reviewClinical ChemistryJan 1, 2003BRONZE OA

Angiogenesis Assays: A Critical Overview

University of Wisconsin–Madison

Indexed incrossref

Abstract

Methods

Most studies of angiogenesis inducers and inhibitors rely on various models, both in vitro and in vivo, as indicators of efficacy. In this report we describe the principal methods now in use: the in vivo Matrigel plug and corneal neovascularization assays, the in vivo/in vitro chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay, and the in vitro cellular (proliferation, migration, tube formation) and organotypic (aortic ring) assays. We include description of two new methods, the chick aortic arch and the Matrigel sponge assays.

Conclusions

In vitro tests are valuable, can be carried out expeditiously, and lend themselves to quantification, but must be interpreted with extreme caution. In vitro tests are best viewed as providing initial information, subject to confirmation by in vivo assays. Multiple tests should be used to obtain maximum benefit from in vitro tests. In vivo tests are more difficult and time-consuming to perform, thereby limiting the number of tests that can run at any one time. Quantification is generally more difficult as well. However, in vivo assays are essential because of the complex nature of vascular responses to test reagents, responses that no in vitro model can fully achieve.

Citation impact

699
total citations
FWCI
10.99
Percentile
100%
References
41
Citations per year

Authors

5

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • In vivo
  • Angiogenesis
  • Matrigel
  • In vitro
  • Chorioallantoic membrane
  • Fumagillin
  • In vitro toxicology
  • Neovascularization
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Good health and well-being
No related works found for this paper.

Funding