Tumor vascular responses to antivascular and antiangiogenic strategies: Looking for suitable models

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 30, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 649-658

  Mriouah, Jihane ^a,b   Boura, Cédric ^a   Thomassin, Magalie ^a,b   Bastogne, Thierry ^a,b   Dumas, Dominique ^a   Faivre, Béatrice ^a   Barberi Heyob, Muriel ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LORRAINE   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

^c CENTRE ALEXIS VAUTRIN   (France)

Author keywords

Angiogenesis; Angiogenesis assays; Computational modeling.; In vivo models

Indexed keywords

AFTER-TREATMENT; ANGIOGENESIS; ANTIANGIOGENIC; ANTIVASCULAR; COMPUTATIONAL MODELING; ELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE; EX-VIVO; IN-VITRO; IN-VIVO; NON-INVASIVE IMAGING; TUMOR RESPONSE; TUMOR VASCULARIZATION; VASCULAR DISRUPTING AGENTS; VASCULAR RESPONSE;

IMAGING TECHNIQUES; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY;

TUMORS;

4 HYDROXYBENZYL ALCOHOL; AFLIBERCEPT; AL 3810; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR; BEVACIZUMAB; CETUXIMAB; CYTOTOXIC AGENT; DOVITINIB; HEPTAPEPTIDE; LOW MOLECULAR WEIGHT HEPARIN; MATRIGEL; MATRIX METALLOPROTEINASE; MOTESANIB; N ACETYLSARCOSYLGLYCYLVALYL DEXTRO ALLOISOLEUCYLTHREONYLNORVALYLISOLEUCYLARGINYLPROLINE ETHYLAMIDE; NADROPARIN; NEUROPILIN 1; PAZOPANIB; PHENOL DERIVATIVE; PHOTOSENSITIZING AGENT; PROTEIN TYROSINE KINASE INHIBITOR; RESVERATROL; SUNITINIB; THALIDOMIDE; THROMBOPLASTIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VASCULOTROPIN; VASCULOTROPIN RECEPTOR; VITRONECTIN RECEPTOR;

ANGIOGENESIS; BLOOD VESSEL; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER STEM CELL; CANCER THERAPY; CELL CULTURE; CELL MIGRATION; CHORION; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; ENDOTHELIAL PROGENITOR CELL; ENDOTHELIUM CELL; EX VIVO STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL MODEL; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; FETUS MEMBRANE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; LOW DRUG DOSE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MELANOMA; METRONOMIC DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MICROFLUIDICS; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINOPATHY; REVIEW; TUMOR GROWTH; VASCULAR RING; ZEBRA FISH;

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NEOPLASMS; NEOVASCULARIZATION, PATHOLOGIC;

EID: 84869132161     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.08.006     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. Bussolati B., et al. Tumor exploits alternative strategies to achieve vascularization. FASEB 2011, 25:2874-2882.
2. Borgström P., et al. Complete inhibition of angiogenesis and growth of microtumors by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor neutralizing antibody: novel concepts of angiostatic therapy from intravital videomicroscopy. Cancer Res. 1996, 56:4032-4039.
3. Holash J., et al. VEGF-Trap: a VEGF blocker with potent antitumor effects. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99:11393-11398.
4. D'Amato R.J., et al. Thalidomide is an inhibitor of angiogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91:4082-4085.
5. Debergh I., et al. The low-molecular-weight heparin, nadroparin, inhibits tumour angiogenesis in a rodent dorsal skinfold chamber model. Br. J. Cancer 2010, 102:837-843.
6. Dredge K., et al. PG545, a dual heparanase and angiogenesis inhibitor, induces potent anti-tumour and anti-metastatic efficacy in preclinical models. Br. J. Cancer 2011, 104:635-664.
7. Olson P., et al. Imaging guided trials of the angiogenesis inhibitor sunitinib in mouse models predict efficacy in pancreatic neuroendocrine but not ductal carcinoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2011, 108:1275-1284.
8. Zhou Y., et al. AL3810, a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, exhibits potent anti-angiogenic and antitumor activity via targeting VEGFR, FGFR, and PDGFR. J. Cell Mol. Med. 2012, 16:2321-2330.
9. Trudel S., et al. CHIR-258, a novel, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor for the potential treatment of t(4;14) multiple myeloma. Blood 2005, 105:2941-2948.
10. Polverino A., et al. AMG 706, an oral, multikinase inhibitor that selectively targets vascular endothelial growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, and kit receptors, potently inhibits angiogenesis and induces regression in tumor xenografts. Cancer Res. 2006, 66:8715-8721.
11. Sloan B., Scheinfeld N.S. Pazopanib, a VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor for cancer therapy. Curr. Opin. Investig. Drugs 2008, 12:1324-1335.
12. Anderson J.C., et al. ABT-510, a modified type 1 repeat peptide of thrombospondin, inhibits malignant glioma growth in vivo by inhibiting angiogenesis. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2007, 6:454-462.
13. Santulli G., et al. Evaluation of the anti-angiogenic properties of the new selective αVβ3 integrin antagonist RGDechiHCit. J. Transl. Med. 2011, 9. 10.1186/1479-5876-9-7.
14. Jouan-Hureaux V., et al. Modulation of endothelial cell network formation in vitro by molecular signaling of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) exposed to cetuximab. Microvasc. Res. 2012, 83:131-137.
15. Chabot S., et al. A novel antiangiogenic and vascular normalization therapy targeted against human CD160 receptor. J. Exp. Med. 2011, 208:973-986.
16. Bechet D., et al. Neuropilin-1 targeting photosensitization-induced early stages of thrombosis via tissue factor release. Pharm. Res. Mar. 2010, 27:468-479.
17. Trapp V., et al. Anti-angiogenic effects of resveratrol mediated by decreased VEGF and increased TSP1 expression in melanoma-endothelial cell co-culture. Angiogenesis 2010, 13:305-315.
18. Laschke M.W., et al. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the anti-angiogenic actions of 4-hydroxybenzyl alcohol. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2011, 163:835-844.
19. Lim E.J., et al. Anti-angiogenic, anti-inflammatory and anti-nociceptive activity of 4-hydroxybenzyl alcohol. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2007, 59:1235-1240.
20. Eichhorn M.E., et al. Anti-vascular tumor therapy: recent advances, pitfalls and clinical perspectives. Drug Resist. Updat. 2004, 7:125-138.
21. Eberhard A., et al. Heterogeneity of angiogenesis and blood vessel maturation in human tumors: implications for antiangiogenic tumor therapies. Cancer Res. 2000, 60:1388-1393.
22. Thorpe P.E., et al. The first international conference on vascular targeting: meeting overview. Cancer Res. 2003, 63:1144-1147.
23. Augustin H.G. Antiangiogenic tumour therapy: will it work?. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1998, 19:216-222.
24. Gasparini G. Metronomic scheduling: the future of chemotherapy. Lancet Oncol. 2001, 2:733-740.
25. Benachour H., et al. Targeting strategies in photodynamic therapy. Brain Cancer, Targeting Strategies and Cervical Cancer 2011, 1-38. Nova Science Publishers. E.K. Salvatti (Ed.).
26. Tirand L., et al. A peptide competing with VEGF165 binding on neuropilin-1 mediates targeting of a chlorin-type photosensitizer and potentiates its photodynamic activity in human endothelial cells. J. Control. Release 2006, 111:153-164.
27. Cryan L.M., Rogers M.S. Targeting the anthrax receptors, TEM-8 and CMG-2, for anti-angiogenic therapy. Front. Biosci. 2011, 16:1574-1588.
28. Wong K., et al. Microfluidic models of vascular functions. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2012, 14:205-230.
29. Bird C., Kirstein S. Real-time, label-free monitoring of cellular invasion and migration with the xCELLigence system. Nat. Methods 2009, 6.
30. Nicosia R.F. The aortic ring model of angiogenesis: a quarter century of search and discovery. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2009, 13:4113-4136.
31. Passman J.A., et al. A sonic hedgehog signaling domain in the arterial adventitia supports Sca1+ smooth muscle progenitor cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:9349-9354.
32. Nicoli S., Presta M. The zebrafish/tumor xenograft angiogenesis assay. Nat. Protoc. 2007, 2:2918-2923.
33. Lee S.L.C., et al. Hypoxia-induced pathological angiogenesis mediates tumor cell dissemination, invasion and metastasis in a zebrafish tumor model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:19485-19490.
34. Ribatti D. Chick embryo chorioallantoic-membrane as a useful tool to study angiogenesis. Int. Rev. Cell Mol. Biol. 2008, 270:181-224.
35. Deryugina E.I., Quigley J.P. Chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane models to quantify angiogenesis induced by inflammatory and tumor cells or purified effector molecules. Methods Enzymol. 2008, 444:21-41.
36. Hanjaya-Putra D., Gerecht S. Vascular engineering using human embryonic stem cells. Biotechnol. Prog. 2009, 25:2-9.
37. Loi M., et al. The use of the orthotopic model to validate antivascular therapies for cancer. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 2011, 55:547-555.
38. Ebos J.M.L., Kerbel R.S. Antiangiogenic therapy: impact on invasion, disease progression, and metastasis. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 8:210-221.
39. Tozer G.M. Measuring tumour vascular response to antivascular and antiangiogenic drugs. Br. J. Radiol. 2003, 76:23-35.
40. Mayes P., et al. Non-invasive vascular imaging in fluorescent tumors using multispectral unmixing. Biotechniques 2008, 45:459-464.
41. Oudina K., et al. Noninvasive bioluminescent quantification of viable stem cells in engineered constructs. Mammalian Cell Viability: Methods and Protocols, Methods in Molecular Biology 2011, Vol. 740:165-178. Humana Press.
42. Baron T.V., et al. Intravital microscopy in the mouse dorsal skin chamber model for the study of solid tumors. Am. J. Cancer Res. 2011, 5:674-686.
43. Fukumura D., et al. Tumor microvasculature and microenvironment: novel insights through intravital imaging in preclinical models. Microcirculation 2010, 17:206-225.
44. Wittenborn T., et al. Ultrahigh-field DCE-MRI of angiogenesis in a novel angiogenesis mouse model. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2012, 35:703-710.
45. Gabhann F.M. Modeling Tumor Vasculature: Molecular, Cellular, and Tissue Level Aspects and Implications 2011, 37-53. Springer. T.L. Jackson (Ed.).
46. Thompson J.R., Brown B.W. Cancer Modeling 1987, 1-440. Springer Press. Marcel Dekker (Ed.).
47. Chaplain M.A.J. From mutation to metastasis: the mathematical modelling of the stages of tumour development. A Survey of Models for Tumor-Immune System Dynamics 1987, 187-236. Birkhäuser. J.A. Adam, N. Bellomo (Eds.).
48. Peirce S.M. Computational and mathematical modeling of angiogenesis. Microcirculation 2008, 15:739-751.
49. Rejniak K.A., McCawley L.J. Current trends in mathematical modeling of tumor-microenvironment interactions: a survey of tools and applications. Exp. Biol. Med. 2010, 235:411-423.
50. Hahnfeldt P., et al. Tumor development under angiogenic signaling: a dynamical theory of tumor growth, treatment response, and postvascular dormancy. Cancer Res. 1999, 59:4770-4775.
51. Chaplain M.A. Mathematical modelling of angiogenesis. J. Neurooncol. 2000, 50:37-51.
52. Arakelyan L., et al. Multi-scale analysis of angiogenic dynamics and therapy. Cancer Modelling and Simulation 2003, 205-239. CRC Press. L. Preziosi (Ed.).
53. Billy F., et al. A pharmacologically based multiscale mathematical model of angiogenesis and its use in investigating the efficacy of a new cancer treatment strategy. J. Theor. Biol. 2009, 260:545-562.
54. D'Onofrio A., Gandolfi A. A family of models of angiogenesis and anti-angiogenesis anti-cancer therapy. Math. Med. Biol. 2009, 26:63-95.
55. Ribba B., et al. A model of vascular tumour growth in mice combining longitudinal tumour size data with histological biomarkers. Eur. J. Cancer 2011, 47:479-490.
56. Gevertz J.L. Computational modeling of tumor response to vascular-targeting therapies - part I: validation. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2011, 10.1155/2011/830515.
57. Gorelik B., et al. Efficacy of weekly docetaxel and bevacizumab in mesenchymal chondrosarcoma: a new theranostic method combining xenografted biopsies with a mathematical model. Cancer Res. 2008, 68:9033-9040.
58. Finley S.D., et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of VEGF-neutralizing antibodies. BMC Syst. Biol. 2011, 21:193-213.
59. Finley S.D., Popel A.S. Predicting the effects of anti-angiogenic agents targeting specific VEGF isoforms. AAPS J. 2012, 14:500-509.
60. Ledzewicz U., Schattler H. Optimal and suboptimal protocols for a class of mathematical models of tumor anti-angiogenesis. J. Theor. Biol. 2008, 252:295-312.
61. Stéphanou A., et al. Mathematical modelling of flow in 2D and 3D vascular networks: Applications to anti-angiogenic and chemotherapeutic drug strategies. Math. Comput. Model. 2005, 41:1137-1156.
62. Sachs R.K., et al. Simple ODE models of tumor growth and anti-angiogenic or radiation treatment. Math. Comput. Model. 2001, 33:1297-1305.
63. Ergun A., et al. Optimal scheduling of radiotherapy and angiogenic inhibitors. Bull. Math. Biol. 2003, 65:407-424.
64. Benzekry S., et al. Modeling the impact of anticancer agents on metastatic spreading. Math. Model. Nat. Phenomenon 2012, 7:306-336.
65. Plank M.J., Sleeman B.D. A reinforced random walk model of tumour angiogenesis and anti-angiogenic strategies. Math. Med. Biol. 2003, 20:135-181.
66. McDougall S.R., et al. Mathematical modelling of flow through vascular networks: implications for tumour-induced angiogenesis and chemotherapy strategies. Bull. Math. Biol. 2002, 64:673-702.
67. Habbal A. A Nash topology game for tumoral anti-angiogenesis. Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 2005, 30:404-412.
68. Jain R.K., et al. Effect of vascular normalization by antiangiogenic therapy on interstitial hypertension, peritumor edema, and lymphatic metastasis: insights from a mathematical model. Cancer Res. 2007, 67:2729-2735.
69. Vital-Lopez F.G., et al. Modeling the effect of chemotaxis on glioblastoma tumor progression. AIChE J. 2011, 57:778-792.
70. Karasözen B., et al. A model of angiogenesis by hybrid systems with delay on the piecewise constant part. J. Process Control 2009, 19:1257-1264.
71. Jain R.K., Baxter L.T. Mechanisms of heterogeneous distribution of monoclonal antibodies and other macromolecules in tumors: significance of elevated interstitial pressure. Cancer Res. 1988, 48:7022-7032.
72. Delgado M., et al. An angiogenesis model with nonlinear chemotactic response and flux at the tumor boundary. Nonlin. Anal. Theory Methods Appl. 2010, 72:330-347.
73. Anderson A.R., Chaplain M.A. Continuous and discrete mathematical models of tumor-induced angiogenesis. Bull. Math. Biol. 1998, 60:857-899.
74. Kim E., et al. Multiscale imaging and computational modeling of blood flow in the tumor vasculature. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2012, 40:2425-2441.
75. van de Ven A.L., et al. Integrated intravital microscopy and mathematical modeling to optimize nanotherapeutics delivery to tumors. AIP Adv. 2012, 2. 10.1063/1.3699060.
76. Snoeks T.J.A., et al. In vivo optical approaches to angiogeneisis imaging. Angiogenesis 2010, 13:135-147.
77. White S.M., et al. Automated computation of functional vascular density using laser speckle imaging in a rodent window chamber model. Microvasc. Res. 2011, 82:92-95.
78. Patenaude A., et al. Involvement of endothelial progenitor cells in tumor vascularization. Microvasc. Res. 2010, 79:217-223.