This Article Abstract Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lindner, V. Articles by Reidy, M. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lindner, V. Articles by Reidy, M. A.

(Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 1996;16:1399-1405.)
© 1996 American Heart Association, Inc.

Articles

Expression of VEGF Receptors in Arteries After Endothelial Injury and Lack of Increased Endothelial Regrowth in Response to VEGF

Volkhard Lindner; Michael A. Reidy

the Department of Surgery, Maine Medical Center Research Institute, South Portland, Me (V.H.), and the Department of Pathology, Vascular Biology, University of Washington, Seattle (M.A.R.).

Correspondence to Volkhard Lindner, MD, PhD, Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 125 John Roberts Rd, Suite 8, South Portland, ME 04106. E-mail lindnv.mmcri@office.mmc.org.

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an endothelial cell–specific factor with angiogenic effects in vivo and mitogenic effects in vitro. Administration of VEGF has been reported to stimulate endothelial growth in denuded arteries and new blood vessel formation in models of induced tissue ischemia. In the present study, expression of VEGF and its receptors flk-1 and flt-1 was determined in injured aortas and carotid arteries of rats and mice. Neither VEGF nor flk-1 mRNA was detectable in vascular cells. mRNA levels for flt-1 were dramatically upregulated at the leading edge of a growing endothelial monolayer in vivo; however, these cells did not demonstrate increased replication after VEGF infusion. Furthermore, all doses and treatment protocols of VEGF failed to promote reendothelialization in denuded arteries. At sites of flt-1 expression, VEGF increased permeability. These areas revealed a loss of endothelial contacts at the ultrastructural level. These findings suggest that VEGF is not a direct mitogen for large-vessel endothelium in vivo and that VEGF may play a role in abolishing contact inhibition, which may be a prerequisite for endothelial proliferation.

Key Words: flt-1 • flk-1 • vascular endothelial growth factor • permeability • junctions

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
VEGF,^{1 2 3} also known as vascular permeability factor,⁴ has been shown to be an EC-specific mitogen in vitro³ and angiogenic in vivo.^{5 6} Another property of this factor is its ability to increase vascular permeability.⁷ Two receptors, flt-1 and flk-1 (the latter of which is the mouse homologue of human KDR), have been shown to bind VEGF with high affinity.^{8 9 10} Expression of flt-1 by ECs has been documented during mouse development as well as in adult tissue,^{9 11} and binding sites for radiolabeled VEGF colocalized with factor VIII–like immunoreactivity in rat vessels.¹²

The ability to stimulate new blood vessel formation and endothelial growth has prompted the use of VEGF as a therapeutic agent in models of decreased limb perfusion^{13 14} and reendothelialization of large vessels.¹⁵ Takeshita and coworkers^{13 16} reported increased perfusion and blood vessel formation in the rabbit hindlimb in response to VEGF injection after ligation of the femoral artery. Furthermore, an increase in endothelial regrowth and a reduction in intimal lesion formation in the balloon-injured carotid arteries of rabbits and rats have been recently reported after administration of VEGF.^{15 17}

In contrast to these reports, we and others have been unable to elicit a mitogenic response in either ECs in vitro or bovine aortic ECs in vivo (unpublished data). These findings led us to study the expression of VEGF and its receptors flt-1 and flk-1 in the injured aorta and carotid arteries of rats and mice. Furthermore, we tested the effects of recombinant VEGF on endothelial replication and regrowth with a variety of doses and different treatment protocols. In the absence of any stimulatory effect on endothelial growth, we present evidence that infused VEGF increases endothelial permeability at sites of flt-1 expression.

	Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Experimental Protocols
A total of 107 male Sprague-Dawley rats (weight, 320 to 400 g; 3 to 4 months old) and 20 FVB mice (30 g) were used in the studies (Bantin & Kingman, Edmonds, Wash). All surgical procedures were performed under general anesthesia by intraperitoneal injection of xylazine (2.2 mg/kg body weight; AnaSed, Lloyd Laboratories) and ketamine (50 mg/kg body weight; Ketaset, Aveco Co, Inc). Animals were preanesthetized by ether injection into the tail vein. In mice, the aorta was partially denuded with a flexible wire as described.¹⁸ In rats, the left carotid artery and the aorta were denuded with a 2F balloon catheter as described.¹⁹ For studying the wounded endothelium at early time points (up to 48 hours after denudation), the aortic endothelium was only partially denuded by passing an uninflated balloon catheter along the aorta. Deendothelialized segments of arteries were identified by intravenous injection of Evans blue dye (0.3 mL of a 5% solution in saline) 10 minutes before the animals were killed. Animals were perfusion-fixed with phosphate-buffered (0.1 mol/L, pH 7.4) 4% p-formaldehyde. For in situ hybridization studies, the animals were killed at the indicated times after injury (between 24 hours and 6 weeks). All animal studies were performed in accordance with institutional guidelines and were approved by the animal care committee at the University of Washington.

Human recombinant VEGF (165–amino acid form) for all experiments was kindly provided by Dr Stuart Bunting (Genentech, Inc).

In Situ Hybridization and Northern Blotting
In situ hybridization was carried out on en face preparations of vessel segments as recently described.²⁰ Mouse cDNAs for VEGF (300 bp), flt-1 (extracellular domain, 2200 bp), and flk-1 (1200 bp) were kindly provided by Dr Werner Risau (Bad Nauheim, Germany).^{21 22} For VEGF, 29 specimens were hybridized with antisense and 8 with sense probes. For flk-1, 30 specimens were probed with antisense and 10 with sense probes. For flt-1, 63 en face preparations were hybridized with antisense and 18 with sense probes. After in situ hybridization, the slides were coated with autoradiographic emulsion (Kodak NTB2), exposed for 3 to 6 weeks, and then developed (Kodak D-19). Preparations were observed by dark-field light microscopy. Northern blot analysis was performed on RNA isolated from rat carotid arteries at various times after balloon catheter injury.²³

Stimulation of Endothelial Replication
The purpose of the following experiment was to test whether VEGF could restimulate EC replication at a wound edge after these cells became quiescent. Groups of rats had their left carotid arteries denuded by balloon catheterization as described.¹⁹ Six weeks later, when endothelial regrowth from the carotid bifurcation and aortic arch had slowed dramatically, doses of 10, 100, and 500 µg VEGF were tested for their ability to restimulate endothelial replication at the wound edge. The growth factor was diluted in saline and infused at a constant rate into the aortic arch via the right axillary artery during a 6-hour period. Control animals received infusions of the saline vehicle in an identical fashion. At 30, 38, and 46 hours after the start of the infusion, all animals were injected with [³H]thymidine (50 µCi/100 g body weight, 6.7 mCi·mmol^-1·L^-1; New England Nuclear). After injection of Evans blue dye (5% in 0.5 mL saline), all rats were killed and perfusion-fixed 47 hours after the start of growth factor treatment. Tissues of proximal and distal carotid arteries that contained the EC–smooth muscle cell interfaces (leading edge of the endothelium) were processed for en face preparation according to the procedure described by Schwartz and Benditt.²⁴ The endothelium was identified by en face immunocytochemical staining with an antibody to factor VIII–related antigen as described.²⁵ For autoradiography, the preparations were coated with photographic emulsion (Kodak NTB2) and exposed for 2 weeks. The slides were then developed, stained with hematoxylin, and mounted under coverslips. For measuring EC proliferation (ie, [³H]thymidine index), the numbers of all ECs and of labeled ECs were counted microscopically (with a square reticule in a 10x eyepiece and a 40x objective). Quantitation of replicating ECs was restricted to the area within 1 mm of the interface with the luminal smooth muscle cells, equivalent to four reticule fields deep into the endothelial monolayer.

In another experiment we tested whether VEGF could accelerate the replication of actively proliferating endothelium. This was done by injecting VEGF 1 mg IV into rats that had had their entire thoracic aortas deendothelialized by balloon catheter denudation 7 days before injection. Pulse labeling of replicating cells was performed 23 hours after VEGF administration by injection of the thymidine analogue BrdU (25 mg/kg body weight IP; Boehringer Mannheim) 1 hour before the animals were killed. Immunostaining of en face preparations with an antibody against BrdU was carried out as described.²⁰ Quantitation of replication along the lateral leading edges of regenerating endothelium from intercostal arteries was carried out by counting the numbers of labeled and total ECs that were within 0.25 mm of the leading edge. This procedure was performed along a 10-mm segment of thoracic aorta, and replication was expressed as the percent BrdU replication index (labeled cells divided by total cellsx100). Control animals that had received the saline vehicle were treated in an identical fashion. Segments of thoracic aorta from VEGF and control groups were also processed for transmission electron microscopy as described below.

EC Outgrowth
The purpose of the experiments described below was to determine whether administration of VEGF after balloon denudation would lead to an increase in reendothelialized area.

Groups of rats had the endothelium of the left common carotid artery removed by balloon catheterization as previously described.¹⁹ One group of rats received three intravenous injections of VEGF per week (10 µg per injection) starting 2 weeks after denudation of the carotid artery, and control animals received vehicle alone (10 mmol/L sodium citrate and 126 mmol/L NaCl, pH 6.0) in an identical way. Injections were given for a total of 6 weeks. The animals were killed 8 weeks after injury and the tissue processed as described below.

In another experiment VEGF was delivered by continuous infusion into the jugular vein. Osmotic infusion pumps (Alzet 2 ml2, Alza Corp) were implanted subcutaneously 2 weeks after balloon catheter denudation of the left carotid artery. VEGF was delivered for 2 weeks at a rate of 2.5 µg/h, and control animals received vehicle only in an identical manner. The animals were killed 4 weeks after balloon catheter denudation (2 weeks of VEGF or vehicle infusion). Endothelialized areas were identified by injection of Evans blue dye. Endothelial outgrowth from the carotid bifurcation and the aortic arch was measured macroscopically with a ruler.

In an additional experiment we investigated whether a bolus injection of VEGF given at the time of denudation would result in increased regrowth of endothelium 8 days later. Two groups of rats had the entire thoracic aorta denuded of endothelium with a balloon catheter, and 1 mg VEGF or vehicle was infused into the aortic arch via the left carotid artery over a 3-minute period. After 8 days the rats were injected with Evans blue dye and perfusion-fixed with 4% p-formaldehyde, and the entire thoracic aorta was excised. The vessels were cut open longitudinally on the ventral side, mounted under a coverslip, and photographed. The photographs were digitized and the images analyzed with a computer (NIH Image 1.55). The total surface area and the endothelialized area (in intercostal arteries) of a 4-cm-long segment of the thoracic aorta was measured, and reendothelialization was expressed as a percentage of total surface area.

Transmission Electron Microscopy
Aortic segments from rats that had received 1 mg VEGF or vehicle 24 hours before they were killed (8 days after aortic denudation) were immersion-fixed in phosphate-buffered glutaraldehyde/p-formaldehyde (2%:2%, vol/vol). Further tissue processing for transmission electron microscopy was carried out as described.²⁶ Thin sections cut perpendicular to the leading edge of endothelium were examined by electron microscopy.

Statistics
Student's t test was used to compare treatment and control groups. ANOVA followed by Scheffe's F test was used to compare cell replication data for the animals treated with vehicle or 10, 100, or 500 µg VEGF (Fig 2). Data were considered significantly different if P<.05.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. EC replication near the denuded surface 6 weeks after balloon catheterization of the carotid artery and intra-arterial infusion (over 6 hours) of VEGF. None of the three doses tested caused a significant increase in replication. Means of treatment groups were compared with Scheffe's F test. Data represent mean±SEM.

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Expression of VEGF and VEGF Receptors
Recently we developed a technique for in situ hybridization of en face preparations of rat arteries,²⁰ which enabled us to examine mRNA expression in the entire cell population on the luminal surface. Wounding of the aortic and carotid endothelium was achieved by partial denudation with an uninflated balloon catheter, which allowed analysis of gene expression at various times after denudation.

We were unable to detect expression of VEGF mRNA in ECs or smooth muscle cells by in situ hybridization in injured rat arteries. Northern blot analysis of total RNA isolated from rat carotid arteries at various times after balloon injury also failed to show any transcripts for VEGF (data not shown). Similarly, expression of VEGF receptor flk-1 mRNA was not detectable at any time after injury in rat arteries, by neither in situ hybridization nor Northern blotting. The possibility that the absence of hybridization of mouse VEGF and flk-1 antisense probes was due to insufficient cross-hybridization with rat mRNA was ruled out by applying the same probes to injured mouse aortas, which also showed no hybridization (data not shown).

En face preparations of normal endothelium from the uninjured aorta and carotid artery showed either no hybridization or only low levels of hybridization with the radiolabeled antisense probe for flt-1 (Fig 1a). Within 24 hours after wounding, however, high levels of flt-1 mRNA were expressed by those ECs near the wound edge (Fig 1b). mRNA for flt-1 continued to be expressed by leading-edge endothelium undergoing replication and migration at 2 and 8 days after denudation (Fig 1c). Recently regenerated endothelium away from the leading edge no longer expressed flt-1 mRNA (Fig 1d). Specimens probed with the corresponding sense probe of flt-1 showed no hybridization (Fig 1e).

View larger version (480K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Expression of VEGF receptor flt-1 on en face preparations of rat arteries. a, In situ hybridization of normal aorta showed low levels of hybridization with the [35S]UTP-labeled antisense riboprobe for flt-1 (x400). b, At 24 hours after partial denudation, ECs at the leading edge express high levels of flt-1 mRNA (x400). c, Regenerating ECs near the leading edge express flt-1 mRNA 8 days after denudation (x100). d, Hybridization with the labeled sense probe shows very little nonspecific signal over normal endothelium (x400). Arrows indicate denuded area. Panels a-d are photomicrographs taken under dark-field illumination with hematoxylin-stained nuclei.

Effect of VEGF on Endothelial Replication
After it was established that injured endothelium expressed receptors for VEGF, we tested whether VEGF administration would stimulate endothelial replication. These experiments were performed on the rat carotid artery, since endothelial regeneration in this vessel is incomplete and usually stops within 6 weeks after balloon catheter denudation. The ability of VEGF to restimulate the leading edge of the endothelial sheet was studied in groups of rats 6 weeks after balloon denudation of the carotid artery. None of the three different doses of VEGF (10, 100, and 500 µg) that were infused intra-arterially over 6 hours caused a significant increase in EC replication near the leading edge (Fig 2).

We also tested whether infused VEGF could increase proliferation in the endothelium that was still undergoing replication. For this experiment, groups of rats had their thoracic aortas denuded of endothelium 7 days before administration of 1 mg VEGF. Cell replication in the aortic endothelium was determined 24 hours later by pulse labeling with BrdU. Compared with control animals, rats injected with VEGF showed no increase in endothelial replication (Fig 3).

View larger version (26K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Replication of endothelial outgrowth in intercostal arteries 8 days after denudation of the thoracic aorta. Rats were injected with 1 mg VEGF 23 hours before pulse labeling with BrdU and killed 1 hour later. Replication in wound-edge endothelium was not significantly different between VEGF-treated and control animals. Data represent mean±SEM.

VEGF and Endothelial Outgrowth
In subsequent experiments, we tested whether repeated injections of VEGF could promote endothelial outgrowth onto the denuded surface. In one experiment, 10-µg injections of VEGF were given three times per week for 6 weeks. The treatment period was started when spontaneous endothelial regeneration began to decrease, ie, 2 weeks after denudation. When total endothelial regrowth from the carotid bifurcation and aortic arch was measured 8 weeks after injury, no significant difference was found between animals treated with vehicle or those treated with VEGF (Fig 4). To confirm this result, VEGF was also administered by continuous intravenous infusion with osmotic pumps. VEGF infusion into these animals was started 2 weeks after denudation, and endothelial outgrowth was measured 2 weeks later. This regimen also failed to stimulate endothelial regrowth in denuded vessels (Fig 5).

View larger version (18K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Endothelial regrowth of carotid artery from the carotid bifurcation and aortic arch. Three injections of VEGF (10 µg each) per week were given intravenously for 6 weeks starting 2 weeks after denudation. No significant difference in endothelial regrowth was found at 8 weeks after denudation. Data represent mean±SEM.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 5. Endothelial regrowth of carotid artery from the carotid bifurcation and aortic arch. Continuous intravenous infusion of VEGF (2.5 µg/h) for 2 weeks starting 2 weeks after denudation showed no significant difference in endothelial regrowth at 4 weeks after denudation. Data represent mean±SEM.

In an additional experiment, we determined whether a 1-mg VEGF injection administered via the carotid artery at the time of aortic denudation would lead to increased reendothelialization 8 days later. The percentage of reendothelialized surface area in the thoracic aorta was not significantly different between control rats and rats that had received VEGF (Fig 6a and 6b).

View larger version (142K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 6. Endothelial regrowth in rat thoracic aortas 8 days after balloon catheter denudation and local infusion of VEGF (1 mg) or vehicle administered at the time of injury. a, After injection of Evans blue dye, thoracic aortas were cut open longitudinally and photographed. White areas represent reendothelialization from intercostal arteries. b, Percent reendothelialized surface area was not significantly different between VEGF-treated and control animals. Data represent mean±SEM.

VEGF and Vascular Permeability
Aortas obtained from rats injected with 1 mg VEGF 24 hours before they were killed (8 days after denudation) revealed diffusely increased Evans blue staining in areas close to the leading edge where flt-1 expression was known to occur (Fig 7a and 7b). The aorta from the animal in Fig 7a revealed "speckled" blue staining near the wound edge. In another animal, vascular permeability after VEGF infusion had increased so dramatically that the endothelialized areas in the periphery of intercostal arteries were no longer able to exclude the Evans blue dye–albumin complex. This lack of exclusion led to an apparent reduction in white areas and also caused their borders to appear irregular and poorly defined (Fig 7b). Control animals injected with vehicle, however, always showed a sharp demarcation between white areas of regenerated endothelium and blue areas of denuded surface (Fig 7c and 7d). Since these findings were suggestive of increased endothelial permeability at these sites, we carried out an ultrastructural analysis with transmission electron microscopy. Sections through the leading-edge endothelium showed gaps between ECs in VEGF-treated animals (Fig 8a). Junctions between ECs in vehicle-treated rats, however, appeared normal (Fig 8b).

View larger version (107K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 7. Photomicrographs of rat thoracic aortas 8 days after denudation and 24 hours after 1 mg VEGF (a, b) or vehicle (c, d) infusion. Vessels were cut open longitudinally after Evans blue dye injection. a, Spotty staining along edges of the endothelial sheet (white) growing out from intercostal arteries indicates increased influx of Evans blue dye–albumin after VEGF injection. b, Extensive and diffuse increase in permeability in peripheral endothelialized areas around intercostal arteries led to an influx of Evans blue dye after VEGF injection, causing white areas to appear smaller and irregular. Rats injected with vehicle (c, d) always showed a clear demarcation between endothelialized (white) and denuded (dark) areas.

View larger version (226K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 8. Transmission electron micrographs from sections through leading-edge endothelium after (a) VEGF injection (1 mg) or (b) saline vehicle. a, Loss of endothelium-endothelium contacts and open junctions were seen after VEGF injection (arrowhead). b, Endothelium from rats injected with vehicle showed intact junctions (arrowhead). Scale bar=1 µm.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Recent studies have suggested that VEGF stimulates not only angiogenesis but also endothelial regrowth in denuded arteries.^{13 14 15 17 27 28} These data are important, since VEGF, unlike other factors such as FGF-2 (bFGF), stimulates only endothelial and no other cell type in the artery wall. Thus, VEGF could be used to selectively stimulate EC growth in vivo without inducing unwanted cell proliferation in blood vessels; for this reason, VEGF is now being used in clinical trials for therapeutic angiogenesis.

In previous studies on EC regrowth in vivo, we observed that even potent mitogenic factors have no effect on intact, confluent endothelium but are able to stimulate those cells adjacent to a wound edge.²⁵ This variation in response may be explained by contact inhibition; ie, cells at the wound are released from an inhibitory signal. In addition, in vivo only those cells that adjoin the wound express the relevant receptors that allow them to respond to the mitogenic signal. For example, in an injured artery only those ECs that adjoin the wound and are not within the intact monolayer strongly express the receptor for FGF-1,²⁰ and administration of FGF-2 stimulates just these cells at the wound edge and not those within the intact monolayer. The same is true for urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, which is important in allowing ECs to migrate.²⁹ Only those cells that directly abut the wound express mRNA for this receptor,²⁹ which presumably then allows such cells to migrate into the denuded area.

On the basis of the aforementioned findings, we undertook to determine whether ECs in an injured artery express VEGF receptors in a similar manner. Our in situ hybridization data showed that neither VEGF ligand nor the receptor flk-1 was expressed by the endothelium in proximity or at a distance from the wound (data not shown) but that ECs adjacent to the wound did express flt-1 mRNA. This pattern of flt-1 expression predicts that only ECs adjacent to the wound edge will respond to VEGF. We were therefore surprised that in all of our studies, VEGF did not stimulate EC replication either at the wound edge or within the intact monolayer. None of the doses of VEGF infused over 6 hours (10, 100, or 500 µg) caused a significant increase in replication. In addition, in a separate experiment, one injection of 1 mg VEGF was given to the animals 8 days after injury; likewise, no increase in replication was observed. We know that rat endothelium can be stimulated under these conditions, since infusion of FGF-2 was able to stimulate endothelial replication at the wound edge by 20-fold.²⁵

An alternative approach to measuring cell replication is based on whether administration of growth factor can affect the absolute amount of endothelial outgrowth. Therefore, we addressed this issue by measuring endothelial outgrowth after administering VEGF for a prolonged period. Continuous VEGF infusion for 2 weeks had no effect on total endothelial outgrowth, and in an additional study in which VEGF was given for 6 weeks, no increase in endothelial outgrowth was detected. Finally, because one large dose of VEGF given immediately after balloon injury has been reported to stimulate EC regrowth in rats,¹⁵ we evaluated the effect of one VEGF injection. In this study, one 1-mg injection of VEGF was given immediately after aortic balloon catheter denudation, and EC regrowth in the intercostal ostia was measured after 8 days. No significant changes were observed in either cell replication rate at the wound edge over 24 hours (data not shown) or area repopulated by endothelial outgrowth after 8 days. It should be pointed out that in this study, we opted to examine regrowth in the aorta, although there are multiple sites for endothelial regrowth. In addition, early after injury quantitation of cell outgrowth at these sites is highly reproducible and possibly more sensitive than in the carotid artery.

We conclude that VEGF is not a direct mitogen for large-vessel endothelium and is unable to stimulate EC outgrowth in denuded rat arteries. These data do not agree with those of Asahara et al,¹⁵ who showed that one dose of VEGF given immediately after injury caused a significant increase in EC regrowth over 14 days. The dose and route of administration of any mitogen are problematic, since parameters such as pharmacokinetics and local availability are not well understood. For these reasons we tried four different doses via the most direct intra-arterial route (10, 100, and 500 µg and 1 mg) and in three different ways (multiple intravenous injections for 6 weeks, continuous infusion for 2 weeks, and one dose immediately after surgery) for VEGF administration. Despite these efforts, we were unable to influence the rate of EC regrowth. VEGF, however, is considered to be angiogenic, and one important issue is that our study focused on EC replication and regrowth in large arteries and not angiogenesis per se. Not all factors that are angiogenic stimulate endothelial regrowth, and one conclusion is that VEGF may belong to this category of growth factors. The possibility that the VEGF used in this study was biologically inactive can be discounted, because there was a response to this factor in the rat endothelium permeability assay. Reidy and Schwartz³⁰ studied the effects of endotoxin in rat aortic endothelium in vivo and found that endotoxin infusion actually increased endothelial replication. We think that effects due to potential endotoxin contamination can therefore be ruled out.

One possible explanation for our results comes from the observations of Keyt and coworkers,³¹ who recently found that there are different determinants on VEGF for binding to its flk-1 and flt-1 receptors. These authors demonstrated that VEGF binding to the flt-1 receptor was unrelated to mitogenesis induction and proliferation.³¹ Binding to the flk-1 receptor, however, exhibited full activity with respect to EC proliferation. These data are supported by our findings, in that we detected flt-1 and not flk-1 expression and that no cell replication was observed after VEGF administration.

An interesting finding of the present study was that endothelium near the leading edge showed a speckled pattern of Evans blue dye staining 24 hours after VEGF injection. Normally after in vivo administration, Evans blue dye binds to albumin and acts as a permeability marker, so that those zones without endothelium stain blue and those with endothelium remain white. The patchy blue staining over leading-edge endothelium could mean either that these areas were only partially covered by endothelium or that the endothelium was "leaky." We believe that the first possibility can be excluded, since the pattern and extent of endothelialized zones were identical in VEGF- and vehicle-treated animals (Fig 6). VEGF has been well documented to cause changes in permeability and indeed was first recognized by Dvorak's laboratory^{3 7 32 33} as a stimulator of permeability (hence the name vascular permeability factor). Electron microscopy of the endothelium showed gaps between ECs in these areas, which were not observed in control animals. Thus, we believe that the blue zones in intact, regrown endothelium represent sites of increased permeability due to disruption of endothelial junctions. Release from contact inhibition may be a requirement of ECs before they can respond to a mitogenic stimulus via cell division, and one possibility is that VEGF binding to its flt-1 receptor plays a role in releasing these cells from contact inhibition. This hypothesis is supported by our earlier findings obtained from in vivo studies with FGF-2,²⁵ wherein significant and widespread increases in endothelial replication after FGF-2 infusion were seen only along the leading edges of endothelial sheets and not within the confluent, quiescent monolayers away from the leading edge. One explanation may be that cells at the leading edge are not contact inhibited, and ECs that abut the wound edge are known to have poorly formed junctions.^{34 35} These results may be summarized in a unifying hypothesis: VEGF is important in the disruption of contact inhibition, which in turn may be a prerequisite for other endothelial mitogens to induce cell proliferation. The fact that permeability was seen only in VEGF-treated animals demonstrates that the VEGF was biologically active and that the lack of mitogenicity was not due to infusion of inactive VEGF.

In summary, we report that VEGF receptor flt-1 is markedly upregulated in the endothelium near the wound edge but that VEGF infusion failed to increase endothelial replication at these sites. Colocalization of receptor expression and increased permeability in response to VEGF suggests a role for this factor in cellular events that are not directly related to mitogenicity. At present, there is no ready explanation as to why our data do not agree with some other published data; however, our data suggest that the role of VEGF as an EC mitogen may not be as simple as first postulated.

	Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms

 

EC(s) = endothelial cell(s) FGF = fibroblast growth factor flk-1 = fetal liver kinase 1 flt-1 = fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 VEGF = vascular endothelial growth factor

	Acknowledgments

 
This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid from the American Heart Association (AHA) and with funds contributed in part by the AHA, Alaska Affiliate, Inc. The generous gift of recombinant human VEGF from Genentech, Inc, is greatly appreciated.

Received March 29, 1996; revision received June 18, 1996;

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 

1. Ferrara N, Henzel WJ. Pituitary follicular cells secrete a novel heparin-binding growth factor specific for vascular endothelial cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1989;161:851-858.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Conn G, Soderman DD, Schaeffer M-T, Wile M, Hatcher VB, Thomas KA. Purification of a glycoprotein vascular endothelial cell mitogen from a rat glioma-derived cell line. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87:1323-1327.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Keck PJ, Hauser SD, Krivi G, Sanzo K, Warren T, Feder J, Connolly DT. Vascular permeability factor, an endothelial cell mitogen related to PDGF. Science. 1989;246:1309-1312.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Senger DR, Van De Water L, Brown LF, Nagy JA, Yeo K-T, Yeo T-K, Berse B, Jackman RW, Dvorak AM, Dvorak HF. Vascular permeability factor (VPF, VEGF) in tumor biology. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1993;12:303-324.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5. Leung DW, Cachianes G, Kuang W-J, Goeddel DV, Ferrara N. Vascular endothelial growth factor is a secreted angiogenic mitogen. Science. 1989;246:1306-1309.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Connolly DT, Heuvelman DM, Nelson R, Olander JV, Eppley BL, Delfino JJ, Siegel NR, Leimgruber RM, Feder J. Tumor vascular permeability factor stimulates endothelial cell growth and angiogenesis. J Clin Invest. 1989;84:1470-1478.
7. Senger DR, Galli SJ, Dvorak AM, Perruzzi CA, Harvey VS, Dvorak HF. Tumor cells secrete a vascular permeability factor that promotes accumulation of ascites fluid. Science. 1983;219:983-985.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. De Vries C, Escobedo JA, Ueno H, Houck K, Ferrara N, Williams LT. The fms-like tyrosine kinase, a receptor for vascular endothelial growth factor. Science. 1992;255:989-991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Quinn TP, Peters KG, De Vries C, Ferrara N, Williams LT. Fetal liver kinase 1 is a receptor for vascular endothelial growth factor and is selectively expressed in vascular endothelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993;90:7533-7537.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Millauer B, Wizigmann-Voos S, Schnurch H, Martinez R, Moller NPH, Risau W, Ullrich A. High affinity VEGF binding and developmental expression suggest Flk-1 as a major regulator of vasculogenesis and angiogenesis. Cell. 1993;72:835-846.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Peters KG, De Vries C, Williams LT. Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor expression during embryogenesis and tissue repair suggests a role in endothelial differentiation and blood vessel growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993;90:8915-8919.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Jakeman LB, Winer J, Bennett GL, Altar CA, Ferrara N. Binding sites for vascular endothelial growth factor are localized on endothelial cells in adult rat tissues. J Clin Invest. 1992;89:244-253.
13. Takeshita S, Pu L-Q, Stein LA, Sniderman AD, Bunting S, Ferrara N, Isner JM, Symes JF. Intramuscular administration of vascular endothelial growth factor induces dose-dependent collateral artery augmentation in a rabbit model of chronic limb ischemia. Circulation. 1994;90:228-234.
14. Bauters C, Asahara T, Zheng LP, Takeshita S, Bunting S, Ferrara N, Symes JF, Isner JM. Site-specific therapeutic angiogenesis after systemic administration of vascular endothelial growth factor. J Vasc Surg. 1995;21:314-325.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Asahara T, Bauters C, Pastore C, Kearney M, Rossow S, Bunting S, Ferrara N, Symes JF, Isner JM. Local delivery of vascular endothelial growth factor accelerates reendothelialization and attenuates intimal hyperplasia in balloon-injured rat carotid artery. Circulation. 1995;91:2793-2801.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Takeshita S, Rossow ST, Kearney M, Zheng LP, Bauters C, Bunting S, Ferrara N, Symes JF, Isner JM. Time course of increased cellular proliferation in collateral arteries after administration of vascular endothelial growth factor in a rabbit model of lower limb vascular insufficiency. Am J Pathol. 1995;147:1649-1660.[Abstract]
17. Callow AD, Choi ET, Trachtenberg JD, Stevens SL, Connolly DT, Rodi C, Ryan US. Vascular permeability factor accelerates endothelial regrowth following balloon angioplasty. Growth Factors. 1994;10:223-228.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Lindner V, Fingerle J, Reidy MA. Mouse model of arterial injury. Circ Res. 1993;73:792-796.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Clowes AW, Reidy MA, Clowes MM. Kinetics of cellular proliferation after arterial injury, I: smooth muscle growth in the absence of endothelium. Lab Invest. 1983;49:327-333.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20. Lindner V, Reidy MA. Expression of basic fibroblast growth factor and its receptor by smooth muscle cells and endothelium in injured rat arteries: an en face study. Circ Res. 1993;73:589-595.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Breier G, Albrecht U, Sterrer S, Risau W. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor during embryonic angiogenesis and endothelial cell differentiation. Development. 1992;114:521-532.[Abstract]
22. Plate KH, Breier G, Millauer B, Ullrich A, Risau W. Up-regulation of vascular endothelial growth factor and its cognate receptors in a rat glioma model of tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Res. 1993;53:5822-5827.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Lindner V, Lappi DA, Baird A, Majack RA, Reidy MA. Role of basic fibroblast growth factor in vascular lesion formation. Circ Res. 1991;68:106-113.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Schwartz SM, Benditt EP. Cell replication in the aortic endothelium: a new method for study of the problem. Lab Invest. 1973;28:699-707.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25. Lindner V, Majack RA, Reidy MA. Basic fibroblast growth factor stimulates endothelial regrowth and proliferation in denuded arteries. J Clin Invest. 1990;85:2004-2008.
26. Lindner V, Reidy MA, Fingerle J. Regrowth of arterial endothelium: denudation with minimal trauma leads to complete endothelial cell regrowth. Lab Invest. 1989;61:556-563.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Banai S, Jaklitsch MT, Shou M, Lazarous DF, Scheinowitz M, Biro S, Epstein SE, Unger EF. Angiogenic-induced enhancement of collateral blood flow to ischemic myocardium by vascular endothelial growth factor in dogs. Circulation. 1994;89:2183-2189.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Takeshita S, Zheng LP, Brogi E, Kearney M, Pu L-Q, Bunting S, Ferrara N, Symes JF, Isner JM. Therapeutic angiogenesis: a single intraarterial bolus of vascular endothelial growth factor augments revascularization in a rabbit ischemic hind limb model. J Clin Invest. 1994;93:662-670.
29. Reidy MA, Irvin C, Lindner V. Migration of arterial wall cells: expression of plasminogen activators and inhibitors in injured rat arteries. Circ Res. 1996;78:405-414.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Reidy MA, Schwartz SM. Endothelial injury and regeneration, IV: endotoxin—a nondenuding injury to aortic endothelium. Lab Invest. 1983;48:25-34.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31. Keyt BA, Nguyen HV, Berleau LT, Duarte CM, Park J, Chen H, Ferrara N. Identification of VEGF determinants for binding kinase insert domain-containing receptor and Fms-like tyrosine kinase. J Biol Chem. 1996;277:5638-5646.
32. Yeo K-T, Wang HH, Nagy JA, Sioussat TM, Ledbetter SR, Hoogewerf AJ, Zhou Y, Masse EM, Senger DR, Dvorak HF, Yeo T-K. Vascular permeability factor (vascular endothelial growth factor) in guinea pig and human tumor and inflammatory effusions. Cancer Res. 1993;53:2912-2918.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Roberts WG, Palade GE. Increased microvascular permeability and endothelial fenestration induced by vascular endothelial growth factor. J Cell Sci. 1995;108:2369-2379.[Abstract]
34. Spagnoli LG, Pietra GP, Villaschi S, Johns LW. Morphometric analysis of gap junctions in regenerated arterial endothelium. Lab Invest. 1982;46:139-148.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. Liaw L, Schwartz SM. Microtubule disruption stimulates DNA synthesis in bovine endothelial cells and potentiates cellular response to basic fibroblast growth factor. Am J Pathol.. 1993;143:937-948.[Abstract]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. G. Touchard and R. S. Schwartz Preclinical Restenosis Models: Challenges and Successes Toxicol Pathol, January 1, 2006; 34(1): 11 - 18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Hutter, F. E. Carrick, C. Valdiviezo, C. Wolinsky, J. S. Rudge, S. J. Wiegand, V. Fuster, J. J. Badimon, and B. V. Sauter Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Regulates Reendothelialization and Neointima Formation in a Mouse Model of Arterial Injury Circulation, October 19, 2004; 110(16): 2430 - 2435. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. S. Schwartz, N. A. Chronos, and R. Virmani Preclinical restenosis models and drug-eluting stents: Still important, still much to learn J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 6, 2004; 44(7): 1373 - 1385. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Kishore, C. Luedemann, E. Bord, D. Goukassian, and D. W. Losordo Tumor Necrosis Factor-Mediated E2F1 Suppression in Endothelial Cells: Differential Requirement of c-Jun N-Terminal Kinase and p38 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Signal Transduction Pathways Circ. Res., November 14, 2003; 93(10): 932 - 940. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Gennaro, C. Menard, S.-E. Michaud, and A. Rivard Age-Dependent Impairment of Reendothelialization After Arterial Injury: Role of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Circulation, January 21, 2003; 107(2): 230 - 233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Lindner and T. Maciag The Putative Convergent and Divergent Natures of Angiogenesis and Arteriogenesis Circ. Res., October 26, 2001; 89(9): 747 - 749. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Vidal, J. Aragones, A. Alfranca, and M. O. de Landazuri Up-regulation of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor Flt-1 after endothelial denudation: role of transcription factor Egr-1 Blood, June 1, 2000; 95(11): 3387 - 3395. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Patterson and M. S. Runge Therapeutic Angiogenesis : The New Electrophysiology? Circulation, May 25, 1999; 99(20): 2614 - 2616. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y.-X. Chen, Y. Nakashima, K. Tanaka, S. Shiraishi, K. Nakagawa, and K. Sueishi Immunohistochemical Expression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor/Vascular Permeability Factor in Atherosclerotic Intimas of Human Coronary Arteries Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., January 1, 1999; 19(1): 131 - 139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. M. van Beusekom, D. M. Whelan, S. H. Hofma, S. C. Krabbendam, V. W. M. van Hinsbergh, P. D. Verdouw, and W. J. van der Giessen Long-term endothelial dysfunction is more pronounced after stenting than after balloon angioplasty in porcine coronary arteries J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 1, 1998; 32(4): 1109 - 1117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Van Belle, C. Bauters, T. Asahara, and J. M. Isner Endothelial regrowth after arterial injury: from vascular repair to therapeutics Cardiovasc Res, April 1, 1998; 38(1): 54 - 68. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. L. Couper, S. R. Bryant, J. Eldrup-Jorgensen, C. E. Bredenberg, and V. Lindner Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Increases the Mitogenic Response to Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells In Vivo via Expression of fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase-1 Circ. Res., December 19, 1997; 81(6): 932 - 939. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				E. Deindl, I. Buschmann, I. E. Hoefer, T. Podzuweit, K. Boengler, S. Vogel, N. van Royen, B. Fernandez, and W. Schaper Role of Ischemia and of Hypoxia-Inducible Genes in Arteriogenesis After Femoral Artery Occlusion in the Rabbit Circ. Res., October 26, 2001; 89(9): 779 - 786. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lindner, V. Articles by Reidy, M. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lindner, V. Articles by Reidy, M. A.