Skip to main content
Cancer Science logoLink to Cancer Science
. 2008 Jan 15;99(3):510–517. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2007.00721.x

Targeting Slit–Roundabout signaling inhibits tumor angiogenesis in chemical‐induced squamous cell carcinogenesis

Li‐Jing Wang 1,3, Yuan Zhao 1, Bing Han 5, Yu‐Guang Ma 1, Jie Zhang 1, Ding‐Ming Yang 6, Jian‐Wen Mao 3, Fu‐Tian Tang 3, Wei‐Dong Li 3, Yang Yang 3, Rui Wang 1,✉, Jian‐Guo Geng 2,4,✉
PMCID: PMC11159389  PMID: 18201275

Abstract

Slit is a secreted protein known to function through the Roundabout (Robo) receptor as a repellent for axon guidance and neuronal migration, and as an inhibitor in leukocyte chemotaxis. We have previously shown that Slit2 is also secreted by a variety of human cancer cells whereby it acts as a chemoattractant to vascular endothelial cells for tumor angiogenesis. We used a blocking antibody to investigate the role of Slit–Robo signaling in tumor angiogenesis during oral carcinogenesis. In this report we undertook a multistage model of 7,12‐dimethyl‐1,2‐benzanthracene‐induced squamous cell carcinoma in the hamster buccal pouch. R5, a monoclonal antibody against the first immunoglobulin domain of Robo1, was used to study whether R5 blocks the Slit–Robo interaction and furthermore inhibits tumor angiogenesis and growth in our model. In addition, the expression of Slit2, von Willebrand factor, and vascular endothelial growth factor were examined using human tissue of oral cheek mucosa with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Our data showed that Slit2 was expressed minimally in normal and hyperplastic mucosa, moderately in dysplastic mucosa, and highly in neoplastic mucosa obtained from hamster buccal pouch. We also found that increased Slit2 expression was associated with higher tumor angiogenesis, as reflected by increased vascular endothelial growth factor expression and microvessel density. A similar Slit2 expression profile was found in human tissue. Importantly, interruption of the Slit2–Robo interaction using R5 inhibited tumor angiogenesis and growth in our in vivo model, which indicates that Slit2‐mediated tumor angiogenesis is a critical process underlying the carcinogenesis of chemical‐induced squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, targeting Slit–Robo signaling may offer a novel antiangiogenesis approach for oral cancer therapy. (Cancer Sci 2008; 99: 510–517)


Angiogenesis is the cellular process of new blood vessel formation, involving capillary sprouting from existing blood vessels and configuring of the neovasculature. In normal adults, angiogenesis occurs rarely, except at times during the female reproductive cycle such as ovulation, menstruation, implantation, and pregnancy. Endothelial cells are usually quiescent and long lived, activated only by appropriate stimuli under which they will grow into new capillaries.( 1 , 2 , 3 ) Angiogenesis is important in a variety of physiological and pathological conditions such as hemostasis, ischemia and hypoxia, wound healing, as well as cancer growth and metastasis.( 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ) Although vascular endothelial cell growth factors (VEGF), fibroblast growth factors, and several other angiogenic molecules are indispensable for vessel formation, the mechanisms at the molecular and cellular levels for regulating tumor angiogenesis in carcinogenesis are still not well known.

The Slit family of migratory signaling proteins is comprised of three known members in mammals: Slit‐1, Slit‐2, and Slit‐3.( 9 ) Slit genes are expressed in midline and endothelial cells.( 10 , 11 , 12 ) They comprise multiple functional domains, including four leucine‐rich repeats, nine epidermal growth factor (EGF)‐like factors, one agrin‐laminin‐perlecan‐slit fragment, which inserts between the sixth and seventh EGF domains, and a cysteine knot at the COOH‐terminus.( 13 , 14 ) Slit ligands bind to Roundabout (Robo), a membrane‐protein family that all share a single transmembrane domain.( 15 ) There are four known Robo genes in mammals. The extracellular portions of Robo1, ‐2, and ‐3 contain five immunoglobulin domains and three fibrinogen type III repeats, and the intracellular portions of Robo1, ‐2, and ‐3 contain, among other domains, CC0, CC1, CC2, and CC3 motifs.( 16 , 17 ) Robo4 is found exclusively on vascular endothelial cells with an extracellular region containing only two immunoglobulin domains and an intracellular region containing CC0 and CC2 motifs, but not CC1 and CC3 motifs.( 18 ) Slit2 interacts with Robo1 to mediate repulsive cues in axon guidance,( 19 , 20 , 21 ) and neuronal migration.( 11 , 22 , 23 ) The Slit2–Robo1 interaction also functions as an endogenous inhibitor of leukocyte chemotaxis.( 12 ) In addition, our previous study has shown that Slit2 is secreted by cancer cells and Robo1 is expressed in vascular endothelial cells, where Slit2 can attract vascular endothelial cells in vitro and promote tumor‐induced angiogenesis in a xenograft model of human malignant melanoma cells.( 24 ) In accordance with our finding, Slit2–Robo4 also functions as a chemoattractant to recruit vascular endothelial cells to sites for vasculogenesis.( 25 , 26 ) However, no studies have yet been done on the effects of targeting Slit–Robo signaling on tumor angiogenesis of spontaneous tumorigenesis.

The hamster buccal pouch carcinoma is the most widely accepted model for oral cancer. Chemical induction of epithelial carcinogenesis in the buccal pouch of the Syrian hamster is a multistage model for investigating oral cancer development and intervention by therapeutic agents.( 27 , 28 , 29 ) Application of chemical carcinogens, such as 7,12‐dimethyl‐1,2‐benzanthracene (DMBA), to the hamster buccal pouch consistently induces squamous cell transformation‐associated lesions (hyperplasia, dysplasia, carcinoma in situ [CIS], and invasive carcinoma) in a time‐dependent manner that closely resembles the changes in morphology, pathophysiology, and biochemistry of human oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).( 30 , 31 , 32 ) The advantage of the model is that carcinogenesis is induced by a spontaneous process of malignant transformation rather than by the implantation of tumor cells through xenograft. Furthermore, it allows the study of premalignant stages during tumor development.

The role of Slit2‐mediated tumor angiogenesis in the development of chemical‐induced squamous cell carcinoma remains undetermined. In the present study, we investigated the function of Slit2‐mediated tumor angiogenesis in a multistage model of DMBA‐induced squamous cell carcinoma in the hamster buccal pouch. In addition, we compared the pathological changes in animal data to those in human tissue with OSCC. Our results have established that Slit–Robo signaling plays a causal role in tumor angiogenesis and growth in chemical‐induced hamster and human squamous carcinogenesis. The effectiveness of Robo blockade in inhibiting tumor angiogenesis demonstrates a novel target for oral cancer therapy.

Materials and Methods

Chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane assay.  The chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay was carried out as described previously,( 33 ) with some modification. On day 9, small windows (10 × 10 mm2) were opened in fertilized COFAL‐negative White Leghorn chicken eggs (Charles River Laboratories, North Franklin, CT, USA) by using a slow‐speed dental molar. The egg shells were then opened with sterile forceps. The sample solution (10 µg/mL of R5, a monoclonal antibody to the first immunoglobulin domain of Robo1 that neutralizes the binding of Robo1 to Slit2),( 24 ) and its isotype‐matched control IgG2b in 20 µL of phosphate‐buffered saline (pH 7.4), was then placed directly onto the CAM through the egg shell openings. The openings were sealed and the eggs were incubated at 37.8°C and 60% humidity in a rotating incubator for 48 h. The egg shells were then cut carefully along the axis of the median line and the content was discarded. The CAM vasculature around the egg shell openings was observed and defined as the treated area on which the CAM with R5 or control IgG were bound. Digital images were captured at room temperature with a Nikon camera (Nikon). The photographs were analyzed using a multispectral image analysis system to determine the microvessel density (MVD) by ratios of vessels versus CAM. Each experiment was repeated twice, with 10 embryos per condition. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD.

Buccal pouch squamous cell carcinoma model.  Sixty outbred male Syrian golden hamsters (Mesocricatus auratus), weighing 60–80 g (each) at the beginning of the experiment, were divided randomly into an experimental group (n = 50) and a control group (n = 10). They were housed under constant conditions (22°C, 12:12 h L : D cycle) and fed with tap water and standard Purina laboratory chow ad libitum. The experimental methods were the same as those described previously.( 27 , 28 ) Hamsters in the control group were untreated throughout the entire experiment. For experimental animals, the left pouch was painted twice with a 0.5% DMBA–acetone solution (Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA) using a no. 4 sable‐hair brush, and the right pouch was painted twice with acetone alone as the solvent control. Approximately 0.1 mL of the respective solution was twice applied topically to the medial wall of each pouch. Hamsters were treated three times per week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) for 10 weeks. Animals in the experimental group were killed simultaneously in groups of 10 by inhalation of a lethal dose of diethyl ether after treatment for 6, 8, 10, 12, or 16 weeks, whereas animals in the control group were killed after treatment for 16 weeks. Appropriate animal care and an approved experimental protocol were ensured through animal handling, and all procedures were conducted in accordance with the regulations of the China National Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.

Histology.  Histopathological classification of epithelial lesions in the buccal pouches of hamsters following DMBA treatment was scored as follows: (1) epithelial hyperplasia (n = 8); (2) moderate dysplasia (n = 12); (3) squamous cell CIS (n = 10); and (4) squamous cell carcinoma (n = 24). Normal mucosa (n = 8) from the right buccal pouch treated with acetone only was used as the control. Tissue samples were classified according to the World Health Organization guidelines for histological typing of cancer and precancer of the oral mucosa.( 34 )

Informed consent was obtained from patients with OSCC for the histological examination. The formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded specimens (117 in total) were obtained as surgical or biopsy samples, including normal cheek mucosa (n = 19), epithelial hyperplasia (n = 18), epithelial dysplasia (n = 20), CIS (n = 20), and carcinoma (n = 40). Specimens were collected between September 1999 and June 2003 from the archives of the Oral Pathology Laboratory, Shanghai 9th Hospital, China. Tissues were selected initially on the basis of the original pathological diagnosis. Following hematoxylin–eosin (HE) staining of the tissue sections, they were reevaluated by two experienced pathologists, according to World Health Organization classification guidelines.( 34 ) Specimens from patients who had not previously received radiotherapy were included in the current study to avoid potential complications from the pathological changes caused by radiation injury. Five serial sections (4 µm thick) from specimens collected from patients or animals were prepared and used for HE or immunohistochemical staining.

Immunohistochemical staining.  The buccal pouches of hamsters were dissected, excised, and fixed in 10% formalin solution for 24 h followed by paraffin embedding. OSCC specimens were also fixed and paraffin‐embedded as described above. Tissue sections (4 µm thick) were subsequently dewaxed, and endogenous peroxidase was quenched with 3% H2O2 in methanol. Prior to staining, non‐specific binding was blocked by incubation with 10% bovine serum albumin in 50 mM Tris‐HCl (pH 7.6), 0.15 M NaCl, and 0.02% NaN3 (TBS) at 37°C for 30 min. Tissue sections were incubated with 10 µg/mL of a rabbit preimmune IgG, a rabbit polyclonal antibody to von Willebrand factor (vWF; Peninsula Diagnostics, San Carlos, CA, USA), or a rabbit anti‐Slit2 polyclonal antibody,( 24 ) and a rabbit anti‐VEGF polyclonal antibody (Peninsula Diagnostics, San Carlos, CA, USA) in TBS containing 1% bovine serum albumin at 4°C overnight. The tissue sections were then treated with a horseradish peroxidase‐conjugated goat antirabbit IgG antibody (Sigma) at 37°C for 1 h. Color development was carried out by incubation with 0.05% 3‐3′diamenobenzidine solution (Sigma) in TBS supplemented with 2 mM H2O2 for 3 min. All incubations were followed by three washes in TBS over 15 min. Tissue sections were finally counterstained with hematoxylin. Semiquantitation of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF was determined according to previously published methods.( 35 , 36 ) Statistical analysis was carried out using the Mann–Whitney U‐test and one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Association among variables was assessed using the Spearman bivariate correlation test. P‐values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD, or mean ± SE of Slit2 and VEGF expression.

Microvessel density counts.  The MVD counts were determined in terms of the method described previously by Weidner et al.( 37 ) After the areas containing dense vascularity, either within the tumor or during different pathological stages, were selected using a microscopic field with ×100 power, all of the brown‐stained vessels were counted under three fields with ×200 power. The mean value of the vessels in the three fields was taken as the MVD count of a tumor. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD.

R5 treatment protocol.  Eighty male Syrian golden hamsters (6 weeks old) were treated with DMBA as described above. Briefly, the left buccal pouch was painted with a 0.5% solution of DMBA in acetone, and the right buccal pouch was painted with acetone alone for 10 weeks. Animals were weighed, and the size of the tumor was measured twice per week with a microcaliper. The tumor size was calculated by using the formula: volume = 0.52 × length × width2.( 24 ) In the animal model, the tumor size varied among animals because of individual differences. Of the 80 animals treated with DMBA, 48 hamsters with similar tumor sizes were selected. The rest of the 32 hamsters with too large or too small tumor sizes were eliminated from the experiments. Forty‐eight animals were divided randomly into three groups: R5 treatment group (n = 18), control antibody treatment group (n = 16), and sham group (n = 14).

At the beginning of the fourteenth week (there were 4‐week intervals between the DMBA and R5 treatments), an intraperitoneal injection of R5 or its isotype‐matched control IgG2b (1.2 mg/twice per week) was given for 4 weeks. For measurement of cell proliferation, intraperitoneal administration of bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU, 50 mg/kg; Sigma) was given 2 h prior to the death of the animals. Blood obtained retrovitreously was used for counting leukocytes. Normal and pathogenic mucosa of the bilateral buccal pouch was dissected and fixed for histological and immunohistologic studies as described above. For measurement of BrdU‐incorporated nuclei, a rat anti‐BrdU antibody (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland) was used at a concentration of 5 µg/mL. More than three non‐contiguous, randomly selected fields (at least 2000 cells) in each sample were counted under 400× magnification. The proliferative index (%) was calculated as the number of positively stained cells divided by the total number of tumorous cells counted.( 29 ) All data were analyzed with SPSS 10.0 statistical software using Student's t‐test and one‐way ANOVA. P‐values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD and proliferative index, or the mean ± SE of VEGF expression.

Results

Blockade of the Slit2–Robo1 interaction suppresses angiogenesis in chick embryo CAM.  We first investigated whether R5, a mouse monoclonal IgG2b antibody to the first immunoglobulin domain of Robo1 that neutralizes the interaction of Robo1 with Slit2,( 24 ) could inhibit angiogenesis in the chick embryo CAM assay compared to the blank control and the isotype‐matched control mouse IgG2b. The topical application of R5, but not the isotype‐matched control mouse IgG2b or sham treatment, suppressed the formation of neovasculature in chick embryo CAM (Fig. 1; P < 0.05). These data indicate that Slit2–Robo1 signaling is active in regulating angiogenesis

Figure 1.

Figure 1

R5 abrogates angiogenesis in chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM). Fertilized chicken eggs were carefully opened and either untreated (blank) or treated with an isotype‐matched control IgG2b or R5. (a) Representatives of vasculature displayed in the CAM assay. (b) Photographic images were analyzed using a MIAS multispectral image analysis system to determine the area ratios of vessel (VA) versus CAM (VA/CAM) in the blank group (n = 10), control antibody group (n = 10), and R5 group (n = 10). *P < 0.05.

Levels of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF in chemical‐induced carcinogenesis.  We then studied variations in the levels of vWF (an indicator of MVD), Slit2, and VEGF during different pathological stages in the hamster buccal pouch model of squamous cell carcinogenesis induced by DMBA. Tissue samples were stained with HE and classified into different pathological stages, including normal mucosa, hyperplasia, dysplasia, CIS, and carcinoma (Fig. 2a), according to World Health Organization classification guidelines.( 34 ) Blood vessels were stained immunohistochemically with an antibody to vWF. The presence of the Slit2 and VEGF proteins was determined immunohistochemically with an anti‐Slit2 antibody and an anti‐VEGF antibody, respectively. Notably, Slit2 was found only in a minority of animals with normal mucosa (1/8 hamsters, 12.5%) and an increasing number of animals with hyperplastic tissue (2/8 hamsters, 25%) and dysplastic tissue (5/12 hamsters, 41.7%). In contrast, Slit2 expression was increased in the tissue of all animals with CIS (10/10 hamsters, 100%), and carcinoma (24/24 hamsters, 100%). Analogously, VEGF expression was increased with varying frequency in tissues from normal mucosa (1/8 hamsters, 12.5%), hyperplasia (1/8 hamster, 12.5% positive), dysplasia (2/12 hamster, 16.7%), CIS (8/10 hamsters, 80%), and carcinoma (22/24 hamsters, 91.7%). Notably, staining for vWF also increased at advanced stages of squamous cell carcinogenesis. Quantitative analysis of our data illustrated that the stage of disease progression correlated positively with the degree of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF levels (Fig. 2b–d; r = 1.0, P < 0.01, for correlations between MVD vs Slit2, MVD vs VEGF, and Slit2 vs VEGF). Our findings indicate that Slit2 is present during multiple stages of DMBA‐induced squamous cell carcinogenesis, and imply that Slit–Robo signaling might play a role throughout disease progression.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Measurement of von Willebrand factor (vWF), Slit2, and vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF) expression in 7,12‐dimethyl‐1,2‐benzanthracene (DMBA)‐induced carcinogenesis of buccal pouch squamous cells. Syrian golden hamsters were divided randomly into the experimental group (n = 50) and control group (n = 10). For each animal, the left pouch was painted with a DMBA–acetone solution three times/week for 10 weeks. Animals in the experimental group were killed simultaneously after treatment for 6, 8, 10, 12, or 16 weeks (10 animals at each time point). The pouches were dissected and stained with preimmune IgG, anti‐vWF, anti‐Slit2, or anti‐VEGF antibodies. The statistical analysis was carried out using the one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Scale bars were 100 µm for hematoxylin–eosin and vWF staining and 50 µm for Slit2 and VEGF staining. **P < 0.01. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD, or mean ± SE of Slit2 and VEGF expression.

Neutralization of the Slit2–Robo1 interaction suppresses tumor angiogenesis and growth.  To explore the pathological significance of Slit2–Robo1 signaling in DMBA‐induced hamster buccal pouch squamous carcinogenesis, we examined whether treatment with R5 inhibited tumor angiogenesis and growth in vivo. Macroscopically, the malignant lesions induced by DMBA were highly dysplastic with the profound architectural and cytological distortion characteristic of human cancer (Fig. 3a). Compared to the isotype‐matched control IgG2b, intraperitoneal administration of R5 altered the appearance of the papillary protuberance (normally an ulcerative, erosive, reddish, and fragile solid tumor with microhemorrhaging) into a smooth, pale, and encapsulated tumor mass, suggesting a reduced blood supply to the surface of the tumor. Microscopic observation revealed profound cribriform tumor growth with areas of necrosis and prominent desmoplastic stromal reaction suggestive of invasion of the lamina propia (Fig. 3b). Compared with the control IgG group, R5 treatment clearly decreased lesions of blood vessels that were dilated irregularly, swollen, incontiguous, and microhemorrhagic. Immunohistochemical staining with anti‐vWF antibody revealed less neovasculature in cancerous tissue from hamsters treated with R5 compared with hamsters treated with control IgG (Fig. 3c,f). BrdU staining showed reduced proliferation in the R5‐treated tissues compared with control IgG‐treated tissues (Fig. 3d,f). The R5 group also had a significantly smaller tumor volume when compared with the blank and control IgG groups (Fig. 3e). Statistical analysis further demonstrated a reduction of MVD in the R5 group when compared with the MVD in the blank and control IgG groups (Fig. 3f). Notably, leukocytes and VEGF levels were not reduced in the R5‐treated group, thus ruling out the possibility that R5 acts on leukocytes or VEGF. Taken together, our data indicate that Slit–Robo signaling plays a causal role in tumor angiogenesis and growth in chemical‐induced squamous carcinogenesis.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

R5 inhibits tumor angiogenesis and growth. Following 7,12‐dimethyl‐1,2‐benzanthracene (DMBA) treatment for 10 weeks, hamsters were divided randomly into three groups including the blank group (n = 14), the control IgG group (n = 16), and the R5 group (n = 18). The (a) representative overall appearance and (b) hematoxylin–eosin staining of DMBA‐induced squamous cell carcinoma of hamster buccal pouch following treatment with control mouse IgG2b or R5. The staining of (c) von Willebrand factor (vWF) and (d) BrdU for neovasculatures and proliferation in DMBA‐induced carcinogenesis. (e) The measurements of tumor volumes and (f) the determinations of microvessel density (MVD), leukocyte and vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF), and bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) staining in each animal. The absolute values were 23.075 ± 6.11 for MVD, 16.11 ± 3.62 for leukocytes, 2.6 ± 0.88 for VEGF, and 21.28 ± 3.41 for BrdU. Scale bar = 100 µm. **P < 0.01. Results are mean ± SD of MVD and proliferative index, mean ± SE of VEGF expression.

Levels of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF in human OSCC.  To evaluate our in vivo findings in humans, we examined the variation in protein levels of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF in a total of 117 samples of human cheek mucosal squamous cell carcinoma at varying stages of disease progression. The pathological stages were classified into normal mucosa, hyperplasia, dysplasia, CIS, and carcinoma according to World Health Organization classification guidelines (Fig. 4a). Notably, Slit2 was rarely found in the tissue of normal mucosa (1/19 cases, 5% positive). It appeared with increasing frequency in samples of hyperplastic tissue (4/18 cases, 22% positive), dysplastic tissue (7/20 cases, 35% positive), CIS (9/20 cases, 45% positive), and carcinoma (34/40 cases, 85% positive). The basal VEGF level was moderately higher than the Slit2 levels in all disease stages, but a similar VEGF profile was observed (3/19 cases, 16% positive for normal mucosa; 11/18 cases, 61% positive for hyperplasia; 14/20 cases, 70% positive for dysplasia; 17/20 cases, 85% positive for CIS; 37/40 cases, 93% positive for carcinoma). Quantitative analysis of data on the levels of vWF, Slit2, and VEGF revealed a positive correlation between vWF, Slit2, and VEGF levels and the pathological stages of human OSCC (Fig. 4b–d; r = 1.0, P < 0.01, for the correlations between MVD vs Slit2, MVD vs VEGF, and Slit2 vs VEGF). Analogous to VEGF, the importance of Slit2 for tumor angiogenesis and growth is supported by our findings that Slit2 is present with increasing frequency in advanced stages of human OSCC.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Expression of von Willebrand factor (vWF), Slit2, and vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF) in human cheek squamous cell carcinoma. The samples of human cheek squamous cell cancer were fixed, paraffin‐embedded, sectioned, and stained with the rabbit preimmune IgG, the rabbit anti‐vWF polyclonal antibody, the rabbit anti‐Slit2 polyclonal antibody or the rabbit anti‐VEGF polyclonal antibody followed by a horseradish peroxidase‐conjugated goat antimouse IgG. The statistical analysis was carried out using the one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Scale bar = 100 µm. *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01. Results are the mean ± SD of the MVD, or mean ± SE of Slit2 and VEGF expression.

Discussion

Oral squamous cell carcinoma is the sixth most common neoplasm worldwide. More than half a million new cases are being diagnosed annually,( 38 ) particularly in certain areas of Asia, the Pacific Islands, Europe, and Brazil where it constitutes up to one‐quarter of all human cancers.( 39 , 40 ) Unfortunately, the survival of oral cancer patients has not improved significantly despite recent advances in radiotherapy and chemotherapy.( 41 ) Therefore, it is important to understand the pathogenesis of this cancer, and to design novel therapeutic strategies to combat this disease.

The role of Slit2 in oral squamous cell carcinogenesis remains undetermined; no study has yet been done on spontaneous tumorigenesis in an animal model compared with human OSCC tissue. Previously, Slit2 was shown to be frequently inactivated in lung, breast, and colorectal cancers due to hypermethylation of its promoter region.( 42 , 43 ) Recently, evidence is growing to support the involvement of Slit family members in carcinogenesis.( 24 , 42 , 44 ) We have previously examined human samples of malignant melanoma, rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma, invasive breast carcinoma, gastric squamous carcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma for Slit2 expression. We found that Slit2 was expressed in the cancerous tissues, but not in the nearby regions of apparently normal tissues.( 24 ) In the current study, we observed the Slit2 expression profile of oral cancer tissue derived from carcinoma patients and an animal model. We found that overexpression of Slit2 occurred in almost all human OSCC and tissues of hamster buccal pouch carcinoma, whereas Slit2 was expressed minimally in normal cheek mucosa. Therefore, our finding that Slit2 is expressed widely in OSCC indicates the importance of Slit–Robo signaling in the development of oral cancer.

The angiogenic properties of neuronal guidance factors, such as semaphorins, ephrins, slits, and netrins, and their cognate receptors, have drawn a lot of attention lately.( 45 ) Among the novel angiogenesis‐related pathways, Slit–Robo is one of the most recently identified pathways, and may play important roles in regulating the migration of endothelial cells.( 46 ) However, its exact effect in pathological angiogenesis remains to be clarified. We have previously shown that Slit2 is secreted by a variety of human cancer cells and Robo1 is expressed in vascular endothelial cells, where Slit2 can attract vascular endothelial cells in vitro and promote tumor‐induced angiogenesis in a xenograft model of human malignant melanoma cells.( 24 ) In the present study, we have shown that carcinogens, such as DMBA, can induce squamous cells of the hamster buccal pouch to express Slit2 in a stage‐specific manner, which is temporally consistent with the expression profile of VEGF, rendering an increased MVD within the lesions (Fig. 2). Interestingly, the findings of increased Slit2 and VEGF expression in relation to exaggerated MVD in chemical‐induced squamous cell carcinogenesis are consistent with patterns of enhanced Slit2 and VEGF expression and augmented MVD in human cheek samples of OSCC (Fig. 4). Various studies have reported that the levels of VEGF expression and an increased MVD in the oral mucosa are associated with angiogenesis and disease progression.( 47 ) Our findings confirm that high Slit2 expression is associated with higher tumor angiogenesis, as reflected by increased VEGF expression and higher MVD, which implies that Slit–Robo signaling may be involved in tumor angiogenesis throughout cancerous progression.

Most of the work on Slit–Robo signaling‐mediated angiogenesis has been done in embryonic and adult murine vasculatures.( 16 , 18 , 26 ) Furthermore, not much is known about the effect of blocking the Slit–Robo interaction in a spontaneous animal model. We have tested whether R5, a monoclonal antibody to Robo1 that can neutralize the binding of Slit2 to Robo1,( 24 ) inhibits angiogenesis in the chick embryo CAM assay (Fig. 1). The results showed that R5 significantly inhibited the angiogenesis of CAM, which further supports the idea that Slit2–Robo1 signaling plays an important role in angiogenesis. Hence, the R5 antibody affects Slit2–Robo1 signaling, as investigated using a squamous cell carcinogenesis model. Importantly, through both macroscopic and microscopic observation we found that R5 treatment could reduce blood supply to the tumor (Fig. 3a,b), and decrease tumor volume, MVD, and cell proliferation (Fig. 3c–f). These results suggest that the R5 antibody suppresses angiogenesis and, consequently, inhibits tumor growth in vivo. The importance of Slit2‐mediated tumor angiogenesis in chemical‐induced squamous cell carcinogenesis is consistent with the finding of our previous study on human malignant melanoma A375 cells in a xenograft model. The effectiveness of Robo1 blockade in inhibiting tumor angiogenesis demonstrates a novel target as well as molecular tools for cancer therapy.

According to our study, treatment with R5 had no significant effect on leukocyte levels in the in vivo model (Fig. 3f). This is consistent with the findings in the previous study.( 24 ) Slit2 seems not to be involved in leukocyte migration in malignant tumors in vivo. The failure of R5 treatment to alter the expression profile of VEGF in our in vivo model implies that Slit–Robo signaling induces and maintains tumor angiogenesis independently of VEGF signaling (Fig. 3f). An angiogenic signaling pathway that is independent of VEGF could potentially address the clinical problem of drug resistance in patients treated with VEGF antagonists, such as bevacizumab.( 48 , 49 ) Neutralization of both VEGF and Slit using a combination of bevacizumab and R5 might further suppress tumor angiogenesis and growth. Additionally, a rotating schedule of VEGF and Slit might prevent drug resistance during treatment with VEGF inhibitors alone. Thus, Slit antagonists potentially offer a novel approach to therapy for patients with late‐stage carcinoma refractory to traditional surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy.

In our study, high levels of VEGF and Slit2 were found in CIS and carcinomas, but not in dysplasia of animal models (Fig. 2), although they were shown in human dysplasia, CIS, and carcinomas (Fig. 4). The expression levels of Slit2 and VEGF correlate well with the advanced carcinoma stages. These findings have shown that Slit2 may be a marker of malignant transformation of oral dysplasia to oral cancer, although the temporal expression of Slit2 in an animal model and in patients might not be fully consistent. Furthermore, the findings indicate that Slit–Robo signaling participates in activating the angiogenic switch during carcinogenesis. Among preangiogenic hyperplasia, dysplasia, and CIS, angiogenic dysplasia and CIS, and tumor stages, angiogenesis is switched on during the premalignant stage of tumor development and persists thereafter.( 1 ) Given that Slit2 induces angiogenesis in vitro ( 24 ) and in our in vivo model, we suggest that Slit–Robo signaling is potentially involved in the angiogenic switch during tumorigenesis, including squamous cell carcinogenesis. We are currently testing the hypothesis that Slit–Robo signaling participates in the angiogenic switch and is pathologically significant using Slit2 transgenic mice crossed with the well‐characterized Rip1–Tag2 mice with spontaneous insulinoma.

In summary, the results of our current study have established that Slit–Robo signaling plays an important role in oral squamous carcinogenesis, which significantly extends the previous conclusion that Slit–Robo signaling attracts vascular endothelial cells in tumor angiogenesis. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study describing the overexpression of Slit2 in OSCC. Furthermore, the effectiveness of Robo1 blockade independent of VEGF signaling demonstrates a novel approach for antiangiogenic therapy. Moreover, our results also provide new information about Slit–Robo signaling participating in activating the angiogenic switch in the early stages of experimental oral carcinogenesis. Slit2 may be a useful marker for oral premalignant to malignant diagnosis. These findings add a new dimension to our understanding of Slit2‐mediated tumor angiogenesis and also open up a new era of potential therapeutic interventions.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr Biao Wang for preliminary studies and technical assistance and Michael Franklin for editing the manuscript. We are grateful to Dr Jiang Li for her generous support in providing human samples of OSCC. This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (30370694, 30421005, 30400245 and 30470858, 30630036), National Key Basic Research and Development Program of China (973 Program, 2002CB513000), Shanghai Municipal Commission for Science and Technology (04JC14078, 055407035, 058014578), and NIH (RO1AI64743).

References

  • 1. Hanahan D, Folkman J. Patterns and emerging mechanisms of the angiogenic switch during tumorigenesis. Cell 1996; 86: 353–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Carmeliet P. Angiogenesis in life, disease and medicine. Nature 2005; 438: 932–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Carmeliet P, Tessier‐Lavigne M. Common mechanisms of nerve and blood vessel wiring. Nature 2005; 436: 193–200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 2000; 100: 57–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Holash J, Thurston G, Rudge JS et al . Inhibitors of growth factor receptors, signaling pathways and angiogenesis as therapeutic molecular agents. Cancer Metastasis Rev 2006; 25: 243–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Folkman J. Angiogenesis: an organizing principle for drug discovery? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2007; 6: 273–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Folkman J. Angiogenesis. Annu Rev Med 2006; 57: 1–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Ferrara N. Role of vascular endothelial growth factor physiologic and pathologic angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. Semin Oncol 2002; 29: 10–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Itoh A, Miyabayashi T, Sakano S et al . Cloning and expression of three mammalian homologues of Drosophila slit suggest possible roles of Slit in the formation and maintenance of the nervous system. Mol Brain Res 1998; 62: 175–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Wong K, Park HT, Wu JY, Rao Y. Slit proteins: molecular guidance cues for cells ranging from neurons to leukocytes. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2002; 12: 583–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Wu W, Wong K, Chen JH et al . Directional guidance of neuronal migration in the olfactory system by the protein Slit. Nature 1999; 400: 331–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Wu JY, Feng L, Park HT et al . Slit, a molecule known to guide axon projection and neuronal migration, inhibits leukocyte chemotaxis induced by chemotactic factors. Nature 2001; 410: 948–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Piper M, Georgas K, Yamada T, Little M. Expression of the vertebrate Slit gene family and their putative receptors, the Robo genes, in the developing murine kidney. Mech Dev 2000; 94: 213–17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Marillat V, Cases O, Nguyen‐Ba‐Charvet KT, Tessier‐Lavigne M, Sotelo C, Chedotal A. Spatiotemporal expression patterns of slit and robo genes in the rat brain. J Comp Neurol 2002; 442: 130–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Stein E, Tessier‐Lavigne M. Hierarchical organization of guidance receptors: silencing of netrin attraction by slit through a Robo/DCC receptor complex. Science 2001; 291: 1928–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Huminiecki L, Gorn M, Suchting S, Poulsom R, Bicknell R. Magic roundabout is a new member of the roundabout receptor family that is endothelial specific and expressed at sites of active angiogenesis. Genomics 2002; 79: 547–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Wong K, Ren XR, Huang YZ et al . Signal transduction in neuronal migration: roles of GTPase activating proteins and the small GTPase Cdc42 in the Slit‐Robo pathway. Cell 2001; 107: 209–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Park KW, Morrison CM, Sorenson LK et al . Robo4 is a vascular‐specific receptor that inhibits endothelial migration. Dev Bio 2003; 261: 251–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Kidd T, Brose K, Mitchell KJ et al . Roundabout controls axon crossing of the CNS midline and defines a novel subfamily of evolutionarily conserved guidance receptors. Cell 1998; 92: 201–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Brose K, Bland KS, Wang KH et al . Slit proteins bind Robo receptors and have an evolutionarily conserved role in repulsive axon guidance. Cell 1999; 96: 795–806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Wang KH, Brose K, Arnott D et al . Biochemical purification of a mammalian slit protein as a positive regulator of sensory axon elongation and branching. Cell 1999; 96: 771–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Li HS, Chen JH, Wu W et al . Vertebrate Slit, a secreted ligand for the transmembrane protein roundabout, is a repellent for olfactory bulb axons. Cell 1999; 96: 807–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Whitford KL, Marillat V, Stein E et al . Regulation of cortical dendrite development by Slit–Robo interactions. Neuron 2002; 33: 47–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Wang B, Xiao Y, Ding BB et al . Induction of tumor angiogenesis by Slit–Robo signaling and inhibition of cancer growth by blocking Robo activity. Cancer Cell 2003; 4: 19–29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Kaur S, Castellone MD, Bedell VM, Konar M, Gutkind JS, Ramchandran R. Robo 4 signaling in endothelial cells implies attraction guidance mechanisms. J Biol Chem 2006; 281: 11 347–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Bedell VM, Yeo SY, Park KW et al . Roundabout 4 is essential for angiogenesis in vivo . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102: 6373–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Salley JJ. Experimental carcinogenesis in the cheek pouch of the Syrian hamster. J Dent Res 1954; 33: 253–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Gimenez‐Conti IB, Slaga TJ. The hamster cheek pouch carcinogenesis model. J Cell Biochem Suppl 1993; 17F: 83–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Li N, Chen X, Liao J et al . Inhibition of 7,12‐dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA)‐induced oral carcinogenesis hamsters by tea and curcumin. Carcinogenesis 2002; 23: 1307–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Chang KW, Sarraj S, Lin SC, Tsai PI, Solt D. P53 expression, p53 and Ha‐ras mutation and telomerase activation during nitrosamine‐mediated hamster pouch carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 2000; 21: 1441–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Kohno Y, Patel V, Kim Y et al . Apoptosis, proliferation and p12 (doc‐1) profiles in normal, dysplastic and malignant squamous epithelium of the Syrian hamster cheek pouch model. Oral Oncol 2002; 38: 274–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Chen YK, Huse SS, Lin LM. Inhibitory effect of inducible nitric oxide synthase inhibitor on DMBA‐induced hamster buccal‐pouch squamous‐cell carcinogenesis. Nitric Oxide 2005; 13: 232–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Chan T, Burggren W. Hypoxic incubation creates differential morphological effects during specific developmental critical windows in the embryo of the chicken (Gallus gallus ) Respir Physiol Neurobiol 2005; 145: 251–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Pingdborg J, Reichart P, Smith C, Van Der Wall I, World Health Organization . International Histological Classification of Tumors: Histological Typing of Cancer and Precancer of Oral Mucosa, 2nd edn. Berlin: Springer, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Yoshida K, Hirose Y, Tanaka T et al . Inhibitory effects of troglitazone, a peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor γ ligand, in rat tongue carcinogenesis initiated with 4‐nitroquinoline 1‐oxide. Cancer Sci 2003; 94: 365–71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Carlile J, Harada K, Baillie R et al . Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression in oral tissues: possible relevance to angiogenesis, tumour progression and field cancerisation. J Oral Pathol Med 2001; 30: 449–57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis‐correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 1–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005; 55: 74–108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Funk GF, Karnell LH, Robinson RA, Zhen WK, Trask DK, Hoffman HT. Presentation, treatment, and outcome of oral cavity cancer: a National Cancer Data Base report. Head Neck 2002; 24: 165–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T et al . Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 2004; 54: 8–29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Davies L, Welch HG. Epidemiology of head and neck cancer in the United States. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 135: 451–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Dallol A, Da Silva NF, Viacava P et al . SLIT2, a human homologue drosophila Slit2 gene, has tumor suppressor activity is frequently inactivated lung breast cancers. Cancer Res 2002; 62: 5874–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Dallol A, Morton D, Maher ER, Latif F. SLIT2 axon guidance molecule is frequently inactivated in colorectal cancer and suppresses growth of colorectal carcinoma cells. Cancer Res 2003; 63: 1054–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Latil A, Chene L, Cochant‐Priollet B et al . Quantification of expression of netrins, slits and their receptors in human prostate tumors. Int J Cancer 2003; 103: 306–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Klagsbrun M, Eichmann A. A role for axon guidance receptors and ligands in blood vessel development and tumor angiogenesis. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2005; 16: 535–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Fujiwara M, Ghazizadeh M, Kawanami O. Potential role of the Slit/Robo signal pathway in angiogenesis. Vasc Med 2006; 11: 115–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Arora S, Kaur J, Sharma C et al . Stromelysin 3, Ets‐1, and vascular endothelial growth factor expression in oral precancerous and cancerous lesions: correlation with microvessel density, progression, and prognosis. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 2272–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Casanovas O, Hicklin DJ, Berqers G, Hanahan D. Drug resistance by evasion of antiangiogenic targeting of VEGF signaling in late‐stage pancreatic islet tumors. Cancer Cell 2005; 8: 299–309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W et al . Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 2335–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Cancer Science are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES