Functional Characterization of the Spontaneously Transformed Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cell Line ECV304: Use in anin VitroModel of Angiogenesis
Abstract
To gain insight into the role of the endothelial cell during the pathophysiology of the angiogenic response, investigators have isolated micro- and macrovascular endothelial cells from a wide range of both animal and human vessels, including the umbilical vein. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) isolated from umbilical cords remain a readily available and popular source of endothelial cell. However, the isolation and culture of these cells have several disadvantages, including the risk of infection, exogenous growth factor requirement, and low proliferative capacity. The heterogeneity of endothelial cells from different vascular beds as well as the heterogeneity between HUVEC isolates from different cords can make the critical interpretation of results difficult. ECV304 is a unique spontaneously transformed human umbilical vein endothelial cell line. In this report, the novel use of ECV304 cells as an alternative to HUVECs in an in vitro model of angiogenesis using the reconstituted basement membrane extract (Matrigel) was investigated. ECV304 cells were characterized immunohistochemically and their angiogenic behavior on Matrigel was analyzed functionally by phase-contrast, electron, and time-lapse video microscopy. ECV304 cells had several practical advantages over HUVEC culture and in contrast to HUVECs, ECV304 cells exhibited an enhanced and highly reproducible capacity for in vitro angiogenesis. However, several differentiated functions were lost or reduced…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The HaCaT, HUVEC, SV-HUC-1, and hEM15A cell lines were totally free from cross-contamination.
“The HaCaT [34], HUVEC [35], SV-HUC-1[36], and hEM15A cell lines established from immortalized human skin cutis cells, umbilical cords, ureteral epithelium and endometrial stromal cells were totally free from cross-contamination.”
From Investigation of Cross-Contamination and Misidentification of 278 Widely Used Tumor Cell Lines (2017) · cites this paper as [35]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Investigation of Cross-Contamination and Misidentification of 278 Widely Used Tumor Cell Lines
Huang, Y., Liu, Y., Zheng, C., & Shen, C. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0170384 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hughes, S. E.
- Affiliations
- St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hughes, Siân E.
- Venue
- Experimental Cell Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-05
- Volume
- 225
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 171-185
- ISSN
- 0014-4827 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2153920513
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Experimental Cell Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Angiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Cell Adhesion Molecules Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
- Keywords
- human umbilical vein endothelial cells, angiogenesis, in vitro angiogenesis model, Matrigel, endothelial heterogeneity, cytokeratin expression, endothelial differentiation, endothelial cell culture
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Antigens, Surface, Cell Line, Transformed, Endothelium, Vascular, Humans, Models, Biological, Time Factors, Umbilical Veins, Neovascularization, Physiologic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review