Vascular endothelial growth factor in the circulation in cancer patients may not be a relevant biomarker.

BACKGROUND: Levels of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have widely been used as biomarker for angiogenic activity in cancer. For this purpose, non-standardized measurements in plasma and serum were used, without correction for artificial VEGF release by platelets activated ex vivo. We hypothesize that "true" circulating (c)VEGF levels in most cancer patients are low and unrelated to cancer load or tumour angiogenesis. METHODOLOGY: We determined VEGF levels in PECT, a medium that contains platelet activation inhibitors, in citrate plasma, and in isolated platelets in 16 healthy subjects, 18 patients with metastatic non-renal cancer (non-RCC) and 12 patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In non-RCC patients, circulating plasma VEGF levels were low and similar to VEGF levels in controls if platelet activation was minimized during the harvest procedure by PECT medium. In citrate plasma, VEGF levels were elevated in non-RCC patients, but this could be explained by a combination of increased platelet activation during blood harvesting, and by a two-fold increase in VEGF content of individual platelets (controls: 3.4 IU/10(6), non-RCC: 6.2 IU/10(6) platelets, p = 0.001). In contrast, cVEGF levels in RCC patients were elevated (PECT plasma: 64 pg/ml vs. 21 pg/ml, RCC vs. non-RCC, p<0.0001), and not related to platelet VEGF concentration. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that "true" freely cVEGF levels are not elevated in the majority of cancer patients. Previously reported elevated plasma VEGF levels in cancer appear to be due to artificial release from activated platelets, which in cancer have an increased VEGF content, during the blood harvest procedure. Only in patients with RCC, which is characterized by excessive VEGF production due to a specific genetic defect, were cVEGF levels elevated. This observation may be related to limited and selective success of anti-VEGF agents, such as bevacizumab and sorafenib, as monotherapy in RCC compared to other forms of cancer.

Endogenous activated protein C limits cancer cell extravasation through sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 1-mediated vascular endothelial barrier enhancement.

Activated protein C (APC) has both anticoagulant activity and direct cell-signaling properties. APC has been reported to promote cancer cell migration/invasion and to inhibit apoptosis and therefore may exacerbate metastasis. Opposing these activities, APC signaling protects the vascular endothelial barrier through sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor-1 (S(1)P(1))activation, which may counteract cancer cell extravasation. Here, we provide evidence that endogenous APC limits cancer cell extravasation, with in vivo use of monoclonal antibodies against APC. The protective effect of endogenous APC depends on its signaling properties. The MAPC1591 antibody that only blocks anticoagulant activity of APC does not affect cancer cell extravasation as opposed to MPC1609 that blocks anticoagulant and signaling properties of APC. Combined administration of anti-APC antibodies and S(1)P(1) agonist (SEW2871) resulted in a similar number of pulmonary foci in mice in presence and absence of APC, indicating that the protective effect of APC depends on the S(1)P(1) pathway. Moreover, endogenous APC prevents cancer cell-induced vascular leakage as assessed by the Evans Blue Dye assay, and SEW2871 treatment reversed MPC1609-dependent vascular leakage. Finally, we show that cancer cells combined with MPC1609 treatment diminished endothelial VE-cadherin expression. In conclusion, endogenous APC limits cancer cell extravasation because of S(1)P(1)-mediated VE-cadherin-dependent vascular barrier enhancement.

Differential effects of anticoagulants on tumor development of mouse cancer cell lines B16, K1735 and CT26 in lung.

Cancer progression is facilitated by blood coagulation. Anticoagulants, such as Hirudin and low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), reduce metastasis mainly by inhibition of thrombin formation and L- and P-selectin-mediated cell-cell adhesion. It is unknown whether the effects are dependent on cancer cell type. The effects of anticoagulants on tumor development of K1735 and B16 melanoma cells and CT26 colon cancer cells were investigated in mouse lung. Tumor load was determined noninvasively each week up to day 21 in all experiments using bioluminescence imaging. Effects of anticoagulants on tumor development of the three cell lines were correlated with the fibrin/fibrinogen content in the tumors, expression of tissue factor (TF), protease activated receptor (PAR)-1 and -4 and CD24, a ligand of L- and P-selectins. Hirudin inhibited tumor development of B16 cells in lungs completely but did not affect tumor growth of K1735 and CT26 cells. Low molecular weight heparin did not have an effect on K1735 melanoma tumor growth either. TF and PAR-4 expression was similar in the three cell lines. PAR-1 and CD24 were hardly expressed by K1735, whereas CT26 cells expressed low levels and B16 high levels of PAR-1 and CD24. Fibrin content of the tumors was not affected by LMWH. It is concluded that effects of anticoagulants are dependent on cancer cell type and are correlated with their CD24 and PAR-1 expression.

Validity of bioluminescence measurements for noninvasive in vivo imaging of tumor load in small animals.

A relatively new strategy to longitudinally monitor tumor load in intact animals and the effects of therapy is noninvasive bioluminescence imaging (BLI). The validity of BLIf or quantitative assessment of tumor load in small animals is critically evaluated in the present review. Cancer cells are grafted in mice or rats after transfection with a luciferase gene--usually that of a firefly. To determine tumor load, animals receive the substrate agent luciferin intraperitoneally, which luciferase converts into oxyluciferin in an ATP-dependent manner Light emitted by oxyluciferin in viable cancer cells is captured noninvasively with a highly sensitive charge-coupled device (CCD) camera. Validation studies indicate that BLI is useful to determine tumor load in the course of time, with each animal serving as its own reference. BLI is rapid, easy to perform, and sensitive. It can detect tumor load shortly after inoculation, even when relatively few cancer cells (2500-10,000) are used. BLI is less suited for the determination of absolute tumor mass in an animal because of quenching of bioluminescence by tissue components and the exact location of tumors because its spatial resolution is limited. Nevertheless, BLI is a powerful tool for high-throughput longitudinal monitoring of tumor load in small animals and allows the implementation of more advanced orthotopic tumor models in therapy intervention studies with almost the same simplicity as when measuring traditional ectopic subcutaneous models in combination with calipers.