Fig 1: Restoration of VETC formation by recombinant Angpt2 supplementation reestablishes the immunosuppression in Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts.(A and B) Peritumoral injection with Angpt2 restored TGF-β1 expression in the TECs of Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts. (C and D) Angpt2 supplementation recovered the number of Tregs (C) and the ratio of Treg/CD8+ T cells (D) in Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts. (E–G) Angpt2 supplementation restored the proportion of TNFRSF4+ Tregs (E), KI67+ Tregs (F), and PD1+CD8+T cells (G) in Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts. For (A–G), shNC+Ctrl, Hepa-shNC allografts were peritumorally injected with 0.9% saline (negative control, n = 6); shAngpt2+Ctrl, Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts were peritumorally injected with 0.9% saline (n = 6); shAngpt2+rmAngpt2, Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts were peritumorally injected with recombinant mouse Angpt2 (n = 6). Scale bar: 25 μm. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01, 1-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test (B–G).
Fig 2: Disruption of VETC formation by inhibiting the Angpt2/Tie2 signaling relieves the immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment.(A) Disruption of the Angpt2/Tie2 axis by shAngpt2 or Rebastinib disrupted VETC formation in Hepa1-6 allografts. Rebastinib, Tie2 inhibitor. (B) The levels of TGF-β1 in TECs. (C) The number of Tregs. (D) The ratio of Treg/CD8+ T cells. (E and F) The proportions of TNFRSF4+ Tregs (E) and Ki67+ Tregs (F). (G) The proportion of PD1+CD8+ T cells. (H) The number of CD8+ T cells. (I) The proportion of GZMB+ or GZMK+CD8+ T cells. For (A–I), left panels: shNC, Hepa-shNC allografts (negative control, n = 11); shAngpt2, Hepa-shAngpt2 allografts with stable silencing of Angpt2 (n = 6). Right panels: Ctrl, Hepa1-6 allografts in mice treated with control solution (n = 6); Rebastinib, Hepa1-6 allografts in mice treated with Rebastinib (n = 8). Data are shown as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001, by Mann-Whitney U test (A, left panel; B; E right panel; F left panel; H left panel), 2-tailed Student’s t test (A, right panel; C; D; E, left panel; F, right panel; G; H, right panel; I).
Fig 3: Effects of anti‐VEGFA, ‐ANG‐2, or bispecific antibody on pathological neovascularization in the mouse OIR model. (A) Schematic representation of the experimental design to evaluate the effects of intraocular injected antibodies in a mouse OIR model. The antibodies were intravitreally injected into OIR mice at P14. Retinal whole‐mounts were prepared at P17 and P19 and immunostained with anti‐CD31 antibody. (B) The areas of neovascularization (red) and vaso‐obliteration (non‐perfusion, yellow) in the OIR retina treated with control IgG, anti‐VEGFA antibody, anti‐ANG‐2 antibody, or anti‐VEGFA/ANG‐2 bispecific antibody are shown. Scale bar = 1 mm. (C and D) The area (% of total area) of neovascularization and the vaso‐obliteration area in the OIR mouse retina. The averages of the area with standard errors are shown in the bar graphs. (E and F) The antibodies were intravitreally injected into OIR mice at P14, and the retina was harvested at P17 and frozen sectioned. Immunostaining with anti‐CD31 and ‐Ki67 antibodies was performed to examine endothelial cell proliferation. Scale bar = 50 μm. Nuclei were visualized with DAPI staining. Numbers of CD31 and Ki67 double‐positive cells inner to the INL were counted (F). Data are the averages of 8 samples with standard deviation. (C, D, F) Tukey's HSD test was used for the statistical analysis. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Supplier Page from R&D Systems, a Bio-Techne Brand for Recombinant Mouse Angiopoietin-2 Protein