Explore the vast range of titles available.

In multicellular organisms, angiogenesis, the formation of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, is an essential process for growth and development. Different mechanisms such as vasculogenesis, sprouting, intussusceptive, and coalescent angiogenesis, as well as vessel co-option, vasculogenic mimicry and lymphangiogenesis, underlie the formation of new vasculature. In many pathological conditions, such as cancer, atherosclerosis, arthritis, psoriasis, endometriosis, obesity and SARS-CoV-2(COVID-19), developmental angiogenic processes are recapitulated, but are often done so without the normal feedback mechanisms that regulate the ordinary spatial and temporal patterns of blood vessel formation. Thus, pathological angiogenesis presents new challenges yet new opportunities for the design of vascular-directed therapies. Here, we provide an overview of recent insights into blood vessel development and highlight novel therapeutic strategies that promote or inhibit the process of angiogenesis to stabilize, reverse, or even halt disease progression. In our review, we will also explore several additional aspects (the angiogenic switch, hypoxia, angiocrine signals, endothelial plasticity, vessel normalization, and endothelial cell anergy) that operate in parallel to canonical angiogenesis mechanisms and speculate how these processes may also be targeted with anti-angiogenic or vascular-directed therapies.

Beneficial effects of metformin on cancer risk and mortality have been proved by epidemiological and clinical studies, thus attracting research interest in elucidating the underlying mechanisms. Recently, tumour‐associated macrophages (TAMs) appeared to be implicated in metformin‐induced antitumour activities. However, how metformin inhibits TAMs‐induced tumour progression remains ill‐defined. Here, we report that metformin‐induced antitumour and anti‐angiogenic activities were not or only partially contributed by its direct inhibition of functions of tumour and endothelial cells. By skewing TAM polarization from M2‐ to M1‐like phenotype, metformin inhibited both tumour growth and angiogenesis. Depletion of TAMs by clodronate liposomes eliminated M2‐TAMs‐induced angiogenic promotion, while also abrogating M1‐TAMs‐mediated anti‐angiogenesis, thus promoting angiogenesis in tumours from metformin treatment mice. Further in vitro experiments using TAMs‐conditioned medium and a coculture system were performed, which demonstrated an inhibitory effect of metformin on endothelial sprouting and tumour cell proliferation promoted by M2‐polarized RAW264.7 macrophages. Based on these results, metformin‐induced inhibition of tumour growth and angiogenesis is greatly contributed by skewing of TAMs polarization in microenvironment, thus offering therapeutic opportunities for metformin in cancer treatment.

Background Effective therapeutic options are limited for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The incorporation of an immune checkpoint inhibitor and a molecular anti‐angiogenic agent into the commonly adopted chemotherapy may produce synergistic effects. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of camrelizumab plus apatinib combined with chemotherapy as the first‐line treatment of advanced ESCC. Methods In this single‐arm prospective phase II trial, patients with unresectable locally advanced or recurrent/metastatic ESCC received camrelizumab 200 mg, liposomal paclitaxel 150 mg/m2, and nedaplatin 50 mg/m2 on day 1, and apatinib 250 mg on days 1‐14. The treatments were repeated every 14 days for up to 9 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with camrelizumab and apatinib. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results We enrolled 30 patients between August 7, 2018 and February 23, 2019. The median follow‐up was 24.98 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23.05‐26.16 months). The centrally assessed ORR was 80.0% (95% CI: 61.4%‐92.3%), with a median duration of response of 9.77 months (range: 1.54 to 24.82+ months). The DCR reached 96.7% (95% CI: 82.8%‐99.9%). The median PFS was 6.85 months (95% CI: 4.46‐14.20 months), and the median OS was 19.43 months (95% CI: 9.93 months – not reached). The most common grade 3‐4 treatment‐related adverse events (AEs) were leukopenia (83.3%), neutropenia (60.0%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase level (26.7%). Treatment‐related serious AEs included febrile neutropenia, leukopenia, and anorexia in one patient (3.3%), and single cases of increased blood bilirubin level (3.3%) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (3.3%). No treatment‐related deaths occurred. Conclusions Camrelizumab plus apatinib combined with liposomal paclitaxel and nedaplatin as first‐line treatment demonstrated feasible anti‐tumor activity and manageable safety in patients with advanced ESCC. Randomized trials to evaluate this new combination strategy are warranted. Trial registration This trial was registered on July 27, 2018, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03603756).

Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common primary malignant bone tumour with a peak in incidence during adolescence. Delayed patient presentation and diagnosis is common with approximately 15% of OS patients presenting with metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. With the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the 1970s, disease prognosis improved from 17% to 60%‐70% 5‐year survival, but outcomes have not significantly improved since then. Novel and innovative therapeutic strategies are urgently needed as an adjunct to conventional treatment modalities to improve outcomes for OS patients. Angiogenesis is crucial for tumour growth, metastasis and invasion, and its prevention will ultimately inhibit tumour growth and metastasis. Dysregulation of angiogenesis in bone microenvironment involving osteoblasts and osteoclasts might contribute to OS development. This review summarizes existing knowledge regarding pre‐clinical and developmental research of targeted anti‐angiogenic therapy for OS with the aim of highlighting the limitations associated with this application. Targeted anti‐angiogenic therapies include monoclonal antibody to VEGF (bevacizumab), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (Sorafenib, Apatinib, Pazopanib and Regorafenib) and human recombinant endostatin (Endostar). However, considering the safety and efficacy of these targeted anti‐angiogenesis therapies in clinical trials cannot be guaranteed at this point, further research is needed to completely understand and characterize targeted anti‐angiogenesis therapy in OS. Mechanistic insights into the OS targeted anti‐angiogenesis therapy.

Substantial data from preclinical studies have revealed the biphasic effects of statins on cardiovascular angiogenesis. Although some have reported the anti‐angiogenic potential of statins in malignant tumors, the underlying mechanism remains poorly understood. The aim of this study is to elucidate the mechanism by which simvastatin, a member of the statin family, inhibits tumor angiogenesis. Simvastatin significantly suppressed tumor cell‐conditioned medium‐induced angiogenic promotion in vitro, and resulted in dose‐dependent anti‐angiogenesis in vivo. Further genetic silencing of hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α (HIF‐1α) reduced vascular endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor‐2 expressions in 4T1 cells and correspondingly ameliorated HUVEC proliferation facilitated by tumor cell‐conditioned medium. Additionally, simvastatin induced angiogenic inhibition through a mechanism of post‐transcriptional downregulation of HIF‐1α by increasing the phosphorylation level of AMP kinase. These results were further validated by the fact that 5‐aminoimidazole‐4‐carboxamide ribonucleotide reduced HIF‐1α protein levels and ameliorated the angiogenic ability of endothelial cells in vitro and in vivo. Critically, inhibition of AMPK phosphorylation by compound C almost completely abrogated simvastatin‐induced anti‐angiogenesis, which was accompanied by the reduction of protein levels of HIF‐1α and its downstream pro‐angiogenic factors. These findings reveal the mechanism by which simvastatin induces tumor anti‐angiogenesis, and therefore identifies the target that explains the beneficial effects of statins on malignant tumors. Simvastatin significantly suppressed tumor angiogenesis promoted by HIF‐1α‐induced pro‐angiogenic factors in 4T1 tumor cells. Further inhibition of AMPK phosphorylation by compound C almost completely abrogated simvastatin‐induced anti‐angiogenesis, which was accompanied by the reduction of protein levels of HIF‐1α and its downstream pro‐angiogenic factors.

Angiogenesis is the process through which novel blood vessels are formed from pre-existing ones and it is involved in both physiological and pathological processes of the body. Furthermore, tumor angiogenesis is a crucial factor associated with tumor growth, progression, and metastasis. In this manner, there has been a great interest in the development of anti-angiogenesis strategies that could inhibit tumor vascularization. Conventional approaches comprise the administration of anti-angiogenic drugs that target and block the activity of proangiogenic factors. However, as their efficacy is still a matter of debate, novel strategies have been focusing on combining anti-angiogenic agents with chemotherapy or immunotherapy. Moreover, nanotechnology has also been investigated for the potential of nanomaterials to target and release anti-angiogenic drugs at specific sites. The aim of this paper is to review the mechanisms involved in angiogenesis and tumor vascularization and provide an overview of the recent trends in anti-angiogenic strategies for cancer therapy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) activates host’s anti-tumor immune response by blocking negative regulatory immune signals. A series of clinical trials showed that ICI could effectively induce tumor regression in a subset of advanced cancer patients. In clinical practice, a main concerning for choosing ICI is the low response rate. Even though multiple predictive biomarkers such as PD-L1 expression, mismatch-repair deficiency, and status of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes have been adopted for patient selection, frequent resistance to ICI monotherapy has not been completely resolved. However, some recent studies indicated that ICI resistance could be alleviated by combination therapy with anti-angiogenesis treatment. Actually, anti-angiogenesis therapy not only prunes blood vessel which is essential to cancer growth and metastasis, but also reprograms the tumor immune microenvironment. Preclinical studies demonstrated that the efficacy of combination therapy of ICI and anti-angiogenesis was superior to monotherapy. In mice model, combination therapy could effectively increase the ratio of anti-tumor/pro-tumor immune cell and decrease the expression of multiple immune checkpoints more than PD-1. Based on exciting results from preclinical studies, many clinical trials were deployed to investigate the synergistic effect of the combination therapy and acquired promising outcome. This review summarized the latest understanding of ICI combined anti-angiogenesis therapy and highlighted the advances of relevant clinical trials.

Angiogenesis is the growth of new capillaries from the preexisting blood vessels. Glioblastoma (GBM) tumors are highly vascularized tumors, and glioma growth depends on the formation of new blood vessels. Angiogenesis is a complex process involving proliferation, migration, and differentiation of vascular endothelial cells (ECs) under the stimulation of specific signals. It is controlled by the balance between its promoting and inhibiting factors. Various angiogenic factors and genes have been identified that stimulate glioma angiogenesis. Therefore, attention has been directed to anti-angiogenesis therapy in which glioma proliferation is inhibited by inhibiting the formation of new tumor vessels using angiogenesis inhibitory factors and drugs. Here, in this review, we highlight and summarize the various molecular mediators that regulate GBM angiogenesis with focus on recent clinical research on the potential of exploiting angiogenic pathways as a strategy in the treatment of GBM patients.

The apelin receptor (APJ) is a key player in tumour angiogenesis, but its role in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. This study aims to elucidate the function of the apelin/APJ pathway in HCC using a multi‐omics approach and identify potential therapeutic biomarkers. Differentially expressed genes related to the apelin/APJ axis were identified from bulk transcriptomics to reveal HCC‐associated disparities. Single‐cell and spatial transcriptomics were used to localize and analyse the function of these genes. Machine learning models were constructed to predict outcomes based on apelin/APJ expression, and experimental validation was conducted to explore the pathway's impact on HCC angiogenesis. Single cell analysis revealed an overexpression of APJ/Aplin in the endothelium. The stemness of endothelial cell (EC) with high apelin/APJ was enhanced, as well as the expression of TGFb, oxidative stresses and PI3K/AKT pathway genes. Spatial transcriptomics confirmed that EC populations with high APJ scores were enriched within the tumour. Machine learning models showed high prognostic accuracy. High APJ expression was linked to worse outcomes (p = 0.001), and AUC values were high (1 year, 3 year, 5 year) (0.95, 0.97, 0.98). Immune suppression and non‐responsiveness of immune therapy were also seen in high‐risk groups. The experimental validation showed that silencing apelin reduced angiogenesis (p  < 0.05), endothelial proliferation, decreased expression of ANG2, KLF2, VEGFA and lower ERK1/2 phosphorylation. Apelin may serve as a potential therapeutic target in HCC, given its role in promoting tumour angiogenesis and poor patient outcomes.

Neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) antagonists exert antitumor action, are safe and do not cause serious side-effects. These antagonists (via the NK-1R) exert multiple actions against cancer: antiproliferative and anti-Warburg effects and apoptotic, anti-angiogenic and antimetastatic effects. These multiple effects have been shown for a broad spectrum of cancers. The drug aprepitant (an NK-1R antagonist) is currently used in clinical practice as an antiemetic. In in vivo and in vitro studies, aprepitant also showed the aforementioned multiple antitumor actions against many types of cancer. A successful combination therapy (aprepitant and radiotherapy) has recently been reported in a patient suffering from lung carcinoma: the tumor mass disappeared and side-effects were not observed. Aprepitant could be considered as an intelligent bullet against cancer. The administration of aprepitant in cancer patients to prevent recurrence and metastasis after surgical procedures, thrombosis and thromboembolism is discussed, as is the possible link, through the substance P (SP)/NK-1R system, between cancer and depression. Our main aim is to review the multiple antitumor actions exerted by aprepitant, and the use of this drug is suggested in cancer patients. Altogether, the data support the reprofiling of aprepitant for a new therapeutic use as an antitumor agent.