Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of three in vitro human ‘angiogenesis’ assays with capillaries formed in vivo

  • Published:
Angiogenesis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Angiogenesis assays are an important tool for studying both the mechanisms of angiogenesis and the potential development of therapeutic strategies to modulate neovascularisation. In vivo angiogenesis assays are considered to be the most informative of these but are often expensive, time-consuming and require specialist training to perform. In vitro assays tend to be more rapid, less expensive and easier to interpret. In vitro angiogenesis assays operate on the principle that endothelial cells form tubule-like structures when cultured on a supportive matrix. Assays involving a matrix derived from murine tumours, Matrigel (or a growth factor reduced form of this), are now the most common in vitro tubule formation assays. However, another tubule formation assay has recently been developed in which endothelial cells are co-cultured with fibroblasts. Here, we have used quantitative image analysis to compare the morphological features of tubules formed in the Matrigel assay and this new ‘Co-culture’ assay, with those of capillaries formed in a microvascular bed in vivo. Tubules formed in standard and growth factor reduced Matrigel assays were short and relatively homogeneous, whereas those formed in the Co-culture assay were significantly more heterogeneous, consisting of both short and long interconnecting tubules that more closely resembled capillaries than Matrigel tubules. Moreover, cells on Matrigel, and to a lesser extent growth factor reduced (GFR) Matrigel, often clumped into large cell aggregates, a feature rarely seen in the Co-culture assay. In addition, we demonstrate that Matrigel stimulates tubule formation by various non-endothelial cell types, suggesting that tubule formation by endothelial cells may not represent true differentiation of this cell type. In summary, the morphology of tubules in the Co-culture assay appears more representative of capillary formation in vivo, than the endothelial cell changes that occur in either form of Matrigel assay.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arbiser JL. Angiogenesis and the skin: A primer. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996; 34: 486–97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Winet H. The role of microvasculature in normal and perturbed bone healing as revealed by intravital microscopy. Bone 1996; 19: 39S-57S.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Reynolds LP, Killilea SD, Redmer DA. Angiogenesis in the female reproductive system. FASEB J 1992; 6: 886–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Koch AE. Angiogenesis: Implications for rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1998; 41: 951–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Folkman J, Shing Y. Angiogenesis. J Biol Chem 1992; 267: 10931–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Malhotra R, Stenn KS, Fernandez LA, Braverman IM. Angiogenic properties of normal and psoriatic skin associate with epidermis, not dermis. Lab Invest 1989; 61: 162–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Battegay EJ. Angiogenesis: Mechanistic insights, neovascular disease, and therapeutic prospects. J Mol Med 1995; 73: 333–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Folkman J. What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent? J Nat Cancer Inst 1990; 82: 4–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jain RK, Schlenger K, Hockel M, Yuan F. Quantitative angiogenesis assays: Progress and problems. Nat Med 1997; 3: 1203–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bootle-Wilbraham CA, Tazzyman S, Marshall JM, Lewis CE. Fibrinogen E-fragment inhibits the migration and tubule formation of human dermal microvascular endothelial cells in vitro. Cancer Res 2000; 60: 4719–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lawley TJ, Kubota Y. Induction of morphologic differentiation of endothelial cells in culture. J Invest Dermatol 1989; 93: 59S-61S.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fournier N, Doillon CJ. In vitro angiogenesis in fibrin matrices containing fibronectin or hyaluronic acid. Cell Biol Int Rep 1992; 16: 1251–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanzawa S, Endo H, Shioya N. Improved in vitro angiogenesis model by collagen density reduction and the use of type III collagen. Ann Plast Surg 1993; 30: 244–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nehls V, Drenckhahn D. A microcarrier-based cocultivation system for the investigation of factors and cells involved in angiogenesis in three-dimensional fibrin matrices in vitro. Histochem Cell Biol 1995; 104: 459–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Montesano R, Pepper MS, Orci L. Paracrine induction of angiogenesis in vitro by Swiss 3T3 fibroblasts. J Cell Sci 1993; 105: 1013–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bishop ET, Bell GT, Bloor S et al. An in vitro model of angiogenesis: basic features. Angiogenesis 1999; 3: 335–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sakuda H, Nakashima Y, Kuriyama S, Sueishi K. Media conditioned by smooth muscle cells cultured in a variety of hypoxic environments stimulates in vitro angiogenesis. A relationship to transforming growth factor-beta 1. Am J Pathol 1992; 141: 1507–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nicosia RF, Ottinetti A. Growth of microvessels in serum-free matrix culture of rat aorta. A quantitative assay of angiogenesis in vitro. Lab Invest 1990; 63: 115–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hudetz AG, Greene AS, Feher G et al. Imaging system for three-dimensional mapping of cerebrocortical capillary networks in vivo. Microvasc Res 1993; 46: 293–309.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Shakado S, Sakisaka S, Noguchi K et al. Effects of extracellular matrices on tube formation of cultured rat hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cells. Hepatology 1995; 22: 969–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kumar R, Yoneda J, Bucana CD, Fidler IJ. Regulation of distinct steps of angiogenesis by different angiogenic molecules. Int J Oncol 1998; 12: 749–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bradham DM, Passaniti A, Horton WEJ. Mesenchymal cell chondrogenesis is stimulated by basement membrane matrix and inhibited by age-associated factors. Matrix Biol 1995; 14: 561–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Taub M, Wang Y, Szczesny TM, Kleinman HK. Epidermal growth factor or transforming growth factor alpha is required for kidney tubulogenesis in matrigel cultures in serum-free medium. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87: 4002–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lopata A, Kohlman DJ, Bowes LG, Watkins WB. Culture of marmoset blastocysts on matrigel: A model of differentiation during the implantation period. Anat Rec 1995; 241: 469–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim HS, Lee BL, Bae SI et al. Differentiation of a colon cancer cell line on a reconstituted basement membrane in vitro. Int J Exp Pathol 1998; 79: 443–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Zimrin AB, Villeponteau B, Maciag T. Models of in vitro angiogenesis: Endothelial cell differentiation on fibrin but not matrigel is transcriptionally dependent. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1995; 213: 630–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Cockerill GW, Varcoe L, Meyer GT et al. Early events in angiogenesis: Cloning an alpha-prolyl 4-hydroxylase-like gene. Int J Oncol 1998; 13: 595–600.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Grant DS, Lelkes P, Fukuda K, Kleinman HK. Intracellular mechanisms involved in basement membrane induced blood vessel differentiation in vitro. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1991; 27A: 327–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lawley TJ, Kubota Y. Induction of morphologic differentiation of endothelial cells in culture. J Invest Dermatol 1989; 93: 59S-61S.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Leung DW, Cachianes G, Kuang WJ et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor is a secreted angiogenic mitogen. Science 1989; 246: 1306–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Donovan, D., Brown, N., Bishop, E. et al. Comparison of three in vitro human ‘angiogenesis’ assays with capillaries formed in vivo. Angiogenesis 4, 113–121 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012218401036

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012218401036

Navigation