Cargando…
What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics
BACKGROUND: Of the 200 million patients worldwide affected by peripheral arterial disease (PAD), 4% will inevitably require major limb amputation. Previous systematic reviews presented a conflicting body of evidence in terms of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family member effects upon PAD...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
S. Karger AG
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9808638/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36380643 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000527079 |
_version_ | 1784862975509659648 |
---|---|
author | Kastora, Stavroula L. Eley, Jonathan Gannon, Martin Melvin, Ross Munro, Euan Makris, Sotirios A. |
author_facet | Kastora, Stavroula L. Eley, Jonathan Gannon, Martin Melvin, Ross Munro, Euan Makris, Sotirios A. |
author_sort | Kastora, Stavroula L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Of the 200 million patients worldwide affected by peripheral arterial disease (PAD), 4% will inevitably require major limb amputation. Previous systematic reviews presented a conflicting body of evidence in terms of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family member effects upon PAD natural progression. Despite that, modulation of intrinsic angiogenesis mechanisms targeting the VEGF family members still confers an attractive therapeutic target. The aim of the present study was to evaluate current evidence of VEGF modulation in the context of PAD. METHODS: This is a systematic literature review conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered under PROSPERO database [CRD42021285988]. Independent literature search was performed up to April 1, 2022, on six databases. A total of 22 eligible studies were identified [N: 3, interventional patient studies; N: 19, animal studies]. Animal studies were appraised by the SYRCLE risk of bias tool, while human participant studies were assessed by the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Overall, quality of evidence was deemed fair for both animal and human studies. Main study outcomes were percentage change of injured vessel lumen stenosis and neointimal area formation upon VEGF modulation (inhibition or activation) in comparison with control group. FINDINGS: Nineteen animal models and three human participant studies were included in the systematic review and assessed separately. Positive modulation of VEGF-A in animal models resulted in a median decrease of 65.58% [95% CI 45.2; 71.87] in lumen stenosis [14 studies]. Furthermore, positive modulation of VEGF-A was found to reduce neointimal area proliferation by a median decrease of 63.41% [95% CI 41.6; 79.59] [14 studies]. Median end of study duration was 28 days [range: 14–84 days]. Data were insufficient to assess these outcomes with respect to VEGF-B or VEGF-C modulation. The limited number of available human studies presented inadequate outcome assessment despite their overall fair NOS grading. INTERPRETATION: VEGF-A-positive modulation decreases lumen stenosis and neointimal hyperplasia in PAD simulation animal models. Previously identified variability among outcomes was found to strongly stem from the variability of experimental designs. Clinical applicability and safety profile of VEGF-A in the context of PAD remain to be defined by a robust and uniformly designed body of further animal model-based experiments. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9808638 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | S. Karger AG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98086382023-01-04 What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics Kastora, Stavroula L. Eley, Jonathan Gannon, Martin Melvin, Ross Munro, Euan Makris, Sotirios A. J Vasc Res Methods in Vascular Biology BACKGROUND: Of the 200 million patients worldwide affected by peripheral arterial disease (PAD), 4% will inevitably require major limb amputation. Previous systematic reviews presented a conflicting body of evidence in terms of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family member effects upon PAD natural progression. Despite that, modulation of intrinsic angiogenesis mechanisms targeting the VEGF family members still confers an attractive therapeutic target. The aim of the present study was to evaluate current evidence of VEGF modulation in the context of PAD. METHODS: This is a systematic literature review conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered under PROSPERO database [CRD42021285988]. Independent literature search was performed up to April 1, 2022, on six databases. A total of 22 eligible studies were identified [N: 3, interventional patient studies; N: 19, animal studies]. Animal studies were appraised by the SYRCLE risk of bias tool, while human participant studies were assessed by the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Overall, quality of evidence was deemed fair for both animal and human studies. Main study outcomes were percentage change of injured vessel lumen stenosis and neointimal area formation upon VEGF modulation (inhibition or activation) in comparison with control group. FINDINGS: Nineteen animal models and three human participant studies were included in the systematic review and assessed separately. Positive modulation of VEGF-A in animal models resulted in a median decrease of 65.58% [95% CI 45.2; 71.87] in lumen stenosis [14 studies]. Furthermore, positive modulation of VEGF-A was found to reduce neointimal area proliferation by a median decrease of 63.41% [95% CI 41.6; 79.59] [14 studies]. Median end of study duration was 28 days [range: 14–84 days]. Data were insufficient to assess these outcomes with respect to VEGF-B or VEGF-C modulation. The limited number of available human studies presented inadequate outcome assessment despite their overall fair NOS grading. INTERPRETATION: VEGF-A-positive modulation decreases lumen stenosis and neointimal hyperplasia in PAD simulation animal models. Previously identified variability among outcomes was found to strongly stem from the variability of experimental designs. Clinical applicability and safety profile of VEGF-A in the context of PAD remain to be defined by a robust and uniformly designed body of further animal model-based experiments. S. Karger AG 2022-12 2022-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9808638/ /pubmed/36380643 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000527079 Text en Copyright © 2022 by The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes requires written permission. |
spellingShingle | Methods in Vascular Biology Kastora, Stavroula L. Eley, Jonathan Gannon, Martin Melvin, Ross Munro, Euan Makris, Sotirios A. What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title | What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title_full | What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title_fullStr | What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title_full_unstemmed | What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title_short | What Went Wrong with VEGF-A in Peripheral Arterial Disease? A Systematic Review and Biological Insights on Future Therapeutics |
title_sort | what went wrong with vegf-a in peripheral arterial disease? a systematic review and biological insights on future therapeutics |
topic | Methods in Vascular Biology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9808638/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36380643 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000527079 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kastorastavroulal whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics AT eleyjonathan whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics AT gannonmartin whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics AT melvinross whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics AT munroeuan whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics AT makrissotiriosa whatwentwrongwithvegfainperipheralarterialdiseaseasystematicreviewandbiologicalinsightsonfuturetherapeutics |