Cells (Jan 2024)

Peto’s “Paradox” and Six Degrees of Cancer Prevalence

  • Andras Szasz

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13020197
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 2
p. 197

Abstract

Read online

Peto’s paradox and the epidemiologic observation of the average six degrees of tumor prevalence are studied and hypothetically solved. A simple consideration, Petho’s paradox challenges our intuitive understanding of cancer risk and prevalence. Our simple consideration is that the more a cell divides, the higher the chance of acquiring cancerous mutations, and so the larger or longer-lived organisms have more cells and undergo more cell divisions over their lifetime, expecting to have a higher risk of developing cancer. Paradoxically, it is not supported by the observations. The allometric scaling of species could answer the Peto paradox. Another paradoxical human epidemiology observation in six average mutations is necessary for cancer prevalence, despite the random expectations of the tumor causes. To solve this challenge, game theory could be applied. The inherited and random DNA mutations in the replication process nonlinearly drive cancer development. The statistical variance concept does not reasonably describe tumor development. Instead, the Darwinian natural selection principle is applied. The mutations in the healthy organism’s cellular population can serve the species’ evolutionary adaptation by the selective pressure of the circumstances. Still, some cells collect multiple uncorrected mutations, adapt to the extreme stress in the stromal environment, and develop subclinical phases of cancer in the individual. This process needs extensive subsequent DNA replications to heritage and collect additional mutations, which are only marginal alone. Still, together, they are preparing for the first stage of the precancerous condition. In the second stage, when one of the caretaker genes is accidentally mutated, the caused genetic instability prepares the cell to fight for its survival and avoid apoptosis. This can be described as a competitive game. In the third stage, the precancerous cell develops uncontrolled proliferation with the damaged gatekeeper gene and forces the new game strategy with binary cooperation with stromal cells for alimentation. In the fourth stage, the starving conditions cause a game change again, starting a cooperative game, where the malignant cells cooperate and force the cooperation of the stromal host, too. In the fifth stage, the resetting of homeostasis finishes the subclinical stage, and in the fifth stage, the clinical phase starts. The prevention of the development of mutated cells is more complex than averting exposure to mutagens from the environment throughout the organism’s lifetime. Mutagenic exposure can increase the otherwise random imperfect DNA reproduction, increasing the likelihood of cancer development, but mutations exist. Toxic exposure is more challenging; it may select the tolerant cells on this particular toxic stress, so these mutations have more facility to avoid apoptosis in otherwise collected random mutational states.

Keywords