Review



human renal epithelial cells  (ATCC)


Bioz Verified Symbol ATCC is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol ATCC manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 94

    Structured Review

    ATCC human renal epithelial cells
    Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal <t>epithelial</t> cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.
    Human Renal Epithelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 57 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pmc13182272-181-0-4?v=ATCC
    Average 94 stars, based on 57 article reviews
    human renal epithelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    94/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Transcriptional Profiling at Single‐Cell Resolution Reveals Diversity and Regulatory Networks of Primary and Secondary Senescent Cells"

    Article Title: Transcriptional Profiling at Single‐Cell Resolution Reveals Diversity and Regulatory Networks of Primary and Secondary Senescent Cells

    Journal: Aging Cell

    doi: 10.1111/acel.70540

    Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal epithelial cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal epithelial cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.

    Techniques Used: Single Cell, Irradiation, Expressing, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Two Tailed Test, Activity Assay

    SASP‐driven secondary senescence shows distinct transcriptional states. (A) Experimental overview: Proliferative renal epithelial cells were treated with CM from quiescent cells (QCMT) or primary senescent cells (SCMT) and separately processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) qPCR validation of senescence/SASP‐associated genes and expressed as fold changes in SCMT versus QCMT (QCMT, n = 4; SCMT, n = 3). Data are presented as the mean ± standard error of the mean. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two‐tailed unpaired t ‐test) (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured by ELISA (QCMT, n = 12; SCMT, n = 8). (D) UMAP of secondary SnCs showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C2 and C6), intermediate (C0, C1, and C4), and fully senescent clusters (C3, C5, and C7) (left). Each bar represents either QCMT or SCMT, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of QCMT and SCMT cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots of representative proliferation and senescence‐associated genes across clusters. (F) Heatmap of pathway activities across clusters ( Z ‐score normalized). (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifies four lineages with distinct terminal clusters, including a senescence‐resistant endpoint. Trajectory lines indicate senescence progression, and clusters are colored by pseudotime. (H, I) Boxplots of DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene set scores (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis two‐sided test with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways categorized into non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) Heatmap displaying temporally regulated the top 500 genes identified through tradeSeq along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 4 in secondary senescence (hypergeometric distribution; p < 0.05).
    Figure Legend Snippet: SASP‐driven secondary senescence shows distinct transcriptional states. (A) Experimental overview: Proliferative renal epithelial cells were treated with CM from quiescent cells (QCMT) or primary senescent cells (SCMT) and separately processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) qPCR validation of senescence/SASP‐associated genes and expressed as fold changes in SCMT versus QCMT (QCMT, n = 4; SCMT, n = 3). Data are presented as the mean ± standard error of the mean. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two‐tailed unpaired t ‐test) (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured by ELISA (QCMT, n = 12; SCMT, n = 8). (D) UMAP of secondary SnCs showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C2 and C6), intermediate (C0, C1, and C4), and fully senescent clusters (C3, C5, and C7) (left). Each bar represents either QCMT or SCMT, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of QCMT and SCMT cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots of representative proliferation and senescence‐associated genes across clusters. (F) Heatmap of pathway activities across clusters ( Z ‐score normalized). (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifies four lineages with distinct terminal clusters, including a senescence‐resistant endpoint. Trajectory lines indicate senescence progression, and clusters are colored by pseudotime. (H, I) Boxplots of DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene set scores (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis two‐sided test with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways categorized into non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) Heatmap displaying temporally regulated the top 500 genes identified through tradeSeq along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 4 in secondary senescence (hypergeometric distribution; p < 0.05).

    Techniques Used: Biomarker Discovery, Two Tailed Test, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay



    Similar Products

    94
    ATCC human renal epithelial cells
    Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal <t>epithelial</t> cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.
    Human Renal Epithelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pmc13182272-181-0-4?v=ATCC
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    human renal epithelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    ATCC human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Human Renal Proximal Tubular Epithelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pmc13179815-45-0-11?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    ATCC renal epithelial cells
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Renal Epithelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pm42108472-149-5-18?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    renal epithelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    ATCC renal epithelial cell line
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Renal Epithelial Cell Line, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pm42108472-138-15-26?v=ATCC
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    renal epithelial cell line - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    ATCC pcs 400 010tm
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Pcs 400 010tm, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/us12616681-590-22-18?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    pcs 400 010tm - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    ATCC cortical pcs 400 011
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Cortical Pcs 400 011, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/bio_rxiv__64898__2026__04__23__720088-28-2-2?v=ATCC
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cortical pcs 400 011 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    rptecs  (ATCC)
    99
    ATCC rptecs
    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular <t>epithelial</t> cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.
    Rptecs, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pm41947350-94-0-4?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    rptecs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    ATCC renal proximal tubule epithelial cell rptec immortalized cell line
    Treatment of synchronized kidney and muscle cells with recombinant Fbln5 (10ng/mL) disrupts rhythmic gene expression. A,B) Disrupted expression of Clock and Bmal1 but not C) Per2 in mouse myotube C2C12 cells with Fbln5 treatment. D,E) Disrupted expression of Bmal1 and Per1 but not F) Clock in human renal proximal tubule endothelial cells <t>(RPTEC)</t> with Fbln5. n=3 repetitions with biological triplicate. *p<0.05 Vehicle vs Fbln5. Cells were synchronized with dexamethasone prior to treatment with Fbln5 or vehicle.
    Renal Proximal Tubule Epithelial Cell Rptec Immortalized Cell Line, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pmc13078729-89-2-11?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    renal proximal tubule epithelial cell rptec immortalized cell line - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    ATCC growth medium
    Treatment of synchronized kidney and muscle cells with recombinant Fbln5 (10ng/mL) disrupts rhythmic gene expression. A,B) Disrupted expression of Clock and Bmal1 but not C) Per2 in mouse myotube C2C12 cells with Fbln5 treatment. D,E) Disrupted expression of Bmal1 and Per1 but not F) Clock in human renal proximal tubule endothelial cells <t>(RPTEC)</t> with Fbln5. n=3 repetitions with biological triplicate. *p<0.05 Vehicle vs Fbln5. Cells were synchronized with dexamethasone prior to treatment with Fbln5 or vehicle.
    Growth Medium, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/primary+human+renal+epithelial+cells/pmc13078729-89-17-28?v=ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    growth medium - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal epithelial cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.

    Journal: Aging Cell

    Article Title: Transcriptional Profiling at Single‐Cell Resolution Reveals Diversity and Regulatory Networks of Primary and Secondary Senescent Cells

    doi: 10.1111/acel.70540

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Transcriptional heterogeneity and lineage‐resolved progression in primary senescence at single‐cell level. (A) Experimental overview. Renal epithelial cells were irradiated (IR; 10 Gy, 10 days) to induce primary senescence, with quiescent controls (QUI; 0.01% serum, 3 days) processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) Expression levels of senescence and SASP‐related genes in senescent relative to the controls (QUI, n = 3; IR, n = 3). (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured using ELISA (QUI, n = 6; IR, n = 6). Data are presented as the means ± the standard error of the mean (unpaired two‐tailed t ‐test; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (D) UMAP of primary dataset showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C4 and C9), intermediate (C0, C1, C3, and C7), and fully senescent states (C5, C6, and C8) (left). Each bar represents either IR or QUI, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of IR and QUI cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots showing expression levels of proliferation and senescence‐associated genes. (F) Heatmap of pathway activity across clusters scored via gene set variation analysis, with Z ‐score normalization. (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifying three senescence progression lineages. Trajectory lines overlaid on UMAP. Cell clusters are colored by pseudotime progression. (H, I) Boxplots of normalized pathway scores for DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene sets (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis test, with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways of non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states in the primary SnCs. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) TradeSeq‐based heatmap of temporally regulated top 500 genes along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 3 ( p < 0.05), with representative late‐pseudotime genes highlighted.

    Article Snippet: Human renal epithelial cells (ATCC; PCS‐400‐011) were cultured in Renal Epithelial Cell Basal Medium (ATCC; PCS‐400‐030) supplemented with the Renal Epithelial Cell Growth Kit (ATCC; PCS‐400‐040), which maintains the cultures at a final serum concentration of 0.5% and incubated at 37°C in 10% CO 2 and 3% O 2 .

    Techniques: Single Cell, Irradiation, Expressing, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Two Tailed Test, Activity Assay

    SASP‐driven secondary senescence shows distinct transcriptional states. (A) Experimental overview: Proliferative renal epithelial cells were treated with CM from quiescent cells (QCMT) or primary senescent cells (SCMT) and separately processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) qPCR validation of senescence/SASP‐associated genes and expressed as fold changes in SCMT versus QCMT (QCMT, n = 4; SCMT, n = 3). Data are presented as the mean ± standard error of the mean. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two‐tailed unpaired t ‐test) (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured by ELISA (QCMT, n = 12; SCMT, n = 8). (D) UMAP of secondary SnCs showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C2 and C6), intermediate (C0, C1, and C4), and fully senescent clusters (C3, C5, and C7) (left). Each bar represents either QCMT or SCMT, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of QCMT and SCMT cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots of representative proliferation and senescence‐associated genes across clusters. (F) Heatmap of pathway activities across clusters ( Z ‐score normalized). (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifies four lineages with distinct terminal clusters, including a senescence‐resistant endpoint. Trajectory lines indicate senescence progression, and clusters are colored by pseudotime. (H, I) Boxplots of DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene set scores (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis two‐sided test with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways categorized into non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) Heatmap displaying temporally regulated the top 500 genes identified through tradeSeq along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 4 in secondary senescence (hypergeometric distribution; p < 0.05).

    Journal: Aging Cell

    Article Title: Transcriptional Profiling at Single‐Cell Resolution Reveals Diversity and Regulatory Networks of Primary and Secondary Senescent Cells

    doi: 10.1111/acel.70540

    Figure Lengend Snippet: SASP‐driven secondary senescence shows distinct transcriptional states. (A) Experimental overview: Proliferative renal epithelial cells were treated with CM from quiescent cells (QCMT) or primary senescent cells (SCMT) and separately processed for scRNA‐seq. (B) qPCR validation of senescence/SASP‐associated genes and expressed as fold changes in SCMT versus QCMT (QCMT, n = 4; SCMT, n = 3). Data are presented as the mean ± standard error of the mean. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two‐tailed unpaired t ‐test) (C) Secreted IL‐6 levels in CM measured by ELISA (QCMT, n = 12; SCMT, n = 8). (D) UMAP of secondary SnCs showing clusters grouped into non‐senescent (C2 and C6), intermediate (C0, C1, and C4), and fully senescent clusters (C3, C5, and C7) (left). Each bar represents either QCMT or SCMT, and each colored segment's height indicates the fraction of one of the three senescence states within that group (middle). Stacked bar chart showing the proportions of QCMT and SCMT cells across each cluster (right). (E) Feature plots of representative proliferation and senescence‐associated genes across clusters. (F) Heatmap of pathway activities across clusters ( Z ‐score normalized). (G) UMAP trajectory analysis using Slingshot identifies four lineages with distinct terminal clusters, including a senescence‐resistant endpoint. Trajectory lines indicate senescence progression, and clusters are colored by pseudotime. (H, I) Boxplots of DNA repair (H) and SASP‐related gene set scores (I) across clusters (Kruskal–Wallis two‐sided test with pairwise Wilcoxon rank‐sum test; adjusted p‐values as shown). (J) Enriched pathways categorized into non‐senescent, intermediate, and fully senescent states. p‐values were calculated using a hypergeometric distribution. (K) Heatmap displaying temporally regulated the top 500 genes identified through tradeSeq along the pseudotime trajectory for lineage 4 in secondary senescence (hypergeometric distribution; p < 0.05).

    Article Snippet: Human renal epithelial cells (ATCC; PCS‐400‐011) were cultured in Renal Epithelial Cell Basal Medium (ATCC; PCS‐400‐030) supplemented with the Renal Epithelial Cell Growth Kit (ATCC; PCS‐400‐040), which maintains the cultures at a final serum concentration of 0.5% and incubated at 37°C in 10% CO 2 and 3% O 2 .

    Techniques: Biomarker Discovery, Two Tailed Test, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay

    Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular epithelial cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

    Journal: Human Mutation

    Article Title: Cross‐Cohort Transcriptomic Integration Identifies IFIT2 as a Translational Diagnostic Biomarker and Functional Driver of Inflammation‐Linked Tubular Injury in Chronic Kidney Disease

    doi: 10.1155/humu/8282277

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Induction and knockdown of IFIT2 in renal tubular epithelial cells. (A–B) IFN‐ γ –induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–D) TGF‐ β 1–induced IFIT2 expression in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (E–F) Validation of IFIT2 knockdown efficiency by qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± SD. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

    Article Snippet: Human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells, including the HK‐2 cell line (ATCC, RRID: CVCL_0302) and primary RPTEC cells (ATCC, RRID: CVCL_K278), were used in this study.

    Techniques: Knockdown, Expressing, Biomarker Discovery

    IFIT2 knockdown attenuates IFN‐ γ –induced injury and apoptosis in renal tubular epithelial cells. (A–B) CCK‐8 assay showing that IFIT2 knockdown alleviates IFN‐ γ –induced reduction of cell viability in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–F) Annexin V/PI flow cytometry analysis showing that IFIT2 knockdown reduces IFN‐ γ –induced apoptosis in (C, E) HK‐2 and (D, F) RPTEC cells. Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

    Journal: Human Mutation

    Article Title: Cross‐Cohort Transcriptomic Integration Identifies IFIT2 as a Translational Diagnostic Biomarker and Functional Driver of Inflammation‐Linked Tubular Injury in Chronic Kidney Disease

    doi: 10.1155/humu/8282277

    Figure Lengend Snippet: IFIT2 knockdown attenuates IFN‐ γ –induced injury and apoptosis in renal tubular epithelial cells. (A–B) CCK‐8 assay showing that IFIT2 knockdown alleviates IFN‐ γ –induced reduction of cell viability in HK‐2 and RPTEC cells. (C–F) Annexin V/PI flow cytometry analysis showing that IFIT2 knockdown reduces IFN‐ γ –induced apoptosis in (C, E) HK‐2 and (D, F) RPTEC cells. Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

    Article Snippet: Human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells, including the HK‐2 cell line (ATCC, RRID: CVCL_0302) and primary RPTEC cells (ATCC, RRID: CVCL_K278), were used in this study.

    Techniques: Knockdown, CCK-8 Assay, Flow Cytometry

    Treatment of synchronized kidney and muscle cells with recombinant Fbln5 (10ng/mL) disrupts rhythmic gene expression. A,B) Disrupted expression of Clock and Bmal1 but not C) Per2 in mouse myotube C2C12 cells with Fbln5 treatment. D,E) Disrupted expression of Bmal1 and Per1 but not F) Clock in human renal proximal tubule endothelial cells (RPTEC) with Fbln5. n=3 repetitions with biological triplicate. *p<0.05 Vehicle vs Fbln5. Cells were synchronized with dexamethasone prior to treatment with Fbln5 or vehicle.

    Journal: Comprehensive Physiology

    Article Title: The cardiac circadian clock regulates rhythms in peripheral tissues via Fibulin 5

    doi: 10.1002/cph4.70147

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Treatment of synchronized kidney and muscle cells with recombinant Fbln5 (10ng/mL) disrupts rhythmic gene expression. A,B) Disrupted expression of Clock and Bmal1 but not C) Per2 in mouse myotube C2C12 cells with Fbln5 treatment. D,E) Disrupted expression of Bmal1 and Per1 but not F) Clock in human renal proximal tubule endothelial cells (RPTEC) with Fbln5. n=3 repetitions with biological triplicate. *p<0.05 Vehicle vs Fbln5. Cells were synchronized with dexamethasone prior to treatment with Fbln5 or vehicle.

    Article Snippet: The human Renal Proximal Tubule Epithelial Cell (RPTEC) immortalized cell line (ATCC, PCS-400–010) was cultured in complete growth medium consisting of the base medium containing DMEM: F12 Medium (ATCC 30–2006) and the RPTEC Growth Kit components (ATCC ACS-4007) consisting of 5 pM triiodo-L-thyronine, 10 ng/mL recombinant human EGF, 3.5 μg/mL ascorbic acid, 5.0 μg/mL human transferrin, 5.0 μg/mL insulin, 25 ng/mL prostaglandin E 1 , 25 ng/mL hydrocortisone, 8.65 ng/mL sodium selenite and 1.2 mg/mL sodium bicarbonate.

    Techniques: Recombinant, Gene Expression, Expressing