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.

Example Input: Although essentially unknown as a therapeutic concept as recently as a decade ago, it is difficult now to open a cardiology journal, attend a cardiology meeting, or scan a newspaper without being caught up in the excitement generated by the thought that angiogenesis therapy may soon have a major impact on the treatment of patients with atherosclerotic lesions obstructing arteries that supply the myocardium or legs. Potent therapeutic interventions, however, are rarely free of at least the potential for causing harmful effects. Angiogenesis therapy is no exception. Despite this and despite the fact that the only reasonably powered, randomized, double-blind clinical studies to date have failed to demonstrate primary end-point efficacy,1 thoughtful consideration of the serious side effects that might accompany any therapeutic benefit has been largely missing from scientific communications. For the lay media, a switch from this unbounded enthusiasm to profound skepticism occurred recently after a report of the tragic death of a young man caused by injection of large amounts of an adenoviral vector into the hepatic artery (unrelated to angiogenesis therapy).2 For the scientific community, however, there has been a general lack of in-depth discussion of the potential dangers inherent in angiogenesis interventions. Such a discussion is appropriate not only because of the event cited above but also because considerable mechanistic data are available that actually permit us to identify specific side effects that we might anticipate as potential complications of angiogenesis therapy. The following therefore is a discussion of potential complications based predominantly on our knowledge of the underlying biological activities of 2 of the most potent angiogenic cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF). Angiogenic agents are thought to have the potential to induce neovascularization in many different tissues. This becomes important in that under clinical circumstances it
Example Output: Angiogenesis therapy: amidst the hype, the neglected potential for serious side effects.

Example Input: The recent availability in culture of embryo-derived pluripotential cells which exhibit both a normal karyotype and a high differentiative ability13 has encouraged us to assess the potential of these cells to form functional germ cells following their incorporation into chimaeric mice. We report here the results of blastocyst injection studies using three independently isolated XY embryo-derived cell lines (EK.CP1, EK.CC1.1 and EKCC1.2) which produce a very high proportion (>50%) of live-born animals that are overtly chimaeric. Seven chimaeric male mice, derived from these three lines, have, so far, proved to be functional germ-line chimaeras.
Example Output: Formation of germ-line chimaeras from embryo-derived teratocarcinoma cell lines

Example Input: The two membrane proteins, STIM1 and Orai1, have each been shown to be essential for the activation of store-operated channels (SOC). Yet, how these proteins functionally interact is not known. Here, we reveal that STIM1 and Orai1 expressed together reconstitute functional SOCs. Expressed alone, Orai1 strongly reduces store-operated Ca(2+) entry (SOCE) in human embryonic kidney 293 cells and the Ca(2+) release-activated Ca(2+) current (I(CRAC)) in rat basophilic leukemia cells. However, expressed along with the store-sensing STIM1 protein, Orai1 causes a massive increase in SOCE, enhancing the rate of Ca(2+)entry by up to 103-fold. This entry is entirely store-dependent since the same coexpression causes no measurable store-independent Ca(2+) entry. The entry is completely blocked by the SOC blocker, 2-aminoethoxydiphenylborate. Orai1 and STIM1 coexpression also caused a large gain in CRAC channel function in rat basophilic leukemia cells. The close STIM1 homologue, STIM2, inhibited SOCE when expressed alone but coexpressed with Orai1 caused substantial constitutive (store-independent) Ca(2+) entry. STIM proteins are known to mediate Ca(2+) store-sensing and endoplasmic reticulum-plasma membrane coupling with no intrinsic channel properties. Our results revealing a powerful gain in SOC function dependent on the presence of both Orai1 and STIM1 strongly suggest that Orai1 contributes the PM channel component responsible for Ca(2+) entry. The suppression of SOC function by Orai1 overexpression likely reflects a required stoichiometry between STIM1 and Orai1.
Example Output:
Orai1 and STIM reconstitute store-operated calcium channel function.