Abstract
- Top of page
- Abstract
- INTRODUCTION
- RESULTS
- DISCUSSION
- EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
- REFERENCES
- Supporting Information
Though development of the coronary vasculature is a critical event during embryogenesis, the molecular mechanisms that regulate its formation are not well characterized. Two unique approaches were used to investigate interactions between cardiac myocytes and proepicardial (PE) cells, which are the coronary anlagen. One of these experimental approaches used a 3-D collagen scaffold system on which specific cell-cell and cell-matrix interactions were studied. The other approach used a whole heart culture system that allowed for the analysis of epicardial to mesenchymal transformation (EMT). The VEGF signaling system has been implicated previously as an important regulator of coronary development. Our results demonstrated that a specific isoform of VEGF-A, VEGF164, increased PE-derived endothelial cell proliferation and also increased EMT. However, VEGF-stimulated endothelial cells did not robustly coalesce into endothelial tubes as they did when cocultured with cardiac myocytes. Interestingly, blocking VEGF signaling via flk-1 inhibition reduced endothelial tube formation despite the presence of cardiac myocytes. These results indicate that VEGF signaling is complex during coronary development and that combinatorial signaling by other VEGF-A isoforms or other flk-1-binding VEGFs are likely to regulate endothelial tube formation. Developmental Dynamics 238:423–430, 2009. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
- Top of page
- Abstract
- INTRODUCTION
- RESULTS
- DISCUSSION
- EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
- REFERENCES
- Supporting Information
The formation of the coronary vasculature system involves vasculogenesis and angiogenesis and is dependent on a transient structure called the proepicardium (PE) (reviewed in Wada et al.,2003a,b). The process of coronary vessel morphogenesis is initiated when the PE attaches to the heart at the junction between the embryonic atrium and ventricle at Hamburger and Hamilton (HH) stage 16 (1951) in avians and embryonic day 10.5 in rats (Viragh et al.,1993; Nesbitt et al.,2006). The PE is a cluster of cells that attach to the myocardium and migrate superficially on the heart to form the epicardium (Manner,1992). Some epicardial cells undergo epithelial to mesenchymal transformation (EMT), to invade the subepicardial space and myocardium (Munoz-Chapuli et al., 1996; Perez-Pomares et al.,1997; Dettman et al.,1998; Gittenberger-de Groot,1998; Manner,1999). Mesenchymal cells derived from the epicardium contribute to the coronary vasculature as vascular endothelial cells, vascular smooth muscle cells, and perivascular and interstitial fibroblasts (Mikawa and Fischman,1992; Mikawa and Gourdie,1996; Dettman et al.,1998; Gittenberger-de Groot,1998; Kirby,2002; Reese et al.,2002; Wada et al.,2003; Olivey et al.,2004; Wessels and Perez-Pomares,2004; Tomanek,2005).
Coronary vasculature development arises by a series of events in which vasculogenic endothelial cells form a plexus of tube-like structures (Sabin,1917; Poole and Coffin,1989; Kattan et al., 2004). Angiogenesis occurs as the existing capillary network increases in size via branching and connects to the aortic root forming the coronary arteries (Bogers et al.,1989; Poelmann et al.,1993; Tomanek,1996,2005; Waldo et al.,1990). This process continues as newly formed arteries recruit other PE-derived cells such as vascular smooth muscle cells and fibroblasts to form the vascular network (Tomanek,2005).
Although a wealth of knowledge exists concerning the anatomical development of the coronary vasculature system, much remains to be determined about the molecular mechanisms that regulate this process. Previous reports have suggested that myocardial development and coronary vascularization are interdependent processes because of bidirectional signaling occurring between epicardially-derived cells (EPDCs) and cardiac myocytes (reviewed in Bhattacharya et al.,2006). To date, studies have shown that when the interaction of GATA-4 and FOG-2 transcription factors is perturbed in cells of the myocardium, the epicardium fails to undergo EMT and coronary vascular development is disrupted (Svensson et al.,2000; Crispino et al.,2001). Thus, it appears that cardiac myocytes are critical to the generation of signals that stimulate epicardial EMT and coronary development. Conditioned media obtained from cardiac myocytes has also been shown to enhance epicardial EMT, which suggests that these cells are able to regulate this process by secreted factors (Morabito et al.,2001; Chen et al.,2002).
Several reports suggest that when PE-derived cells come in contact with the myocardium, these cells become exposed to myocardial-derived growth factors that induce the process of coronary vessel morphogenesis (Guadix et al.,2006; Pennisi et al.,2003). In addition, paracrine factors secreted by the myocardium may stimulate the development, growth, and maintenance of the coronary vasculature system (Giordano et al.,2001). Several growth factors including VEGF, FGF, PDGF, and TGF-β have been identified as potential regulators of coronary vessel morphogenesis (Beck and D'Amore,1997; Tomanek et al.,1998,1999; Tomanek and Zheng,2002; Tomanek,2005; Lavine et al.,2006). VEGF-A, in particular, has been extensively recognized as an important growth factor for myocardial vascularization (Tomanek and Zheng,2002; Tomanek,2005). VEGF-A is a single gene deriving three splice products, VEGF120, VEGF165 (4) in murines, and VEGF188. Recent reports indicate that each isoform may have a specific role in vascular patterning during development (Mitchell et al.,2006; Lundkvist et al.,2007).
In this report, we sought to specifically address the role that cardiac myocytes and VEGF164 plays in coronary vessel morphogenesis. This investigation was facilitated by use of two novel models of coronary development. One is an in vitro model system in which PE cells are cultured on a collagen scaffold. In this model, PE cells undergo EMT and develop capillary networks of endothelial tubes (tubulogenesis) when cultured with cardiac myocytes (Nesbitt et al.,2007). The other model system uses an organ culture approach in which embryonic hearts are used to assay epicardial EMT (Dokic and Dettman, 2007). The in vitro collagen cell scaffold can be used as an artificial extracellular matrix by incorporating VEGF molecules into the scaffold. PE cells cultured on these VEGF164-treated scaffolds had increased numbers of endothelial cells and higher endothelial cell proliferation rates in comparison to untreated scaffolds and PE cells co-cultured with cardiac myocytes. However, there was no evidence that the VEGF164-stimulated endothelial cells underwent morphogenesis into endothelial tubes (tubulogenesis). This is opposed to PE cells that were cocultured with cardiac myocytes in which extensive tubulogenesis was observed. Interestingly, inhibiting the VEGF receptor, Flk-1 (VEGFR-2), reduced tubulogenesis in the PE cardiac myocyte cocultures. Organ culture studies found that VEGF164 stimulated epicardial EMT to the same degree as TGFβ1; however, co-stimulation with VEGF164 and TGFβ1 did not increase overall epicardial EMT. These results indicate that myocardially derived VEGF164 drives proliferation and EMT of PE-derived cells, but is not sufficient to induce the morphogenesis of endothelial cells into endothelial tubes. However, the VEGF pathway does appear to regulate coronary tubulogenesis via the flk-1 receptor.
DISCUSSION
- Top of page
- Abstract
- INTRODUCTION
- RESULTS
- DISCUSSION
- EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
- REFERENCES
- Supporting Information
In this report, two unique in vitro systems have been used to investigate the cellular and molecular mechanisms of early coronary vascular development. In previous work, our group has demonstrated the ability to grow spontaneously contracting embryonic cardiac myocytes (CM) in a 3-D culture for long periods of time (Evans et al.,2003). Here, we have used this model to investigate the interactions between CM and PE cells during coronary vasculogenesis.
There has been some controversy about the origin of the endothelial cells of the coronary vasculature. As reported recently, there appears to be cellular heterogeneity within the PE. Cells on the outside of the PE are epithelial and express a discrete set of attachment molecules including α4 integrin (Pae et al.,2008). Cells within the core of the PE buds appear to be mesothelial and express adhesion molecules also found in mature vascular endothelium such as α5 integrin. Experiments in this study were carried out using PE cells that had yet to contact the myocardium. Also, PE dissections were carried out so as to include as little liver tissue as possible. However, since the PE forms as a cellular projection that is connected to the liver, there is always the possibility that some liver cells may be present in PE explants. Regardless, numerous endothelial cells (QH1-positive) were reliably cultured from these explants.
Culturing PE explants in the presence of VEGF164 stimulated endothelial expansion. The observation that VEGF164 treatment stimulated endothelial proliferation in PE cells indicates that this VEGF A isoform has the capacity to drive the proliferation of committed endothelial cells as opposed to differentiation of uncommitted PE cells. If VEGF164 induced endothelial differentiation, then we would have expected to see endothelial expansion without an increase in BrdU incorporation.
Our initial hypothesis was that the presence of CM would stimulate endothelial expansion. Though an upward trend was observed at the day-7 time point of the PE/CM cocultures, no significant difference was observed between it and the PE-only cultures. However, there was a difference in the morphology of a subset of endothelial cells of the PE/CM cocultures and the PE-only and VEGF164-treated PE cultures. Tube-like arrangements of spindle-shaped endothelial cells were abundant in the PE/CM co-cultures, but not so in the PE-only and VEGF164-treated PE cultures. This indicates that the presence of CM provides an additional signal that stimulates coronary tubulogenesis. Inhibition of the VEGF-A receptor Flk-1 (VEGFR-2) decreased CM-induced tube formation. Thus, it is possible that other VEFG-A isoforms (VEGF121 or VEGF189) could be regulating this next step in coronary morphogenesis.
As has been shown by Tomanek and colleagues (2006), other signaling molecules are critical in the development of the coronaries. Of particular relevance to our observations is another VEGF family member, VEGF-B. Inhibiting antibodies against this VEGF were found to inhibit coronary artery development. Since VEGF-A and -B bind the Flt-1 receptor (VEGF-R1), we posit that cooperation between Flk-1 and Flt-1 could be necessary for coronary vascular development. Alternatively, the role of VEGF164 may be to simply stimulate endothelial proliferation creating the adequate numbers of endothelial cells necessary for VEGF-B to have its affect.
VEGF164 was also found to stimulate EMT in organ culture experiments. Interestingly, this stimulation could not be enhanced by co-stimulation with TGFβ. Some studies have demonstrated that individual TGFβ isoforms can repress endothelial tube formation in the avian heart (Holifield et al.,2004). Other studies have supported a role for TGFβ in epicardial EMT. We observed here that VEGF164, in particular, could stimulate epicardial EMT, but only in the heart. This supported the earlier work of Morabito et al. (2001), which demonstrated a role for rhVEGF in epicardial EMT. Neither, TGFβ (Holifield et al.,2004) nor VEGF164 (this study) could drive endothelial tubulogenesis. Thus, both TGFβ and VEGF164 have the capacity to induce epicardial EMT and neither drives tubulogenesis. A critical difference here was our observation that VEGF164 stimulated endothelial cell proliferation. While it is possible that overlapping signaling pathways govern endothelial differentiation, growth, tube formation, and EMT, it is likely that these pathways differ or must synergize. Our present results support the idea that molecular control points of coronary vascular development are separable experimentally using the collagen gel scaffold.
The idea that the TGFβ and VEGF signaling pathways are linked somehow is especially provocative. Perhaps, TGFβs are primarily involved in stimulating epicardial EMT but as is suggested by Holifield et al. (2004), TGFβs simultaneously repress VEGF-mediated events such as tubulogenesis. This would allow cells to differentiate along a non-endothelial path such as into smooth muscle precursors or cardiac fibroblasts. Conversely, as we observed that VEGF164 stimulated epicardial EMT at an equal rate to that of TGFβ1, VEGF164 may stimulate epicardial EMT in other areas where TGFβ is less abundant or repressed. These cells may then be influenced in a greater way by pathways that favor endothelial cells. Together, these observations point to subtleties in the molecular regulation of epicardial EMT, endothelial proliferation, and differentiation that will require future study.
In an attempt to synthesize the data presented here with previous studies, we suggest the following pathway of coronary development. The PE contains cells with differing potentials and fates. Epithelial cells of the PE attach to the myocardium via an α4β1/WT1-meditated process and become definitive epicardium. Mesothelial cells in the core of PE villi are committed to the endothelial line. The interaction of the PE cells with the myocardium would then stimulate FGF signaling that, in turn, induces the sonic hedgehog signal that is required for VEGF A, B, C, and Ang 2 expression (Lavine et al.,2006). Expression of the VEGF164 would then drive EMT and endothelial proliferation and subsequent VEGF-A and VEGF-B expression and TGFβ inhibition would then promote tubulogenesis of the coronary vasculature. These events would then be followed by recruitment of smooth muscle cells and further pruning and stabilization that occurs as blood flow is established after the coronaries become patent with the aorta.