Questions Raised About Widely Used Blood-Brain Barrier Model

A study has sparked controversy by suggesting that cells made using a popular lab protocol have been misidentified, with potentially serious repercussions for brain research. Critics say the significance of the findings has been overstated.

Written byCatherine Offord

| 6 min read

Save for Later

Listen with Speechify

0:00

6:00

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, UNOL

A well-known in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier that is widely used in studies of neurodegenerative diseases and in preclinical research is made from the wrong kind of cells, according to claims made in a PNAS paper this month (February 4).

Researchers report in the study that cells produced using a popular lab protocol, which involves reprogramming human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs), show gene expression patterns typical of the epithelial cells coating human organs, rather than of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) endothelial cells they’re supposed to mimic.

The authors of the paper, which has fueled debate in the BBB research community since it was first posted as a preprint on bioRxiv in 2019, say that the findings raise serious questions about the value of the model in ongoing neuroscience and drug studies. Other researchers, including the designers of the protocol, tell The Scientist that the ...

Interested in reading more?

The Scientist ARCHIVES

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!

Join for free today

Already a member?

Add The Scientist as a preferred Google source to see more of our trusted coverage.

Meet the Author

Catherine Offord
After undergraduate research with spiders at the University of Oxford and graduate research with ants at Princeton University, Catherine left arthropods and academia to become a science journalist. She has worked in various guises at The Scientist since 2016. As Senior Editor, she wrote articles for the online and print publications, and edited the magazine’s Notebook, Careers, and Bio Business sections. She reports on subjects ranging from cellular and molecular biology to research misconduct and science policy. Find more of her work at her website.
View Full Profile