EDITORIAL NOTE
Imaging of angiogenesis
Willem J. M. Mulder • Arjan W. Griffioen
Published online: 18 June 2010
/C211The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
Imaging of angiogenesis is an important tool in the diag-
nosis of disease. Small molecule or nanoparticular probes
are currently developed to identify angiogenic endothelium
with non-invasive imaging techniques such as magnetic
resonance and ultrasound imaging. These techniques are
very valuable since they would not only contribute to
improved diagnosis, but will also allow monitoring of
angiogenesis intervention therapies, early detection of
disease, as well therapy development. Such techniques will
ultimately also contribute to the introduction of personal-
ized medicine. The current special issue of Angiogenesis is
put together to highlight several interesting and new
developments in this field.
Intervention in angiogenesis has currently made its way
into daily clinical practice. Several angiogenesis inhibitors
have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) for therapeutic use in the therapy of disease, most
commonly in oncological pathologies. Since angiogenesis
is a multidisciplinary theme, application of angiogenesis
inhibition is also expected for other angiogenic diseases
such as rheumatoid arthritis, atherosclerosis, endometriosis
and psoriasis [ 1]. Clinical application has been approved
for the therapy of many cancer types and eye diseases, such
as age-related macular degeneration. In the field of cancer,
neutralization of the key angiogenic growth factor VEGF is
daily clinical practice, mostly in combination with che-
motherapeutic agents. While the first approved agent,
Avastin/bevacizumab, is an anti-VEGF antibody based
therapeutic, later generation drugs are collectively based on
inhibition of VEGF (and other growth factor) signaling by
inhibition of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. This type of
inhibitors is now widely tested and clinical studies have led
to FDA approval for several of them. Application is pos-
sible now for many tumor types and is especially suc-
cessful in renal cell cancer, where monotherapy with
Sutent/sunitinib is nowadays first line therapy.
While these examples picture the exploitation of angi-
ogenesis for development of therapy, there is also an active
field of science exploiting angiogenesis or angiogenesis
inhibitors for diagnostic purposes making use of imaging
technologies. Imaging of diseased tissue by exploiting
vascular permeability or vascular targeting is a promising
tool in modern medicine. The latter approach depends on
identification of targets that are upregulated at angiogenic
blood vessels as compared to quiescent normal blood
vessels and on the availability of probes that bind selec-
tively and with high affinity to such targets. Different
genomic screening approaches, performed worldwide,
identified markers of angiogenic endothelial cells. Among
these markers are molecules such as a
vb3 integrin, CD13,
vimentin, VEGF receptor, and galectin-1, which have
shown promise in imaging of angiogenesis [ 2–4].
The field of angiogenesis research has been initiated by
the hypothesis that the growth of tumors is dependent on
the formation of new blood vessels, put forward by Folk-
man [5] in the early 1970s. This idea indicated that angi-
ogenesis inhibitors might be discovered and employed as
therapy against angiogenic diseases. The process of angi-
ogenesis is an intricately regulated cascade of processes
that occurs in growing tissues where, for example,
W. J. M. Mulder ( &)
Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Mount Sinai
School of Medicine, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1234,
New York, NY, USA
e-mail:
[email protected]
A. W. Griffioen
Angiogenesis Laboratory, Department of Medical Oncology,
VUmc-Cancer Center Amsterdam, VU University Medical
Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
123
Angiogenesis (2010) 13:71–74
DOI 10.1007/s10456-010-9178-9
conditions of hypoxia have turned on the production of
angiogenic growth factors such as the families of vascular
endothelial cell growth factors (VEGFs) and fibroblast
growth factors (FGFs). Preexisting endothelial cells in
capillaries can sense that and subsequently produce prote-
ases to dissolve the basement membrane and extracellular
matrix. Thereby endothelial cells migrate into the direction
of the stimulus. Endothelial cells subsequently proliferate
and form new vascular sprouts that become functional
blood vessels after the attraction of accessory cells such as
pericytes and the formation of a new rigid extracellular
matrix [6]. This angiogenesis cascade provides opportuni-
ties for intervention in every single step separately, and
inhibitors for each of these steps have been discovered and
are being developed in clinical studies. Anti-angiogenesis
compounds can specifically and directly inhibit the prolif-
eration of endothelial cells (TNP-470/caplostatin, platelet
factor-4) or interfere directly with the migratory activity of
these cells (endostatin, integrin antagonists). Alternatively,
they can inhibit the production or activity of metallopro-
teinases (MMPs), inducing a hampered mobility of endo-
thelial cells. However, the best developed angiogenesis
inhibitors are the ones that act indirectly, either by clearing
angiogenic growth factors from the circulation, blocking
the corresponding growth factor receptors, or by interven-
tion in the intracellular signaling pathways activated by
these growth factors.
A variety of imaging modalities is available to visualize
and characterize the angiogenic vasculature [ 7]. In a clin-
ical setting these include magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single photon
emission computed tomography (SPECT), ultrasound
imaging and computed tomography (CT) [ 8]. Preclinically,
all the aforementioned imaging modalities are available,
but usually as dedicated small animal scanners with a
smaller field of view and higher spatial resolution [ 9]. In
addition, optical in vivo imaging techniques such as
intravital microscopy, near infrared fluorescence (NIRF)
and bioluminescence imaging are frequently employed to
evaluate angiogenesis in small laboratory animals [ 10].
Dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI is one of the
most widely and commonly used imaging methods to
visualize tumor angiogenesis in cancer patients and to
evaluate angiostatic therapies [ 11]. The application of
contrast enhanced CT imaging is also being explored for
perfusion imaging of cancers in patients. Both DCE MRI
and CT provide information about the vascular perme-
ability of tumors, but do not directly visualize the newly
formed vasculature. Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET
imaging allows quantitative imaging of glucose metabo-
lism. Since tumor glucose metabolism is expected to
decrease when nutrient vessels regress after the onset of
angiostatic therapy, as an indirect marker for angiogenesis,
a decrease in glucose metabolism may be visualized by
FDG-PET. Unfortunately, changes in vascular permeability
and FDG uptake may not necessarily be the result of
changes in ongoing angiogenesis, but can also be the result
of a variety of different processes, including hypoxia or the
collapse of the tumor microvasculature. More recently,
contrast enhanced MRI and CT as well as FDG-PET have
been explored for the study of neovascularization in ath-
erosclerosis in a number of studies [12, 13]. Although in its
infancy, these studies have shown a clear correlation
between atherosclerotic plaque permeability, microvessel
density and vulnerability. Interestingly, Calcagno et al.
[12], who also contributed to this special issue, have shown
parameters obtained in vivo with DCE-MRI and FDG-PET
to correlate with the plaque microvessel density determined
ex vivo, in a rabbit model of atherosclerosis.
To enable a more specific evaluation of angiogenesis,
target-specific imaging methods have been developed for
PET and SPECT imaging, MRI, ultrasound as well as
optical imaging [ 14]. Such molecular imaging methods
exploit probes that, after intravenous administration, spe-
cifically target molecular epitopes upregulated at the
angiogenic vasculature. These probes are labeled with
tracers and/or materials that allow their visualization with
one (or more) of the aforementioned imaging techniques.
The nuclear imaging techniques (PET and SPECT) inher-
ently rely on target-specific probes. To that end, targeting
ligands such as antibodies, proteins and peptides are
labeled with radioactive isotopes. Most notably, the a
vb3
integrin specific RGD peptide has been studied and applied
in both preclinical and clinical studies, which has resulted
in the development of a wide variety of radiolabeled RGD
analogs [ 15]. In addition, different other endothelial cell
markers have been exploited to image angiogenesis by PET
and SPECT, including the VEGF receptor or adhesion
molecules [16].
The development of nanoparticulate molecular imaging
probes has shown great progress in the past decade [ 17].
Such probes, carrying a high payload of contrast generating
materials, have shown to be especially useful for MR
molecular imaging of angiogenesis, since MRI is a rela-
tively insensitive technique that requires lM concentra-
tions of contrast agents to accumulate to allow their
visualization [ 18]. For optical techniques, quantum dots
have shown great potential because these semiconductor
nanoparticles exhibit some unique properties that make
them resistant to photobleaching and provide a very narrow
and tunable excitation wavelength [ 19]. Interestingly,
nanoparticles allow the integration of multiple materials
and agents for multimodal imaging purposes and/or the
combination of target-specific therapy [ 20].
For the current special issue on ‘‘ Imaging of Angio-
genesis’’ we have invited a series of renowned expert
72 Angiogenesis (2010) 13:71–74
123
investigators to contribute a state-of-the-art review. We
attempted to put together an issue that covers the above-
mentioned wide range of applications in this field. The
issue starts with a contribution, which also provided the
cover art, about vascular permeability and lymphatic
drainage imaging in experimental cancer by Vandoorne,
Addadi and Neeman [ 21]. Calcagno et al. [ 12][ 22] show
the potential of contrast enhanced MR imaging to identify
the vulnerability of atherosclerotic plaques’. MRI of
angiogenesis in the brain as a result of stroke has been
reviewed by investigators of the NRM group of Dijkhuizen
in Utrecht, The Netherlands [ 23]. A contribution from a
Norwegian group by Hak et al. [ 24] exemplifies the use of
window chamber models to visualize nanoparticle target-
ing in tumors by intravital microscopy. We have contrib-
uted a mini review about paramagnetic quantum dots for
multimodal of tumor angiogenesis [ 25], while Snoeks,
Lo¨wik and Kaijzel from the Leiden University Medical
Center in The Netherlands highlight the latest develop-
ments in optical approaches to image and characterize
angiogenesis [ 26]. Investigators Jansen, Koutcher and
Shukla-Dave at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
[27] reviewed the field of head and neck squamous cell
carcinoma imaging. The Biomedical NMR group of the
Eindhoven University of Technology (Nicolay, Strijkers
et al.) summarized their work on multimodal lipoomes
[28], while Willmann et al. from Stanford University
School of Medicine wrote an overview of their ultrasound
based tumor angiogenesis imaging work [ 29]. The special
issue is wrapped up with a great contribution by Lanza
et al. [ 20] from Washington University of Medicine. They
give a summary of their work with angiogenesis specific
perfluorocarbon nanoparticles for molecular MRI and
therapy of cancer and atherosclerosis [ 30].
We are confident that this special issue of Angiogenesis
is a valuable documentation of the current technologies
available to image neovaculature formation.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which per-
mits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
References
1. Carmeliet P (2005) Angiogenesis in life, disease and medicine.
Nature 438:932–936
2. Brooks PC, Clark RA, Cheresh DA (1994) Requirement of vascular
integrin alpha v beta 3 for angiogenesis. Science 264:569–571
3. Thijssen VL, Postel R, Brandwijk RJ, Dings RP, Nesmelova I,
Satijn S, Verhofstad N, Nakabeppu Y, Baum LG, Bakkers J,
Mayo KH, Poirier F, Griffioen AW (2006) Galectin-1 is essential
in tumor angiogenesis and is a target for antiangiogenesis ther-
apy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:15975–15980
4. van Beijnum JR, Dings RP, van der LE, Zwaans BM, Ramaekers
FC, Mayo KH, Griffioen AW (2006) Gene expression of tumor
angiogenesis dissected: specific targeting of colon cancer angio-
genic vasculature. Blood 108:2339–2348
5. Folkman J (1971) Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications.
N Engl J Med 285:1182–1186
6. Griffioen AW, Molema G (2000) Angiogenesis: potentials for
pharmacologic intervention in the treatment of cancer, cardio-
vascular diseases, and chronic inflammation. Pharmacol Rev
52:237–268
7. McDonald DM, Choyke PL (2003) Imaging of angiogenesis:
from microscope to clinic. Nat Med 9:713–725
8. Jaffer FA, Weissleder R (2005) Molecular imaging in the clinical
arena. JAMA 293:855–862
9. Rudin M, Weissleder R (2003) Molecular imaging in drug dis-
covery and development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:123–131
10. Shah K, Weissleder R (2005) Molecular optical imaging: appli-
cations leading to the development of present day therapeutics.
NeuroRx 2:215–225
11. Padhani AR (2002) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical
oncology: current status and future directions. J Magn Reson
Imaging 16:407–422
12. Calcagno C, Cornily JC, Hyafil F, Rudd JH, Briley-Saebo KC,
Mani V, Goldschlager G, Machac J, Fuster V, Fayad ZA (2008)
Detection of neovessels in atherosclerotic plaques of rabbits using
dynamic contrast enhanced MRI and 18F-FDG PET. Arterioscler
Thromb Vasc Biol 28:1311–1317
13. Hyafil F, Cornily JC, Feig JE, Gordon R, Vucic E, Amirbekian V,
Fisher EA, Fuster V, Feldman LJ, Fayad ZA (2007) Noninvasive
detection of macrophages using a nanoparticulate contrast agent
for computed tomography. Nat Med 13:636–641
14. Weissleder R, Mahmood U (2001) Molecular imaging. Radiology
219:316–333
15. Haubner R, Decristoforo C (2009) Radiolabelled RGD peptides
and peptidomimetics for tumour targeting. Front Biosci 14:872–
886
16. Cai W, Chen X (2008) Multimodality molecular imaging of
tumor angiogenesis. J Nucl Med 49(Suppl 2):113S–128S
17. Cormode DP, Skajaa T, Fayad ZA, Mulder WJ (2009) Nano-
technology in medical imaging: probe design and applications.
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 29(7):992–1000
18. Mulder WJ, Strijkers GJ, van Tilborg GA, Griffioen AW, Nicolay
K (2006) Lipid-based nanoparticles for contrast-enhanced MRI
and molecular imaging. NMR Biomed 19:142–164
19. Medintz IL, Uyeda HT, Goldman ER, Mattoussi H (2005)
Quantum dot bioconjugates for imaging, labelling and sensing.
Nat Mater 4:435–446
20. Lanza GM, Winter PM, Caruthers SD, Hughes MS, Cyrus T,
Marsh JN, Neubauer AM, Partlow KC, Wickline SA (2006)
Nanomedicine opportunities for cardiovascular disease with
perfluorocarbon nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 1:321–329
21. Vandoorne K, Addadi Y, Neeman M (2010) Visualizing vascular
permeability and lymphatic drainage using labeled serum albu-
min. Angiogenesis. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9170-4
22. Calcagno C, Mani V, Ramachandran S, Fayad ZA (2010)
Dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) of atherosclerotic plaque angiogenesis. Angiogenesis. doi:
10.1007/s10456-010-9172-2
23. Seevinck PR, Deddens LH, Dijkhuizen RM (2010) Magnetic
resonance imaging of brain angiogenesis after stroke. Angio-
genesis. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9174-0
24. Hak S, Reitan N, Haraldseth O, de Lange Davies C (2010)
Intravital microscopy in window chambers: a unique tool to study
tumor angiogenesis and delivery of nanoparticles. Angiogenesis.
doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9176-y
Angiogenesis (2010) 13:71–74 73
123
25. Mulder WJM, Strijkers GJ, Nicolay K, Griffioen AW (2010)
Quantum dots for multimodal molecular imaging of angiogene-
sis. Angiogenesis. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9177-x
26. Snoeks TJA, Lo¨wik CWGM, Kaijzel EL (2010) ‘In vivo’ optical
approaches to angiogenesis imaging. Angiogenesis. doi: 10.1007/
s10456-010-9168-y
27. Jansen JFA, Koutcher JA, Shukla-Dave A (2010) Non-invasive
imaging of angiogenesis in head and neck squamous cell carci-
noma. Angiogenesis. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9167-z
28. Strijkers GJ, Kluza E, Van Tilborg GAF, van der Schaft DWJ, Grif-
fioen AW, Mulder WJM, Nicolay K (2010) Paramagnetic and
fluorescent liposomes for target-specific imaging and therapy of tumor
angiogenesis. Angiogenesis. doi:10.1007/s10456-010-9165-1
29. Deshpande N, Pysz MA, Willmann JK (2010) Molecular ultra-
sound assessment of tumor angiogenesis. Angiogenesis. doi:
10.1007/s10456-010-9175-z
30. Lanza GM, Winter PM, Caruthers SD, Hughes MS, Hu G, Sch-
mieder AH, Wickline SA (2010) Theragnostics for tumor and
plaque angiogenesis with perfluorocarbon nanoemulsions. Angi-
ogenesis. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9166-0
74 Angiogenesis (2010) 13:71–74
123
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.