Figure 7.

Effective anti-tumor and tumor microenvironment remodeling after treatment with different nano-complexes in the B16 tumor model. (A) Schematic illustration of the time sequence of administration of nano-complex to tumor-bearing mice. (B) Tumor volume from mice that received iv infusion containing different nano-complexes. (C) Tumor inhibition fractions after receiving iv infusion of various nano-complexes formulations. (D) Evidence of necrosis in tumors after treatment with different nano-complexes by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. (E) Caspase-3 analysis of tumor tissue indicating apoptotic cells by immunofluorescence in frozen tumor sections. (F) The number of vessels per image field is identified by CD31 label after treatment with different nano-complexes. (G) VEGF labeled by immunofluorescence indicates the quality of pro-angiogenesis secretion per image field after treatment with different nano-complexes. The data were analyzed by automatic multispectral imaging system (PerkinElmer Vectra II). Scale bar: 100 μm. For E-G, the quantifications are shown in Figure S11A-C. Three mice were analyzed in every group (n = 3), and one representative image per group is displayed. Data are the mean ± SEM and representative of three independent experiments. Differences between two groups were tested using an unpaired, two-tailed Student's t-test. Differences among multiple groups were tested with one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's multiple comparison. Significant differences between groups are expressed as follows: *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, or ***P < 0.001.