NIH Public Access

Author Manuscript
NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.
Published in final edited form as:
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. 2012 July ; 25(7): 935–942. doi:10.1002/nbm.1814.

DCE and DW-MRI Monitoring of Vascular Disruption following

VEGF-Trap Treatment of a Rat Glioma Model
Benjamin A. Hoff1, Mahaveer S. Bhojani2, John Rudge5, Thomas L. Chenevert1, Charles R.
Meyer1, Stefanie Galbán2, Timothy D. Johnson4, Judith Sebolt Leopold1, Alnawaz
Rehemtulla2, Brian D. Ross1,3, and Craig J. Galbán1
1Department of Radiology, Center for Molecular Imaging, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA
2Department of Radiation Oncology, Center for Molecular Imaging, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109,
USA
3Department of Biological Chemistry, Center for Molecular Imaging, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109,
USA
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

4Department of Biostatistics University of Michigan, Center for Molecular Imaging, Ann Arbor,
Michigan 48109, USA
5Department of Regeneron Corporation, 777 Old Saw Mill Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591

Abstract
Vascular-targeted therapies have shown promise as adjuvant cancer treatment. As these agents
undergo clinical evaluation, sensitive imaging biomarkers are need to assess drug target
interaction and treatment response. In this study, dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and
diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) were evaluated for detecting response of intracerebral 9L
gliosarcomas to the antivascular agent VEGF-Trap, a fusion protein designed to bind all forms of
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A (VEGF-A) and Placental Growth Factor (PGF). Rats with
9L tumors were treated twice weekly for two weeks with vehicle or VEGF-Trap. DCE- and DW-
MRI were performed one day prior to treatment initiation and one day following each
administered dose. Kinetic parameters (Ktrans: volume transfer constant, kep: efflux rate constant
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

from extravascular/extracellular space to plasma, and vp: blood plasma volume fraction) and the
apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) over the tumor volumes were compared between groups. A
significant decrease in kinetic parameters was observed 24 hours following the first dose of
VEGF-Trapin treated versus control animals (p<0.05) and was accompanied by a decline in ADC
values. In addition to the significant hemodynamic effect, VEGF-Trap treated animals exhibited
significantly longer tumor doubling times (p<0.05) compared to the controls. Histological findings
were found to support imaging response metrics. In conclusion, kinetic MRI parameters and
change in ADC have been found to serve as sensitive and early biomarkers of VEGF-Trapanti-
vascular targeted therapy.

Corresponding Author: Craig J. Galbán, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, University of Michigan, Radiology Department, BSRB, Room
D206, 109 Zina Pitcher Place, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2200, Phone: 734-764-8726, Fax: 734-615-1599, [email protected].
 Hoff et al. Page 2

Keywords
anti-angiogenic therapy; VEGF-Trap; glioma; DCE-MRI; DW-MRI; hemodynamics; diffusion;
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

preclinical

Introduction
In Phase III clinical testing, Stupp and colleagues demonstrated the efficacy of concurrent
temozolomide and radiation for treating newly diagnosed glioblastoma (1). With an
improvement of median survival from 12 months to 14 months, this treatment regimen has
become the standard of care. Although radiotherapy plus concomitant temozolomide
provides a clinically meaningful and significant survival benefit, the prognosis remains poor
for most patients with malignant gliomas. A number of molecularly targeted therapies are
being investigated for their potential to significantly improve the outcome for these patients
(2,3).

Anti-angiogenic and anti-vascular therapies are at the forefront of development as viable

treatment options for solid tumors (4,5). Recent clinical trials have shown that such agents,
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

e.g. Bevacizumab, provide improved efficacy for the treatment of recurrent brain tumors (6).
The requirement of malignant gliomas for a continual supply of nutrients and oxygen
provided by a vast network of newly forming intra-tumoralvessels, provides a sound
scientific rationale for targeting tumor angiogenesis. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
(VEGF) is one of the principal driving-forces for tumors to maintain their highly
proliferative potential. Elevated stimulation of angiogenesis through the production of
VEGF occurs predominantly in high-grade tumors (7). Recent studies have also shown a
significant reduction in both vascular permeability and neovascular formation in tumors
treated with VEGF inhibitors (8–14) and have shown tumor regression in some cases (15).
VEGF-Trap (Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, NY), currently in clinical trials,
is a decoy receptor protein effective in inhibiting VEGF signaling by binding with a high
affinity to all isoforms of VEGF-A and placental growth factor (9–11, 15–20). Preclinical
studies have shown that this agent when combined with standard treatments encompassing
chemotherapy as well as radiotherapy results in improved efficacy (21–23). Ultimately,
these treatments are aimed at indirectly inhibiting tumor growth and possibly inducing cell
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

death by limiting the availability of vital nutrients, which may improve the effectiveness of
conventional therapies (21,22).

Efforts are being made to evaluate imaging modalities to provide biomarkers of therapeutic-
induced alterations in the tumor vasculature. Monitoring of volumetric changes prior to and
following treatment initiation is the current standard of practice for assessing treatment
effects. Although effective in predicting clinical outcome to therapy, prognosis may take 2–
3 months following the start of treatment. Functional imaging complements traditional
anatomical imaging for improved diagnosis and response assessment. Hemodynamic
imaging techniques including dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) and dynamic susceptibility
contrast (DSC) MRI provide insights into tumor blood flow, blood volume and vessel
permeability, which have shown promise as sensitive biomarkers of treatment-induced

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 3

response (23). Most notably, DCE-MRI uses low contrast agent concentrations to produce
signal enhancement, which can be tracked and fit to a pharmacokinetic model to extract such
values as volume transfer constant (Ktrans), the flux rate constant between the extravascular
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

extracellular space and plasma (kep), and blood plasma volume fraction (vp) (24–26). DCE-
MRI has been used successfully to show decreased Ktrans in tumors very early after anti-
VEGF treatments (8,12,13). A decrease in Ktrans has been correlated with decreased growth
rates and decreased levels of free VEGF, indicating effective drug targeting. The apparent
diffusion coefficient (ADC), a quantitative measure of water mobility calculated from
diffusion weighted (DW) MRI, has shown promise as a sensitive and reliable biomarker for
cytotoxic therapies (27–30) that elicits a treatment-induced reduction in tumor cellularity
(31). Increased cell death has been correlated with an increase in ADC. In this study, DCE-
and DW-MRI were used to evaluate cellular and hemodynamic response of 9L rat brain
tumors to a VEGF-Trap antibody regimen.

Experimental
Animal Tumor Models
9L glioma cells were obtained from the Brain Tumor Research Center at the University of
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

California at San Francisco. The cells were grown as monolayers in 10 cm2 sterile plastic
flasks in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium with 10% fetal bovine serum, 100 IU/mL
penicillin and 100 mg/mL streptomycin, and 2 mM L-glutamine in a 37°C incubator. Prior
to implantation, cells were harvested by trypsinization, counted, and re-suspended in serum-
free medium for injection.

Tumor implantation was performed in17male Fischer-344 rats, 7 to 9 weeks old (Harlan
Sprague-Dawley, Indianapolis, IN) weighing between 125 and 150g. Briefly, animals were
anesthetized with a ketamine/xylazine mixture (87/13 mg/kg) administered intraperitoneally.
A small incision was made over the right hemisphere of the cranium. A 1-mm-diameter burr
hole was drilled through the skull using a high-speed surgical drill, and a 5-µL suspension
containing 2×105 9L cells was slowly injected at a depth of 3 mm. The burr hole was filled
with bone wax, and the surgical area was cleaned using 70% ethanol. Vetbond® (3M, St.
Paul, MN) was used to close the incision until healed.

Anti-Angiogenic Therapy
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Once tumor volumes reached 20–60 mm3 as determined using MRI, pre-treatment DCE and
DW-MR images were acquired for all animals. Animals were then separated into two groups
and were treated with either 25 mg/kg VEGF-Trap (n=10) or 12.5 mg/kg human Fc (vehicle
protein) (n=7). Treatments were administered subcutaneously twice weekly for two weeks
(Fig 1A).

MRI Scans
MRI scans were performed on a 9.4T, 16 cm horizontal bore Varian (Palo Alto, CA) Direct
Drive system with a quadrature rat head coil (Doty Scientific, Inc., Columbia, SC). During
all MRI procedures, animals were anesthetized with a 1–2% isofluorane/air mixture and
body temperature was maintained using a heated air system (Air-Therm, World Precision

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 4

Instruments, Sarasota, FL). MR images were acquired one day prior to treatment initiation
and 24 hours after each treatment (Fig 1A). Each MR experiment consisted of a fast spin-
echo-based T1-mapping sequence and DCE-and DW-MRI sequences with a total overall
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

acquisition time for each imaging session of approximately 45 minutes.

DW-MRI was performed using a spin-echo sequence with a navigator echo for motion
correction and gradient waveforms sensitive to isotropic diffusion (32). Images were
acquired using the following parameters: repetition time/echo time (TR/TE) = 4000/47 ms,
field of view (FOV) = 30 mm, matrix size = 128×64, slice thickness = 1 mm, slice number =
13, and b-values (diffusion weighting) of 120 and 1200 s/mm2.

DCE-MRI was performed using a T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence with the following
parameters: TR/TE = 85/3.2 ms, flip angle = 20°, FOV = 30 mm, matrix size = 128×64,
slice thickness = 1 mm, slice number = 13 and averages = 2. Image data sets were acquired
over a 15-minute period with a time resolution of 10.9 seconds. Following one minute of
scanning (~6 images), a bolus dose of gadolinium-DTPA (Magnevist, Bayer Healthcare
Pharmaceuticals, 0.15 mmol/kg, diluted 1:8.3 from 0.5 mmol/mL in 0.9% saline solution to
0.06 mmol/ml) was administered via tail-vein catheter at a rate of 4ml/min.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Image Reconstruction and Analysis

Tumors were manually contoured on the low-bimages from the DW-MRI sequence (b=120
s/mm2). These volumes of interest (VOI) were used to determine tumor volume and whole-
tumor mean values generated from quantification of DW-MRI and DCE-MRI data. Tumor
doubling times were calculated for each animal from exponential fits in Excel (Microsoft,
Redmond, WA) to each individual growth time course (33).

Apparent diffusion coefficients were calculated from the two diffusion weightings (b-
values) using the following equation:

where S1 and S2 are the signal intensities at b-values b1=120 s/mm2 and b2=1200 s/mm2,
respectively, and ADC1–2 is the apparent diffusion coefficient obtained using b1 and b2.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Tumor kinetic parameters were determined by a voxel-wise three-parameter fit on the

acquired time-resolved T1-weighted images using a tri-exponential arterial input function
(AIF) for blood plasma concentration (Cp) (12):

with A1 = 0.8259, A2 = 0.2230, A3 = 0.1565 mM, α1 = 1.220, α2 = 0.156, and α3 = 0.017

min−1. In this study, we followed the referenced contrast injection procedure used for this
AIF and assumed negligible differences in AIF over time as well as between animals. This
AIF was incorporated into a generalized kinetic model, equivalent to the efflux-corrected
Patlak model (34,35):

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 5
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

where Ktrans is the volume transfer constant, kep is the flux rate constant between extra
vascular extracellular space (EES) and plasma, and vpis the blood plasma volume fraction.
Fits were performed using a non-linear least-squares algorithm, and goodness-of-fit (GoF)
was monitored to confirm reliable results. GoF was defined as the normalized root mean
square error. Baseline signal intensity was calculated as a mean from the first ~6 images
before contrast injection excluding the first image due to non-steady-state signal. Tissue
concentrations of contrast agent were determined using the following equation:
1/T1=R*[Gd-DTPA]+1/T10. The relaxivity (R) was determined to be 5.5 ml/(mmol·s)by
acquiring T1 maps of 1cc syringes filled with saline (0.5M) and 13 Gd-DTPA concentrations
ranging from 0 to 10mM. The relaxation constant was assumed constant between animals
and time points. T10 is the T1 of the tumor tissue prior to injection of contrast agent. T10was
set to2.5s which was the average of T1 measurements obtained in each animal pre-therapy
using a fast spin-echo sequence with the following parameters: five TR values = 5, 1.5, 1,
0.8, and 0.6 seconds with 1, 1, 1, 2, and 4 averages, respectively; effective echo time (TE) =
39.68ms, echo train length (ETL) = 4, 2 dummy scans, matrix size = 128×256, field of view
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

(FOV) = 3cm, slice thickness = 1mm. Parameter maps of Ktrans, kep, vp, and GoF were
saved for the tumor VOI. Non-enhancing tumor tissue within the VOI was excluded from
the analysis due to the model’s inability to accurately describe the tissue’s kinetic properties.
Therefore, voxels with lower than 0.35 Go For 0.002 vpwere excluded in mean tumor
measurements. All reconstruction and analyses were performed using in-house programs
written in Matlab (The Math works, Natick, MA, USA). Parameter maps shown in Figure 2
were interpolated to 256×256 matrix size for display only.

Histology
Three representative animals were randomly selected from each group for tumor histology at
approximately 12 days post-treatment initiation (Fig 1A). 9L tumors from control and
treated animals were placed in buffered formalin overnight, dehydrated in 70% ethanol, and
subsequently embedded in paraffin. Tissue sections were prepared for histological
processing by routine techniques. Briefly, paraffin sections (5 µm thick) were cut on a micro
to me and heated for 20 min at 65°C. Slides were de-paraffinized in xylene with three
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

changes for 5 min each, then re-hydrated through an alcohol gradient for 2 min each (100%
alcohol, 95%alcohol, 70% alcohol). Some sections were first stained using a Gill’s 2×
hematoxylin solution followed by eosin while others were stained using the rabbit
polyclonal antibody to Von Willebrand Factor III (vWf) to highlight tissue vasculature, and
counterstained for the nuclei. For counting tumor vasculature representative fields were
obtained from the vWf-stained slides at random on each of three controls and three treated
tumor slices. Brown-stained areas greater than about 10 microns in diameter were
considered positive stains for the purpose of counting. Positive stains were counted using
ImageJ software (NIH) and used to quantify the difference between groups. On additional
sections, ApopTag or Ki-67 stains were performed using standard techniques to highlight
apoptotic or proliferating cells in the tumor, respectively.

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 6

Assessment of Free and Bound VEGF

Blood serum samples were collected through a tail vein catheter 24 hours after the final dose
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

of VEGF-Trap (n=7) or vehicle (n=3) (Fig 1A). Samples were stored short-term in a 3°C
refrigerator until being shipped on ice to Regeneron Pharmaceuticals for analysis.

Free VEGF trap was measured using a sandwich ELISA method in which hVEGF165
(Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc) diluted in 0.05M carbonate-bicarbonate buffer was used
as the capture protein at a concentration of 2µg/mL. The antigen was VEGF-Trap
(Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc) prepared in 1%BSA (KPLabs). Samples and standard
were incubated for two hours at room temperature and the excess was removed in
subsequent washes. The bound material was then reported with a mouse monoclonal
antibody (P10 G1F6, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc)then a secondary antibody was used.
Anti-mouse HRP (Jackson Laboratories) TMB substrate (Sigma, T8665) was used in the
color development, the plates were read at 450–570nm and results analyzed using the
SoftMax Pro 5.3 (Molecular Devices).

Bound endogenous rat VEGF was determined by an ELISA developed using the antibody to
Rat VEGF164 affinity purified polyclonal antibody (R&D Systems, Cat#AF564) as the
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

capture antibody. The antigen was prepared fresh with rVEGF bound to two molar
quantities of the VEGF-Trap and allowed to incubate at room temperature for 1 hour. This
complex was used to generate a standard curve. Samples were bound to the plate, and after
washing away the unbound rVEGF the unknown and controls were reported with an anti-
human Fc IgG (Sigma, A-0170).

The captured protein used in this assay was recombinant rat VEGF at 2µg/mL in 0.05M
carbonate-bicarbonate buffer. The antigen used was the mouse monoclonal antibody P10
(Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc), which was reported using a goat anti-mouse antibody
(Jackson Laboratories) and the samples were reported with an anti-rat antibody (Promega).
The samples were diluted 1:1000 to dilute out the serum effects of this assay.

Statistics
A paired Student’s t-test was used to compare the percent change of parameter values
between pre- and post-therapy time points for each animal. An unpaired Student’s t-test was
used to perform group comparisons in percent change of parameter values at each time point
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

and tumor doubling times. Results were declared statistically significant at the two-sided 5%
comparison-wise significance level (p < 0.05). Values are given as means ± standard error of
the mean (SEM).

Results
Therapeutic intervention was initiated at tumor volumes of 35.8 ± 5.0 mm3 and 36.4 ± 8.6
mm3 for VEGF-Trap therapy and vehicle treated control animals, respectively. Based on
ELISA analyses, VEGF-Trap proved effective at binding to virtually all endogenous VEGF
with no detectible VEGF and excess VEGF-Trap within the blood samples tested (Table 1).
Data for the control group were not presented due to the absence of VEGF-Trap and VEGF
levels being below quantification. Low levels of endogenous VEGF in non VEGF-Trap

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 7

treated animals have been reported in previous studies (19,36). As shown in Figure 1B,
inhibition of VEGF signaling within the tumor resulted in significantly larger percent
changes in control tumor volumes at 8 and 11 days post-treatment initiation than those
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

observed for VEGF-Trap treated tumors (p<0.05). Tumor volume doubling times were also
affected as evidenced by values of 3.76 (±0.325) and 5.32 (±0.319) days for vehicle and
VEGF-Trap groups, respectively (p = 0.004).

Representative vascular kinetic and diffusion parameter maps are shown as color overlays in
Figure 2. Partial-voluming effects are apparent in Figure 2, evidenced by reduced kinetic
measurements on the periphery of the color overlays. In vehicle-treated animals, negligible
changes in parameter values were observed one day post-treatment initiation compared to
the pre-treatment baseline (Figure 2A–D). In striking contrast, a single treatment with
VEGF-Trap resulted in a substantial decrease in all kinetic parameters (Figure 2E–H)
consistent with successful drug targeting. In general, all kinetic parameters showed spatial
variability within the 9L tumors at any given time point. Nevertheless, a spatially uniform
response to VEGF-Trap was observed throughout the tumor for all kinetic metrics.

The two kinetic transfer constants, Ktrans and kep, and blood volume fraction (vp) were
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

found to be dependent on VEGF-Trap treatment, again consistent with strong effectiveness

in target modulation by the drug (Figure 3). The reduction in Ktrans was observed following
the first day of treatment, with a significant difference in Ktrans (27±3.1%, p=0.002) when
compared to vehicle treated animals. Similar trends were observed for vpwith a change of
63±2.3% (p<0.001). Subsequent to the initial decrease, parameter values plateaued and
remained stable throughout the rest of the treatment cycle. A gradual reduction in
kepresulted in significant differences between the two treatment groups by day 3 post-
treatment initiation (Figure 3). The maximum change in kep (34.6±5.8%, p=0.007) was
observed at day 11.

In line with the kinetic parameters, ADC values declined following VEGF-Trap treatment
(Figure 3). Although not as pronounced as the changes in kinetic metrics, a significant
reduction in the change in ADC values was observed in VEGF-Trap treated tumors when
compared to controls for all time points after treatment. ADC values did not reach a
minimum value until day 8 with a percent decrease of 17.8±3.2% (p=0.027). Although ADC
values for VEGF-Trap animals increased slightly from day 8 to 11, this change was not
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

significant.

Histological sections of representative animals from control (n = 3) and treated (n = 3)

groups taken 24 hours after the last treatment (11 days post-initial-treatment) were subjected
to H&E, Ki-67, Von Willebrand / Factor VIII (vWF) and ApopTag staining. As observed in
Figure 4, a 14% reduction in Ki-67 staining was observed for VEGF-Trap treated tumors.
This difference, although consistent with reduced proliferative potential, was not significant
(p=0.25). In contrast, vWF stained sections revealed that vessel numbers were significantly
lower in VEGF-Trap treated versus vehicle treated animals (p=0.011, Figure 5).
Interestingly, ApopTag staining revealed that apoptosis appeared to be localized within the
endothelial cells of the vasculature, as shown by heavily stained regions in Figure 6. In
contrast, tumor tissue did not show significant staining, and was therefore not quantified and

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 8

compared between groups. There sults observed in Fig. 6 are consistent with the loss in
vessel number (Fig. 5) as well the reduction in MRI-determined kinetic measures (Fig. 3).
However, loss of vasculature due to VEGF inhibition did not result in a reduction in tumor
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

cellularity as depicted by visual inspection of tumor nuclear staining as well as lack of

significant ApopTag staining in the tumor (Figure 6).

Discussion
The development of molecular targeted cancer therapies represents an area of intense
investigation. Consequently, a number of clinical trials are underway encompassing a
diverse array of targets and agents. However, the primary endpoint used for assessing
therapeutic response continues to be gross tumor volumetric change. This endpoint may not
be the best choice for measuring the effectiveness of those molecularly targeted agents that
do not uniformly elicit a significant reduction in tumor volume (37–39). Therefore, there is
an impetus to explore non-invasive quantitative imaging modalities, such as MRI and
positron emission tomography, for their potential to provide non-invasive biomarkers of
treatment response. In fact, DCE-MRI and DW-MRI metrics have shown significant
promise as biomarkers of early cancer therapeutic response (40,41). The goal of this study
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

was to evaluate DCE-MRI and DW-MRI for their ability to detect and quantify the
therapeutic response of glioma-bearing animals treated with VEGF-Trap.

VEGF-Trapis extremely effective in binding VEGF and PGF (15,18). The extent of VEGF-
Trap binding to endogenous VEGF was virtually complete following two weeks of
treatment (Table 1). This strong binding affinity to endogenous VEGF was clearly evident
early in our MRI measurements. Vascular kinetic rates and blood plasma volume fraction as
measured by DCE-MRI were highly sensitive to VEGF-Trap treatment. Subsequent to the
first treatment, both Ktrans and vp diminished by approximately 30% and 60%, respectively,
suggesting an extremely rapid response of tumor vasculature to VEGF-Trap. These vascular
changes are reflected in our vWF and ApopTag histological stains (Figs 5 and 6), which
show a lower number of vWF-positive-stained blood vessels and greater ApopTag staining
of vessel endothelial cells in treated animals. These trends agree with those observed in both
preclinical and clinical investigations of tumor response to anti-angiogenic and anti-vascular
agents as measured by DCE-MRI (8,41).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

An increase in tumor water mobility as determined by ADC measurements has been

associated with a reduction of tumor cellularity as a consequence of massive cell kill (27).
Treatment by VEGF-Trap elicited no such response in ADC values suggesting no
substantial decrease in tumor cellularity due to cell death. Staining by H&E and ApopTag
corroborated what was observed by ADC. In fact, ADC values decreased significantly
following VEGF-Trap treatment with a significant drop observed as early as one day post-
treatment. Reiger and colleagues monitored changes in DSC-MRI and DW-MRI quantitative
metrics during Bevacizumab treatment in glioma patients, observing a similartrend in ADC
(41). In their clinical study, a drop in tumor blood volume as well as water mobility within
the tumor was reported by 8 weeks post-treatment initiation. The reduction of ADC was
attributed to pathological changes in the tumor, which may result in a decrease in
extracellular water content and narrowing of extracellular space due to treatment-induced

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 9

hypoxia. This would result in an increase in tumor cellularity per unit volume, which is
inversely related to ADC values.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Numerous models for assessing pharmacokinetic qualities in vivo with varying assumptions
have been proposed. In this study we used an established model that assumes the fast-
exchange limit to analyze our DCE-MRI data. This technique has been well-documented but
recent studies have provided more robust models such as the shutter-speed approach
developed by Yankeelov et al. in 2003 (34). This model has shown greater accuracy in
quantifying permeability kinetics but has only recently seen more extensive application.
Although more accurate, the sensitivity of the newer models to therapeutic response have
yet to be tested against established pharmacokinetic models. Such an analysis is beyond the
scope of this study.

The impairment of VEGF signaling activity in the9L glioma model resulted in apoptosis of
the vascular endothelial cell population, which likely contributed to the overall reduction in
tumor vessel numbers. The observed decrease in tumor vessel density is also in agreement
with previously reported results of the use of anti-vascular agents on gliomas (42–45).
However, in these previous studies, apoptosis of endothelial cells was not reported following
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

VEGF-Trap treatment. Erber and colleagues showed that targeting VEGFR-2 and PDGFR-β
signaling using the tyrosine kinase inhibitor SU6668 in a C6 rat tumor model resulted in
endothelial cell apoptosis and reduced tumor growth rate (46). This is in agreement with our
results, which show a similar reduced growth rate as reflected in our volume measurements
as well as Ki-67 staining (Fig 1B and 4) that show a slightly diminished fraction of
proliferating cells.

In conclusion, this study supports the utility of DCE and DW-MRI in monitoring the
effectiveness of angiogenesis-targeted cancer therapy in this case response to VEGF-Trap.
The ability to track therapeutic effectiveness with non-invasive imaging biomarkers is
especially important for gliomas since biopsies during the course of treatment are not an
option (unlike most other histotypes that are amenable to pharmacodynamic biomarkers).
The use of these MRI modalities is especially compelling as angiogenesis targets are
prominently being tested in the glioma population. Besides Aflibercept (VEGF-Trap), there
are a number of other targeted agents in current clinical trials for treating glioma patients,
e.g. Zactima (vandetanib, ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00272350), cediranib (AZD2171)
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

(35), ramucirumab (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00895180), BIBF1120 (ClinicalTrials.gov

ID: NCT01380782), as well as numerous be vacizumab (Avastin; ClinicalTrials.gov ID:
NCT00782756) (47–49) combination trials. Studies are underway to extend this proof-of-
principle to the study of the broader angiogenesis portfolio to build a compelling case for
clinical trial incorporation. Overall, MRI biomarkers have significant potential for not only
monitoring treatment effects but also for optimization of drug dose and schedules.

Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health Research Grants P01CA85878 and P50CA93990.
VEGF-Trap was kindly provided by Regeneron, Inc.

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 10

Abbreviations

VEGF-A Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

PGF Placental Growth Factor

DCE-MRI dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging
DSC dynamic susceptibility contrast
DW-MRI diffusion weighted MRI

References
1. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, Belanger K, Brandes
AA, Marosi C, Bogdahn U, Curschmann J, Janzer RC, Ludwin SK, Gorlia T, Allgeier A, Lacombe
D, Cairncross JG, Eisenhauer E, Mirimanoff RO. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant
temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352(10):987–996. [PubMed: 15758009]
2. Thaker NG, Pollack IF. Molecularly targeted therapies for malignant glioma: rationale for
combinatorial strategies. Expert Rev Neurother. 2009; 9(12):1815–1836. [PubMed: 19951140]
3. Yamanaka R, Saya H. Molecularly targeted therapies for glioma. Ann Neurol. 2009; 66(6):717–729.
[PubMed: 20035507]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

4. Ferrara N, Kerbel RS. Angiogenesis as a therapeutic target. Nature. 2005; 438(7070):967–974.

[PubMed: 16355214]
5. Gasparini G, Longo R, Toi M, Ferrara N. Angiogenic inhibitors: a new therapeutic strategy in
oncology. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2005; 2(11):562–577. [PubMed: 16270097]
6. Raizer JJ, Grimm S, Chamberlain MC, Nicholas MK, Chandler JP, Muro K, Dubner S, Rademaker
AW, Renfrow J, Bredel M. A phase 2 trial of single-agent bevacizumab given in an every-3-week
schedule for patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas. Cancer. 2010; 116(22):5297–5305.
[PubMed: 20665891]
7. Schmidt NO, Westphal M, Hagel C, Ergun S, Stavrou D, Rosen EM, Lamszus K. Levels of vascular
endothelial growth factor, hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor and basic fibroblast growth factor
in human gliomas and their relation to angiogenesis. Int J Cancer. 1999; 84(1):10–18. [PubMed:
9988225]
8. Bauerle T, Bartling S, Berger M, Schmitt-Graff A, Hilbig H, Kauczor HU, Delorme S, Kiessling F.
Imaging anti-angiogenic treatment response with DCE-VCT, DCE-MRI and DWI in an animal
model of breast cancer bone metastasis. European journal of radiology. 2008
9. Byrne AT, Ross L, Holash J, Nakanishi M, Hu L, Hofmann JI, Yancopoulos GD, Jaffe RB.
Vascular endothelial growth factor-trap decreases tumor burden, inhibits as cites, and causes
dramatic vascular remodeling in an ovarian cancer model. Clin Cancer Res. 2003; 9(15):5721–
5728. [PubMed: 14654557]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

10. Inai T, Mancuso M, Hashizume H, Baffert F, Haskell A, Baluk P, Hu-Lowe DD, Shalinsky DR,
Thurston G, Yancopoulos GD, McDonald DM. Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor
(VEGF) signaling in cancer causes loss of endothelial fenestrations, regression of tumor vessels,
and appearance of basement membrane ghosts. The American journal of pathology. 2004; 165(1):
35–52. [PubMed: 15215160]
11. Kadenhe-Chiweshe A, Papa J, McCrudden KW, Frischer J, Bae JO, Huang J, Fisher J, Lefkowitch
JH, Feirt N, Rudge J, Holash J, Yancopoulos GD, Kandel JJ, Yamashiro DJ. Sustained VEGF
blockade results in micro environmental sequestration of VEGF by tumors and persistent VEGF
receptor-2 activation. Mol Cancer Res. 2008; 6(1):1–9. [PubMed: 18234958]
12. Maxwell RJ, Wilson J, Prise VE, Vojnovic B, Rustin GJ, Lodge MA, Tozer GM. Evaluation of the
anti-vascular effects of combretastatin in rodent tumours by dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.
NMR Biomed. 2002; 15(2):89–98. [PubMed: 11870904]
13. Raatschen HJ, Simon GH, Fu Y, Sennino B, Shames DM, Wendland MF, McDonald DM, Brasch
RC. Vascular permeability during anti angiogenesis treatment: MR imaging assay results as

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 11

biomarker for subsequent tumor growth in rats. Radiology. 2008; 247(2):391–399. [PubMed:
18372448]
14. Riely GJ, Miller VA. Vascular endothelial growth factor trap in non small cell lung cancer. Clin
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Cancer Res. 2007; 13(15 Pt 2):s4623–s4627. [PubMed: 17671153]

15. Huang J, Frischer JS, Serur A, Kadenhe A, Yokoi A, McCrudden KW, New T, O'Toole K, Zabski
S, Rudge JS, Holash J, Yancopoulos GD, Yamashiro DJ, Kandel JJ. Regression of established
tumors and metastases by potent vascular endothelial growth factor blockade. Proc Natl Acad Sci
U S A. 2003; 100(13):7785–7790. [PubMed: 12805568]
16. Baffert F, Le T, Sennino B, Thurston G, Kuo CJ, Hu-Lowe D, McDonald DM. Cellular changes in
normal blood capillaries undergoing regression after inhibition of VEGF signaling. American
journal of physiology. 2006; 290(2):H547–H559. [PubMed: 16172161]
17. Fricke I, Mirza N, Dupont J, Lockhart C, Jackson A, Lee JH, Sosman JA, Gabrilovich DI. Vascular
endothelial growth factor-trap overcomes defects in dendritic cell differentiation but does not
improve antigen-specific immune responses. Clin Cancer Res. 2007; 13(16):4840–4848. [PubMed:
17699863]
18. Holash J, Davis S, Papadopoulos N, Croll SD, Ho L, Russell M, Boland P, Leidich R, Hylton D,
Burova E, Ioffe E, Huang T, Radziejewski C, Bailey K, Fandl JP, Daly T, Wiegand SJ,
Yancopoulos GD, Rudge JS. VEGF-Trap: a VEGF blocker with potent antitumor effects. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99(17):11393–11398. [PubMed: 12177445]
19. Rudge JS, Holash J, Hylton D, Russell M, Jiang S, Leidich R, Papadopoulos N, Pyles EA, Torri A,
Wiegand SJ, Thurston G, Stahl N, Yancopoulos GD. Inaugural Article: VEGF Trap complex
formation measures production rates of VEGF, providing a biomarker for predicting efficacious
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

angiogenic blockade. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(47):18363–18370. [PubMed:

18000042]
20. Kim ES, Serur A, Huang J, Manley CA, McCrudden KW, Frischer JS, Soffer SZ, Ring L, New T,
Zabski S, Rudge JS, Holash J, Yancopoulos GD, Kandel JJ, Yamashiro DJ. Potent VEGF
blockade causes regression of coopted vessels in a model of neuroblastoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U
S A. 2002; 99(17):11399–11404. [PubMed: 12177446]
21. Bergers G, Benjamin LE. Tumorigenesis and the angiogenic switch. Nature reviews. 2003; 3(6):
401–410.
22. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell. 2000; 100(1):57–70. [PubMed:
10647931]
23. Yankeelov TE, Gore JC. Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Oncology:
Theory, Data Acquisition, Analysis, and Examples. Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2009; 3(2):91–107.
[PubMed: 19829742]
24. Kety SS. The theory and applications of the exchange of inert gas at the lungs and tissues.
Pharmacological reviews. 1951; 3(1):1–41. [PubMed: 14833874]
25. Kovar DA, Lewis M, Karczmar GS. A new method for imaging perfusion and contrast extraction
fraction: input functions derived from reference tissues. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998; 8(5):1126–
1134. [PubMed: 9786152]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

26. Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging.
1997; 7(1):91–101. [PubMed: 9039598]
27. Chenevert TL, Stegman LD, Taylor JM, Robertson PL, Greenberg HS, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD.
Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: an early surrogate marker of therapeutic efficacy in brain
tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92(24):2029–2036. [PubMed: 11121466]
28. Chenevert TL, Sundgren PC, Ross BD. Diffusion imaging: insight to cell status and
cytoarchitecture. Neuroimaging clinics of North America. 2006; 16(4):619–632. viii–ix. [PubMed:
17148023]
29. Galban S, Brisset JC, Rehemtulla A, Chenevert TL, Ross BD, Galban CJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI
for assessment of early cancer treatment response. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2010; 11(6):701–708.
[PubMed: 20504274]
30. Hamstra DA, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for
treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(26):4104–4109. [PubMed: 17827460]

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 12

31. Ellingson BM, Malkin MG, Rand SD, Connelly JM, Quinsey C, LaViolette PS, Bedekar DP,
Schmainda KM. Validation of functional diffusion maps (fDMs) as a biomarker for human glioma
cellularity. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010; 31(3):538–548. [PubMed: 20187195]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

32. Moffat BA, Hall DE, Stojanovska J, McConville PJ, Moody JB, Chenevert TL, Rehemtulla A,
Ross BD. Diffusion imaging for evaluation of tumor therapies in preclinical animal models.
Magma (New York, NY. 2004; 17(3–6):249–259.
33. Ross BD, Zhao YJ, Neal ER, Stegman LD, Ercolani M, Ben-Yoseph O, Chenevert TL.
Contributions of cell kill and post treatment tumor growth rates to the repopulation of intracerebral
9L tumors after chemotherapy: an MRI study. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95(12):7012–
7017. [PubMed: 9618530]
34. Yankeelov TE, Rooney WD, Li X, Springer CS Jr. Variation of the relaxographic "shutter-speed"
for transcytolemmal water exchange affects the CR bolus-tracking curve shape. Magn Reson Med.
2003; 50(6):1151–1169. [PubMed: 14648563]
35. Batchelor TT, Sorensen AG, di Tomaso E, Zhang WT, Duda DG, Cohen KS, Kozak KR, Cahill
DP, Chen PJ, Zhu M, Ancukiewicz M, Mrugala MM, Plotkin S, Drappatz J, Louis DN, Ivy P,
Scadden DT, Benner T, Loeffler JS, Wen PY, Jain RK. AZD2171, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine
kinase inhibitor, normalizes tumor vasculature and alleviates edema in glioblastoma patients.
Cancer Cell. 2007; 11(1):83–95. [PubMed: 17222792]
36. Bocci G, Man S, Green SK, Francia G, Ebos JM, du Manoir JM, Weinerman A, Emmenegger U,
Ma L, Thorpe P, Davidoff A, Huber J, Hicklin DJ, Kerbel RS. Increased plasma vascular
endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as a surrogate marker for optimal therapeutic dosing of VEGF
receptor-2 monoclonal antibodies. Cancer Res. 2004; 64(18):6616–6625. [PubMed: 15374976]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

37. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, de Castro Faria S, Tamm EP, Benjamin RS, Johnson MM, Macapinlac
HA, Podoloff DA. CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib
mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. AJR Am J
Roentgenol. 2004; 183(6):1619–1628. [PubMed: 15547201]
38. Jaffe CC. Measures of response: RECIST, WHO, new alternatives. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24(20):
3245–3251. [PubMed: 16829648]
39. Strumberg D, Richly H, Hilger RA, Schleucher N, Korfee S, Tewes M, Faghih M, Brendel E,
Voliotis D, Haase CG, Schwartz B, Awada A, Voigtmann R, Scheulen ME, Seeber S. Phase I
clinical and pharmacokinetic study of the Novel Raf kinase and vascular endothelial growth factor
receptor inhibitor BAY 43-9006 in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors. J Clin Oncol.
2005; 23(5):965–972. [PubMed: 15613696]
40. Hamstra DA, Galban CJ, Meyer CR, Johnson TD, Sundgren PC, Tsien C, Lawrence TS, Junck L,
Ross DJ, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD, Chenevert TL. Functional diffusion map as an early imaging
biomarker for high-grade glioma: correlation with conventional radiologic response and overall
survival. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(20):3387–3394. [PubMed: 18541899]
41. Sorensen AG, Batchelor TT, Zhang WT, Chen PJ, Yeo P, Wang M, Jennings D, Wen PY,
Lahdenranta J, Ancukiewicz M, di Tomaso E, Duda DG, Jain RK. A "vascular normalization
index" as potential mechanistic biomarker to predict survival after a single dose of cediranib in
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

recurrent glioblastoma patients. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(13):5296–5300. [PubMed: 19549889]

42. Wachsberger PR, Burd R, Cardi C, Thakur M, Daskalakis C, Holash J, Yancopoulos GD, Dicker
AP. VEGF trap in combination with radiotherapy improves tumor control in u87 glioblastoma.
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. 2007; 67(5):1526–1537.
43. Gomez-Manzano C, Holash J, Fueyo J, Xu J, Conrad CA, Aldape KD, de Groot JF, Bekele BN,
Yung WK. VEGF Trap induces antiglioma effect at different stages of disease. Neuro-oncology.
2008; 10(6):940–945. [PubMed: 18708344]
44. Kunkel P, Ulbricht U, Bohlen P, Brockmann MA, Fillbrandt R, Stavrou D, Westphal M, Lamszus
K. Inhibition of glioma angiogenesis and growth in vivo by systemic treatment with a monoclonal
antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. Cancer Res. 2001; 61(18):6624–
6628. [PubMed: 11559524]
45. Rubenstein JL, Kim J, Ozawa T, Zhang M, Westphal M, Deen DF, Shuman MA. Anti-VEGF
antibody treatment of glioblastoma prolongs survival but results in increased vascular cooption.
Neoplasia. 2000; 2(4):306–314. [PubMed: 11005565]

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 13

46. Erber R, Thurnher A, Katsen AD, Groth G, Kerger H, Hammes HP, Menger MD, Ullrich A,
Vajkoczy P. Combined inhibition of VEGF and PDGF signaling enforces tumor vessel regression
by interfering with pericyte-mediated endothelial cell survival mechanisms. FASEB J. 2004;
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

18(2):338–340. [PubMed: 14657001]

47. Drappatz J, Lee EQ, Hammond S, Grimm SA, Norden AD, Beroukhim R, Gerard M, Schiff D, Chi
AS, Batchelor TT, Doherty LM, Ciampa AS, Lafrankie DC, Ruland S, Snodgrass SM, Raizer JJ,
Wen PY. Phase I study of panobinostat in combination with bevacizumab for recurrent high-grade
glioma. J Neurooncol. 2011
48. Vredenburgh JJ, Desjardins A, Reardon DA, Peters KB, Herndon JE 2nd, Marcello J, Kirkpatrick
JP, Sampson JH, Bailey L, Threatt S, Friedman AH, Bigner DD, Friedman HS. The addition of
bevacizumab to standard radiation therapy and temozolomide followed by bevacizumab,
temozolomide, and irinotecan for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2011; 17(12):
4119–4124. [PubMed: 21531816]
49. Zhang W, Fulci G, Buhrman JS, Stemmer-Rachamimov AO, Chen JW, Wojtkiewicz GR,
Weissleder R, Rabkin SD, Martuza RL. Bevacizumab With Angiostatin-armed oHSV Increases
Antiangiogenesis and Decreases Bevacizumab-induced Invasion in U87 Glioma. Mol Ther. 2011
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 14
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Diagrammatic presentation of study time points (A). Treatments are highlighted in green,
MRI (both DCE and DWI) are highlighted blue, MRI and blood serum collection were
performed on day 11 (red), and histological samples were taken at approximately day 12
(yellow). Plot showing relative change in tumor volume in control (diamond, solid line) and
treated (square, dotted line) groups over the study time period (B). Treated animals generally
showed a significant slowing of tumor growth compared to controls. Doubling times in the
control and treated groups were 3.76 (±0.325) and 5.32 (±0.319) days, respectively (p =

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 15

0.004). Significance in relative change in volume between groups occurred at days 8 and 11
post-therapy. Data are presented as means ± SEM. Significance was assessed at p<0.05 and
indicated by *.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 16
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 2.
T2-weighted images with color overlays of parametric maps are shown for a representative
animal in the control group (A – D) and the VEGF-Trap-treated group (E – H) prior-to (day
−1, left image) and following (day 1, right image) the initial treatment. The initial drop for
the VEGF-Trap-treated group in Ktrans (−27%), kep (−12%), and vp (−64%) can clearly be
seen here (E – G). ADC shows a small, but significant drop (−7%) by the first day post-
therapy (H). Tumor heterogeneity was observed at individual time points. Nevertheless
response to VEGF-Trap did not vary spatially throughout the tumor.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 17
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 3.
Plots of relative change in kinetic and diffusion parameters for the treated group (diamond,
dotted line) shown together with the control (square, solid line). A significant decrease in
Ktrans and vpoccurred on the first day post-therapy and persisted throughout the study.
Tumor ADC steadily decreased in VEGF-Trap treated tumors up to 15% from the initial
value. In contrast, kep continued to decrease throughout the study. Data are presented as
means ± SEM. Significance was assessed at p<0.05 and indicated by * under their respective
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

p-values. Baseline parameter values for vehicle and VEGF-Trap treated animals are for
Ktrans, 2.4±0.1×10−4s−1 and 2.3±0.1×10−4s−1 (p=0.7), respectively, vp, 7.6±1.3×10−3 and
8.1±0.5×10−3 (p=0.7), respectively, kep, 1.9±0.1×10−3 and 1.9±0.1×10−3 (p=0.8),
respectively, and ADC, 1.1±0.02×10−3mm2/s and 1.0±0.02×10−3mm2/s (p=0.1),
respectively.

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 18
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 4.
The proliferative potential of tumors following treatment with vehicle (A) or VEGF-Trap
(B) was determined by Ki-67 staining of samples taken on day 12. Positively identified
nuclei were counted in randomly selected fields. Representative micrographs for each group
are shown. The quantification of the nuclei for each treatment group in 3–6 randomly
selected fields per subject (C). Insignificant differences in Ki-67 positive nuclei were
observed between treatment groups (p=0.25). Bar plots are presented as the mean number of
nuclei and SEM. Images were acquired at 40× magnification.

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 19
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 5.
Tumor vasculature following treatment with vehicle (A) or VEGF-Trap (B) was determined
by Von Willebrand factor staining of samples taken on day 12. Positively stained vessels
were counted in randomly selected fields. Representative micrographs for each group are
shown. The quantification of the vessels for each treatment group in 2–3 randomly selected
fields per subject (C). A significant decrease in the number of vessels occurred in VEGF-
Trap treated animals (p=0.011). Bar plots are presented as the mean number of nuclei and
SEM. Images were acquired at 10× magnification.

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 20
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 6.
Apoptosis and tumor cellularity following treatment with vehicle (A) or VEGF-Trap (B)
was determined by ApopTag staining of samples taken on day 12, superimposed on H&E.
Extent of apoptosis and tumor cellularity were assessed by visual inspection. Representative
micrographs for each group are shown. Treatment by VEGF-Trap resulted in massive
apoptotic events in the tumor vasculature but negligible change in tumor cellularity when
compared to vehicle treated tumors. Healthy and apoptotic vessels are indicated by yellow
and red arrows, respectively. A closer representative VEGF-Trap treated sample is shown in

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 21

C, highlighting the border between tumor epithelial and vessel endothelial cells. Images
were acquired at 20× (A&B) or 40× (C) magnification.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.

 Hoff et al. Page 22

Table 1

ELISA analysis of endogenous VEGF

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Free VEGF-Trap Bound VEGF Free Rat VEGF

VEGF-Trap 98660 ± 11529 1540.45 ± 149.30 0.00 ± 0.00

BLQ 359 309 783

Note: ELISA analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of VEGF-Trap in attenuating the signaling of free rat VEGF. Blood serum levels
were measured on day 11, after the last treatment. Free VEGF-Trap refers to unbound VEGF-Trap, Bound VEGF refers to VEGF/VEGF-Trap
complex, Free Rat VEGF refers to unbound endogenous VEGF, and BLQ indicates Below Level of Quantification. Quantities are shown as group
mean ± standard error (n=7). All units are ng/mL. VEGF levels for control animals were immeasurable and are not shown.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NMR Biomed. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 27.