Search

While it is recognised that most, if not all, multicellular organisms harbour neoplastic processes within their bodies, the timing of when these undesirable cell proliferations are most likely to occur and progress throughout the organism's lifetime remains only partially documented. Due to the different mechanisms implicated in tumourigenesis, it is highly unlikely that this probability remains constant at all times and stages of life. In this article, we summarise what is known about this variation, considering the roles of age, season and circadian rhythm. While most studies requiring that level of detail be done on humans, we also review available evidence in other animal species. For each of these timescales, we identify mechanisms or biological functions shaping the variation. When possible, we show that evolutionary processes likely played a role, either directly to regulate the cancer risk or indirectly through trade-offs. We find that neoplastic risk varies with age in a more complex way than predicted by early epidemiological models: rather than resulting from mutations alone, tumour development is dictated by tissue- and age-specific processes. Similarly, the seasonal cycle can be associated with risk variation in some species with life-history events such as sexual competition or mating being timed according to the season. Lastly, we show that the circadian cycle influences tumourigenesis in physiological, pathological and therapeutic contexts. We also highlight two biological functions at the core of these variations across our three timescales: immunity and metabolism. Finally, we show that our understanding of the entanglement between tumourigenic processes and biological cycles is constrained by the limited number of species for which we have extensive data. Improving our knowledge of the periods of vulnerability to the onset and/or progression of (malignant) tumours is a key issue that deserves further investigation, as it is key to successful cancer prevention strategies., Competing Interests: F.T. is an Editorial Board member of Evolutionary Applications and a co‐author of this article. To minimise bias, they were excluded from all editorial decision‐making related to the acceptance of this article for publication. The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s). Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Growing evidence indicates that human activities are causing cancer rates to rise in both human and wildlife populations. This is due to the inability of ancestral anti-cancer defences to cope with modern environmental risks. The evolutionary mismatch between modern oncogenic risks and evolved cancer defences has far-reaching effects on various biological aspects at different timeframes, demanding a comprehensive study of the biology and evolutionary ecology of the affected species. Firstly, the increased activation of anti-cancer defences leads to excessive energy expenditure, affecting other biological functions and potentially causing health issues like autoimmune diseases. Secondly, tumorigenesis itself can impact important fitness-related parameters such as competitiveness, predator evasion, resistance to parasites, and dispersal capacity. Thirdly, rising cancer risks can influence the species' life-history traits, often favoring early reproduction to offset fitness costs associated with cancer. However, this strategy has its limits, and it may not ensure the sustainability of the species if cancer risks continue to rise. Lastly, some species may evolve additional anti-cancer defences, with uncertain consequences for their biology and future evolutionary path. In summary, we argue that the effects of increased exposure to cancer-causing substances on wildlife are complex, ranging from immediate responses to long-term evolutionary changes. Understanding these processes, especially in the context of conservation biology, is urgently needed., Competing Interests: Frédéric Thomas is an Editorial Board member of Evolutionary Applications and a co‐author of this article. To minimize bias, Frédéric Thomas was excluded from all editorial decision‐making related to the acceptance of this article for publication., (© 2024 The Author(s). Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Since the emergence of a transmissible cancer, devil facial tumour disease (DFT1), in the 1980s, wild Tasmanian devil populations have been in decline. In 2016, a second, independently evolved transmissible cancer (DFT2) was discovered raising concerns for survival of the host species. Here, we applied experimental and modelling frameworks to examine competition dynamics between the two transmissible cancers in vitro. Using representative cell lines for DFT1 and DFT2, we have found that in monoculture, DFT2 grows twice as fast as DFT1 but reaches lower maximum cell densities. Using co-cultures, we demonstrate that DFT2 outcompetes DFT1: the number of DFT1 cells decreasing over time, never reaching exponential growth. This phenomenon could not be replicated when cells were grown separated by a semi-permeable membrane, consistent with exertion of mechanical stress on DFT1 cells by DFT2. A logistic model and a Lotka-Volterra competition model were used to interrogate monoculture and co-culture growth curves, respectively, suggesting DFT2 is a better competitor than DFT1, but also showing that competition outcomes might depend on the initial number of cells, at least in the laboratory. We provide theories how the in vitro results could be translated to observations in the wild and propose that these results may indicate that although DFT2 is currently in a smaller geographic area than DFT1, it could have the potential to outcompete DFT1. Furthermore, we provide a framework for improving the parameterization of epidemiological models applied to these cancer lineages, which will inform future disease management., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Infectious diseases are a major threat for biodiversity conservation and can exert strong influence on wildlife population dynamics. Understanding the mechanisms driving infection rates and epidemic outcomes requires empirical data on the evolutionary trajectory of pathogens and host selective processes. Phylodynamics is a robust framework to understand the interaction of pathogen evolutionary processes with epidemiological dynamics, providing a powerful tool to evaluate disease control strategies. Tasmanian devils have been threatened by a fatal transmissible cancer, devil facial tumour disease (DFTD), for more than two decades. Here we employ a phylodynamic approach using tumour mitochondrial genomes to assess the role of tumour genetic diversity in epidemiological and population dynamics in a devil population subject to 12 years of intensive monitoring, since the beginning of the epidemic outbreak. DFTD molecular clock estimates of disease introduction mirrored observed estimates in the field, and DFTD genetic diversity was positively correlated with estimates of devil population size. However, prevalence and force of infection were the lowest when devil population size and tumour genetic diversity was the highest. This could be due to either differential virulence or transmissibility in tumour lineages or the development of host defence strategies against infection. Our results support the view that evolutionary processes and epidemiological trade-offs can drive host-pathogen coexistence, even when disease-induced mortality is extremely high. We highlight the importance of integrating pathogen and population evolutionary interactions to better understand long-term epidemic dynamics and evaluating disease control strategies., Competing Interests: The authros declare no competing interest., (© 2023 The Authors. Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Recent pandemics have highlighted the urgency to connect disciplines studying animal, human, and environment health, that is, the "One Health" concept. The One Health approach takes a holistic view of health, but it has largely focused on zoonotic diseases while not addressing oncogenic processes. We argue that cancers should be an additional key focus in the One Health approach based on three factors that add to the well-documented impact of humans on the natural environment and its implications on cancer emergence. First, human activities are oncogenic to other animals, exacerbating the dynamics of oncogenesis, causing immunosuppressive disorders in wildlife with effects on host-pathogen interactions, and eventually facilitating pathogen spillovers. Second, the emergence of transmissible cancers in animal species (including humans) has the potential to accelerate biodiversity loss across ecosystems and to become pandemic. It is crucial to understand why, how, and when transmissible cancers emerge and spread. Third, translating knowledge of tumor suppressor mechanisms found across the Animal Kingdom to human health offers novel insights into cancer prevention and treatment strategies., (© 2021 The Authors. Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The application of evolutionary and ecological principles to cancer prevention and treatment, as well as recognizing cancer as a selection force in nature, has gained impetus over the last 50 years. Following the initial theoretical approaches that combined knowledge from interdisciplinary fields, it became clear that using the eco-evolutionary framework is of key importance to understand cancer. We are now at a pivotal point where accumulating evidence starts to steer the future directions of the discipline and allows us to underpin the key challenges that remain to be addressed. Here, we aim to assess current advancements in the field and to suggest future directions for research. First, we summarize cancer research areas that, so far, have assimilated ecological and evolutionary principles into their approaches and illustrate their key importance. Then, we assembled 33 experts and identified 84 key questions, organized around nine major themes, to pave the foundations for research to come. We highlight the urgent need for broadening the portfolio of research directions to stimulate novel approaches at the interface of oncology and ecological and evolutionary sciences. We conclude that progressive and efficient cross-disciplinary collaborations that draw on the expertise of the fields of ecology, evolution and cancer are essential in order to efficiently address current and future questions about cancer., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2020 The Authors. Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Changes in diet are frequently correlated with the occurrence and progression of malignant tumors (i.e., cancer) in both humans and other animals, but an integrated conceptual framework to interpret these changes still needs to be developed. Our aim is to provide a new perspective on dietary changes in tumor-bearing individuals by adapting concepts from parasitology. Dietary changes may occur alongside tumor progression for several reasons: (i) as a pathological side effect with no adaptive value, (ii) as the result of self-medication by the host to eradicate the tumor and/or to slow down its progression, (iii) as a result of host manipulation by the tumor that benefits its progression, and finally (iv) as a host tolerance strategy, to alleviate and repair damages caused by tumor progression. Surprisingly, this tolerance strategy can be beneficial for the host even if diet changes are beneficial to tumor progression, provided that cancer-induced death occurs sufficiently late (i.e., when natural selection is weak). We argue that more data and a unifying evolutionary framework, especially during the early stages of tumorigenesis, are needed to understand the links between changes in diet and tumor progression. We argue that a focus on dietary changes accompanying tumor progression can offer novel preventive and therapeutic strategies against cancer.

Central to evolutionary theory is the idea that living organisms face phenotypic and/or genetic trade-offs when allocating resources to competing life-history demands, such as growth, survival, and reproduction. These trade-offs are increasingly considered to be crucial to further our understanding of cancer. First, evidences suggest that neoplastic cells, as any living entities subject to natural selection, are governed by trade-offs such as between survival and proliferation. Second, selection might also have shaped trade-offs at the organismal level, especially regarding protective mechanisms against cancer. Cancer can also emerge as a consequence of additional trade-offs in organisms (e.g., eco-immunological trade-offs). Here, we review the wide range of trade-offs that occur at different scales and their relevance for understanding cancer dynamics. We also discuss how acknowledging these phenomena, in light of human evolutionary history, may suggest new guidelines for preventive and therapeutic strategies.

The evolutionary perspective of cancer (which origins and dynamics result from evolutionary processes) has gained significant international recognition over the past decade and generated a wave of enthusiasm among researchers. In this context, several authors proposed that insights into evolutionary and adaptation dynamics of cancers can be gained by studying the evolutionary strategies of organisms. Although this reasoning is fundamentally correct, in our opinion, it contains a potential risk of excessive adaptationism, potentially leading to the suggestion of complex adaptations that are unlikely to evolve among cancerous cells. For example, the ability of recognizing related conspecifics and adjusting accordingly behaviors as in certain free-living species appears unlikely in cancer. Indeed, despite their rapid evolutionary rate, malignant cells are under selective pressures for their altered lifestyle for only few decades. In addition, even though cancer cells can theoretically display highly sophisticated adaptive responses, it would be crucial to determine the frequency of their occurrence in patients with cancer, before therapeutic applications can be considered. Scientists who try to explain oncogenesis will need in the future to critically evaluate the metaphorical comparison of selective processes affecting cancerous cells with those affecting organisms. This approach seems essential for the applications of evolutionary biology to understand the origin of cancers, with prophylactic and therapeutic applications.

For an increasing number of biologists, cancer is viewed as a dynamic system governed by evolutionary and ecological principles. Throughout most of human history, cancer was an uncommon cause of death and it is generally accepted that common components of modern culture, including increased physiological stresses and caloric intake, favor cancer development. However, the precise mechanisms for this linkage are not well understood. Here, we examine the roles of ecological and physiological disturbances and resource availability on the emergence of cancer in multicellular organisms. We argue that proliferation of 'profiteering phenotypes' is often an emergent property of disturbed, resource-rich environments at all scales of biological organization. We review the evidence for this phenomenon, explore it within the context of malignancy, and discuss how this ecological framework may offer a theoretical background for novel strategies of cancer prevention. This work provides a compelling argument that the traditional separation between medicine and evolutionary ecology remains a fundamental limitation that needs to be overcome if complex processes, such as oncogenesis, are to be completely understood.

We tested the fitness consequences of introgression of fast-growing domesticated fish into a wild population. Fry from wild and domesticated rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) crosses, F1 hybrids, and first- and second-generation backcrosses were released into two natural lakes. Parentage analysis using microsatellite loci facilitated the identification of survivors, so fitness was estimated in nature from the first-feeding stage. Results indicated that under certain conditions, domesticated fish survived at least as well as wild fish within the same environment. Relative growth and survival of the crosses, however, were highly dependent on environment. During the first summer, fastest-growing crosses had the highest survival, but this trend was reversed after one winter and another summer. Although the F1 hybrids showed evidence of outbreeding depression because of the disruption of local adaptation, there was little evidence of outbreeding depression in the backcrosses, and the second-generation backcrosses exhibited a wild-type phenotype. This information is relevant for assessing the multigenerational risk of escaped or released domesticated fish should they successfully interbreed with wild populations and provides information on how to minimize detrimental impacts of a conservation breeding and/or management programme. These data also further understanding of the selection pressures in nature that maintain submaximal rates of growth.