OBJECTIVE: To study the antiangiogenetic and tumor inhibitory effects of endostatin (Es) by intratumoral versus intravenous administration combined with adriamycin (Adm) for treatment of transplanted tumor in mice. METHODS: Forty mice were subjected to subcutaneous implantation of H22 cells and randomly divided into 4 groups by the body weight when the tumor diameter reached 1 cm, namely the control group (with intratumoral and intravenous injection of normal saline), Es intratumoral group (with intratumoral injection Es and intraperitoneal Adm injection), Es vein group (with intravenous Es injection and intraperitoneal Adm injection), and Adm group (with intratumoral saline injection and intraperitoneal Adm injection). The tumor volumes and tumor inhibition rates were calculated, and the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the microvessel density (MVD) of the tumors were examined, with the survival time of the mice also observed. RESULTS: The tumor volume was smaller in Es intratumoral group than in the other groups (P<0.05). The expression of VEGF and M VD in Es intratumoral group was significantly decreased as compared with that in the other groups (P<0.05). The survival time was significantly longer in Es intratumoral group and Es vein group than in the other groups (P<0.05), but showed no significant difference between Es intratumoral group and Es vein group (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: In combination with Adm regimen, Es given intratumoral injection produces better effect than intravenous Es injection against angiogenesis and tumor growth, no significant difference can be found in the survival time between them.
OBJECTIVE: To study the antiangiogenetic and tumor inhibitory effects of endostatin (Es) by intratumoral versus intravenous administration combined with adriamycin (Adm) for treatment of transplanted tumor in mice. METHODS: Forty mice were subjected to subcutaneous implantation of H22 cells and randomly divided into 4 groups by the body weight when the tumor diameter reached 1 cm, namely the control group (with intratumoral and intravenous injection of normal saline), Es intratumoral group (with intratumoral injection Es and intraperitoneal Adm injection), Es vein group (with intravenous Es injection and intraperitoneal Adm injection), and Adm group (with intratumoral saline injection and intraperitoneal Adm injection). The tumor volumes and tumor inhibition rates were calculated, and the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the microvessel density (MVD) of the tumors were examined, with the survival time of the mice also observed. RESULTS: The tumor volume was smaller in Es intratumoral group than in the other groups (P<0.05). The expression of VEGF and M VD in Es intratumoral group was significantly decreased as compared with that in the other groups (P<0.05). The survival time was significantly longer in Es intratumoral group and Es vein group than in the other groups (P<0.05), but showed no significant difference between Es intratumoral group and Es vein group (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: In combination with Adm regimen, Es given intratumoral injection produces better effect than intravenous Es injection against angiogenesis and tumor growth, no significant difference can be found in the survival time between them.