In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate title for this article. Preferred titles are under thirty words.

[Q]: Angiogenesis, the development of new blood vessel from pre-existing vessels, is a key process in the formation of the granulation tissue during wound healing. The appropriate development of new blood vessels, along with their subsequent maturation and differentiation, establishes the foundation for functional wound neovasculature. We performed studies in vivo and used a variety of cellular and molecular approaches in vitro to show that insulin stimulates angiogenesis and to elucidate the signalling mechanisms by which this protein stimulates microvessel development. Mice skin injected with insulin shows longer vessels with more branches, along with increased numbers of associated alpha-smooth muscle actin-expressing cells, suggesting the appropriate differentiation and maturation of the new vessels. We also found that insulin stimulates human microvascular endothelial cell migration and tube formation, and that these effects occur independently of VEGF/VEGFR signalling, but are dependent upon the insulin receptor itself. Downstream signalling pathways involve PI3K, Akt, sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1 (SREBP-1) and Rac1; inhibition of these pathways results in elimination of endothelial cell migration and tube formation and significantly decreases the development of microvessels. Our findings strongly suggest that insulin is a good candidate for the treatment of ischaemic wounds and other conditions in which blood vessel development is impaired.
[A]: Cell and molecular mechanisms of insulin-induced angiogenesis

[Q]: 1. The liver is the target organ for the lipid-regulating effect of rosuvastatin, a new 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor, and liver-selective uptake of this drug is therefore a desirable property. The uptake kinetics of rosuvastatin were investigated and compared with those of pravastatin using isolated rat hepatocytes. 2. Uptake for both drugs involved both active transport and passive diffusion processes. The Michaelis constant (K(m)) of uptake rate for rosuvastatin (9.17 micro M) was approximately half that for pravastatin (16.5 micro M). However, the maximum uptake rate (V(max)) and carrier-mediated uptake clearance (V(max)/K(m)) of rosuvastatin were significantly (p < 0.01) greater than those of pravastatin, and a larger contribution of carrier-mediated uptake clearance to total uptake clearance was shown for rosuvastatin (contribution ratio 0.903 versus pravastatin 0.654). 3. Sodium and chloride ions did not play a significant role in the uptake of rosuvastatin and pravastatin, but the uptake of both drugs was inhibited both by depletion of cellular ATP and by organic anions such as bromosulfophthalein. 4. Rosuvastatin competitively inhibited the uptake of pravastatin, with an inhibition constant (K(i)) (2.75 micro M) relatively similar to its K(m). 5. The results suggest that an organic anion transport protein is the main mediator of the hepatic uptake of rosuvastatin and pravastatin, which occurs in an ATP-dependent manner. Our results indicated that rosuvastatin was taken up by the hepatocytes via the same transport systems as pravastatin, but with a greater affinity and efficiency than pravastatin.
[A]: Uptake of rosuvastatin by isolated rat hepatocytes: comparison with pravastatin.

[Q]: CONTEXT The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) altered reimbursements for outpatient chemotherapy drugs and drug administration services. Anecdotal reports suggest that these adjustments may have negatively affected access to chemotherapy for Medicare beneficiaries.
OBJECTIVE To compare patient wait times and travel distances for chemotherapy before and after the enactment of the MMA.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Analysis of a nationally representative 5% sample of claims from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for the period 2003 through 2006. Patients were Medicare beneficiaries with incident breast cancer, colorectal cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, or lymphoma who received chemotherapy in inpatient hospital, institutional outpatient, or physician office settings.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Days from incident diagnosis to first chemotherapy visit and distance traveled for treatment, controlling for age, sex, race/ethnicity, cancer type, geographic region, comorbid conditions, and year of diagnosis and treatment.
RESULTS There were 5082 incident cases of breast cancer, colorectal cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, or lymphoma in 2003; 5379 cases in 2004; 5116 cases in 2005; and 5288 cases in 2006. Approximately 70% of patients received treatment in physician office settings in each year. Although the distribution of treatment settings in 2004 and 2005 was not significantly different from 2003 (P = .24 and P = .72, respectively), there was a small but significant change from 2003 to 2006 (P = .02). The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy in inpatient settings decreased from 10.2% in 2003 to 8.8% in 2006 (P = .03), and the proportion in institutional outpatient settings increased from 21.1% to 22.5% (P = .004). The proportion in physician offices remained at 68.7% (P = .29). The median time from diagnosis to initial chemotherapy visit was 28 days in 2003, 27 days in 2004, 29 days in 2005, and 28 days in 2006. In multivariate analyses, average wait times for chemotherapy were 1.96 days longer in 2005 than in 2003 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-3.80 days; P = .04) but not significantly different in 2006 (0.88 days; 95% CI, -0.96 to 2.71 days; P = .35). Median travel distance was 7 miles (11.2 km) in 2003 and 8 miles (12.8 km) in 2004 through 2006. After adjustment, average travel distance remained slightly longer in 2004 (1.47 miles [2.35 km]; 95% CI, 0.87-2.07 miles [1.39-3.31 km]; P < .001), 2005 (1.19 miles [1.90 km]; 95% CI, 0.58-1.80 miles [0.93-2.88 km]; P < .001), and 2006 (1.30 miles [2.08 km]; 95% CI, 0.69-1.90 miles [1.10-3.04 km]; P < .001) compared with 2003.
CONCLUSION There have not been major changes in travel distance and patient wait times for chemotherapy in the Medicare population since 2003, the year before MMA-related changes in reimbursement.
[A]:
Association between the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and patient wait times and travel distance for chemotherapy.