EDP Sciences logo
Authentification abonné
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 40 / Numéro 4 (Avril 2024) Med Sci (Paris), 40 4 (2024) 343-350 Références
Open Access
Numéro
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 40, Numéro 4, Avril 2024
Page(s) 343 - 350
Section M/S Revues
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2024038
Publié en ligne 23 avril 2024
  1. Madsen T, Arnal A, Vittecoq M, et al. Cancer Prevalence and Etiology in Wild and Captive Animals. Paris: Elsevier Inc., 2009 : 11–46. [Google Scholar]
  2. Rothschild BM, Witzke BJ, Hershkovitz I. Metastatic cancer in the Jurassic. Lancet 1999 ; 354 : 398. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aktipis AC, Boddy AM, Jansen G, et al. Cancer across the tree of life: Cooperation and cheating in multicellularity. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 2015 ; 370 : 20140219. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Scharrer B, Lochhead MS. Tumors in the Invertebrates: A Review. Cancer Res 1950 ; 10 : 403–419. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Albuquerque TAF, Drummond do Val L, Doherty A, et al. From humans to hydra: patterns of cancer across the tree of life. Biol Rev 2018 ; 93 : 1715–1734. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Haridy Y, Witzmann F, Asbach P, et al. Triassic Cancer-Osteosarcoma in a 240-Million-Year-Old Stem-Turtle. JAMA Oncol 2019 ; 5 : 425. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Odes EJ, Randolph-Quinney PS, Steyn M, et al. Earliest hominin cancer: 1.7-million-yearold osteosarcoma from Swartkrans cave, South Africa. South Afr J Sci 2016; 112. [Google Scholar]
  8. Szathmáry E, Smith JM. The major evolutionary transitions. Nature 1995 ; 374 : 227–232. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. DeGregori J.. Evolved tumor suppression: Why are we so good at not getting cancer?. Cancer Res 2011 ; 71 : 3739–3744. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Arnal A, Ujvari B, Crespi B, et al. Evolutionary perspective of cancer: Myth, metaphors, and reality. Evol Appl 2015 ; 8 : 541–544. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Capp J-P, DeGregori J, Nedelcu AM, et al. Group phenotypic composition in cancer. eLife 2021; 10 : 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  12. Lineweaver CH, Bussey KJ, Blackburn AC, et al. Cancer progression as a sequence of atavistic reversions. BioEssays 2021; 43. [Google Scholar]
  13. Thomas F, Ujvari B, Renaud F, et al. Cancer adaptations: Atavism, de novo selection, or something in between?. BioEssays 2017 ; 39. [Google Scholar]
  14. Thomas F, Jacqueline C, Tissot T, et al. The importance of cancer cells for animal evolutionary ecology. Nat Ecol Evol 2017 ; 1 : 1592–1595. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Frank SA. Age-Specific Acceleration of Cancer. Curr Biol 2004 ; 14 : 242–246. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Leroi AM, Koufopanou V, Burt A. Opinion: Cancer selection. Nat Rev Cancer 2003 ; 3 : 226–231. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Aktipis CA, Nesse RM. Evolutionary foundations for cancer biology. Evol Appl 2013 ; 6 : 144–159. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Sarver AL, Makielski KM, DePauw TA, et al. Increased risk of cancer in dogs and humans: A consequence of recent extension of lifespan beyond evolutionarily determined limitations? Aging Cancer 2022; 3 : 3–19. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Nunney L. Size matters: Height, cell number and a person’s risk of cancer. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 2018; 285. [Google Scholar]
  20. Vincze O, Colchero F, Lemaître JF, et al. Cancer risk across mammals. Nature 2022; 601 : 263–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Natterson-Horowitz B, Aktipis A, Fox M, et al. The future of evolutionary medicine: sparking innovation in biomedicine and public health. Front Sci 2023; 1 : 997136. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Dujon AM, Vincze O, Lemaitre J-F, et al. The effect of placentation type, litter size, lactation and gestation length on cancer risk in mammals. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 2023; 290. [Google Scholar]
  23. Seluanov A, Hine C, Azpurua J, et al. Hypersensitivity to contact inhibition provides a clue to cancer resistance of naked mole-rat. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009 ; 106 : 19352–19357. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Tian X, Azpurua J, Hine C, et al. High-molecular-mass hyaluronan mediates the cancer resistance of the naked mole rat. Nature 2013 ; 499 : 346–343. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Seluanov A, Gladyshev VN, Vijg J, et al. Mechanisms of cancer resistance in long-lived mammals. Nat Rev Cancer 2018 ; 18 : 433–441. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Zhao Y, Oreskovic E, Zhang Q, et al. Transposon-triggered innate immune response confers cancer resistance to the blind mole rat. Nat Immunol 2021; 22 : 1219–30. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hadi F, Kulaberoglu Y, Lazarus KA, et al. Transformation of naked mole-rat cells. Nature 2020; 583 : E1–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Gorbunova V, Hine C, Tian X, et al. Cancer resistance in the blind mole rat is mediated by concerted necrotic cell death mechanism. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2012 ; 109 : 19392–19396. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Nunney L. Cancer suppression and the evolution of multiple retrogene copies of TP53 in elephants: A re-evaluation. Evol Appl 2022; 15 : 891–901. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Vazquez JM, Sulak M, Chigurupati S, et al. A zombie LIF gene in elephants is up-regulated by TP53 to induce apoptosis in response to DNA damage. Cell Rep 2018 ; 24 : 1765–1776. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Vazquez JM, Pena MT, Muhammad B, et al. Parallel evolution of reduced cancer risk and tumor suppressor duplications in Xenarthra. eLife 2022; 11. [Google Scholar]
  32. Scheben A, Mendivil Ramos O, Kramer M, et al. Long-Read Sequencing Reveals Rapid Evolution of Immunity- and Cancer-Related Genes in Bats. Genome Biol Evol 2023; 15 : evad148. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Yim HS, Cho YS, Guang X, et al. Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans. Nat Genet 2014 ; 46 : 88–92. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Keane M, Semeiks J, Webb AE, et al. Insights into the evolution of longevity from the bowhead whale genome. Cell Rep 2015 ; 10 : 112–122. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Warren WC, Kuderna L, Alexander A, et al. The Novel Evolution of the Sperm Whale Genome. Genome Biol Evol 2017 ; 9 : 3260–3264. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Tollis M, Robbins J, Webb AE, et al. Return to the sea, get huge, beat cancer: an analysis of cetacean genomes including an assembly for the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Mol Biol Evol 2019 ; 36 : 1746–1763. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Sun D, Chai S, Huang X, et al. Novel Genomic Insights into Body Size Evolution in Cetaceans and a Resolution of Peto’s Paradox. Am Nat 2022; 199 : E28–42. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Nagy JD, Victor EM, Cropper JH. Why don’t all whales have cancer? A novel hypothesis resolving Peto’s paradox. Integr Comp Biol 2007 ; 47 : 317–328. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Vazquez JM, Lynch VJ. Pervasive duplication of tumor suppressors in afrotherians during the evolution of large bodies and reduced cancer risk. eLife 2021; 10. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ulhas Nair N, Cheng K, Naddaf L, et al. Cross-species identification of cancer resistance-associated genes that may mediate human cancer risk. Sci Adv 2022; 8 : eabj7176. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Perillo M, Punzo A, Caliceti C, et al. The spontaneous immortalization probability of mammalian cell culture strains, as their proliferative capacity, correlates with species body mass, not longevity. Biomed J 2023; 46 : 100596. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Nery MF, Rennó M, Picorelli A, et al. A phylogenetic review of cancer resistance highlights evolutionary solutions to Peto’s Paradox. Genet Mol Biol 2022; 45 : e20220133. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Trivedi DD, Dalai SK, Bakshi SR. The Mystery of Cancer Resistance: A Revelation Within Nature. J Mol Evol 2023; 91 : 133–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kapsetaki SE, Compton ZT, Mellon W, et al. Germline mutation rate predicts cancer mortality across 37 vertebrate species. BioRxiv Prepr. Doi Httpsdoiorg10110120230813553123 2023. [Google Scholar]
  45. Dujon AM, Boutry J, Tissot S, et al. Cancer Susceptibility as a Cost of Reproduction and Contributor to Life History Evolution. Front Ecol Evol 2022; 10 : 861103. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. García-Cao I, García-Cao M, Martín-Caballero J, et al. “Super p53” mice exhibit enhanced DNA damage response, are tumor resistant and age normally. EMBO J 2002 ; 21 : 6225–6235. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Matheu A, Maraver A, Klatt P, et al. Delayed ageing through damage protection by the Arf/p53 pathway. Nature 2007 ; 448 : 375–379. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Fernandez A, Morris MR. Mate choice for more melanin as a mechanism to maintain a functional oncogene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008 ; 105 : 13503–13507. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Møller AP, Mousseau TA. Birds prefer to breed in sites with low radioactivity in Chernobyl. Proc Biol Sci 2007 ; 274 : 1443–1448. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Dawson EH, Bailly TPM, Dos Santos J, et al. Social environment mediates cancer progression in Drosophila. Nat Commun 2018 ; 9 : 3574. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Arnal A, Jacqueline C, Ujvari B, et al. Cancer brings forward oviposition in the fly Drosophila melanogaster. Ecol Evol 2017 ; 7 : 272–276. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Boutry J, Tissot S, Mekaoui N, et al. Tumors alter life history traits in the freshwater cnidarian, Hydra oligactis. iScience 2022; 25 : 105034. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Jones ME, Cockburn A, Hamede R, et al. Life-history change in disease-ravaged Tasmanian devil populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008 ; 105 : 10023–10027. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Fortunato A, Fleming A, Aktipis A, Maley CC. Upregulation of DNA repair genes and cell extrusion underpin the remarkable radiation resistance of Trichoplax adhaerens. PLoS Biol 2021; 19 : e3001471. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.