Lin et al. (Cell Research, 2007) derived chHES-32, the first highly homozygous (99.29% homozygous SNP calls) and parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cell (hESC) line, from a discarded one-pronuclear (1PN) oocyte after routine IVF, and proposed 1PN oocytes as a source of HLA-homozygous (homozygous at human leukocyte antigen genes) lines for stem-cell banking. The paper's findings and acknowledged limitations left five linked issues open: the frequency and mechanistic basis by which 1PN oocytes are parthenogenetic (uniparental) versus asynchronously fertilized (biparental diploid); the timing, cellular mechanism, and frequency of the haploid-to-diploid conversion that must have produced the homozygous diploid genome; the stability of maternal-only imprinting during derivation, long-term culture, and differentiation, and its functional consequences; confirmation of absolute homozygosity by assays stronger than mid-density SNP arrays; and the translational utility of such lines for HLA-matched cell therapy. The frequency of biparental versus uniparental 1PN blastocysts is now quantified (roughly three-quarters biparental), haploid human ES cells with spontaneous diploidization have been established, imprinting stability is partially characterized with a demonstrated lineage-gating role of the Dlk1-Dio3 imprinted cluster, and parthenogenetic-ESC-derived products have reached clinical-grade primate studies and two phase-1 trials. What remains open is the coherent core: a reproducible, mechanistically understood route from clinical IVF byproducts to genomically and epigenetically stable HLA-homozygous parthenogenetic hESC lines, together with human proof of immunological compatibility, functional differentiation, and transplantation safety/efficacy.

Background

Human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) are pluripotent cell lines derived from the inner cell mass of blastocysts and can, in principle, supply replacement cells for regenerative medicine, but their human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes, which trigger transplant rejection when mismatched, differ between any two unrelated embryos. A line that is homozygous across the HLA loci would match a much larger fraction of a population, so far smaller line banks could immunomatch many patients. One route to homozygosity is parthenogenesis: activation of an unfertilized oocyte without extrusion of the second polar body yields an embryo whose cells contain only maternal chromosomes. Before 2007, artificial activation protocols had produced human parthenogenetic ESC (pESC) lines, but these were heterozygous, because they retain both maternal chromosome sets after meiosis II (Revazova et al., Cloning and Stem Cells, 2007; Mai et al., Cell Research, 2007). A parthenogenetic embryo that starts truly haploid (one maternal chromosome set) and then duplicates its whole genome would instead become homozygous diploid. In clinical IVF, a small fraction of oocytes show a single pronucleus (one-pronuclear, 1PN, zygotes) instead of the normal two; cytogenetic work had shown such zygotes can be haploid, diploid biparental (from asynchronous pronuclear appearance after fertilization), or abnormal (Sultan et al., Human Reproduction, 1995), and they are usually discarded. Lin et al. (Cell Research, 2007) derived chHES-32 from such a discarded 1PN oocyte: the line had a stable 46,XX karyotype over more than 50 passages, formed teratomas representing all three germ layers, expressed no detectable message from five paternally expressed imprinted genes, matched the oocyte donor's HLA genotype, and showed 99.29% homozygous calls on an Affymetrix 500K single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array, with the residual 0.71% heterozygous calls attributed to platform error (reported as 2-5% elsewhere). Genomic imprinting is the parent-of-origin-specific monoallelic expression of a few dozen genes, controlled by differentially methylated regions (DMRs); parthenogenetic cells carry only maternal imprints, which is why parthenogenetic embryos arrest in mammals and why imprinted-gene expression served as the origin test. The authors themselves flagged what the work did not establish: they reported that most 1PN-derived hESC lines in their unpublished series were biparental; they inferred that chHES-32 was originally haploid, followed by a diploidization event, without demonstrating its timing, mechanism, or frequency; imprinting stability over derivation, culture, and differentiation was untested; the SNP-array evidence left open low-level residual heterozygosity or mosaicism; and clinical utility (immunogenicity, functional differentiation into clinically relevant cell types, transplantation safety) was suggested, not demonstrated. Mouse parthenogenetic ESC work (Kim et al., Science, 2007) had shown histocompatibility advantages in principle. The question bundle above thus defines the follow-up agenda for the 1PN/parthenogenetic route to HLA-homozygous cell therapy.

Problem Statement

The problem is the set of follow-up questions raised by the findings and acknowledged limitations of Lin et al. (2007) for chHES-32, the first homozygous parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cell line derived from a discarded one-pronuclear (1PN) IVF oocyte. Given that proof of concept, determine whether clinical IVF byproducts can yield, reproducibly and safely, HLA-homozygous human parthenogenetic ESC lines suitable for matched cell therapy. Concretely: (1) establish, with mechanistic attribution rather than retrospective inference, the fraction of 1PN oocytes that are parthenogenetically activated (uniparental, potentially haploid) versus asynchronously fertilized (biparental diploid), and the biological causes of each outcome, so that the practical yield of the 1PN source is predictable; (2) determine the timing, cellular mechanism, and frequency of the haploid-to-diploid conversion that converts a parthenogenetic haploid genome into a homozygous diploid one, both in early human development and in long-term culture; (3) determine the stability of maternal-only imprinting (and the genomic stability of the lines) during derivation, prolonged expansion, differentiation into clinically relevant lineages, and after transplantation, together with the functional consequences of lacking paternal imprints for lineage competence; (4) confirm absolute homozygosity - or characterize any residual heterozygosity or mosaicism - with assays of higher resolution than the original mid-density SNP array; and (5) test the translational proposition itself: immunogenicity (including HLA match quality and natural-killer-cell responses), functional differentiation into clinically needed cell types, and safety and efficacy of transplantation, ultimately in controlled human studies. These five components serve one objective - a mechanistically understood and clinically validated pipeline from discarded oocytes to bankable, immunomatched cells - and none alone resolves it. The published literature cannot settle component (5)'s human safety and efficacy testing.

References

  1. Lin G, OuYang Q, Zhou X, Gu Y, Yuan D, Li W, Liu G, Liu T, Lu G. A highly homozygous and parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cell line derived from a one-pronuclear oocyte following in vitro fertilization procedure. Cell Research 17(12):999-1007, 2007. DOI 10.1038/cr.2007.97. https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2007.97
  2. Mai Q, Yu Y, Li T, Wang L, Chen M, Huang S, Zhou C, Zhou Q. Derivation of human embryonic stem cell lines from parthenogenetic blastocysts. Cell Research 17(12):1008-1019, 2007. DOI 10.1038/cr.2007.102. https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2007.102
  3. Cheng L. More new lines of human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells. Cell Research 18(2):215-217, 2008. DOI 10.1038/cr.2008.19. https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2008.19
  4. Sultan KM, Munne S, Palermo GD, Alikani M, Cohen J. Chromosomal status of uni-pronuclear human zygotes following in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Human Reproduction 10(1):132-136, 1995. DOI 10.1093/humrep/10.1.132. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/10.1.132
  5. Kim K, Lerou P, Yabuuchi A, Lengerke C, Ng K, West J, Kirby A, Daly MJ, Daley GQ. Histocompatible embryonic stem cells by parthenogenesis. Science 315(5811):482-486, 2007. DOI 10.1126/science.1133542. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133542
  6. Revazova ES, Turovets NA, Kochetkova OD, Kindarova LB, Kuzmichev LN, Janus JD, Pryzhkova MV. Patient-specific stem cell lines derived from human parthenogenetic blastocysts. Cloning and Stem Cells 9(3):432-449, 2007. DOI 10.1089/clo.2007.0033. https://doi.org/10.1089/clo.2007.0033
  7. Liao H, Zhang S, Cheng D, Ouyang Q, Lin G, Gu Y, Lu C, Gong F, Lu G. Cytogenetic analysis of human embryos and embryonic stem cells derived from monopronuclear zygotes. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 26(11-12):583-589, 2009. DOI 10.1007/s10815-009-9355-1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-009-9355-1
  8. Lin G, Xie Y, Ouyang Q, Qian X, Xie P, Zhou X, Xiong B, Tan Y, Li W, Deng L, Zhou J, Zhou D, Du L, Cheng D, Liao Y, Gu Y, Zhang S, Liu T, Sun Y, Lu G. HLA-matching potential of an established human embryonic stem cell bank in China. Cell Stem Cell 5(5):461-465, 2009. DOI 10.1016/j.stem.2009.10.009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2009.10.009
  9. Ahmad R, Wolber W, Eckardt S, Koch P, Schmitt J, Semechkin R, Geis C, Heckmann M, Brustle O, McLaughlin JK, Siren A, Muller AM. Functional neuronal cells generated by human parthenogenetic stem cells. PLoS ONE 7(8):e42800, 2012. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042800
  10. Vassena R, Montserrat N, Carrasco Canal B, Aran B, de Onate L, Veiga A, Izpisua Belmonte JC. Accumulation of instability in serial differentiation and reprogramming of parthenogenetic human cells. Human Molecular Genetics 21(15):3366-3373, 2012. DOI 10.1093/hmg/dds168. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/dds168
  11. Liu W, Guo L, He W, Li Q, Sun X. Higher copy number variation and diverse X chromosome inactivation in parthenote-derived human embryonic stem cells. Journal of Reproduction and Development 58(6):642-648, 2012. DOI 10.1262/JRD.2012-076. https://doi.org/10.1262/JRD.2012-076
  12. Du L, Xu X, Duan X, Lu G, Lin G. Developmental incompatibility of human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells in mouse blastocysts. In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology - Animal 48(3):156-164, 2012. DOI 10.1007/s11626-012-9483-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11626-012-9483-2
  13. Epsztejn-Litman S, Cohen-Hadad Y, Aharoni S, Altarescu G, Renbaum P, Levy-Lahad E, Schonberger O, Eldar-Geva T, Zeligson S, Eiges R. Establishment of homozygote mutant human embryonic stem cells by parthenogenesis. PLoS ONE 10(10):e0138893, 2015. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0138893. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138893
  14. Yu Y, Gao Q, Zhao H, Li R, Gao J, Ding T, Bao S, Zhao Y, Sun X, Fan Y, Qiao J. Ascorbic acid improves pluripotency of human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells through modifying imprinted gene expression in the Dlk1-Dio3 region. Stem Cell Research and Therapy 6(1):69, 2015. DOI 10.1186/s13287-015-0054-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-015-0054-9
  15. Schmitt J, Eckardt S, Schlegel PG, Siren A, Bruttel VS, McLaughlin KJ, Wischhusen J, Muller AM. Human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cell-derived neural stem cells express HLA-G and show unique resistance to NK cell-mediated killing. Molecular Medicine 21(1):185-196, 2015. DOI 10.2119/molmed.2014.00188. https://doi.org/10.2119/molmed.2014.00188
  16. Gonzalez R, Garitaonandia I, Poustovoitov M, Abramihina T, McEntire C, Culp B, Attwood J, Noskov A, Christiansen-Weber T, Khater M, Mora-Castilla S, To C, Crain A, Sherman G, Semechkin A, Laurent LC, Elsworth JD, Sladek J, Snyder EY, Redmond DE, Kern RA. Neural stem cells derived from human parthenogenetic stem cells engraft and promote recovery in a nonhuman primate model of Parkinson's disease. Cell Transplantation 25(11):1945-1966, 2016. DOI 10.3727/096368916X691682. https://doi.org/10.3727/096368916X691682
  17. Sagi I, Chia G, Golan-Lev T, Peretz M, Weissbein U, Sui L, Sauer MV, Yanuka O, Egli D, Benvenisty N. Derivation and differentiation of haploid human embryonic stem cells. Nature 532(7597):107-111, 2016. DOI 10.1038/nature17408. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17408
  18. Xie PY, Tang Y, Hu L, Ouyang Q, Gu YF, Gong F, Leng LZ, Zhang SP, Xiong B, Lu GX, Lin G. Identification of biparental and diploid blastocysts from monopronuclear zygotes with the use of a single-nucleotide polymorphism array. Fertility and Sterility 110(3):545-554.e5, 2018. DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.04.034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.04.034
  19. Mai Q, Mai X, Huang X, Zhang D, Huang K, Zhou C. Imprinting status in two human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cell lines: analysis of 63 imprinted gene expression levels in undifferentiated and early differentiated stages. Stem Cells and Development 27(6):430-439, 2018. DOI 10.1089/scd.2017.0247. https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2017.0247
  20. Wang Y, Zhu W, Wu M, Wu Y, Liu Z, Liang L, Sheng C, Hao J, Wang L, Li W, Zhou Q, Hu B. Human clinical-grade parthenogenetic ESC-derived dopaminergic neurons recover locomotive defects of nonhuman primate models of Parkinson's disease. Stem Cell Reports 11(1):171-182, 2018. DOI 10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.05.010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.05.010
  21. Garitaonandia I, Gonzalez R, Sherman G, Semechkin A, Evans A, Kern R. Novel approach to stem cell therapy in Parkinson's disease. Stem Cells and Development 27(14):951-957, 2018. DOI 10.1089/scd.2018.0001. https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2018.0001
  22. Li M, Dang Y, Wang Y, Li J, Liu P. Value of transferring embryos derived from monopronucleated (1PN) zygotes at the time of fertilization assessment. Zygote 28(3):241-246, 2020. DOI 10.1017/S096719942000009X. https://doi.org/10.1017/S096719942000009X
  23. Liang R, Wang Z, Kong X, Xiao X, Chen T, Yang H, Li Y, Zhao X. Differentiation of human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells into functional hepatocyte-like cells. Organogenesis 16(4):137-148, 2020. DOI 10.1080/15476278.2020.1848237. https://doi.org/10.1080/15476278.2020.1848237
  24. Soler N, Bautista-Llacer R, Escrich L, Oller A, Grau N, Tena R, Insua MF, Ferrer P, Escriba MJ, Vendrell X. Rescuing monopronucleated-derived human blastocysts: a model to study chromosomal topography and fingerprinting. Fertility and Sterility 116(2):583-596, 2021. DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.03.038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.03.038
  25. Wang HS, Ma XR, Niu WB, Shi H, Liu YD, Ma NZ, Zhang N, Jiang ZW, Sun YP. Generation of a human haploid neural stem cell line for genome-wide genetic screening. World Journal of Stem Cells 15(7):734-750, 2023. DOI 10.4252/wjsc.v15.i7.734. https://doi.org/10.4252/wjsc.v15.i7.734
  26. Cai H, Huang J, Wang W, Lin W, Ahmed W, Lu D, Quan J, Chen L. Characteristics of parthenogenetic stem cells and their potential treatment strategy for central nervous system diseases. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 21:213-227, 2025. DOI 10.2147/NDT.S497758. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S497758
  27. Ma Y, Yan M, Xie Z, Zhang H, Li Z, Li Y, Yang S, Zhang M, Li W, Li J. Generation of live mice from haploid ESCs with germline-DMR deletions or switch. Cell Discovery 11:5, 2025. DOI 10.1038/s41421-024-00757-x. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41421-024-00757-x
  28. Roos Kulmann MI, Frantz G, Pagnoncelli de Oliveira N, Gross Dutra C, Martello C, Mezzomo Donatti L, Frantz N, Bos-Mikich A. Artificial activation of clinically failed human oocytes enables euploid blastocyst formation. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 43(5):1495-1507, 2026. DOI 10.1007/s10815-026-03838-w. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-026-03838-w