Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20686621›Full record

ArticlePloS one2010

Quantifying the proteolytic release of extracellular matrix-sequestered VEGF with a computational model.

Prakash Vempati, Feilim Mac Gabhann, Aleksander S Popel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Mechanical regulation of the early stages of angiogenesis.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2022
    Review
  3. Metastasis and MAPK Pathways.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Sex differences in cancer mechanisms.Biology of sex differences · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Can VEGFC Form Turing Patterns in the Zebrafish Embryo?Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2019
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Prakash VempatiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America. pvempat1@jhu.edu
Feilim Mac Gabhann
Aleksander S Popel
Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

TRANS NETWORK PROJECTSU54CA143868 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI WIRTZ, DENIS · 2009 to 2013
$13.7M
Systems Biology of Angiogenesis in Peripheral Arterial DiseaseR01HL101200 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI POPEL, ALEKSANDER S. · 2010 to 2022
$10.7M
Predictive experiment-based multiscale models of the tumor immune microenvironment and immunotherapy in breast cancerR01CA138264 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI POPEL, ALEKSANDER S. · 2009 to 2023
$8.1M
Endothelial cell decisions integrate soluble and matrix-bound VEGF gradientsR00HL093219 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MAC GABHANN, FEILIM C · 2009 to 2011
$746k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA138264NCI NIH HHS U54 CA143868NHLBI NIH HHS R00 HL093219NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL101200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVEGF proteolysis by plasmin or matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) is believed to play an important role in regulating vascular patterning in vivo by releasing VEGF from the extracellular matrix (ECM). However, a quantitative understanding of the kinetics of VEGF cleavage and the efficiency of cell-mediated VEGF release is currently lacking. To address these uncertainties, we develop a molecular-detailed quantitative model of VEGF proteolysis, used here in the context of an endothelial sprout. METHODOLOGY AND

findingsTo study a cell's ability to cleave VEGF, the model captures MMP secretion, VEGF-ECM binding, VEGF proteolysis from VEGF165 to VEGF114 (the expected MMP cleavage product of VEGF165) and VEGF receptor-mediated recapture. Using experimental data, we estimated the effective bimolecular rate constant of VEGF165 cleavage by plasmin to be 328 M(-1) s(-1) at 25 degrees C, which is relatively slow compared to typical MMP-ECM proteolysis reactions. While previous studies have implicated cellular proteolysis in growth factor processing, we show that single cells do not individually have the capacity to cleave VEGF to any appreciable extent (less than 0.1% conversion). In addition, we find that a tip cell's receptor system will not efficiently recapture the cleaved VEGF due to an inability of cleaved VEGF to associate with Neuropilin-1.

conclusionsOverall, VEGF165 cleavage in vivo is likely to be mediated by the combined effect of numerous cells, instead of behaving in a single-cell-directed, autocrine manner. We show that heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) potentiate VEGF cleavage by increasing the VEGF clearance time in tissues. In addition, we find that the VEGF-HSPG complex is more sensitive to proteases than is soluble VEGF, which may imply its potential relevance in receptor signaling. Finally, according to our calculations, experimentally measured soluble protease levels are approximately two orders of magnitude lower than that needed to reconcile levels of VEGF cleavage seen in pathological situations.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, TheoreticalAnimalsBasement MembraneExtracellular MatrixHumansVascular Endothelial Growth FactorsVascular Endothelial Growth Factors

Identifiers

PMID20686621
PMCPMC2912330
OpenAlexW2012576713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.