Merlo et al: Cancer as an evolutionary and ecological process.

L. Merlo, J. Pepper, B. Reid and C. Maley. Cancer as an evolutionary and ecological process. Nature reviews cancer, Vol 6, pp 924-935, December 2006.

New year and (maybe not so) old traditions: the review of a paper. Nature reviews cancer is one of the world’s top scientific journal in terms of impact factor for a reason: they publish very interesting and comprehensive reviews in a field of such importance and as crowded as cancer research. Review papers are comparatively more likely to be cited than the ones about one group’s research, review papers in cancer research are normally highly cited since there are so many researchers working in the field. Review papers in a prestigious journal like Nature reviews cancer are thus bound to be cited once and once again and one would expect that only very good scientists would be invited to write for them (I believe that is only by invitation that you get to publish in these journals).

This review covers a topic that is very close to my interests: cancer from an evolutionary and ecological point of view. This view sees a neoplasm, a tumour, as a population of cells with a diversity of inheritable features. This means that evolution will happen and the fitter phenotypes will tend to be more abundant in the tumour population. Questions that might arise are how to alter the mutation rates, clone expansion and how does this expansion happen. Furthermore, given that in many cancers we can find mutations in vast areas of DNA, how do these cells retain enough genetic material to even function? The authors put forward the idea that this could be because most of the human genome is devoted to the development and homeostasis of a multicellular body and thus has no effect on the survival of the single cell in a tumour.

Having a diverse range of individuals whose uniqueness is inheritable is only one of the requirements of evolution. The other one is selection. In a tumour we have two sources of selection. Natural selection is the one that takes place in any tumour when there is scarcity of resources (oxygen, glucose, space). Under these circumstances some phenotypes are bound to be better at surviving and dividing than others. Additionally there is artificial selection which is the result of a therapy applied to a patient with a tumour. Artificial selection changes the fitness landscape, hopefully in such a way as to make survival impossible to every tumour cell. Unfortunately that is somewhat difficult so in many situations is worth altering the fitness landscape in ways that promote the survival of the least aggressive (that is, less likely to be able to invade and metastasise) tumour cells. In any case, altering the fitness landscape in favour of the patient is significantly easier when the tumour did not have much time to evolve.

Evolution in a tumour is not entirely the same as the one in organismal populations. That is to be expected given that tumour evolution lacks something of great importance: time. That is why during chemotherapy, surviving tumour cells are not the ones that develop mechanisms to resist but the ones that due to other reasons (genetic drift for example) already had the capability to resist before the therapy was used. Other differences include the reliance on stem cells for population diversity or that reproduction is asexual (which, incidentally, makes mathematical treatment much easier).

If a tumour resembles an ecosystem we should expect things such as cooperation, competition or parasitism. It seems that you get some of that. Like in an ecosystem individuals compete for the available resources (there is some speculation about that in the paper from Tomlinson reviewed the 10th of October of last year). There are predators if we understand as predation the behaviour of the cells from the immune system when they meet tumour cells. There should be parasitism, mutualism and commensalism (although the authors provide no evidence for that).

I found this a very nice and readable paper. I think it will make a good introduction to any cancer researcher that wants to study the evolutionary aspects of it. My only criticism of a paper that claims to deal with cancer as an evolutionary and ecological process is that the ecological part is significantly weaker than the evolutionary one.

8 thoughts on “Merlo et al: Cancer as an evolutionary and ecological process.

  1. Thanks for the nice summary. I agree with you that the ecological part of the review is weaker. I think that reflects the state of the art. There just hasn’t been many ecological analyses of neoplastic cells. I think the references we gave as to the fitness effects of cancer cells on their stroma and vice versa, along with the mutations in the stromal cells does mean that we have an example of a mutualistic and coevolutionary relationship, but we are piecing together different papers to put that story together, and it hasn’t been shown in one coherent system.

  2. Hi Carlo,

    Nice to hear from you. I know perfectly well what you mean with lack of relevant literature when it comes to cancer from the ecological point of view: I am trying to collect as much literature as possible but is quite difficult to find anything relevant. Still I believe that there is much to be gained from this and how the interdependence of the different elements in the ecosystem helps the survival or extinction of certain phenotypes. I hope that the comparatively recent focus on the influence of the microenvironment on cancer evolution will result in better knowledge of other ‘agents’ that could be used to enrich the view of the ecological processes in a tumour.

  3. Ew this seems to be like the resident movies, I was watching netgeo channel once and I saw a show about that it's possbile to me something like thew virus of the movie and dna manipulation, it seems this can be, but I really hope no.
    Thanks for sharing, excellent post.

  4. This is truth because belong our lives we can see those cancer mutations, that's because the different changes we're having in our environment and also because of our feeding, taking in account that food we consume have many hormones and other components.

  5. top [url=]free casino[/url] hinder the latest [url=]casino online[/url] autonomous no deposit hand-out at the leading [url=]

  6. [url=]casino[/url], also known as accepted casinos or Internet casinos, are online versions of one of a kind (“confrere and mortar”) casinos. Online casinos determine gamblers to lessen and wager on casino games with the prod the Internet.
    Online casinos superficially advantage strong on the huckster odds and payback percentages that are comparable to land-based casinos. Some online casinos take higher payback percentages in the output in forming of affair automobile games, and some bruit concerning payout grasp out audits on their websites. Assuming that the online casino is using an aptly programmed indefinitely opera house troupe generator, catalogue games like blackjack enthral ordeal an established limit edge. The payout participation persecute of these games are established at expected the rules of the game.
    Separate online casinos sublease or triumph their software from companies like Microgaming, Realtime Gaming, Playtech, Supranational Dodge Technology and CryptoLogic Inc.

  7. top [url=]casino bonus[/url] hinder the latest [url=][/url] unshackled no consign bonus at the foremost [url=]charitable casino games

  8. […] which I include myself, thinks that it is better to talk about the ecosystem of cancer [blog post][blog post]. I am interested in understanding how the interacions between the tumour cells (which is a very […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s