The Tasmanian devil ( Sarcophilus harrisii ) is the only mammalian species known to be affected by multiple transmissible cancers. Devil facial tumour 1 and 2 (DFT1 and DFT2) are independent neoplastic cell lineages that produce large, disfiguring cancers known as devil facial tumour disease (DFTD). The long-term persistence of wild Tasmanian devils is threatened due to the ability of DFTD cells to propagate as contagious allografts and the high mortality rate of DFTD. Recent studies have demonstrated that both DFT1 and DFT2 cancers originated from founder cells of the Schwann cell lineage, an uncommon origin of malignant cancer in humans. This unprecedented finding has revealed a potential predisposition of Tasmanian devils to transmissible cancers of the Schwann cell lineage. In this review, we compare the molecular nature of human Schwann cells and nerve sheath tumours with DFT1 and DFT2 to gain insights into the emergence of transmissible cancers in the Tasmanian devil. We discuss a potential mechanism whereby Schwann cell plasticity and frequent wounding in Tasmanian devils combine with an inherent cancer predisposition and low genetic diversity to give rise to transmissible Schwann cell cancers in devils on rare occasions. Response to Reviewers:We appreciate the suggestions and have incorporated all into the revised version. Thank you.
Disease is increasingly becoming a driver of wildlife population declines and extinction risk. Vaccines have been one of the most successful health interventions in human history, but few have been tested for mitigating wildlife disease. The transmissible cancer, devil facial tumour disease (DFTD), triggered the Tasmanian devil’s (Sarcophilus harrisii) inclusion on the international endangered species list. Development of a protective DFTD vaccine would provide a valuable management approach for conservation of the species. In 2016, 33 devils from a DFTD-free insurance population were given an experimental DFTD vaccination prior to their release on the north coast of Tasmania. The release site was already home to an incumbent population of devils, including some individuals with DFTD. To determine the efficacy of the vaccination protocol and the longevity of the response it induced, six trapping trips took place at the site over the 2.5 years following release. Eight of the 33 vaccinated devils were re-trapped, and six of those developed DFTD within the monitoring period. Despite the apparent lack of protection provided by the vaccine for the re-trapped devils, we observed several signs of immune activation not usually found in unvaccinated devils. Firstly, sera collected from the eight devils showed that anti-DFTD antibodies persisted for up to two years post vaccination. Secondly, tumour infiltrating lymphocytes were found in three out of four biopsies collected from vaccinated devils which contrasts with the “immune deserts” typical of DFT’s; only one out of twenty incumbent devils with DFTD trapped during the same period had a tumour biopsy exhibiting immune cell infiltrate. Thirdly, immunohistochemical analysis of tumour biopsies from the vaccinated devils identified the functional immune molecules associated with antigen presenting cells (MHC-II) and T cells (CD3), and the immune checkpoint molecule PD-1, all associated with anti-tumour immunity in other species. These results correlate with our previous study on captive devils in which a prophylactic vaccine primed the devil immune system and, following DFTD challenge and tumour growth, immunotherapy induced complete tumour regressions. The field trial results presented here provide further evidence that the devil immune system can be primed to recognise DFTD cells, but additional immune manipulation could be needed for complete protection or induction of tumour regressions.
Immune evasion is critical to the growth and survival of cancer cells. This is especially pertinent to transmissible cancers, which evade immune detection across genetically diverse hosts. The Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) is threatened by the emergence of Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD), comprising two transmissible cancers (DFT1 and DFT2). The development of effective prophylactic vaccines and therapies against DFTD has been restricted by an incomplete understanding of how allogeneic DFT1 and DFT2 cells maintain immune evasion upon activation of tumour‐specific immune responses. In this study, we used RNA sequencing to examine tumours from three experimental DFT1 cases. Two devils received a vaccine prior to inoculation with live DFT1 cells, providing an opportunity to explore changes to DFT1 cancers under immune pressure. Analysis of DFT1 in the non‐immunised devil revealed a ‘myelinating Schwann cell’ phenotype, reflecting both natural DFT1 cancers and the DFT1 cell line used for the experimental challenge. Comparatively, immunised devils exhibited a ‘dedifferentiated mesenchymal’ DFT1 phenotype. A third ‘immune‐enriched’ phenotype, characterised by increased PDL1 and CTLA‐4 expression, was detected in a DFT1 tumour that arose after immunotherapy. In response to immune pressure, mesenchymal plasticity and upregulation of immune checkpoint molecules are used by human cancers to evade immune responses. Similar mechanisms are associated with immune evasion by DFTD cancers, providing novel insights that will inform modification of DFTD vaccines. As DFT1 and DFT2 are clonal cancers transmitted across genetically distinct hosts, the Tasmanian devil provides a ‘natural’ disease model for more broadly exploring these immune evasion mechanisms in cancer.
ContextDisease is increasingly becoming a driver of wildlife population declines and an extinction risk. Vaccines are one of the most successful health interventions in human history, but few have been tested for mitigating wildlife disease. The transmissible cancer, devil facial tumour disease (DFTD), triggered the Tasmanian devil’s (Sarcophilus harrisii) inclusion on the international endangered species list. In 2016, 33 devils from a DFTD-free insurance population were given an experimental DFTD vaccination before their wild release on the Tasmanian northern coast. AimTo determine the efficacy of the vaccination protocol and the longevity of the induced responses. MethodSix trapping trips took place over the 2.5 years following release, and both vaccinated and incumbent devils had blood samples and tumour biopsies collected. Key resultsIn all, 8 of the 33 vaccinated devils were re-trapped, and six of those developed DFTD within the monitoring period. Despite the lack of protection provided by the vaccine, we observed signs of immune activation not usually found in unvaccinated devils. First, sera collected from the eight devils showed that anti-DFTD antibodies persisted for up to 2 years post-vaccination. Second, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes were found in three of four biopsies collected from vaccinated devils, which contrasts with the ‘immune deserts’ typical of DFTs; only 1 of the 20 incumbent devils with DFTD had a tumour biopsy exhibiting immune-cell infiltrate. Third, immunohistochemical analysis of the vaccinated devils’ tumour biopsies identified the functional immune molecules associated with antigen-presenting cells (MHC-II) and T-cells (CD3), and the immune checkpoint molecule PD-1, all being associated with anti-tumour immunity in other species. ConclusionsThese results correlate with our previous study on captive devils in which a prophylactic vaccine primed the devil immune system and, following DFTD challenge and tumour growth, immunotherapy induced complete tumour regressions. The field trial results presented here provide further evidence that the devil immune system can be primed to recognise DFTD cells, but additional immune manipulation could be needed for complete protection or induction of tumour regressions. ImplicationsA protective DFTD vaccine would provide a valuable management approach for conservation of the Tasmanian devil.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.