The cancer puzzle: Welcome to organicism

Initiation of Cancer: The Journey From Mutations in Somatic Cells to Epigenetic Changes in Tissue-resident VSELs

Multiple theories exist to explain cancer initiation, although a consensus on this is crucial for developing effective therapies. 'Somatic mutation theory' suggests that mutations in somatic cells during DNA repair initiates cancer but this concept has several attached paradoxes. Research efforts to identify quiescent cancer stem cells (CSCs) that survive therapy and result in metastasis and recurrence have remained futile. In solid cancers, CSCs are suggested to appear during epithelial-mesenchymal transition by the dedifferentiation and reprogramming of epithelial cells. Pluripotent and quiescent very small embryonic-like stem cells (VSELs) exist in multiple tissues but remain elusive owing to their small size and scarce nature. VSELs are developmentally connected to primordial germ cells, undergo rare, asymmetrical cell divisions and are responsible for the regular turnover of cells to maintain tissue homeostasis throughout life. VSELs are directly vulnerable to extrinsic endocrine insults because they express gonadal and gonadotropin hormone receptors. VSELs undergo epigenetic changes due to endocrine insults and transform into CSCs. CSCs exhibit genomic instability and develop mutations due to errors during DNA replication while undergoing excessive proliferation and clonal expansion to form spheroids. Thus tissue-resident VSELs offer a connection between extrinsic insults and variations in cancer incidence reported in various body tissues. To conclude, cancer is indeed a stem cell disease with mutations occurring as a consequence. In addition to immunotherapy, targeting mutations, and Lgr5 + organoids for developing new therapeutics, targeting CSCs (epigenetically altered VSELs) by improving their niche and epigenetic status could serve as a promising strategy to treat cancer.

Is Cancer Reversible? Rethinking Carcinogenesis Models-A New Epistemological Tool

A growing number of studies shows that it is possible to induce a phenotypic transformation of cancer cells from malignant to benign. This process is currently known as "tumor reversion". However, the concept of reversibility hardly fits the current cancer models, according to which gene mutations are considered the primary cause of cancer. Indeed, if gene mutations are causative carcinogenic factors, and if gene mutations are irreversible, how long should cancer be considered as an irreversible process? In fact, there is some evidence that intrinsic plasticity of cancerous cells may be therapeutically exploited to promote a phenotypic reprogramming, both in vitro and in vivo. Not only are studies on tumor reversion highlighting a new, exciting research approach, but they are also pushing science to look for new epistemological tools capable of better modeling cancer.

From developmental to atavistic bet-hedging: How cancer cells pervert the exploitation of random single-cell phenotypic fluctuations

Stochastic gene expression plays a leading developmental role through its contribution to cell differentiation. It is also proposed to promote phenotypic diversification in malignant cells. However, it remains unclear if these two forms of cellular bet-hedging are identical or rather display distinct features. Here we argue that bet-hedging phenomena in cancer cells are more similar to those occurring in unicellular organisms than to those of normal metazoan cells. We further propose that the atavistic bet-hedging strategies in cancer originate from a hijacking of the normal developmental bet-hedging of metazoans. Finally, we discuss the constraints that may shape the atavistic bet-hedging strategies of cancer cells.

Roadmap on plasticity and epigenetics in cancer

The role of plasticity and epigenetics in shaping cancer evolution and response to therapy has taken center stage with recent technological advances including single cell sequencing. This roadmap article is focused on state-of-the-art mathematical and experimental approaches to interrogate plasticity in cancer, and addresses the following themes and questions: is there a formal overarching framework that encompasses both non-genetic plasticity and mutation-driven somatic evolution? How do we measure and model the role of the microenvironment in influencing/controlling non-genetic plasticity? How can we experimentally study non-genetic plasticity? Which mathematical techniques are required or best suited? What are the clinical and practical applications and implications of these concepts?