4.7 Article

Evolved Resistance to Placental Invasion Secondarily Confers Increased Survival in Melanoma Patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10040595

关键词

melanoma metastasis; stromal invasion; cancer dissemination; cancer associated fibroblasts; invasibility; placentation; cancer microenvironment

资金

  1. University of Connecticut
  2. National Cancer Institute [1U54CA209992-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mammals show varied rates of cancer malignancy, related to placental invasion levels, with anti-invasive genes potentially playing a crucial role in human melanoma progression. The loss of these genes is correlated with increased cancer spread and decreased survival, highlighting the importance of studying evolutionary medicine in prognosticating and treating human cancers.
Mammals exhibit large differences in rates of cancer malignancy, even though the tumor formation rates may be similar. In placental mammals, rates of malignancy correlate with the extent of placental invasion. Our Evolved Levels of Invasibility (ELI) framework links these two phenomena identifying genes that potentially confer resistance in stromal fibroblasts to limit invasion, from trophoblasts in the endometrium, and from disseminating melanoma in the skin. Herein, using patient data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), we report that these anti-invasive genes may be crucial in melanoma progression in human patients, and that their loss is correlated with increased cancer spread and lowered survival. Our results suggest that, surprisingly, these anti-invasive genes, which have lower expression in humans compared to species with non-invasive placentation, may potentially prevent stromal invasion, while a further reduction in their levels increases the malignancy and lethality of melanoma. Our work links evolution, comparative biology, and cancer progression across tissues, indicating new avenues for using evolutionary medicine to prognosticate and treat human cancers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据