Introduction Mesenchymal stem cells and its characteristics Experimental/preclinical MSC‐based studies Clinical studies Challenges and future prospects Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), adherent fibroblastoid cells, present in bone marrow and many other tissues can be easily isolated and expanded in vitro. They are capable of differentiating into different cell types such as osteoblasts, chondrocytes, adipocytes, cardiomyocytes, hepatocytes, endothelial cells and neuronal cells. Such immense plasticity coupled with their ability to modulate the activity of immune cells makes them attractive for stem cell‐based therapy aimed at treating previously incurable disorders. Preclinical studies have reported successful use of MSCs for delivering therapeutic proteins and repairing defects in a variety of disease models. These studies highlighted the in vivo potential of MSCs and their ability to home to injury sites and modify the microenvironment by secreting paracrine factors to augment tissue repair. Their therapeutic applicability has been widened by genetic modification to enhance differentiation and tissue targeting, and use in tissue engineering. Clinical trials for diseases such as osteogenesis imperfecta, graft‐versus‐host disease and myocardial infarction have shown some promise, demonstrating the safe use of both allogeneic and autologous cells. However, lack of knowledge of MSC behaviour and responses in vitro and in vivo force the need for basic and animal studies before heading to the clinic. Contrasting reports on immunomodulatory functions and tumorigenicity along with issues such as mode of cell delivery, lack of specific marker, low survival and engraftment require urgent attention to harness the potential of MSC‐based therapy in the near future.

Introduction Transcription factor PU.1: expression distribution and function PU.1‐interacting proteins Concluding remarks During normal haematopoiesis, cell development and differentiation programs are accomplished by switching ‘on’ and ‘off’ specific set of genes. Specificity of gene expression is primarily achieved by combinatorial control, i.e. through physical and functional interactions among several transcription factors that form sequence‐specific multiprotein complexes on regulatory regions (gene promoters and enhancers). Such combinatorial gene switches permit flexibility of regulation and allow numerous developmental decisions to be taken with a limited number of regulators. The haematopoietic‐specific Ets family transcription factor PU.1 regulates many lymphoid‐ and myeloid‐specific gene promoters and enhancers by interacting with multiple proteins during haematopoietic development. Such protein–protein interactions regulate DNA binding, subcellular localization, target gene selection and transcriptional activity of PU.1 itself in response to diverse signals including cytokines, growth factors, antigen and cellular stresses. Specific domains of PU.1 interact with many protein motifs such as bHLH, bZipper, zinc fingers and paired domain for regulating its activity. This review focuses on important protein–protein interactions of PU.1 that play a crucial role in regulation of normal as well as malignant haematopoiesis. Precise delineation of PU.1 protein‐partner interacting interface may provide an improved insight of the molecular mechanisms underlying haematopoietic stem cell fate regulation. Its interactions with some proteins could be targeted to modulate the aberrant signalling pathways for reversing the malignant phenotype and to control the generation of specific haematopoietic progeny for treatment of haematopoietic disorders.

Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) present in the bone marrow are the precursors of osteoblasts, chondrocytes and adipocytes, and hold tremendous potential for osteoregenerative therapy. However, achieving directed differentiation into osteoblasts has been a major concern. The use of lithium for enhancing osteogenic differentiation has been documented in animal models but its effect in humans is not clear. We, therefore, performed high throughput transcriptome analysis of lithium-treated hMSCs to identify altered gene expression and its relevance to osteogenic differentiation. Our results show suppression of proliferation and enhancement of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity upon lithium treatment of hMSCs under non-osteogenic conditions. Microarray profiling of lithium-stimulated hMSC revealed decreased expression of adipogenic genes (CEBPA, CMKLR1, HSD11B1) and genes involved in lipid biosynthesis. Interestingly, osteoclastogenic factors and immune responsive genes (IL7, IL8, CXCL1, CXCL12, CCL20) were also downregulated. Negative transcriptional regulators of the osteogenic program (TWIST1 and PBX1) were suppressed while genes involved in mineralization like CLEC3B and ATF4 were induced. Gene ontology analysis revealed enrichment of upregulated genes related to mesenchymal cell differentiation and signal transduction. Lithium priming led to enhanced collagen 1 synthesis and osteogenic induction of lithium pretreated MSCs resulted in enhanced expression of Runx2, ALP and bone sialoprotein. However, siRNA-mediated knockdown of RRAD, CLEC3B and ATF4 attenuated lithium-induced osteogenic priming, identifying a role for RRAD, a member of small GTP binding protein family, in osteoblast differentiation. In conclusion, our data highlight the transcriptome reprogramming potential of lithium resulting in higher propensity of lithium “primed” MSCs for osteoblastic differentiation.