Y, Shimosato D, Niwa H. Synergistic action of Wnt and LIF in maintaining pluripotency of mouse ES cells. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2006;343(1):159–166. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.02.127. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
62. Boiani M, Schöler HR. Regulatory networks in embryo-derived pluripotent stem cells. Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology. 2005;6(11):872–884. doi: 10.1038/nrm1744. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
63. Pera MF, Tam PPL. Extrinsic regulation of pluripotent stem cells. Nature. 2010;465(7299):713–720. doi: 10.1038/nature09228. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
64. Kochegarov A. Small molecules for stem cells. Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents. 2009;19(3):275–281. doi: 10.1517/13543770802709010. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
65. Niwa H. Mouse ES cell culture system as a model of development. Development, Growth & Differentiation. 2010;52(3):275–283. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-169X.2009.01166.x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
66. Silva J, Smith A. Capturing pluripotency. Cell. 2008;132(4):532–536. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.02.006. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
67. Ying Q, Wray J, Nichols J, Batlle-Morera L, Doble B, Woodgett J, Cohen P, Smith A. The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature. 2008;453(7194):519–523. doi: 10.1038/nature06968. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
68. Chambers I, Tomlinson SR. The transcriptional foundation of pluripotency. Development. 2009;136(14):2311–2322. doi: 10.1242/dev.024398. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
69. Yang W, Wei W, Shi C, Zhu J, Ying W, Shen Y, Ye X, et al. Pluripotin combined with leukemia inhibitory factor greatly promotes the derivation of embryonic stem cell lines from refractory strains. Stem Cells. 2009;27(2):383–389. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2008-0974. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
70. Chen L, Yang M, Dawes J, Khillan JS. Suppression of ES cell differentiation by retinol (vitamin A) via the overexpression of Nanog. Differentiation. 2007;75(8):682–693. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-0436.2007.00169.x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
71. Chen L, Khillan JS. A novel signaling by vitamin A/retinol promotes self renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells by activating PI3K/Akt signaling pathway via insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor. Stem Cells. 2010;28(1):57–63. [PubMed]
72. Chazaud C, Yamanaka Y, Pawson T, Rossant J. Early lineage segregation between epiblast and primitive endoderm in mouse blastocysts through the Grb2-MAPK pathway. Developmental Cell. 2006;10(5):615–624. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2006.02.020. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
73. Carter MG, Stagg CA, Falco G, Yoshikawa T, Bassey UC, Aiba K, Sharova LV, Shaik N, Ko MS. An in situ hybridization-based screen for heterogeneously expressed genes in mouse ES cells. Gene Expression Patterns. 2008;8:181–198. doi: 10.1016/j.gep.2007.10.009. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
74. Toyooka Y, Shimosato D, Murakami K, Takahashi K, Niwa H. Identification and characterization of subpopulations in undifferentiated ES cell culture. Development. 2008;135:909–918. doi: 10.1242/dev.017400. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
75. Kim MO, Lee YJ, Han HJ. Involvement of Cx43 phosphorylation in 5′-N-ethylcarboxamide-induced migration and proliferation of mouse embryonic stem cells. Journal of Cellular Physiology. 2010;224(1):187–194. [PubMed]
76. Todorova MG, Soria B, Quesada I. Gap junctional intercellular communication is required to maintain embryonic stem cells in a non-differentiated and proliferative state. Journal of Cellular Physiology. 2008;214(2):354–362. doi: 10.1002/jcp.21203. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
77. Wörsdörfer P, Maxeiner S, Markopoulos C, Kirfel G, Wulf V, Auth T, Urschel S, Maltzahn J, Willecke K. Connexin expression and functional analysis of gap junctional communication in mouse embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2008;26(2):431–439. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2007-0482. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
78. Wong RCB, Pera MF, Pébay A. Role of gap junctions in embryonic and somatic stem cells. Stem Cell Reviews. 2008;4(4):283–292. doi: 10.1007/s12015-008-9038-9. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
79. Saito R, Yamasaki T, Nagai Y, Wu J, Kajiho H, Yokoi T, Noda E, et al. CrxOS maintains the self-renewal capacity of murine embryonic stem cells. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2009;390(4):1129–1135. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2009.09.118. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
80. Lian I, Kim J, Okazawa H, Zhao J, Zhao B, Yu J, Chinnaiyan A, et al. The role of YAP transcription coactivator in regulating stem cell self-renewal and differentiation. Genes & Development. 2010;24(11):1106–1118. doi: 10.1101/gad.1903310. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
81. Fan Y, Melhem MF, Chaillet JR. Forced expression of the homeobox-containing gene Pem blocks differentiation of embryonic stem cells. Developmental Biology. 1999;210(2):481–496. doi: 10.1006/dbio.1999.9279. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
82. Lim LS, Loh Y, Zhang W, Li Y, Chen X, Wang Y, Bakre M, Ng H, Stanton LW. Zic3 is required for maintenance of pluripotency in embryonic stem cells. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2007;18(4):1348–1358. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E06-07-0624. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
83. Lim LS, Hong FH, Kunarso G, Stanton LW. The pluripotency regulator Zic3 is a direct activator of the Nanog promoter in ESCs. Stem Cells. 2010;28(11):1961–1969. doi: 10.1002/stem.527. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
84. Galan-Caridad JM, Harel S, Arenzana TL, Hou ZE, Doetsch FK, Mirny LA, Reizis B. Zfx controls the self-renewal of embryonic and hematopoietic stem cells. Cell. 2007;129(2):345–357. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.03.014. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
85. Mu W, Munroe RJ, Barker AK, Schimenti JC. PDCD2 is essential for inner cell mass development and embryonic stem cell maintenance. Developmental Biology. 2010;347(2):279–288. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2010.08.026. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
86. Amleh A, Nair SJ, Sun J, Sutherland A, Hasty P, Li R. Mouse cofactor of BRCA1 (Cobra1) is required for early embryogenesis. PLoS ONE. 2009;4(4):e5034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005034. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
87. Hu G, Kim J, Xu Q, Leng Y, Orkin SH, Elledge SJ. A genome-wide RNAi screen identifies a new transcriptional module required for self-renewal. Genes & Development. 2009;23(7):837–848. doi: 10.1101/gad.1769609. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
88. Ding L, Paszkowski-Rogacz M, Nitzsche A, Slabicki MM, Heninger A, Vries I, Kittler R, et al. A genome-scale RNAi screen for Oct4 modulators defines a role of the Paf1 complex for embryonic stem cell identity. Cell Stem Cell. 2009;4(5):403–415. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2009.03.009. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
89. Ivanova N, Dobrin R, Lu R, Kotenko I, Levorse J, DeCoste C, Schafer X, Lun Y, Lemischka IR. Dissecting self-renewal in stem cells with RNA interference. Nature. 2006;442(7102):533–538. doi: 10.1038/nature04915. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
90. Loh Y, Zhang W, Chen X, George J, Ng H. Jmjd1a and Jmjd2c histone H3 Lys 9 demethylases regulate self-renewal in embryonic stem cells. Genes & Development. 2007;21(20):2545–2557. doi: 10.1101/gad.1588207. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
91. Gaspar-Maia A, Alajem A, Polesso F, Sridharan R, Mason MJ, Heidersbach A, Ramalho-Santos J, et al. Chd1 regulates open chromatin and pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2009;460(7257):863–868. [PubMed]
92. Dejosez M, Krumenacker JS, Zitur LJ, Passeri M, Chu L, Songyang Z, Thomson JA, Zwaka TP. Ronin is essential for embryogenesis and the pluripotency of mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2008;133(7):1162–1174. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.05.047. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
93. Dejosez M, Levine SS, Frampton GM, Whyte WA, Stratton SA, Barton MC, Gunaratne PH, Young RA, Zwaka TP. Ronin/Hcf-1 binds to a hyperconserved enhancer element and regulates genes involved in the growth of embryonic stem cells. Genes & Development. 2010;24(14):1479–1484. doi: 10.1101/gad.1935210. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
94. Smith KN, Singh AM, Dalton S. Myc represses primitive endoderm differentiation in pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7(3):343–354. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2010.06.023. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
95. Tay Y, Zhang J, Thomson AM, Lim B, Rigoutsos I. MicroRNAs to Nanog, Oct4 and Sox2 coding regions modulate embryonic stem cell differentiation. Nature. 2008;455:1124–1128. doi: 10.1038/nature07299. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
96. Bernstein E, Kim SY, Carmell MA, Murchison EP, Alcorn H, Li MZ, Mills AA, Elledge SJ, Anderson KV, Hannon GJ. Dicer is essential for mouse development. Nature Genetics. 2003;35(3):215–217. doi: 10.1038/ng1253. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
97. Kanellopoulou C, Muljo SA, Kung AL, Ganesan S, Drapkin R, Jenuwein T, Livingston DM, Rajewsky K. Dicer-deficient mouse embryonic stem cells are defective in differentiation and centromeric silencing. Genes & Development. 2005;19(4):489–501. doi: 10.1101/gad.1248505. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
98. Murchison EP, Partridge JF, Tam OH, Cheloufi S, Hannon GJ. Characterization of Dicer-deficient murine embryonic stem cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005;102(34):12135–12140. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0505479102. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
99. Babiarz JE, Ruby JG, Wang Y, Bartel DP, Blelloch R. Mouse ES cells express endogenous shRNAs, siRNAs, and other Microprocessor-independent, Dicer-dependent small RNAs. Genes & Development. 2008;22(20):2773–2785. doi: 10.1101/gad.1705308. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
100. Wang Y, Medvid R, Melton C, Jaenisch R, Blelloch R. DGCR8 is essential for microRNA biogenesis and silencing of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature Genetics. 2007;39:380–385. doi: 10.1038/ng1969. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
101. Wang Y, Baskerville S, Shenoy A, Babiarz JE, Baehner L, Blelloch R. Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs regulate the G1-S transition and promote rapid proliferation. Nature Genetics. 2008;40:1478–1483. doi: 10.1038/ng.250. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
102. Niwa H, Miyazaki J, Smith AG. Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells. Nature Genetics. 2000;24(4):372–376. doi: 10.1038/74199. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
103. Rizzino A. Transcription factors that behave as master regulators during mammalian embryogenesis function as molecular rheostats. The Biochemical Journal. 2008;411(2):e5–e7. doi: 10.1042/BJ20080479. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
104. Kopp JL, Ormsbee BD, Desler M, Rizzino A. Small increases in the level of Sox2 trigger the differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2008;26(4):903–911. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2007-0951. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
105. Trouillas M, Saucourt C, Guillotin B, Gauthereau X, Ding L, Buchholz F, Doss MX, et al. Three LIF-dependent signatures and gene clusters with atypical expression profiles, identified by transcriptome studies in mouse ES cells and early derivatives. BMC Genomics. 2009;10:73. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-73. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
106. Palmqvist L, Glover CH, Hsu L, Lu M, Bossen B, Piret JM, Humphries RK, Helgason CD. Correlation of murine embryonic stem cell gene expression profiles with functional measures of pluripotency. Stem Cells. 2005;23(5):663–680. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2004-0157. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
107. Schulz H, Kolde R, Adler P, Aksoy I, Anastassiadis K, Bader M, Billon N, et al. The FunGenES database: a genomics resource for mouse embryonic stem cell differentiation. PLoS ONE. 2009;4(9):e6804. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006804. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
108. Loh Y, Wu Q, Chew J, Vega VB, Zhang W, Chen X, Bourque G, et al. The Oct4 and Nanog transcription network regulates pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature Genetics. 2006;38(4):431–440. doi: 10.1038/ng1760. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
109. Cinelli P, Casanova EA, Uhlig S, Lochmatter P, Matsuda T, Yokota T, Rülicke T, Ledermann B, Bürki K. Expression profiling in transgenic FVB/N embryonic stem cells overexpressing STAT3. BMC Developmental Biology. 2008;8:57. doi: 10.1186/1471-213X-8-57. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
110. Storm MP, Kumpfmueller B, Thompson B, Kolde R, Vilo J, Hummel O, Schulz H, Welham MJ. Characterization of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase-dependent transcriptome in murine embryonic stem cells: identification of novel regulators of pluripotency. Stem Cells. 2009;27(4):764–775. doi: 10.1002/stem.3. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
111. Rathjen PD, Nichols J, Toth S, Edwards DR, Heath JK, Smith AG. Developmentally programmed induction of differentiation inhibiting activity and the control of stem cell populations. Genes & Development. 1990;4(12B):2308–2318. doi: 10.1101/gad.4.12b.2308. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
112. Burdon T, Stracey C, Chambers I, Nichols J, Smith A. Suppression of SHP-2 and ERK signalling promotes self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells. Developmental Biology. 1999;210(1):30–43. doi: 10.1006/dbio.1999.9265. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
113. Duval D, Trouillas M, Thibault C, Dembelé D, Diemunsch F, Reinhardt B, Mertz AL, Dierich A, Boeuf H. Apoptosis and differentiation commitment: novel insights revealed by gene profiling studies in mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell Death and Differentiation. 2006;13(4):564–575. doi: 10.1038/sj.cdd.4401789. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
114. Boeuf H, Merienne K, Jacquot S, Duval D, Zeniou M, Hauss C, Reinhardt B, et al. The ribosomal S6 kinases, cAMP-responsive element-binding, and STAT3 proteins are regulated by different leukemia inhibitory factor signaling pathways in mouse embryonic stem cells. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2001;276(49):46204–46211. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M106718200. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
115. Li Y, McClintick J, Zhong L, Edenberg HJ, Yoder MC, Chan RJ. Murine embryonic stem cell differentiation is promoted by SOCS-3 and inhibited by the zinc finger transcription factor Klf4. Blood. 2005;105(2):635–637. doi: 10.1182/blood-2004-07-2681. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
116. Jiang J, Chan Y, Loh Y, Cai J, Tong G, Lim C, Robson P, Zhong S, Ng H. A core Klf circuitry regulates self-renewal of embryonic stem cells. Nature Cell Biology. 2008;10(3):353–360. doi: 10.1038/ncb1698. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
117. Niwa H, Ogawa K, Shimosato D, Adachi K. A parallel circuit of LIF signalling pathways maintains pluripotency of mouse ES cells. Nature. 2009;460(7251):118–122. doi: 10.1038/nature08113. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
118. Parisi S, Passaro F, Aloia L, Manabe I, Nagai R, Pastore L, Russo T. Klf5 is involved in self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells. Journal of Cell Science. 2008;121(Pt 16):2629–2634. doi: 10.1242/jcs.027599. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
119. Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 2006;126(4):663–676. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
120. Zhang P, Andrianakos R, Yang Y, Liu C, Lu W. Kruppel-like factor 4 (Klf4) prevents embryonic stem (ES) cell differentiation by regulating Nanog gene expression. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2010;285(12):9180–9189. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109.077958. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
121. Hall J, Guo G, Wray J, Eyres I, Nichols J, Grotewold L, Morfopoulou S, et al. Oct4 and LIF/Stat3 additively induce Krüppel factors to sustain embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell. 2009;5(6):597–609. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2009.11.003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
122. Moreau JF, Bonneville M, Godard A, Gascan H, Gruart V, Moore MA, Soulillou JP. Characterization of a factor produced by human T cell clones exhibiting eosinophil-activating and burst-promoting activities. Journal of Immunology. 1987;138(11):3844–3849. [PubMed]
123. Dührsen U, Metcalf D. A model system for leukemic transformation of immortalized hemopoietic cells in irradiated recipient mice. Leukemia. 1988;2(6):329–333. [PubMed]
124. Leary AG, Wong GG, Clark SC, Smith AG, Ogawa M. Leukemia inhibitory factor differentiation-inhibiting activity/human interleukin for DA cells augments proliferation of human hematopoietic stem cells. Blood. 1990;75(10):1960–1964. [PubMed]
125. Verfaillie C, McGlave P. Leukemia inhibitory factor/human interleukin for DA cells: a growth factor that stimulates the in vitro development of multipotential human hematopoietic progenitors. Blood. 1991;77(2):263–270. [PubMed]
126. Metcalf D, Gearing DP. Fatal syndrome in mice engrafted with cells producing high levels of the leukemia inhibitory factor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1989;86(15):5948–5952. doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.15.5948. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
127. Metcalf D, Nicola NA, Gearing DP. Effects of injected leukemia inhibitory factor on hematopoietic and other tissues in mice. Blood. 1990;76(1):50–56. [PubMed]
128. Ware CB, Horowitz MC, Renshaw BR, Hunt JS, Liggitt D, Koblar SA, Gliniak BC, McKenna HJ, Papayannopoulou T, Thoma B. Targeted disruption of the low-affinity leukemia inhibitory factor receptor gene causes placental, skeletal, neural and metabolic defects and results in perinatal death. Development. 1995;121(5):1283–1299. [PubMed]
129. Dagoneau N, Scheffer D, Huber C, Al-Gazali LI, Rocco M, Godard A, Martinovic J, et al. Null leukemia inhibitory factor receptor (LIFR) mutations in Stuve-Wiedemann/Schwartz-Jampel type 2 syndrome. American Journal of Human Genetics. 2004;74(2):298–305. doi: 10.1086/381715. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
130. García-Gómez I, Elvira G, Zapata AG, Lamana ML, Ramírez M, Castro JG, Arranz MG, Vicente A, Bueren J, García-Olmo D. Mesenchymal stem cells: biological properties and clinical applications. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy. 2010;10(10):1453–1468. doi: 10.1517/14712598.2010.519333. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
131. Lorgeot V, Rougier F, Fixe P, Cornu E, Praloran V, Denizot Y. Spontaneous and inducible production of leukaemia inhibitory factor by human bone marrow stromal cells. Cytokine. 1997;9(10):754–758. doi: 10.1006/cyto.1997.0225. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
132. Metcalfe SM. Axotrophin and leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF) in transplantation tolerance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 2005;360:1687–1694. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1697. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
133. Nasef A, Mazurier C, Bouchet S, Francois S, Chapel A, Thierry D, Gorin NC, Fouillard L. Leukemia inhibitory factor: role in human mesenchymal stem cells mediated immunosuppression. Cellular Immunology. 2008;253:16–22. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2008.06.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
134. Szilvassy SJ, Weller KP, Chen B, Juttner CA, Tsukamoto A, Hoffman R. Partially differentiated ex vivo expanded cells accelerate hematologic recovery in myeloablated mice transplanted with highly enriched long-term repopulating stem cells. Blood. 1996;88(9):3642–3653. [PubMed]
135. Schraml E, Fehrer C, Brunauer R, Lepperdinger G, Chesnokova V, Schauenstein K. lin-Sca-1+ cells and age-dependent changes of their proliferation potential are reliant on mesenchymal stromal cells and are leukemia inhibitory factor dependent. Gerontology. 2008;54(5):312–323. doi: 10.1159/000161736. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
136. Dhawan J, Rando TA. Stem cells in postnatal myogenesis: molecular mechanisms of satellite cell quiescence, activation and replenishment. Trends in Cell Biology. 2005;15(12):666–673. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2005.10.007. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
137. Montarras D, Morgan J, Collins C, Relaix F, Zaffran S, Cumano A, Partridge T, Buckingham M. Direct isolation of satellite cells for skeletal muscle regeneration. Science. 2005;309(5743):2064–2067. doi: 10.1126/science.1114758. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
138. Buckingham M, Montarras D. Skeletal muscle stem cells. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development. 2008;18(4):330–336. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2008.06.005. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
139. Austin L, Burgess AW. Stimulation of myoblast proliferation in culture by leukaemia inhibitory factor and other cytokines. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 1991;101(2):193–197. doi: 10.1016/0022-510X(91)90045-9. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
140. Barnard W, Bower J, Brown MA, Murphy M, Austin L. Leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) infusion stimulates skeletal muscle regeneration after injury: injured muscle expresses lif mRNA. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 1994;123:108–113. doi: 10.1016/0022-510X(94)90211-9. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
141. Diao Y, Wang X, Wu Z. SOCS1, SOCS3, and PIAS1 promote myogenic differentiation by inhibiting the leukemia inhibitory factor-induced JAK1/STAT1/STAT3 pathway. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2009;29(18):5084–5093. doi: 10.1128/MCB.00267-09. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
142. Yang Y, Xu Y, Li W, Wang G, Song Y, Yang G, Han X, Du Z, Sun L, Ma K. STAT3 induces muscle stem cell differentiation by interaction with myoD. Cytokine. 2009;46(1):137–141. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2008.12.015. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
143. Spangenburg EE, Booth FW. Leukemia inhibitory factor restores the hypertrophic response to increased loading in the LIF(−/−) mouse. Cytokine. 2006;34(3–4):125–130. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2006.05.001. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
144. Gearing DP, Ziegler SF, Comeau MR, Friend D, Thoma B, Cosman D, Park L, Mosley B. Proliferative responses and binding properties of hematopoietic cells transfected with low-affinity receptors for leukemia inhibitory factor, oncostatin M, and ciliary neurotrophic factor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1994;91(3):1119–1123. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.3.1119. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
145. Bazan E, Alonso FJ, Redondo C, Lopez-Toledano MA, Alfaro JM, Reimers D, Herranz AS, et al. In vitro and in vivo characterization of neural stem cells. Histology and Histopathology. 2004;19:1261–1275. [PubMed]
146. Abrous DN, Koehl M, Moal M. Adult neurogenesis: from precursors to network and physiology. Physiological Reviews. 2005;85(2):523–569. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00055.2003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
147. Suh H, Deng W, Gage FH. Signaling in adult neurogenesis. Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology. 2009;25:253–275. doi: 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.042308.113256. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
148. Andersen RK, Zimmer J, Wahlberg LU, Meyer M. Effect of leukemia inhibitory factor on long-term propagation of precursor cells derived from rat forebrain subventricular zone and ventral mesencephalon. Experimental Neurology. 2008;211(1):301–310. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2008.02.007. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
149. Müller S, Chakrapani BPS, Schwegler H, Hofmann H, Kirsch M. Neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus depends on ciliary neurotrophic factor and signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 signaling. Stem Cells. 2009;27(2):431–441. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2008-0234. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
150. Sun Y, Pollard S, Conti L, Toselli M, Biella G, Parkin G, Willatt L, Falk A, Cattaneo E, Smith A. Long-term tripotent differentiation capacity of human neural stem (NS) cells in adherent culture. Molecular and Cellular Neurosciences. 2008;38(2):245–258. doi: 10.1016/j.mcn.2008.02.014. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
151. Covey MV, Levison SW. Leukemia inhibitory factor participates in the expansion of neural stem/progenitors after perinatal hypoxia/ischemia. Neuroscience. 2007;148(2):501–509. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2007.06.015. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
152. Ishibashi T, Lee PR, Baba H, Fields RD. Leukemia inhibitory factor regulates the timing of oligodendrocyte development and myelination in the postnatal optic nerve. Journal of Neuroscience Research. 2009;87(15):3343–3355. doi: 10.1002/jnr.22173. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
153. Yamanaka S. Patient-specific pluripotent stem cells become even more accessible. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7(1):1–2. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2010.06.009. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
154. Takahashi K, Tanabe K, Ohnuki M, Narita M, Ichisaka T, Tomoda K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell. 2007;131(5):861–872. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.019. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
155. Elefanty AG, Blelloch R, Passegué E, Wernig M, Mummery CL. On the streets of San Francisco: highlights from the ISSCR Annual Meeting 2010. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7(4):443–450. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2010.09.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
156. Yoshida Y, Takahashi K, Okita K, Ichisaka T, Yamanaka S. Hypoxia enhances the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2009;5(3):237–241. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2009.08.001. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
157. Zhao T, Xu Y. p53 and stem cells: new developments and new concerns. Trends in Cell Biology. 2010;20(3):170–175. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2009.12.004. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
158. Cotterman R, Knoepfler PS. N-Myc regulates expression of pluripotency genes in neuroblastoma including lif, klf2, klf4, and lin28b. PLoS ONE. 2009;4(6):e5799. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005799. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
159. Auernhammer CJ, Melmed S. Leukemia-inhibitory factor-neuroimmune modulator of endocrine function. Endocrine Reviews. 2000;21(3):313–345. doi: 10.1210/er.21.3.313. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
160. Brivanlou AH, Darnell JE. Signal transduction and the control of gene expression. Science. 2002;295(5556):813–818. doi: 10.1126/science.1066355. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
161. Pires-daSilva A, Sommer RJ. The evolution of signalling pathways in animal development. Nature Reviews. Genetics. 2003;4(1):39–49. doi: 10.1038/nrg977. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
162. Huising MO, Kruiswijk CP, Flik G. Phylogeny and evolution of class-I helical cytokines. The Journal of Endocrinology. 2006;189(1):1–25. doi: 10.1677/joe.1.06591. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
163. Hombría JCG, Brown S. The fertile field of Drosophila Jak/STAT signalling. Current Biology. 2002;12(16):R569–R575. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(02)01057-6. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
164. Horiuchi H, Furusawa S, Matsuda H. Maintenance of chicken embryonic stem cells in vitro. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2006;329:17–34. [PubMed]
165. Fujiki K, Nakao M, Dixon B. Molecular cloning and characterisation of a carp (Cyprinus carpio) cytokine-like cDNA that shares sequence similarity with IL-6 subfamily cytokines CNTF, OSM and LIF. Developmental and Comparative Immunology. 2003;27(2):127–136. doi: 10.1016/S0145-305X(02)00074-5. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
166. Abe T, Mikekado T, Haga S, Kisara Y, Watanabe K, Kurokawa T, Suzuki T. Identification, cDNA cloning, and mRNA localization of a zebrafish ortholog of leukemia inhibitory factor. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Part B: Biochemistry & Molecular Biology. 2007;147(1):38–44. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpb.2006.12.019. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
167. Hanington PC, Belosevic M. Interleukin-6 family cytokine M17 induces differentiation and nitric oxide response of goldfish (Carassius auratus L.) macrophages. Developmental and Comparative Immunology. 2007;31(8):817–829. doi: 10.1016/j.dci.2006.12.001. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
168. Duong CV, Geissen M, Rohrer H. The developmental expression of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) in cholinergic sympathetic neurons depends on cytokines signaling through LIFRbeta-containing receptors. Development. 2002;129(6):1387–1396. [PubMed]
169. Hanington PC, Patten SA, Reaume LM, Waskiewicz AJ, Belosevic M, Ali DW. Analysis of leukemia inhibitory factor and leukemia inhibitory factor receptor in embryonic and adult zebrafish (Danio rerio) Developmental Biology. 2008;314(2):250–260. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2007.10.012. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
170. Nishinakamura R, Matsumoto Y, Matsuda T, Ariizumi T, Heike T, Asashima M, Yokota T. Activation of Stat3 by cytokine receptor gp130 ventralizes Xenopus embryos independent of BMP-4. Developmental Biology. 1999;216(2):481–490. doi: 10.1006/dbio.1999.9518. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
171. Nichane M, Ren X, Bellefroid EJ. Self-regulation of Stat3 activity coordinates cell-cycle progression and neural crest specification. The EMBO Journal. 2010;29(1):55–67. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2009.313. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
172. Brons IG, Smithers LE, Trotter MW, Rugg-Gunn P, Sun B, Lopes SMCDS, Howlett SK, et al. Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature. 2007;448:191–195. doi: 10.1038/nature05950. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
173. Tesar PJ, Chenoweth JG, Brook FA, Davies TJ, Evans EP, Mack DL, Gardner RL, McKay RD. New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2007;448:196–199. doi: 10.1038/nature05972. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
174. Bao S, Tang F, Li X, Hayashi K, Gillich A, Lao K, Surani MA. Epigenetic reversion of post-implantation epiblast to pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2009;461:1292–1295. doi: 10.1038/nature08534. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
175. Guo G, Yang J, Nichols J, Hall JS, Eyres I, Mansfield W, Smith A. Klf4 reverts developmentally programmed restriction of ground state pluripotency. Development. 2009;136:1063–1069. doi: 10.1242/dev.030957. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
176. Matos DG, Miller K, Scott R, Tran CA, Kagan D, Nataraja SG, Clark A, Palmer S. Leukemia inhibitory factor induces cumulus expansion in immature human and mouse oocytes and improves mouse two-cell rate and delivery rates when it is present during mouse in vitro oocyte maturation. Fertility and Sterility. 2008;90:2367–2375. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.061. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
177. Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Inoue K, Ogonuki N, Miki H, Yoshida S, Toyokuni S, Lee J, Ogura A, Shinohara T. Leukemia inhibitory factor enhances formation of germ cell colonies in neonatal mouse testis culture. Biology of Reproduction. 2007;76:55–62. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.106.055863. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
178. Marwood M, Visser K, Salamonsen LA, Dimitriadis E. Interleukin-11 and leukemia inhibitory factor regulate the adhesion of endometrial epithelial cells: implications in fertility regulation. Endocrinology. 2009;150:2915–2923. doi: 10.1210/en.2008-1538. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
179. Mikhaylova IV, Jääskeläinen T, Jääskeläinen J, Palvimo JJ, Voutilainen R. Leukemia inhibitory factor as a regulator of steroidogenesis in human NCI-H295R adrenocortical cells. The Journal of Endocrinology. 2008;199:435–444. doi: 10.1677/JOE-08-0377. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
180. Metcalf D, Hilton D, Nicola NA. Leukemia inhibitory factor can potentiate murine megakaryocyte production in vitro. Blood. 1991;77:2150–2153. [PubMed]
181. Nasef A, Mazurier C, Bouchet S, François S, Chapel A, Thierry D, Gorin N, Fouillard L. Leukemia inhibitory factor: Role in human mesenchymal stem cells mediated immunosuppression. Cellular Immunology. 2008;253:16–22. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2008.06.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
182. Sun L, Ma K, Wang H, Xiao F, Gao Y, Zhang W, Wang K, Gao X, Ip N, Wu Z. JAK1-STAT1-STAT3, a key pathway promoting proliferation and preventing premature differentiation of myoblasts. The Journal of Cell Biology. 2007;179:129–138. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200703184. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
183. Alter J, Rozentzweig D, Bengal E. Inhibition of myoblast differentiation by tumor necrosis factor alpha is mediated by c-Jun N-terminal kinase 1 and leukemia inhibitory factor. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2008;283:23224–23234. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M801379200. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
184. Paradis H, Gendron RL. LIF transduces contradictory signals on capillary outgrowth through induction of stat3 and (P41/43)MAP kinase. Journal of Cell Science. 2000;113(Pt 23):4331–4339. [PubMed]
185. Murphy M, Reid K, Hilton DJ, Bartlett PF. Generation of sensory neurons is stimulated by leukemia inhibitory factor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1991;88:3498–3501. doi: 10.1073/pnas.88.8.3498. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
186. Andersen RK, Widmer HR, Zimmer J, Wahlberg LU, Meyer M. Leukemia inhibitory factor favours neurogenic differentiation of long-term propagated human midbrain precursor cells. Neuroscience Letters. 2009;464:203–208. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2009.08.050. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
187. Carter DA, Dick AD, Mayer EJ. CD133+ adult human retinal cells remain undifferentiated in Leukaemia Inhibitory Factor (LIF) BMC Ophthalmology. 2009;9:1. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-9-1. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
188. Chen H, Ma H, Sytwu H, Wang H, Chen CV, Liu S, et al. Neural stem cells secrete factors that promote auditory cell proliferation via a leukemia inhibitory factor signaling pathway. Journal of Neuroscience Research. 2010;88(15):3308–3318. doi: 10.1002/jnr.22492. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
189. Barasch J, Yang J, Ware CB, Taga T, Yoshida K, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Parravicini E, Malach S, Aranoff T. Mesenchymal to epithelial conversion in rat metanephros is induced by LIF. Cell. 1999;99:377–386. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81524-X. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
190. Kanda J, Uchiyama T, Tomosugi N, Higuchi M, Uchiyama T, Kawabata H. Oncostatin M and leukemia inhibitory factor increase hepcidin expression in hepatoma cell lines. International Journal of Hematology. 2009;90:545–552. doi: 10.1007/s12185-009-0443-x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
191. Lumaki F, Basso SM, Orlando R. Cytokines, thyroid diseases and thyroid cancer. Cytokine. 2010;50(3):299–233. [PubMed]
192. Quaglino A, Schere-Levy C, Romorini L, Meiss RP, Kordon EC. Mouse mammary tumors display Stat3 activation dependent on leukemia inhibitory factor signaling. Breast Cancer Research. 2007;9:R69. doi: 10.1186/bcr1777. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
193. Wysoczynski M, Miekus K, Jankowski K, Wanzeck J, Bertolone S, Janowska-Wieczorek A, Ratajczak J, Ratajczak MZ. Leukemia inhibitory factor: a newly identified metastatic factor in rhabdomyosarcomas. Cancer Research. 2007;67:2131–2140. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1021. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
194. McKenzie RC, Szepietowski J. Cutaneous leukemia inhibitory factor and its potential role in the development of skin tumors. Dermatologic Surgery. 2004;30:279–290. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2004.30087.x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
195. Maruta S, Takiguchi S, Ueyama M, Kataoka Y, Oda Y, Tsuneyoshi M, Iguchi H. A role for leukemia inhibitory factor in melanoma-induced bone metastasis. Clinical & Experimental Metastasis. 2009;26:133–141. doi: 10.1007/s10585-008-9223-x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
196. Peñuelas S, Anido J, Prieto-Sánchez RM, Folch G, Barba I, Cuartas I, García-Dorado D, Poca MA, Sahuquillo J, Baselga J, Seoane J. TGF-[beta] Increases Glioma-Initiating Cell Self-Renewal through the Induction of LIF in Human Glioblastoma. Cancer Cell. 2009;15:315–327. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.02.011. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
197. Kurek JB, Bower JJ, Romanella M, Koentgen F, Murphy M, Austin L. The role of leukemia inhibitory factor in skeletal muscle regeneration. Muscle Nerve. Muscle & Nerve. 1997;20:815–822. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199707)20:7<815::AID-MUS5>3.0.CO;2-A. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
198. Kubota Y, Hirashima M, Kishi K, Stewart CL, Suda T. Leukemia inhibitory factor regulates microvessel density by modulating oxygen-dependent VEGF expression in mice. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2008;118:2393–2403. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
199. Bozec A, Bakiri L, Hoebertz A, Eferl R, Schilling AF, Komnenovic V, Scheuch H, Priemel M, Stewart CL, Amling M, Wagner EF. Osteoclast size is controlled by Fra-2 through LIF/LIF-receptor signalling and hypoxia. Nature. Nature. 2008;454:221–225. doi: 10.1038/nature07019. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
200. Sugiura S, Lahav R, Han J, Kou SY, Banner LR, Pablo F, Patterson PH. Leukaemia inhibitory factor is required for normal inflammatory responses to injury in the peripheral and central nervous systems in vivo and is chemotactic for macrophages in vitro. The European Journal of Neuroscience. 2000;12:457–466. doi: 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2000.00922.x. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
201. Bugga L, Gadient RA, Kwan K, Stewart CL, Patterson PH. Analysis of neuronal and glial phenotypes in brains of mice deficient in leukemia inhibitory factor. Journal of Neurobiology. 1998;36:509–524. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4695(19980915)36:4<509::AID-NEU5>3.0.CO;2-#. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
202. Marriott MP, Emery B, Cate HS, Binder MD, Kemper D, Wu Q, Kolbe S, Gordon IR, Wang H, Egan G, Murray S, Butzkueven H, Kilpatrick TJ. Leukemia inhibitory factor signaling modulates both central nervous system demyelination and myelin repair. Glia. 2008;56:686–698. doi: 10.1002/glia.20646. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
203. Cohen JE, Fields RD. Activity-dependent neuron-glial signaling by ATP and leukemiainhibitory factor promotes hippocampal glial cell development. Neuron Glia Biology. 2008;4:43–55. doi: 10.1017/S1740925X09000076. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
204. Bürgi S, Samardzija M, Grimm C. Endogenous leukemia inhibitory factor protects photoreceptor cells against light-induced degeneration. Molecular Vision. 2009;15:1631–1637. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
205. Kirsch M, Trautmann N, Ernst M, Hofmann H. Involvement of gp130-associated cytokine signaling in Müller cell activation following optic nerve lesion. Glia. 2010;58:768–779. doi: 10.1002/glia.20961. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
206. Bauer S, Rasika S, Han J, Mauduit C, Raccurt M, Morel G, Jourdan F, Benahmed M, Moyse E, Patterson PH. Leukemia inhibitory factor is a key signal for injury-induced neurogenesis in the adult mouse olfactory epithelium. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2003;23:1792–1803. [PubMed]
207. Banner LR, Patterson PH, Allchorne A, Poole S, Woolf CJ. Leukemia inhibitory factor is an anti-inflammatory and analgesic cytokine. The Journal of Neuroscience. 1998;18:5456–5462. [PubMed]
208. Chesnokova V, Kariagina A, Melmed S. Opposing effects of pituitary leukemia inhibitory factor and SOCS-3 on the ACTH axis response to inflammation. American Journal of Physiology. Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2002;282:E1110–E1118. [PubMed]

Articles from Springer Open Choice are provided here courtesy of Springer