| Literature DB >> 24164171 |
Abstract
Metronomic chemotherapy, which is continuously administered systemically at close to non-toxic doses, targets the endothelial cells (ECs) that are proliferating during tumor angiogenesis. This leads to harmful effects of an even greatly increased number contiguous tumor cells. Although pre-clinical studies of angiogenesis-related EC features in vitro and of the anti-angiogenic and anti-tumor effects in vivo of metronomic chemotherapy have provided valuable insights, clinical trials with this type of therapy have been less successful in inhibiting tumor growth. One possible reason for the apparent disconnect between the pre-clinical and clinical outcomes is that most of the currently used experimental angiogenesis assays and tumor models are incapable of yielding data that can be translated readily into the clinical setting. Many of the assays used suffer from unintentional artifactual effects, e.g., oxidative stress in vitro, and inflammation in vivo, which reduces the sensitivity and discriminatory power of the assays. Co-treatment with an antioxidant or the inclusion of antioxidants in the vehicle often significantly affects the angiogenesis-modulating outcome of metronomic mono-chemotherapy in vivo. This 'metronomic chemotherapy vehicle factor' merits further study, as do the observations of antagonistic effects following metronomic treatment with a combination of standard chemotherapeutic drugs in vivo.Entities:
Keywords: Metronomic chemotherapy; angiogenesis assays; autochthonous tumors; in vitro; in vivo; inflammation; reactive oxygen species
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24164171 PMCID: PMC4282375 DOI: 10.1111/apm.12201
Source DB: PubMed Journal: APMIS ISSN: 0903-4641 Impact factor: 3.205
Desired features of biologically appropriate in vivo angiogenesis assays
| Mammalian-based, so as to capture responses to mammalian proteins |
| Natively vascularized, to incorporate the effects of circulating endothelial progenitor cells and platelets |
| No significant angiogenesis occurring in the adult test tissue if |
| Displaying minimal non-specific, artifactually induced inflammation, as inflammation induces angiogenesis, which may interfere with the results |
| Truly quantitative in terms of microvessel formation, which is a prerequisite for molecular-activity and dose-effect studies, although analyses of dose-effect responses in a strict sense are probably not yet achievable, as discussed in the text |
| Allowing the recording of concurrent influences of two or more test agents administered systemically in parallel or sequentially, given that antagonistic or unforeseeable effects may occur |
| Test animals should have mature liver function for metabolizing drugs |
| Any significant toxic influence of the treatment should be measurable |
| High-quality animal facilities and experimental procedures are highly recommended |
| Ethically acceptable |
Critical synopsis of a selection of the main currently used mammalian in vivo angiogenesis assays, as well as the chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay, listed in chronologic order of their introduction
| Assay | Advantage(s) | Disadvantage(s) |
|---|---|---|
| CAM | Technically simple to conduct both in ovo and | Avian embryonic tissue, in which all tissue cells proliferate |
| Test agent applied via a carrier onto the CAM surface | Sometimes difficult to distinguish angiogenesis from artifactual increases in blood vessel density linked to tissue contraction caused by the applied carrier | |
| Suitable for large-scale screening experiments | ||
| Permits non-invasive observations | Very sensitive to increases in oxygen tension; production of ROS | |
| Permits biochemical and genetic analyses | Sprouting angiogenesis is followed by intussusceptive microvessel growth | |
| Suitable for mammalian xenografts until EDD 15–18 | Pro-angiogenic treatment accelerates and anti-angiogenic treatment suppresses constant organogenic angiogenesis | |
| Inexpensive | Induction of ( | |
| Drugs can be administered topically onto the CAM, injected i.v. (difficult), injected i.p. into the body of the embryo or injected into the yolk sac and amnion | The tissue is overly sensitive to inflammatory angiogenesis | |
| No ethical issues | Drugs that require metabolic activation cannot be assessed due to liver immaturity | |
| Lack of excretion from the CAM allows test agents to be maintained in the circulation for extended periods | The relevance to human angiogenic diseases is limited; non-mammalian species, which may respond differently to mammalian proteins | |
| Corneal micropocket | New vessels, except the smallest microvessels, are, in principle, easily identifiable | Atypical angiogenesis, as the normal cornea, is avascular because of the trapping of soluble VEGFR-1 |
| Mammalian model: mice, rats, and rabbits are used | Technically demanding, especially in animals with small eyes, as in mice | |
| Permits non-invasive observation | The surgery- or suture-induced lesion causes inflammation and angiogenesis | |
| Quantitative assessment is reported | Toxicity within the micropocket area is difficult to assess | |
| Expensive | ||
| Immunologically privileged site before vascularization, allowing tumor implantation | Ethically questionable as the cornea is a sensory organ | |
| The cornea is not a highly relevant site for tumor growth | ||
| Angiogenesis by sprouting | Only a few substances can be tested in one setting | |
| Exposure to oxygen via the corneal surface causes angiogenesis through the generation of ROS | ||
| Mesentery | Mammalian adult tissue; natively vascularized; lacks significant physiologic angiogenesis | Time-consuming, especially when assessing the numbers and lengths of individual microvessel segments and sprouts |
| The test tissue is visceral; visceral organs are common sites of primary cancers and metastasis | Does not allow real-time observations | |
| Minimal trauma, if any, is inflicted upon the test tissue by i.p. injection of the test solution | Mice are much less suitable than rats for quantitative angiogenesis | |
| Truly quantitative, allowing dose–response and molecular-activity studies | Rats demand 10 times higher levels of test agents than mice | |
| Suitable for measurements of growth factor-induced signaling | Relatively few substances and doses can be tested in one setting | |
| Sprouting angiogenesis, which predominates in normal tissues and tumors | The mesentery is very sensitive to endotoxin, which induces VEGF expression and angiogenesis (endotoxin-free solutions should be used for i.p. injection) | |
| Toxicity data easily acquired in rats, which grow robustly physiologically in adulthood | Intra-abdominal surgery rapidly disturbs homeostasis causing angiogenesis | |
| Less suitable for screening | ||
| Allows for the two-dimensional visualization of entire microvascular networks down to single cell level | Few genetically engineered rat strains are available | |
| Allows for testing of multiple agents simultaneously or sequentially | Technically fairly demanding | |
| Matrigel plug | Technically simple when used s.c. | Matrigel is not chemically defined and contains growth factors (even in the growth factor-reduced form) |
| Rapid quantitative analysis assessing vascular-specific tissues in chambers with 3-D defined plugs | Difficult to make plugs in a uniform 3-D shape (except in chambers) | |
| No angiogenic response to VEGF in chambers | ||
| Suitable for large-scale screening | Analysis of plugs is time-consuming for tissues other than vascular-specific tissues | |
| Does not allow real-time observations | ||
| The s.c. tissue is not highly relevant for tumor growth | ||
| Plugs lack cells that are able to produce endogenous pro- and anti-angiogenic factors, which would affect vascular responses | ||
| Expensive |
Compiled from the following references: 28,70,83,84.
EDD, Embryonic development day; s.c., subcutaneous; i.p., intraperitoneal; i.v., intravascular; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.
The CAM assay was introduced by Auerbach et al. in 1974 101, the corneal micropocket assay by Gimbrone et al. in 1974 102, the rat mesentery assay by Norrby et al. in 1986 68 [the assay has recently been demonstrated and discussed in a DVD movie with added detailed protocols in an Open Access journal 86], and the Matrigel assay was introduced by Passaniti et al. in 1992 103.
These analyses can also readily be performed using the mesentery.
Inbred and outbred mouse and rat strains are available.
Genetically engineered or immunocompromised mice are available.
As with all current angiogenesis assays, the release rate and the spatial and temporal distributions of exogenous pro- and anti-angiogenic test factors are not fully known, so uncontestable analyses of dose-effects are not feasible.
This enables for the first time the large-scale accurate counting and measurement of representative populations of individual sprouts and individual microvessel segments in any tissue.
Can be used for real-time observations following exteriorization of the mesentery; the model has been proven extremely useful in identifying novel cellular events in angiogenesis 57,58,104. However, the homeostasis of the tissue is rapidly disturbed outside the body, as discussed previously 70.