Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

In vivo models of angiogenesis

Open access
Norrby, K.·2006·Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine

Abstract

The process of building new blood vessels (angiogenesis) and controlling the propagation of blood vessels (anti-angiogenesis) are fundamental to human health, as they play key roles in wound healing and tissue growth. More than 500 million people may stand to benefit from anti- or pro-angiogenic treatments in the coming decades [National Cancer Institute (USA), Cancer Bulletin, volume 3, no. 9, 2006]. The use of animal models to assay angiogenesis is crucial to the search for therapeutic agents that inhibit angiogenesis in the clinical setting. Examples of persons that would benefit from these therapies are cancer patients, as cancer growth and spread is angiogenesis-dependent, and patients with aberrant angiogenesis in the eye, which may lead to blindness or defective sight. Recently, anti-angiogenesis therapies have been introduced successfully in the clinic, representing a turning point in tumor therapy and the treatment of macular degeneration and heralding a new era for the treatment of several commonly occurring angiogenesis-related diseases. On the other hand, pro-angiogenic therapies that promote compensatory angiogenesis in hypoxic tissues, such as those subjected to ischemia in myocardial or cerebral hypoxia due to occluding lesions in the coronary or cerebral arteries, respectively, and in cases of poor wound healing, are also being developed. In this review, the current major and newly introduced preclinical angiogenesis assays are described and discussed in terms of their specific advantages and disadvantages from the biological, technical, economical and ethical perspectives. These assays include the corneal micropocket, chick chorioallantoic membrane, rodent mesentery, subcutaneous (s.c.) sponge/matrix/alginate microbead, s.c. Matrigel plug, s.c. disc, and s.c. directed in vivo angiogenesis assays, as well as, the zebrafish system and several additional assays. A note on quantitative techniques for assessing angiogenesis in patients is also included. The currently utilized preclinical assays are not equivalent in terms of efficacy or relevance to human disease. Some of these assays have significance for screening, while others are used primarily in studies of dosage-effects, molecular structure activities, and the combined effects of two or more agents on angiogenesis. When invited to write this review, I was asked to describe in some detail the rodent mesenteric-window angiogenesis assay, which has not received extensive coverage in previous reviews.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2006.tb00423.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 286

Metadata

Authors
Norrby, K.
Venue
Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-07
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
588-612
ISSN
  • 1582-1838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1582-4934
OpenAlex
W2077501711
Cited by
286
References
0
FWCI
7.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In vivo models of angiogenesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2006.tb00423.x
The paper
Norrby, K. (2006). In vivo models of angiogenesis. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2006.tb00423.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.