FIGURE 6.

miR‐126‐3p is implicated in the pro‐angiogenic effect of SPRED‐1 abolition. (A) To analyse the effect of CXCL12 on SPRED‐1 expression, the HUVEC were stimulated or not with CXCL12 (6 nmol.L^‐1) for 24 h. Total proteins were extracted, and Western blot analysis was performed. (B) To analyse the implication of SPRED‐1 in CXCL12‐induced angiogenesis, HUVEC were transfected with siRNA‐SPRED‐1 (25 nmol.L^‐1), deposited on Matrigel and stimulated with CXCL12 (6 nmol.L^‐1) for 6 h. (C) To analyse the implication of miR‐126‐3p in the pro‐angiogenic effect of the abolition of SPRED‐1, HUVEC and were co‐transfected with siRNA‐SPRED‐1 (25 nmol.L^‐1) and antimiR‐126‐3p (20 nmol.L^‐1). After co‐transfection, HUVEC were deposited on Matrigel and stimulated by CXCL12 (6 nmol.L^‐1) for 6 h. For all analysis of vascular tubes formation and meshes quantification, the phase contrast microscope and the Archimed^(TM) and the Histolab^(TM) software were used. The results are expressed as mean ± SEM of three independent experiments. *p <.05 vs SCL; ^# p <.01 vs SCL + CXCL12; ^$ p <.05 siRNA‐SPRED‐1 vs siRNA‐SPRED‐1 + CXCL12; ^& p <.05 antimiR‐126‐3p vs antimiR‐126‐3p + siRNA‐SPRED‐1. Magnification: x40