VEGF-C and VEGF-C156S in the pro-lymphangiogenic growth factor therapy of lymphedema: a large animal study.

INTRODUCTION: VEGF-C156S, a lymphangiogenesis-specific form of vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGF-C), has been considered as a promising candidate for the experimental pro-lymphangiogenic treatment, as it lacks potential angiogenic effects. As a precursor to future clinical trials, the therapeutic efficacy and blood vascular side effects of VEGF-C and VEGF-C156S were compared in a large animal model of secondary lymphedema. Combination of lymphatic growth factor treatment and autologous lymph node transfer was used to normalize the lymphatic anatomy after surgical excision of lymphatic tissue. METHODS: Lymph vessels around the inguinal lymph node of female domestic pigs were destroyed in order to impair the normal lymphatic drainage from the hind limb. Local injections of adenoviruses (Ad) encoding VEGF-C or VEGF-C156S were used to enhance the regrowth of the lymphatic vasculature. AdLacZ (ß-galactosidase) and saline injections served as controls. RESULTS: Both VEGF-C and VEGF-C156S induced growth of new lymphatic vessels in the area of excision, although lymphangiogenesis was notably stronger after VEGF-C treatment. Also the transferred lymph nodes were best-preserved in the VEGF-C-treated pigs. Despite the enlargement of blood vessels following the VEGF-C therapy, no signs of sprouting angiogenesis or increased blood vascular permeability in the form of increased wound exudate volumes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that VEGF-C provides the preferred alternative for growth factor therapy of lymphedema when compared to VEGF-C156S, due to the superior lymphangiogenic response and minor blood vessel effects. Furthermore, these observations suggest that activation of both VEGFR-2 and VEGFR-3 might be needed for efficient lymphangiogenesis.

Lymph node transfer and perinodal lymphatic growth factor treatment for lymphedema.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to define the optimal growth factor treatment to be used in combination with lymph node transfer to normalize lymphatic vascular anatomy. BACKGROUND: In the lymph node transfer method, lymphatic anastomoses are expected to form spontaneously. However, lymphangiogenic growth factor therapies have shown promising results in preclinical models of lymphedema. METHODS: The inguinal lymphatic vasculature of pigs was surgically destroyed around the inguinal lymph node. To enhance the regrowth of the lymphatic network in the defected area, adenoviral vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGF-C) was administered intranodally or perinodally. Control animals received injections of saline or control vector. The lymphangiogenic effect of the growth factor therapy and any potential adverse effects associated with the 2 alternative delivery routes were examined 2 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Both routes of growth factor administration induced robust growth of lymphatic vessels and helped to preserve the structure of the transferred lymph nodes in comparison with the controls. The lymph nodes of the control treated animals regressed in size and their nodal structure was partly replaced by fibro-fatty scar tissue. Intranodally injected adenoviral VEGF-C and adenoviral vector encoding control gene LacZ induced macrophage accumulation inside the node, whereas perinodal administration of VEGF-C did not have this adverse effect. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphangiogenic growth factors improve lymphatic vessel regeneration and lymph node function after lymph node transfer. The perinodal route of delivery provides a basis for future clinical trials in lymphedema patients.

Genetic Variants of VEGFA and FLT4 Are Determinants of Survival in Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Sorafenib.

Molecular markers of sorafenib efficacy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are not available. The purpose of this study was to discover genetic markers of survival in patients with mRCC treated with sorafenib. Germline variants from 56 genes were genotyped in 295 patients with mRCC. Variant-overall survival (OS) associations were tested in multivariate regression models. Mechanistic studies were conducted to validate clinical associations. VEGFA rs1885657, ITGAV rs3816375, and WWOX rs8047917 (sorafenib arm), and FLT4 rs307826 and VEGFA rs3024987 (sorafenib and placebo arms combined) were associated with shorter OS. FLT4 rs307826 increased VEGFR-3 phosphorylation, membrane trafficking, and receptor activation. VEGFA rs1885657 and rs58159269 increased transcriptional activity of the constructs containing these variants in endothelial and RCC cell lines, and VEGFA rs58159269 increased endothelial cell proliferation and tube formation. FLT4 rs307826 and VEGFA rs58159269 led to reduced sorafenib cytotoxicity. Genetic variation in VEGFA and FLT4 could affect survival in sorafenib-treated patients with mRCC. These markers should be examined in additional malignancies treated with sorafenib and in other angiogenesis inhibitors used in mRCC. SIGNIFICANCE: Clinical and mechanistic data identify germline genetic variants in VEGFA and FLT4 as markers of survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.