Figure 5. Normalization of B16-GFP... | Rockefeller University Press

$Figure 5. Normalization of B16-GFP melanoma tumor vessels in CL1-R2–treated mice observed by in vivo intravital fluorescence microscopy. (A, Left) Host vessels surrounding the tumor in control Ig or CL1-R2–treated mice in combination with cyclophosphamide at day 9 after tumor implantation. Contrast was enhanced by i.v injection of 150 kD TRITC-labeled dextran. Arrowheads and arrows point to the same tumor vessels at day 0 (d0) and day 9 (d9), respectively. Bars, 40 µm. (A, Right) Quantification of the data in the left panel. Data represent mean values ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). ***, P < 0.0001 (two-way ANOVA test). (B, Left) Tumor vascular area 12 or 14 d after CL1-R2 treatment or control IgG1. Bars, 40 µm. (B, Right) Quantification of the tumor vascular areas in the left panels. Values are means ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). *, P = 0.0114 (day 12); *, P = 0.0292 (day 14; Student’s t test). (C, Left) Intratumoral microvasculature in day-14 control IgG1- or CL1-R2–treated mice. Bars, 40 µm. (C, Right) Quantitative analysis of vascular network complexity based on microvessel fractal dimension measurements in IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated mice. Values are means ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). *, P = 0.0211 (Student’s t test). (D, Left) Microangiography of IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated tumors on day 14 after implantation. Bars, 40 µm. (D, Right) Quantitative data from a representative experiment (plotted in the box/whisker format) comparing IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated tumors on day 14 after implantation (n = 5 mice/group). Box plots show median values (horizontal line inside the whiskers box), box boundaries represent quartiles, and error bars represent the lowest and highest values. Images and quantitative data are representative of three independent experiments.$

Figure 5.

Normalization of B16-GFP melanoma tumor vessels in CL1-R2–treated mice observed by in vivo intravital fluorescence microscopy. (A, Left) Host vessels surrounding the tumor in control Ig or CL1-R2–treated mice in combination with cyclophosphamide at day 9 after tumor implantation. Contrast was enhanced by i.v injection of 150 kD TRITC-labeled dextran. Arrowheads and arrows point to the same tumor vessels at day 0 (d0) and day 9 (d9), respectively. Bars, 40 µm. (A, Right) Quantification of the data in the left panel. Data represent mean values ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). ***, P < 0.0001 (two-way ANOVA test). (B, Left) Tumor vascular area 12 or 14 d after CL1-R2 treatment or control IgG1. Bars, 40 µm. (B, Right) Quantification of the tumor vascular areas in the left panels. Values are means ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). *, P = 0.0114 (day 12); *, P = 0.0292 (day 14; Student’s t test). (C, Left) Intratumoral microvasculature in day-14 control IgG1- or CL1-R2–treated mice. Bars, 40 µm. (C, Right) Quantitative analysis of vascular network complexity based on microvessel fractal dimension measurements in IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated mice. Values are means ± SEM (n = 5 mice/group). *, P = 0.0211 (Student’s t test). (D, Left) Microangiography of IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated tumors on day 14 after implantation. Bars, 40 µm. (D, Right) Quantitative data from a representative experiment (plotted in the box/whisker format) comparing IgG1-treated (Ctrl) and CL1-R2–treated tumors on day 14 after implantation (n = 5 mice/group). Box plots show median values (horizontal line inside the whiskers box), box boundaries represent quartiles, and error bars represent the lowest and highest values. Images and quantitative data are representative of three independent experiments.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only