What Animal Cancers teach us about Human Biology.

Cancers in animals present a large, underutilized reservoir of biomedical information with critical implication for human oncology and medicine in general. Discussing two distinct areas of tumour biology in non-human hosts, we highlight the importance of these findings for our current understanding of cancer, before proposing a coordinated strategy to harvest biomedical information from non-human resources and translate it into a clinical setting. First, infectious cancers that can be transmitted as allografts between individual hosts, have been identified in four distinct, unrelated groups, dogs, Tasmanian devils, Syrian hamsters and, surprisingly, marine bivalves. These malignancies might hold the key to improving our understanding of the interaction between tumour cell and immune system and, thus, allow us to devise novel treatment strategies that enhance anti-cancer immunosurveillance, as well as suggesting more effective organ and stem cell transplantation strategies. The existence of these malignancies also highlights the need for increased scrutiny when considering the existence of infectious cancers in humans. Second, it has long been understood that no linear relationship exists between the number of cells within an organism and the cancer incidence rate. To resolve what is known as Peto's Paradox, additional anticancer strategies within different species have to be postulated. These naturally occurring idiosyncrasies to avoid carcinogenesis represent novel potential therapeutic strategies.

Considering the Experimental use of Temozolomide in Glioblastoma Research.

Temozolomide (TMZ) currently remains the only chemotherapeutic component in the approved treatment scheme for Glioblastoma (GB), the most common primary brain tumour with a dismal patient's survival prognosis of only ~15 months. While frequently described as an alkylating agent that causes DNA damage and thus-ultimately-cell death, a recent debate has been initiated to re-evaluate the therapeutic role of TMZ in GB. Here, we discuss the experimental use of TMZ and highlight how it differs from its clinical role. Four areas could be identified in which the experimental data is particularly limited in its translational potential: 1. transferring clinical dosing and scheduling to an experimental system and vice versa; 2. the different use of (non-inert) solvent in clinic and laboratory; 3. the limitations of established GB cell lines which only poorly mimic GB tumours; and 4. the limitations of animal models lacking an immune response. Discussing these limitations in a broader biomedical context, we offer suggestions as to how to improve transferability of data. Finally, we highlight an underexplored function of TMZ in modulating the immune system, as an example of where the aforementioned limitations impede the progression of our knowledge.

Comment in Response to "Temozolomide in Glioblastoma Therapy: Role of Apoptosis, Senescence and Autophagy etc. by B. Kaina".

It is with great pleasure that we acknowledge the fact that our review on Temozolomide (TMZ) has initiated a discussion [1-3]. [...].