Cancer adaptations
NS in cancer
mutation arises increases proliferation - advantage
mutation arises allowing to break free of environment and spread = selected for
cancer phylogenies
can reconstruct e.g. breast cancer cell phylogeny shows all cancer cells are descended from a CA and belong to sub-clones with particular genotypes.
ancestral to metazoa?
appear in mollusca, arthopoda, vertebrata etc
failure of host adaptation to novel envrionment
james graham
aruged cancer was result of new cellular conditions arising in evolution and failure of adaptation
analogy: change product in factory = product decline, takes a while to fix the kinks
argued snail shells werent anti-predation but anti-cancer
examples backing JG hypothesis
would expect more cancer in organisms with more rapid morphology changes
rapid evo in nature?
pediactic cancers are rare
increased risk of osteosarcoma in children tall for their age, occurs at puberty. suggests analagous to dogs. due to pubertal growth spurt
osteosarcoma due to rapid evo of growth rate, anti cancers havent had time to catch up and suppress extra proliferation
growth rate in humans compared
macaques dont have pubertal growth spert
paleontologists suggest homo eretus didnt have a grow spurt
cancers found mostly in adults
= colon, lung, prostate, endothelial
- almost non existant in children
cancers common in children
`1. nervous system tumours - in brain, which has gone fast evo, 3x bigger than apes
2. childhood leukaemia: immune systems have been undergoing continued rapid evo in response to pathogens
arguument for prevelance of childhood cancers
child cancers arent the consequence of exposure or old age, but result of evo changes in morphology as tissue hasnt evolved anti-cancer devices yet
e.g. gut tissue proliferates as much in children as adults but dont see gut or skin cancer in children, sorted out kinks as older in evo time?
animal diversity in body size
differ enormously mammals = 0.02kg dog =20kg human = 75kg whale = 150,000 kg cell size is similar so cell no. must be greater. 6/7 magnitudes between mouse and whale
neoplasia and body size
if risk of neoplasia is constant would expect bigger animals to have more cancers than smaller
all whales should get cancer.
Peto’s paradox
risk of cancer seems constant despite body size changes
wild mice = 46% death by cancer
dogs = 46% death by cancer (US)
humans = 22% death by cancer
nunny theory of cancer resistance
M = expected no. of mutations as function of cell no (c). M = 4(c-1)u M = 4cu-4u (4neU)
proportion of indviduals lacking a mutation
P = e^(-4u(c-1))
P decreases with no. of cells.
P = e^(-4u(c-1))
animal few cells proportion that lack mutation (p) = 1
animal 1 mill cells p = 0 (everyone has a mutation)
selection differential and cancer
if animal has cancer causing muttion which is lethal can estimate selection differential acting against cancer causing mutations S = 1-P, S = 1-e ^-4u(c-1) c = 1000 (c. elegans) u = 10^5 (know from data) selection differential = 0.04
what is required for selection to be effective
S > 1/N
S = 0.04
N = 100
1./ 100 = 0.01
even in small population size of 100 cells there will be selection for cancer resistance
** no. of TS genes increase in evo as animals increase in body size = constant rate of cancer
Tumour suppressor genes
defined as genes in which mutants causing lack of function cause cancer
homo/hetero = responsible for most ases of inherited cancer
inherited cancer example TS
commonly mutation TS leading to cancer
NFI - neurofibromatosis
BRCA1 - breast cancer
Rb - retinoblastoma eye
P53 - many cancer
solution to peters paradox
evolution of TS
- to get cancer need multiple losses of TS genes
- some cancers caused by mutations in single gene Rb, but others requrie sereis of mutations in multiple genes. - e.g. colon cancer
colon cancer need to have many mutations in many genes - suggest big animal have evolved more TS genes