Explore the vast range of titles available.

While it is generally known that the risk of several cancers in humans is higher in urban areas compared with rural areas, cancer is often deemed a problem of human societies with modern lifestyles. At the same time, more and more wild animals are affected by urbanization processes and are faced with the need to adapt or acclimate to urban conditions. These include, among other things, increased exposure to an assortment of pollutants (e.g. chemicals, light and noise), novel types of food and new infections. According to the abundant literature available for humans, all of these factors are associated with an increased probability of developing cancerous neoplasias; however, the link between the urban environment and cancer in wildlife has not been discussed in the scientific literature. Here, we describe the available evidence linking environmental changes resulting from urbanization to cancer-related physiological changes in wild animals. We identify the knowledge gaps in this field and suggest future research avenues, with the ultimate aim of understanding how our modern lifestyle affects cancer prevalence in urbanizing wild populations. In addition, we consider the possibilities of using urban wild animal populations as models to study the association between environmental factors and cancer epidemics in humans, as well as to understand the evolution of cancer and defence mechanisms against it.

Individuals who are minoritized as a result of race, sexual identity, gender, or socioeconomic status experience a higher prevalence of many diseases. Understanding the biological processes that cause and maintain these socially driven health inequities is essential for addressing them. The gut microbiome is strongly shaped by host environments and affects host metabolic, immune, and neuroendocrine functions, making it an important pathway by which differences in experiences caused by social, political, and economic forces could contribute to health inequities. Nevertheless, few studies have directly integrated the gut microbiome into investigations of health inequities. Here, we argue that accounting for host–gut microbe interactions will improve understanding and management of health inequities, and that health policy must begin to consider the microbiome as an important pathway linking environments to population health.

All viruses that are recognized by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as Group 1 carcinogens, namely human papillomaviruses (HPV), Hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV and HCV), Human Herpes Virus type 8 (HHV-8), and Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) [2], break barriers to cancer and therefore generate essential causes of their associated cancers [1]. Increasing evidence implicates bacteria (certain strains of Escherichia coli, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Salmonella Typhi, Chlamydia trachomatis, and a range of Mycoplasma) and protists (Cryptosporidum parvum, Trichomonas vaginalis, Trypanosoma cruzi, Toxoplasma gondii) in cancer development [2, 5–26]. Recent studies suggest that microbes and microbial communities can have similar effects: microbiome composition induces a life-history trade-off between life span and reproduction in flies [29]. [...]natural selection will favor establishment of microbes that are either beneficial to the host or present a low cost of infection early in life, even if these microbes promote oncogenesis later in life. [...]focusing on parasites listed above that have been linked to cancer prevalence, virus-like particles have been observed in T. cruzi [76], a dsRNA virus has been found in Cryptosporidium and virus load correlates with parasite fecundity [8, 77], Heterakis gallinarum is a vector of the pathogenic bacterium Histomonas meleagridis [78, 79], Trichuris muris hosts a complex bacterial microbiome [80], Schistosoma mansoni might be a vector of HCV [81], and genome sequencing of Fasciola hepatica revealed the presence of the endobacterium, Neorickettsia [82].

Evolutionary considerations suggest that oncogenic infections should be pervasive among animal species. Infection-associated cancers are well documented in humans and domestic animals, less commonly reported in undomesticated captive animals, and rarely documented in nature. In this paper, we review the literature associating infectious agents with cancer to evaluate the reasons for this pattern. Non-malignant infectious neoplasms occur pervasively in multicellular life, but oncogenic progression to malignancy is often uncertain. Evidence from humans and domestic animals shows that non-malignant infectious neoplasms can develop into cancer, although generally with low frequency. Malignant neoplasms could be difficult to find in nature because of a low frequency of oncogenic transformation, short survival after malignancy and reduced survival prior to malignancy. Moreover, the evaluation of malignancy can be ambiguous in nature, because criteria for malignancy may be difficult to apply consistently across species. The information available in the literature therefore does not allow for a definitive assessment of the pervasiveness of infectious cancers in nature, but the presence of infectious neoplasias and knowledge about the progression of benign neoplasias to cancer is consistent with a widespread but largely undetected occurrence.

Most known oncogenic viruses of humans use DNA as their genomic material. Research over the past quarter century has revealed that their oncogenicity results largely from direct interference with barriers to oncogenesis. In contrast to viruses that have been accepted causes of particular cancers, candidate viral causes tend to have fewer viral than cellular genomes in the tumours. These low viral loads have caused researchers to conclude that the associated viruses are not primary causes of the associated cancers. Consideration of differential survival, reproduction and infiltration of cells in a tumour suggest, however, that viral loads could be low even when viruses are primary causes of cancer. Resolution of this issue has important implications for human health because medical research tends to be effective at preventing and controlling infectious diseases. Mathematical models may clarify the problem and help guide future research by assessing whether low viral loads are likely outcomes of the differential survival, reproduction, and infiltration of cells in a tumour and, more generally, the extent to which viruses contribute to cancer. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Silent cancer agents: multi-disciplinary modelling of human DNA oncoviruses’.

Based on the abundant studies available on humans showing clear associations between rapid environmental changes and the rate of neoplasia, we propose that human activities might increase cancer rate in wild populations through numerous processes. Most of the research on this topic has concentrated on wildlife cancer prevalence in environments that are heavily contaminated with anthropogenic chemicals. Here, we propose that human activities might also increase cancer rate in wild populations through additional processes including light pollution, accidental (for example, human waste) or intentional (for example, bird feeders) wildlife feeding (and the associated change of diet), or reduction of genetic diversity in human-impacted habitats. The human species can thus be defined as an oncogenic species, moderating the environment in the way that it causes cancer in other wild populations. As human impacts on wildlife are predicted to increase rather than decrease (for example, in the context of urbanization), acknowledging the possible links between human activity and cancer in wild populations is crucial. Environmental factors affect cancer incidence in humans. Here, it is argued that anthropogenic environmental disturbances are likewise responsible for cancer in wild animal populations via a range of different mechanisms.

We propose a general barrier theory as an evolutionary framework for understanding coevolutionary effects of conflicts of interest in natural and human systems. It is generalized from the barrier theory of cancer, which describes how cancer develops through the evasion of mechanisms, that block unregulated cellular reproduction and survival. Barriers are naturally evolved or artificially implemented mechanisms for blocking exploitation; restraints are mechanisms that impede but do not block exploitation. When conflicts of interest arise, selection will favor exploiters that are capable of overcoming barriers and restraints. When barriers are in place, they halt, at least temporarily, coevolutionary arms races (the Red Queen can stop running). Barriers occur in a broad spectrum of interactions characterized by conflicts of interest: barriers to cellular survival (apoptosis) and reproduction (cell cycle arrest) may block a virus from replicating its genome through reproduction of its host cell. Vaccines may completely protect against targeted pathogens. A plant may escape herbivory by evolving defensive chemicals that block herbivory. Obligate mutualisms may evolve when barriers to horizontal transmission favor symbionts that increasingly lose mechanisms that contribute to horizontal transmission. Here, we show how the barrier theory applies across a spectrum of natural and social systems.

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.

The barrier theory of cancer integrates environmental, genetic, and infectious contributions to oncogenesis into a single framework. The full spectrum of symbiotic influences on oncogenesis, however, still needs to be brought into this framework, particularly for symbionts that are classified as commensals or mutualists. This paper contributes to this goal by presenting evidence that these symbionts may improve the effectiveness of immunological defenses against cancer and by drawing attention to the interactions between parasitic and mutualistic microbes in relation to oncogenesis. Although integration of protective symbionts with the barrier theory encompasses a variety of interactions, we highlight one particular aspect: effects of symbionts on the host’s ability to attack tumor cells through the relaxation of immune checkpoints.

The microbiome is composed of hundreds of interacting species that have co-evolved with the host and alterations in microbiome composition have been associated with health and disease. Insights from evolutionary ecology may aid efforts to ameliorate microbiome-associated diseases. One step toward this goal involves recognition that the idea of commensalism has been applied too broadly to human/microbe symbioses. Commensalism is most accurately viewed on a symbiosis continuum as a dividing line that separates a spectrum of mutualisms of decreasing positive interdependence from parasitisms of increasing severity. Insights into the evolution of the gut microbial symbiosis continuum will help distinguish between human actions that will advance or hinder health. Theory and research indicate that a major benefit of mutualistic microbes will be protection against pathogens. Mismatches between current and ancestral diets may disfavor mutualists, resulting in microbiome effects on health problems, including obesity, diabetes, autism, and childhood allergy. Evolutionary theory indicates that mutualisms will be favored when symbionts depend on resources that are not used by the host. These resources, which are referred to as human-inaccessible microbiota-accessible carbohydrates (HIMACs), can be supplied naturally through diet. Public health interventions need to consider the position of gut microbes on the mutualist-parasite continuum and the specific associations between prebiotics, such as HIMACs, and the mutualists they support. Otherwise interventions may fail to restore the match between human adaptations, diet, and microbiome function and may thereby fail to improve health and even inadvertently promote illness.