Observation of Incipient Tumor Angiogenesis That Is Independent of Hypoxia and Hypoxia Inducible Factor-1 Activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that hypoxia potently stimulates tumor angiogenesis by activating hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1)-induced proangiogenic factors, such as vascular endothelial growth factor. However, very little is known about the role of hypoxia in incipient angiogenesis in avascular tumors during their early stages of growth. To noninvasively investigate the functional significance of hypoxia and HIF-1 activation in incipient tumor angiogenesis, we genetically engineered HCT116 human colon carcinoma cells and 4T1 mouse mammary carcinoma cells with constitutively expressed red fluorescence protein as a tumor marker and green fluorescence protein (GFP) as a reporter for hypoxia and HIF-1 activation. The accuracy of GFP fluorescence in reporting hypoxia was confirmed by flow cytometry analysis and by immunohistochemical comparison with pimonidazole, a well-established hypoxia marker drug. Mouse dorsal skin-fold window chambers showed that incipient angiogenesis preceded a detectable level of hypoxia. The detectable levels of hypoxia were spatially and temporally related with more intensive secondary angiogenesis following the initial onset of new vessel formation. Selective killing of hypoxic cells by tirapazamine efficiently eliminated or delayed the detection of hypoxic cells, but it did not significantly delay the onset of incipient angiogenesis. These findings provide the first in vivo evidence that incipient tumor angiogenesis may not depend on hypoxia or HIF-1 activation. This is in contrast to the clear role of hypoxia in driving angiogenesis once initial tumor microvessel formation has occurred.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".