4.6 Article

Comparison of Bevacizumab and Aflibercept for Suppression of Angiogenesis in Human Retinal Microvascular Endothelial Cells

期刊

PHARMACEUTICALS
卷 16, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ph16070939

关键词

angiogenesis; antioxidants; human retinal microvascular endothelial cells; intermittent hypoxia; Notch signaling; VEGF signaling; Notch

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that Eylea is not as effective as Avastin in promoting angiogenesis, although the lower dose of Eylea may be more effective than the higher dose. Additionally, Eylea may promote normal vascular development by regulating the expression of factors such as VEGFR-1 and Notch/Jagged-1.
Bevacizumab (Avastin) is a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor that is widely used for aggressive posterior retinopathy of prematurity (APROP). Its use is associated with multiple adverse effects. Aflibercept (Eylea) is a VEGFR-1 analogue that is approved for ocular use, but its efficacy for APROP is less studied. We tested the hypothesis that Eylea is as effective as Avastin for suppression of intermittent hypoxia (IH)-induced angiogenesis. Human retinal microvascular endothelial cells (HRECs) were treated with Avastin and low- or high-dose Eylea and exposed to normoxia, hyperoxia (50% O-2), or neonatal IH for 24, 48, or 72 h. Cells were assessed for migration and tube formation capacities, as well as biomarkers of angiogenesis and oxidative stress. Both doses of Eylea suppressed migration and tube formation in all oxygen environments, although the effect was not as robust as Avastin. Furthermore, the lower dose of Eylea appeared to be more effective than the higher dose. Eylea induced soluble VEGFR-1 (sVEGFR-1) coincident with high IGF-I levels and decreased Notch/Jagged-1, demonstrating a functional association. Given the role of VEGFR-1 and Notch as guidance cues for vascular sprouting, these data suggest that Eylea may promote normal vascular patterning in a dose-dependent manner.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据