4.3 Article

Amphiphilic suramin dissolves Matrigel, causing an 'inhibition' artefact within in vitro angiogenesis assays

期刊

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/iep.12043

关键词

endothelial; extracellular matrix; in vitro angiogenesis assay; Matrigel; suramin

资金

  1. G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Trust
  2. NIH [EB00620, HG003916, HG005033-CDP1, HG005033-CDP3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The field of study concerning promotion and/or inhibition of angiogenesis has gathered much attention in the scientific community. A great deal of work has been invested towards defining reproducible assays to gauge for promotion or inhibition of angiogenesis in response to drug treatments or growth conditions. Two common components of these assays were noted by our group to have an unexpected and previously unreported interaction. Suramin is a commercially available compound, commonly used as a positive control for in vitro angiogenic inhibition assays. Matrigel is a popular extracellular substrate that supports angiogenic network formation when endothelial cells are cultured on its surface. However, our group demonstrated that suramin alone (without the presence of cells) will actively dissolve Matrigel, causing the extracellular matrix to transition from the gel-like physical state to a more liquid state. This causes cells on the Matrigel to congregate and sink to the bottom of the well. Therefore, previous observations of inhibition of endothelial cell angiogenesis through the incubation with suramin (including previous observations made by our group) are, largely, an artefact caused by suramin and matrix interaction rather than suramin and cells interaction, as previously reported. Our results suggest that the presence of sulphate groups and amphiphilic properties of suramin are likely responsible for the disruption of the matrix layer. We believe that this information is of prime importance to anyone using similar in vitro models, or employing suramin in any therapy or drug development assays.

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

4.3
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