Back

Parsing glomerular and tubular structure variability in high-throughput kidney organoid culture

Uusi-Rauva, K.; Pirttiniemi, A.; Hassinen, A.; Trokovic, R.; Lehtonen, S.; Kallijarvi, J.; Lehto, M.; Fellman, V.; Groop, P.-H.

2025-05-09 developmental biology
10.1101/2025.05.05.652160 bioRxiv
Show abstract

High variability in stem cell research is a well-known limiting phenomenon, with technical variation across experiments and laboratories often surpassing variation caused by genotypic effects of induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines. Evaluation of kidney organoid protocols and culture conditions across laboratories remains scarce in the literature. We used the original air-medium interface protocol to evaluate kidney organoid success rate and reproducibility with several human iPSC lines, including a novel patient-derived GRACILE syndrome iPSC line. Organoid morphology was assessed with light microscopy and immunofluorescence-stained maturing glomerular and tubular structures. The protocol was further adapted to four microplate-based high-throughput approaches utilizing spheroid culture steps. Quantitative high-content screening analysis of the nephrin-positive podocytes and ECAD-positive tubular cells revealed that the choice of approach and culture conditions were significantly associated with structure development. The culture approach, iPSC line, experimental replication, and initial cell number explained 35-77% of the variability in the logit-transformed proportion of nephrin and ECAD-positive area, when fitted into multiple linear models. Our study highlights the benefits of high-throughput culture and multivariate techniques to better distinguishing sources of technical and biological variation in morphological analysis of organoids. Our microplate-based high-throughput approach is easily adaptable for other laboratories to combat organoid size variability.

Published in Methods and Protocols · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.