doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.107.148932
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.
Review |
Endothelial Precursor Cell Migration During Vasculogenesis
From the Department of Molecular and Cellular Sport Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular Research and Sport Medicine, German Sport University Cologne, Germany.
Correspondence to Prof Dr Wilhelm Bloch, Department of Molecular and Cellular Sport Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular Research and Sport Medicine, German Sport University Cologne, Carl-Diem-Weg 6, D-50933 Cologne, Germany. E-mail w.bloch{at}dshs-koeln.de
This Review is part of a thematic series on Migration of Vascular Cells, which includes the following articles:
Mechanisms of Vascular Smooth Muscle Cell Migration
Endothelial Cell Migration During Angiogenesis
Endothelial Precursor Cell Migration During Vasculogenesis
Leukocyte Migration in the Vascular Wall
Molecular Mechanisms of Endothelial Cell Migration
Kathy K. Griendling Editor
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
Migration of endothelial precursor cells (so-called "angioblasts" in embryos and "endothelial progenitor cells" in adults) during vasculogenesis is a requirement for the formation of a primary vascular plexus. The migration is initiated by the change of endothelial precursors to their migratory phenotype. The endothelial precursor cells are then guided to the position where the primary vascular plexus is formed. Migration is stopped by the reversion of the cells to their nonmigratory phenotype. A combination of regulatory mechanisms and factors controls this process. These include gradients of soluble factors, extracellular matrix–cell interaction and cell–cell interaction. In this review, we give an overview of the regulation of angioblast migration during embryonic vasculogenesis and its relationship to the migration of endothelial progenitors during postnatal vascular development.
Key Words: angioblasts • endothelial progenitors • extracellular matrix • growth factors
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
Embryonic and adult growth processes are a prerequisite for the formation of a functional vascular system, which is essential for the proper development of vertebrate embryos, as well as for growth, regeneration, and survival of adults.1 The migration of endothelial precursors is one of the key mechanisms in the process of vascular development. When no preexisting vessels exist, they are derived from endothelial precursors.2 The migration of endothelial precursor cells is regulated by various mechanisms and signals that initiate, guide, and stop the migration of endothelial precursors during formation of a vascular network. The vascular system originates from 2 fundamental processes: vasculogenesis and angiogenesis.3–5 Vasculogenesis is defined as the differentiation of endothelial precursor cells, also known as angioblasts, into endothelial cells (ECs) in combination with the formation of a primitive vascular network. Angiogenesis is defined as the growth of new capillaries from preexisting blood vessels.3 It has long been accepted that vasculogenesis is limited to early embryogenesis and was believed not to occur in adults, whereas angiogenesis occurs in both the developing embryo and postnatal life. However, recent findings reveal that both processes are observed during embryonic and adult growth processes.3,6 ECs responsible for the formation of primitive vascular structures differentiate from angioblasts in embryos and from endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), mesoangioblasts, and multipotent adult progenitor cells in adult bone marrow (BM).7
The essential steps in vasculogenesis during embryo development are the establishment of the angioblasts from mesoderm, assembly of angioblasts into vascular structures, the formation of vascular lumens, and the organization of continuous vascular networks.8,9 Vasculogenesis occurs at 2 distinct embryonic locations during development: the extraembryonic and the intraembryonic tissue. In contrast to earlier reports, where it was assumed that the first blood vessels develop from the yolk sac (extraembryonic tissues), histological analysis indicates that isolated foci of ECs can also be observed in the embryo proper. This suggests that blood vessels arise from an intraembryonic source rather than via colonization.10 The vascular precursor cells that contribute to the primary vascular plexus are initially scattered throughout the mesoderm and assemble either at the location where they arise or, following migration, at the location of the developing vessel. Therefore, the ability of ECs or their precursors or both to migrate is critical for the formation of the primary blood vessels in the embryo.11 The mechanisms characterizing vasculogenesis are dynamic processes modulated by the cell–extracellular matrix (ECM) and cell–cell interactions in the presence of growth factors and morphogens.2,9,12 These include the differentiation of mesodermal cells into angioblasts, the migration of the angioblasts, and the subsequent formation of blood islands and the primitive intraembryonic vascular network. During embryonic development, cell position and cell migration are of major importance and are controlled by certain signaling centers.13 Recent findings of postnatal vascular development from EPCs also raise the question of how EPC migration is regulated in adults.
The main focus of this review is the regulation of angioblast migration during embryonic vasculogenesis. Additionally, we look at the relationship of EPC migration in vitro and during postnatal vascular development. Given that there is no sharp borderline between vasculogenesis and angiogenesis in relation to migration of ECs, consideration is given where knowledge from angiogenesis can help explain vasculogenic processes.
|
Embryonic Angioblasts and EPCs |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
During early development, endothelial precursor cells (angioblasts) migrate to the midline of the embryo in response to an unidentified attractive signal. The migrating angioblasts are in close contact with the endoderm, indicating that the endoderm is required for vascular development.14 In fact, Jin et al showed that the endoderm is temporarily required for initial angioblast migration.1 In wild-type zebrafish, angioblasts migrate as single cells. However, in an endodermless mutant, angioblasts migrate as groups and maintain their cell–cell junctions throughout this process. It is possible that the endoderm prevents cell–cell contact between migrating angioblasts and thereby promotes their migration as individual cells.1 This migration of angioblasts is not only fundamental for vascular development but also essential for the generation of ECs during embryonic development.
But how should embryonic ECs be defined? To answer this question, we have to look at their functionality. One of the important functions of the endothelium, which is a layer of thin specialized epithelium, is to line the interior surface of blood vessels where it forms an interface between circulating blood in the lumen and the rest of the vessel wall. ECs seal the interior surface of vessels. The precondition for sealing the vessels is the development of close cell–cell contacts at the endothelial junctions. The main elements of the endothelial junctions are platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM) (CD31) and vascular endothelial (VE)-cadherin.15 This step of forming endothelial junctions can be defined as the changeover of angioblasts into ECs (Figure 1A) and can also be defined as the changeover between vasculogenesis and angiogenesis (Figure 2).
|
|
The identification of EPCs derived from BM in adults was an outstanding event in the field of vascular biology.16,17 In circulation, the cell population with the capacity of differentiation into EPCs is considered to be included in the cell population expressing CD133 and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)2 markers in the subset of CD34-positive cells.18
Based on the available data concerning the behavior of migration of different ECs, we hypothesize that immature ECs, such as EPCs or angioblasts, have the highest migratory capability. With an increase in maturation, the migratory capacity of ECs decreases until finally only a low capability for migration remains (Figure 1B).
|
Growth Factors, Cytokines, Chemoattractants, and Morphogens Involved in Endothelial Cell and Progenitor Migration |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
During embryogenesis, cells derived from newly formed lateral and posterior mesoderm migrate toward their intraembryonic and extraembryonic locations and differentiate into hematopoietic cells and ECs, which then build primitive vascular networks by vasculogenesis.19,20 At later stages of embryonic development, angioblasts migrate from their mesenchymal or epithelial sources in the developing organs, such as lungs, eyes, and heart, and assemble to form endothelial tubes.2,21–23 Growth factors and other regulatory proteins are necessary for the guidance of migrating cells.11,24–27
VEGF/VEGFR Axis
As described for migration during angiogenesis, the VEGF signaling pathway plays a central role in the migration of angioblasts during vasculogenesis.22,24 The first evidence for this was derived from expression analysis of VEGF and VEGFR (for review, see Tallquist et al28). The importance of VEGF signaling was further supported by the fact that heterozygote deletion of VEGF-A, VEGFR1, and VEGFR2 in null mutant mice led to a strong alteration or nearly complete lack of blood vessels in the mouse embryo.29–32 More specific analyses of the role of VEGF signaling during angioblast migration were performed on different species using experimental approaches. These studies showed that angioblast migration is regulated by VEGF signaling in early embryonic vasculogenesis and at later stages in the vasculogenesis of embryonic organs.1,11,22,24 In Xenopus, migration of VEGFR2-positive vascular precursor cells was shown from the lateral plate mesoderm, below the somites and above the underlying endoderm, toward the midline of the embryo, where they organized into the dorsal aorta. The migration seems to be guided by the soluble form of VEGF expressed in the hypochord, the region where the dorsal aorta is developed. The role of VEGF for migration of the VEGFR2-positive vascular precursor cells was further demonstrated by ectopic expression of VEGF, which led to a several-hundred-micrometer migration of the angioblasts toward the ectopic source of VEGF.11 Supporting this finding, we showed that in a PECAM-1–induced green fluorescent protein (GFP)-reporter embryonic stem cell (ESC) model, VEGF induces an increased motility of angioblasts in the embryoid body (EB).33 More recently, the important role of VEGF-A for guidance and subsequent migration of VEGFR-positive mesodermal cells during early embryogenesis was shown in whole-embryo cultures of genetically modified mice. Expression of VEGF-A in the anterior portion leads to a migration of VEGFR-positive cells from the posterior portion to the head region by interacting with VEGFR. It has been suggested that VEGFR2 is a major receptor for this migration. However, it is considered that VEGFR1 is also involved in the regulation of cell migration.24 At later embryonic stages of organogenesis, VEGF-A plays an important role during vasculogenesis in the migration of angioblasts toward the target tissue. In a mouse embryo model with lens-specific expression of VEGF-A, an increased accumulation of VEGFR1- and VEGFR2-positive cells (which are regarded as angioblasts) were investigated. Interestingly, the angioblasts were found only around but not inside the lens, although a high concentration of VEGF-A was expected there. This suggests that the environment within the lens inhibits angioblast invasion in mice.22 It can be speculated that inhibitors of angioblast migration are localized within the lens. Indirect evidence on the role of VEGF signaling for migration of angioblasts during organogenesis comes from a study on quail embryos. Here, it was shown that VEGF family members regulate myocardial tubulogenesis and coronary artery formation. Both of these processes require angioblast migration. The quail study suggested that VEGF-B is also involved in this regulation, in addition to VEGF-A.26 Possible evidence for a species-specific role of VEGF-A in regulation of angioblast migration comes from analyses conducted in transgenic zebrafish that revealed a GFP expression under the control of flk1 promoter. In this model, a downregulation of the VEGF signaling pathway does not appear to affect the migratory behavior of angioblasts despite a decrease in their number.1 The data from mice, Xenopus, and quail indicate VEGF-dependent regulation of angioblast migration occurs in different species, whereas the findings from the zebrafish suggest that migration of angioblasts can also be independent from VEGF signaling in some species.1,11,22,24,26,33
Additional Repulsive and Attracting Factors
In zebrafish embryos, another molecule seems to play an important role in angioblast migration and vascular development: semaphorin3A1. This molecule is a member of a large family of secreted and cell surface molecules that guide neural growth and cell surface cones to their targets during development.25 Using transgenic zebrafish embryos overexpressing semaphorin3A1 and an antisense knockdown approach, it was shown that semaphorin regulates the migration of neuropilin-positive angioblasts and vascular development. Neuropilins are used by VEGF and class 3 semaphorins as components of their functional receptor,34,35 meaning semaphorin3A1 inhibits the VEGF-induced endothelial motility.36 Semaphorin3A1 may regulate migration of angioblasts by interfering with the chemoattractant activity of VEGF. Another possibility is a direct repulsive effect of semaphorin on the angioblast. Considering the lack of VEGF-dependent regulation of angioblast migration in zebrafish, a direct repulsive effect seems more likely in this species.24 This is supported by the finding of semaphorin–plexin signaling–guided patterning on the developing vasculature. Plexin is another semaphorin receptor that builds a functional complex with neuropilin.35 The semaphorin–plexin signaling is mainly recognized as a key component in neuronal path finding. Semaphorins inhibit migration of plexin-expressing neuronal growth cones by restricting their navigation pathways.37 Therefore, it remains an open question whether migration of angioblasts is regulated by complementary gradients of VEGF and semaphorin, which build a route for migration to the place where the primary vascular tube should be located. VEGF and semaphorin expression is regulated by sonic hedgehog in the embryo.25,38 The hedgehog signaling has been recently recognized as an essential regulatory pathway for endothelial tube formation in avian and mouse embryos.39 Considering that endothelial tube formation during vasculogenesis needs migration of angioblasts, it can be speculated that hedgehog signaling is indirectly or directly involved in the regulation of angioblast migration. It has been speculated that CXCR4 plays a role in the vasculogenesis of the dorsal aorta and the vascularization of the gastrointestinal tract from the expression pattern of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 in chick embryos and CXCR4 knockout mice.40 The influence of the CXCR4/stromal-derived factor (SDF)-1 signaling pathway on migration of angioblasts has been suggested from findings in human ESC-derived EBs. It has been demonstrated that SDF-1 and CXCR4 are expressed concurrently with human ESC-derived embryonic endothelial differentiation and that human ESC-derived embryonic ECs undergoes dose-dependent chemotaxis to SDF-1, which enhances vascular network formation in Matrigel.41 No principal differences are described for the regulation of angioblast migration by the repulsive and chemoattractant factors in the different species and models.25,34–41
Ligand–Receptor Interaction and Signaling Cascades
Although some soluble molecules and growth factors have been identified that regulate the migration of angioblasts during embryonic vasculogenesis, no direct evidence of the downstream signaling pathways has yet been reported. Recent findings on EPCs in adults, and recognition of the vasculogenic potential of these cells, significantly increased the knowledge about the influence of growth factors, cytokines, and chemoattractants on migration of endothelial precursor cells and the downstream pathways. The knowledge about migration of adult endothelial precursor cells is mainly derived from in vitro migration assays on different EPCs, but the potential of these cells to undergo vasculogenesis is less characterized. Nevertheless, it seems that this knowledge is at least partially transferable to embryonic-derived angioblasts and subsequent embryonic vasculogenesis. It is well established that embryonic vasculogenic and migratory VEGF can increase adult EPC migration and subsequent in vitro endothelial tube formation mediated by VEGFR1 and VEGFR2.42 Also, the involvement of sonic hedgehog in vascularization of adult tissue has been shown in wound healing. Here, new blood vessels are derived from a combination of vasculogenesis and angiogenesis, at least in part, by enhanced recruitment of BM-derived EPCs.43,44 Besides proliferation and VEGF expression, sonic hedgehog promotes migration of EPCs. It has been suggested that the phosphatidylinositol-kinase/Akt signaling pathways are involved in such effects of sonic hedgehog.45 Evidence on the involvement of CXCR4 and the ligand SDF-1 in the regulation of endothelial precursor migration also comes from investigations of CXCR4/SDF-1 signaling in EPCs. It has been shown that CXCR4 is expressed in EPCs and SDF-1 can induce increased migration of EPCs mediated by CXCR4.46
Involvement of additional signal pathways in the regulation of migration during vasculogenesis is likely, but has not been directly shown. Although it gives evidence for possible further signal pathways involved in early embryonic vascular development, the role of further pathways for angioblast migration is not shown. The Notch family could be involved in the regulation of migration. It has been shown that a Notch signal pathway is involved in VEGF- and basic fibroblast growth factor–dependent regulation of endothelial cell migration in adults and in the remodeling, but not the creation, of the primitive vascular networks in embryos.47–49 Furthermore, recent identification of hypoxia-dependent regulation of a Notch signal pathways in the endothelial progenitor cell raises the following question50: is Notch involved in the regulation of migration during vasculogenesis? A further candidate for regulation of migration during vasculogenesis is the Wnt signal pathway. Wnts and their receptor Fzd5 are expressed in early-stage embryos when vascular development starts and in vascular progenitor cells. Wnt signaling plays a role in vascular development and remodeling in both embryos and adults.51–53 However, direct evidence for regulation of endothelial precursor cell migration has not yet been shown.
Hypoxia and HIF-1
In addition to VEGF, another hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1–regulated factor (ie, the erythropoietin [Epo] and the Epo receptor) is expressed in growth-arrested angioblasts in von Hippel–Lindau disease. These angioblasts are involved in blood island formation in adult tumors.54 The Epo-signaling pathway influences the migration of ESC-derived angioblasts and ECs as well as the migration of EPCs.55 This shows that Epo is involved in the regulation of embryonic and adult endothelial precursor migration. Furthermore, it shows that—together with the findings on sonic hedgehog, SDF-1, and VEG—mechanistic insights derived from EPCs can be related to the embryonic vasculogenesis and vice versa.
Hypoxia, caused by an imbalance between oxygen supply and consumption, stimulates vasculogenesis in embryonic and adult tissue.42,56–59 Similarly, hypoxia, and the subsequent alteration of HIF-1, can induce VEGF and SDF-1, which stimulates migration of endothelial precursors during vasculogenesis.46,58 Therefore, it can be suggested that hypoxia in embryonic and adult target tissue leads to an expression of chemotactic factors inducing migration of angioblasts and EPCs toward the region to be vascularized by vasculogenesis.
In brief, the directed migration of angioblasts is regulated by a combination of different soluble and interaction molecules that build overlapping attractive and repulsive gradients of soluble factors forming the migratory route for the endothelial precursor cells. It can be suggested that the correct positioning of the endothelial cells after they start to migrate toward the target tissue is dependent on a fine balance of signals. Soluble factor from regions that should be vascularized diffuse to the endothelial precursors, attract them and keep them in their migratory phenotype state until they reach their final position. Further studies are needed to show whether higher concentrations of these attracting factors stop the migration and change the migratory phenotype. Misrouting of the endothelial cells can be prevented by repulsive factors that inhibit the migration of endothelial precursor cells in other areas. Until now, only semaphorins have been identified as repulsive factors for migration during vasculogenesis (Figure 3).24,36
|
|
Free Radicals (NO, Reactive Nitrogen Species, and Reactive Oxygen Species) in Endothelial Migration During Vasculogenesis |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
Less is known about reactive oxygen species (ROS) as migratory regulators during embryonic vasculogenesis. From studies on in vitro cultivated EBs, evidence has been obtained to show that these cells may use ROS as vasculogenic transducers of mechanical strain (Figure 3).11 However, whether this ROS generation is involved in the migration of angioblasts remains uninvestigated because ROS generation in EBs was induced at times when the cells were still undifferentiated (ie, at day 4 of cell culture), whereas differentiation of the cardiovascular cell lineage occurs between days 6 and 9 of cell culture.60 Beside migration, it is feasible that ROS may play a role as a chemoattractant during vasculogenesis (Figure 3). Furthermore, increased ROS generation was apparently a general event occurring in all EB cells before the initiation of differentiation.11 Because ROS are known to freely diffuse within tissues and are highly cell-membrane permeable, it has been proposed that individual embryonic cells differ in their antioxidative capacity, which may critically determine their fate during cell differentiation.11 In this context, it is interesting that the antioxidative defense mechanisms such as catalase, glutathione peroxidase, and the manganese-dependent superoxide dismutase are upregulated in angioblasts and cultivated EPCs compared with mature human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs).61,62 Thus, it may be speculated that an increased antioxidative defense may be a prerequisite for vasculogenic differentiation during embryogenic and adult vasculogenesis and may thus represent a way of "vasculogenic migratory selection" in situations of increased ROS production. Whether there is a direct involvement of ROS in the vasculogenic migration has to be shown in future studies.
Another radical of major importance for the regulation of vasculogenesis is NO and its release via activation of the endothelial NO synthase (eNOS). Using zebrafish as a model for vascular development, a blockade of soluble guanylyl cyclase, a main target of NO, caused no observable effect on vasculogenesis. However, an abnormal angiogenic response involving the cranial and intersegmental vessels, as well as the posterior cardinal vein was reported.63 From these experiments, it may be concluded that NO-dependent activation of the soluble guanylyl cyclase may be of major importance in angiogenesis but not for embryonic vasculogenesis.
Evidence exists about the migratory involvement of eNOS/NO in yolk sac vasculogenesis from embryonic murine studies. A temporally and spatially regulated distribution of nitric oxide synthase (NOS) isoforms occurs during the 3 stages of yolk sac vascular development (blood island formation, primary capillary plexus formation, and vessel maturation/remodeling) and it was found that NOS expression patterns were diametrically opposed. From these results, it was suggested that NO acts as an endoderm-derived factor that modulates normal yolk sac vascular development,64 possibly by the generation of a NO-gradient. No alterations of embryonic vasculogenesis have been described in eNOS-knockout mice.65 However, the eNOS-deficiency in this mouse model may be compensated by an increased activity of the neuronal NOS.66 In addition, triple eNOS-knockout mice are viable but die within the first 10 months because of myocardial infarction or, especially males, atherosclerotic lesion.67 In contrast, cellular eNOS activation is an important modulator for the migration of EPCs. Inhibition of eNOS-activation of these cells, which has been described, for example, in patients with cardiovascular risk factors, significantly impairs their migratory capacity.68,69
|
Cell–Cell Interaction in Endothelial Migration |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
The proper localization of vessels in embryos is regulated by complementary production of chemoattractant and repulsive factors that guide angioblasts to the place where tube formation occur.25 These factors are produced from environmental cells and allow a cell–cell interaction without direct contact, as observed for endodermal regulation of vascular tubes in Xenopus embryos.14 In addition to this indirect cell–cell interaction, direct cell–cell communication can also be involved in the guidance and positioning of angioblasts.12 Cell-adhesion molecules are involved in direct cell–cell interaction. One of the earliest expressed cell-adhesion molecules during endothelial differentiation is PECAM-1. This molecule is expressed in the primitive angioblast cluster in mice embryos and murine EBs before blood islands or endothelial tubes are developed.12,33,70 Our microscopic investigations using genetically modified ESCs (which reveal a PECAM-1–regulated GFP expression) show migration of GFP-positive angioblasts in early EBs.33 Although the knockout of PECAM-1 does not lead to a lethal phenotype, and results in normal vascular development, it has been implied that PECAM-1 is involved in the regulation of angioblast migration.12,71 The observation that dephosphorylation is increased during integrin-mediated cell spreading suggests that PECAM-1 tyrosine phosphorylation might affect angioblast migration.12,72 However PECAM-1 is not essential for the process of vascular development, implying the existence of compensatory mechanisms, at least in mice.12,71 From investigations on ECs, it can be speculated that during vasculogenesis, homophilically engaged tyrosine-phosphorylated PECAM-1 locally activates SHP-2 at cell–cell junctions. A redistribution by selective dephosphorylation of PECAM-1 leads to SHP-2–dependent promigratory changes in phosphorylation of cytoskeletal and focal contact components.73,74
VE-cadherin is another endothelial cell adhesion molecule expressed at the beginning of migration of angioblasts during embryonic vasculogenesis in Xenopus embryos and at the early stages of vascular development (embryonic day [E]7.5) in mesodermal cells of the yolk sac mesenchyme in mice.75–77 VE-cadherin deficiency is lethal at 9.5 days of gestation in mice embryos.78 The time of expression and the functional relevance of VE-cadherin during vasculogenesis are not fully understood. It is not yet determined whether VE-cadherin is expressed before or after assembly of the first primary vascular tubes.8,75,76 This fact has a high relevance for the possible role of VE-cadherin in stopping the migratory activity of angioblasts or preventing the reentry of ECs from primary vascular tubes in migration. In comparison with PECAM-1, phosphorylation of the VE-cadherin at tyrosine residues seems to switch cells to a migratory phenotype. VEGF-induced VE-cadherin tyrosine phosphorylation is mediated by Src kinase, a process that appears to be critical for VEGF-induced EC migration, at least in HUVECs.52,79 Besides phosphorylation, a VEGF-initiated internalization of VE-cadherin could change the migratory phenotype of ECs.80 The adhesion molecule Bves, a potential transmembrane glycoprotein from the Popeye gene family, has also been shown in chicken embryos to regulate cell adhesion and migration during coronary vasculogenesis. In this case, the regulation of cell adhesion and migration seems to be dependent on the alteration of subcellular localization of the molecule from transmembrane to intracellular.81 All 3 molecules can change the migratory phenotype of angioblasts. Therefore, it can be suggested that these molecules are involved in the initiation and arrest of angioblast migration during vasculogenesis.
The signaling between the Eph receptor tyrosine kinases and ephrins, their membrane-tethered ligands, is important for controlling repulsive and attractive cell movements during vascular assembly in embryonic development. Similarly, it guides the migration of ECs and possibly angioblasts.82–84 During early vascular development, different members of the ephrin and Eph family are involved in regulating the guidance of ECs by causing ECs to interact with each other and also with surrounding non-ECs. Both ephrin-B2, which is expressed in arterial endothelial cells, and EphB4, which is expressed in venous ECs, seem to play a major role in the guidance of vascular cells (for review, see Torres-Vazquez et al84). It has been suggested that ephrin-B2 and EphB4 mediate reciprocal interactions between arterial and venous ECs to guide ECs during migration until they find their target site for the formation of a functional vascular network in a murine embryonic explant.85 A direct effect for regulation of migration has been shown on EphB4-expressing HUVECs, in which ephrin-B2 inhibits migration and EphB4 stimulates migration.82 The expression of ephrin-B2 and EphB4 in ESC-derived angioblasts and EPCs raises speculation about angioblasts and EPCs signaling pathway. It is possible that this signaling pathway is relevant for migratory guidance of angioblasts and EPCs, although the formation of primary vascular structures is not prevented in ephrin-B2– and EphB4-deficient mouse embryos55 (for review, see Adams and Klein86). Moreover, nothing is known about the role of ephrin in the regulation of EPC migration in adults. It has been shown that ephrin-Eph interaction leads to specific modulation of migratory activity of endothelial cells. VE-cadherin and PECAM-1 are expressed in circulating human endothelial progenitors, leading to speculation that they are involved in regulation of migration during adult vascular development.87,88 Whether angioblasts and endothelial progenitor cells are also guided by the Eph and Ephrin signaling must be investigated in future studies (Figure 4).
|
|
ECM, ECM Receptors (Such As Integrin), and Focal Adhesion Molecules in Endothelial Migration |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
The ECM is critical for all aspects of vascular biology. Although it is clear that ECM is also of great importance in vasculogenesis and endothelial precursor migration, it is surprising that information concerning these processes is still lacking.
In concert with supporting cells, ECs assemble a laminin-rich basement membrane matrix that provides structural and organizational stability. During the onset of angiogenesis, this basement membrane matrix is degraded by proteinases, among which the membrane-type matrix metalloproteinases are particularly significant.
Most importantly, the known fact is that already during embryonic vasculogenesis, the ECM differs. Recent studies have pointed to a more central role for ß1 integrins, which work mainly as ECM receptors, in vascular development. In a teratoma assay, in the absence of ß1 integrins, fewer blood vessels are formed and formation of a complex vasculature is delayed. Moreover, none of the teratoma vessels are formed by vasculogenesis using ESC-derived angioblasts.89 Concerning ESC-derived angioblasts that lack ß1 integrins, we observed a significantly reduced migration (A. Schmidt, W. Bloch, unpublished data, 2002). In that model, the basement membrane also lacks laminin-1 in EBs.90 It has been shown that 
vß3 integrin is fundamentally involved in the maturation of blood vessels during embryonic neovascularization (vasculogenesis). vß3 integrin is specifically expressed on the surface of angioblasts and the ligand of vß3 integrin, vitronectin, is localized at the basal surface of these cells.91 Several studies have revealed a complex pattern of expression and localization of ECM components. For example, in mice embryos not expressing fibronectin, no blood vessels are formed in the vitelline yolk sac, whereas aortic ECs in the embryos are scattered and disorganized.92,93 It has been shown previously that abundant levels of fibronectin are present in blood islands and the capillary plexus,93 whereas laminin, collagen, and other extracellular matrix molecules are produced by ECs later in vasculogenesis.4 Staining of E8.5 yolk sac blood vessels and dorsal aortas for fibronectin showed that less fibronectin is deposited and retained in the matrix. ECs play an active role in organizing and assembling the fibronectin matrix and it was shown that the failure to organize the matrix appropriately in the endothelial basement membrane could lead to defective EC adhesion and migration. It has been previously shown that the profile of the subendothelial basement matrix changes as vascular development proceeds in the embryo, with fibronectin being the earliest and most abundantly expressed matrix molecule.4,94 Moreover, the assembly of a fibronectin matrix has been shown to influence a number of cellular functions, including the organization of intracellular cytoskeletal structures and changes in signaling pathways. For example, the assembly of a native fibronectin matrix has been shown to induce rapid formation of actin stress fibers and colocalization of 5ß1 integrin, focal adhesion kinase, vinculin, and paxillin to regions of cell–matrix contact.95 Because fibronectin has been shown to play a vital role in normal tube formation in the yolk sac, the initial vessel formation seen in the 5 integrin knockout is probably attributable to the function of other fibronectin receptors, such as the v integrins, which are also expressed in 5-integrin–null primary ECs.94 In addition, ESCs preferentially differentiate toward an endothelial lineage and primitive vessel formation is significantly reduced in 5-integrin–null and fibronectin-null EBs compared with wild-type, ß3-integrin–null, or v-integrin–null EBs.94 Taken together, these data suggest that 5ß1 integrin/fibronectin interactions are necessary for basic cellular processes involved in normal vessel development and that the endothelial functions of 5 integrin can be separated from those of v integrin and ß3 integrin.
Embryonic systems should be compared with what happens during organogenesis. Fibronectin is expressed throughout the developing epicardium but is mostly concentrated on the epicardial–myocardial interface.96,97 In addition, fibronectin is detected at the external surface of the myocardium, where the advancing epicardium has not yet migrated. Also, there is abundant opportunity for remodeling of the ECM in the developing wall because numerous matrix proteases are expressed at this stage of heart development. Again, these spaces are continuous with the subepicardial space but do not connect with the lumen of the heart, and the endocardial lining is not compromised. In summary, remodeling of the myocardial ECM and production of signaling molecules are likely to play important roles in mesodermal migration and vasculogenesis.23
Other ECM molecules such as vitronectin, laminin, JB3, and fibrillin exhibit dynamic patterns of expression at or near the epicardial–myocardial interface. It might also provide cues to the epicardium for its differentiation during and after attachment and migration over the myocardium. Although a comprehensive understanding of the ECM in epicardial movement and adhesion during proepicardial organ and epicardial migration is not yet complete, these data suggest that an intricate modulation of the ECM facilitates scaffolding for angiogenic cell migration to and over the heart.23
The ECM is also able to absorb chemokines. It has been shown that the distribution of chemokines within the ECM can have a coordinating function. In zebrafish embryos, VEGF, together with a member of the semaphorin protein family, semaphorin3A1, builds a route guiding the angioblasts through the embryo.25 Also, in mice, adhesion of ECs induced by the family member semaphorin3C was prevented by integrin-blocking antibodies. Semaphorin3C-induced adhesion and proliferation were similar to those induced by VEGF-A. Semaphorin3C also induced an increase in directional migration and stimulated capillary-like network formation on collagen I gels.98 Besides this, it is also well accepted that decomposition products of the ECM are crucial for endothelial migration. One of the best-investigated decomposition products is endostatin, which results from cleavage of collagen XVIII. Endostatin acts as an angiogenic modulator and affects the migratory activity of ECs. Depending on the maturity of endothelial cells, endostatin can act as a migratory inhibitor or amplifier.99 Also, it has been shown that endostatin is expressed in blood islands during mouse development.100 It could be speculated that endostatin not only plays an important role in early vasculogenesis but also in the migration of mesodermal cells such as angioblasts.
Kim et al showed that endothelial precursors are influenced by endostatin.74 They observed an increased migration of EPCs under the influence of endostatin, which complies with our observations.99,100
It seems also that ß1 integrin is essential for the migratory behavior of EPCs.101 Fibronectin also plays a role in migration and differentiation of EPCs. Together with VEGF, fibronectin promotes the migration and differentiation into ECs. As in embryogenesis, functionality of fibronectin is linked to 5ß1 integrin.102
|
Differences in the Endothelial Migration Among Angioblasts, EPCs, and ECs |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
Angioblast migration starts from the angioblast cluster and moves through the embryonic tissue to the right position. Angioblasts migrate as individual cells to form a vascular cord at the midline.
The migration of angioblasts and EPCs can first be compared after the point when EPCs have crossed the endothelial barrier of the target tissue and have migrated to the right position. EPCs are released from the BM and, after crossing the endothelial barrier, circulate in the blood until they invade the target tissue.
Both isolated EPCs and isolated ECs showed the same VEGF-dependent migratory activity.103 The situation differs in vivo. ECs are normally fixed within an endothelial monolayer. By inducing migration with VEGF, the cells degrade the endothelial junctions before starting migration. This degradation process is directly induced through VEGF by internalization of VE-cadherin. In the in vivo situation, ECs react and migrate with a delay because of the degradation process.80 In zebrafish, hedgehog signaling is necessary for migration of angioblasts from the lateral mesoderm toward the midline.104 This also applies for EPCs. However, no involvement of hedgehog in migration in ECs has yet been reported.45 Endostatin does induce migration in ECs but the response to endostatin differs for different ECs. Postnatal EPCs and ECs also showed increased migration in response to endostatin,103 whereas embryonic ECs demonstrates a much higher increase of activity.99
Based on the available data concerning the behavior of migration of different ECs, we hypothesize that immature ECs, like EPCs or angioblasts, have the highest migratory capability. With an increase of maturation, the migratory capacity of ECs decreases until only a low affinity for migration remains (Figure 1B).
|
What Can We Learn About EPC Migration From Endothelial Migration During Embryonic Vasculogenesis? |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
Postnatal vascular development plays an important role in neovascularization under pathological conditions, eg, ischemia, wound healing or cancer.88,105 Because of the different (patho)physiological situations in which EPCs are involved during adult vascular development, the question arises whether common principles exist for endothelial precursor cell migration during embryonic and adult vascular development or not. This question is complicated by the fact that in adults, the peripheral blood contains several cell types that possess the ability to differentiate into cells with endothelial-like gene expression patterns in vitro (for review see, Ingram DA et al106). However, information is lacking on the migratory capacity of these various endothelial precursor cells and whether the migratory capacity of the various kinds of circulating endothelial precursor cells is a critical determinant of their vasculogenic potential.
Despite the ongoing discussion on EPC-definition, locally restricted hypoxia seems to be a major stimulus for migration during adult vascular development in situations of myocardial infarction, wound healing, and tumor vasculogenesis, similar to that which has been described in embryonic vasculogenesis. Hypoxia induces an increased release of VEGF at the site of the injured tissue and this may be a chemoattractant for both differentiated ECs and circulating EPCs.43 The recruitment of CXCR4-positive progenitor cells to regenerating tissue is also regulated by hypoxic gradients via HIF-1–induced SDF-1 expression.46 Only recently, a subclass of EPCs has been identified in human adult BM that possess selective migratory properties for ischemic tissues, including myocardium, where these cells home and induce vascular development.107 In this context, it has been shown that myocardial production of the interleukin-8/Gro- CXC chemokine family significantly increased in this EPC subclass after acute ischemia. This provides a chemoattractant gradient for the circulating BM-derived EPCs.107
Similar to what has been described above for the embryonic vasculogenesis, migration during adult vascular development is characterized by a gradient built up of inflammatory cytokines. In the stromal tissue, after the inflammatory response of extravasated blood cells, such as platelets and monocyte- and macrophage-derived cytokines, ECs or fibroblast-like cells follow closely behind for neovascularization.108 In addition, the vasculogenic cytokine release of EPCs may contribute to a support mechanism that improves migration during neovascularization.109 Thus, the chemoattractant mechanisms that have been described as regulating angioblast migration seem to be similarly effective during pathological situations in adult vascular development derived from EPCs. These guiding mechanisms seem not only to affect EPCs but also differentiated endothelial cells, so that a comigration between EPCs and differentiated ECs is possible. An interesting feature of tumor vasculogenesis is the fact that tumor cells seem not only to induce the migration of EPCs, but that EPCs may also initiate the migration of tumor cells promoting metastatic migration by forming niches where cancer cells can promote and proliferate.110 It may be speculated that this migration-stimulatory capacity is attributable to only a subclass of the circulating EPCs. Further research should be focused on this question. Attempts to target tumors using migratory capacity EPCs are currently under preclinical investigation. Preclinical studies suggest that tumor targeting using transgenic embryonic ECs carrying the suicide gene may be of therapeutic value.111
|
Concluding Remarks |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
During embryonic development, the process of vasculogenesis starts from clusters of angioblasts. These clusters are composed of cells that are of a nonmigratory phenotype. The reason for this nonmigratory phenotype is the cell–cell contacts of these clustered angioblasts. For the process of vasculogenesis, the cell–cell contact must detach. This detachment gives the start signal for the migration of the angioblasts, which then change to a migratory phenotype. Under normal conditions, the angioblasts migrate as single cells. The guidance of this movement is influenced by ECM–cell interaction, cell–cell contacts, soluble molecules, and free radicals. From the moment migrating angioblasts form primary vascular structures, they build up endothelial junctions and revert to a nonmigratory phenotype. The build up of cell–cell contacts between the angioblasts in the position where the primary vascular plexus is formed is a stop signal for angioblast migration. This step is the changeover between vasculogenesis and angiogenesis (Figure 5). During adult vascular development, EPCs enter the blood as "circulating EPCs." From the blood, circulating EPCs reach their target tissue by transendothelial migration. The EPCs then change to a migratory phenotype. A combination of different kinds of regulatory mechanisms and factors regulates the migration of the endothelial precursor cells. Gradients of soluble factors, ECM interaction and cell–cell interaction initiate, guide and stop the migration of the angioblasts and EPCs (Figure 5B). Here also stable cell–cell interactions and the positioning of the cells are triggers for reversion to a nonmigratory phenotype.
|
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We are indebted to V. B. Komkimalla and S. Griffiths for proofreading the manuscript.
Sources of Funding
This work was supported by the Novartis-Foundation (to W.B.).
Disclosures
None.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Original received January 31, 2007; revision received May 9, 2007; accepted May 30, 2007.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionEmbryonic Angioblasts and EPCsGrowth Factors, Cytokines,...Free Radicals (NO, Reactive...Cell-Cell Interaction in...ECM, ECM Receptors (Such...Differences in the Endothelial...What Can We Learn...Concluding RemarksReferences |
|---|
- Jin SW, Beis D, Mitchell T, Chen JN, Stainier DY. Cellular and molecular analyses of vascular tube and lumen formation in zebrafish. Development. 2005; 132: 5199–5209.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Coffin JD, Poole TJ. Endothelial cell origin and migration in embryonic heart and cranial blood vessel development. Anat Rec. 1991; 231: 383–395.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Risau W. Mechanisms of angiogenesis. Nature. 1997; 386: 671–674.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Risau W, Lemmon V. Changes in the vascular extracellular matrix during embryonic vasculogenesis and angiogenesis. Dev Biol. 1988; 125: 441–450.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Vailhe B, Vittet D, Feige JJ. In vitro models of vasculogenesis and angiogenesis. Lab Invest. 2001; 81: 439–452.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Ribatti D, Vacca A, Nico B, Roncali L, Dammacco F. Postnatal vasculogenesis. Mech Dev. 2001; 100: 157–163.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Ribatti D. The discovery of endothelial progenitor cells. An historical review. Leuk Res. 2006; 31: 439–444.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Drake CJ, Fleming PA. Vasculogenesis in the day 6.5 to 9.5 mouse embryo. Blood. 2000; 95: 1671–1679.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Risau W, Flamme I. Vasculogenesis. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 1995; 11: 73–91.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Ferguson JE, Kelley RW, Patterson C. Mechanisms of endothelial differentiation in embryonic vasculogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2005; 25: 2246–2254.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Cleaver O, Krieg PA. VEGF mediates angioblast migration during development of the dorsal aorta in Xenopus. Development. 1998; 125: 3905–3914.[Abstract]
- Pinter E, Barreuther M, Lu T, Imhof BA, Madri JA. Platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 (PECAM-1/CD31) tyrosine phosphorylation state changes during vasculogenesis in the murine conceptus. Am J Pathol. 1997; 150: 1523–1530.[Abstract]
- Yusuf F, Rehimi R, Dai F, Brand-Saberi B. Expression of chemokine receptor CXCR4 during chick embryo development. Anat Embryol. 2005; 210: 35–41.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Vokes SA, Krieg PA. Endoderm is required for vascular endothelial tube formation, but not for angioblast specification. Development. 2002; 129: 775–785.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Dejana E. Endothelial cell-cell junctions: happy together. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2004; 5: 261–270.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
- Asahara T, Murohara T, Sullivan A, Silver M, van der Zee R, Li T, Witzenbichler B, Schatteman G, Isner JM. Isolation of putative progenitor endothelial cells for angiogenesis. Science. 1997; 275: 964–967.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Shi Q, Rafii S, Wu MH, Wijelath ES, Yu C, Ishida A, Fujita Y, Kothari S, Mohle R, Sauvage LR, Moore MA, Storb RF, Hammond WP. Evidence for circulating bone marrow-derived endothelial cells. Blood. 1998; 92: 362–367.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Peichev M, Naiyer AJ, Pereira D, Zhu Z, Lane WJ, Williams M, Oz MC, Hicklin DJ, Witte L, Moore MA, Rafii S. Expression of VEGFR-2 and AC133 by circulating human CD34(+) cells identifies a population of functional endothelial precursors. Blood. 2000; 95: 952–958.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Eichman