Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health最新文献

Background and objectives: One Paleopathology is a novel concept in Paleopathology that extends the One Health paradigm into the past. A workshop at the University of Durham, UK, was held prior to the 2024 International Society for Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health (ISEMPH) meeting, firstly to define and expand the concept of One Paleopathology and secondly to generate transdisciplinary research and outreach under this framework. This article presents a logic model to evaluate how effectively the workshop met its goals.

Methodology: Two surveys were conducted, one immediately following the workshop and at the 1-year mark. These surveys assess the direct outputs from the workshop-tangible research and outreach products-as well as changes in participants' attitudes toward One Paleopathology and the degree to which transdisciplinarity was incorporated into resulting projects.

Results: Both the outputs (direct products of the workshop activities) and outcomes (changes in knowledge or attitude because of the activities) of the workshop suggest that the goals are being met. The first goal, to define and expand the concept of One Paleopathology, was met, with participants expressing strong acceptance of the framework. The second goal-generating transdisciplinary research-is reflected in eight ongoing projects initiated at the workshop.

Conclusions and implications: The workshop structure and outcomes assessment presented here evaluate an initial effort in effecting conceptual change in the social sciences. Participants were enthusiastic about One Paleopathology, and over the following year new collaborations and research agendas aligned with the concept emerged. Importantly, participants reported integrating transdisciplinarity into their long-term research, indicating that the workshop had a sustained impact.

Comparative phylogenetics provides a wealth of computational tools to understand evolutionary processes and their outcomes. Advances in these methodologies have occurred in parallel with a surge in cross-species genomic and phenotypic data. To date, however, the majority of published studies have focused on classical questions in evolutionary biology, such as speciation and the ecological drivers of trait evolution. Here, we argue that evolutionary medicine in general, and our understanding of the origin and diversification of disease traits in particular, would be greatly expanded by a wider integration of phylogenetic comparative methods (PCMs). We use comparative oncology-the study of cancer across the tree of life-as an example to demonstrate the power of the approach and show that implementing PCMs can highlight the mode and tempo of the evolutionary changes in intrinsic, species-level disease vulnerabilities.

Our ability to define the causes of aging could enable targeted interventions to extend healthspan. Classical evolutionary models based on individual age have provided critical insights into empirical trajectories of aging; however, gaps remain. We argue that technological advances in data capture, resolution, and scale present a rich opportunity to shed light on heterogeneity in patterns of aging. Computational and data analysis advances have produced expanded theoretical models that explicitly address details of the underlying biology, introducing variables and dynamics that go beyond 'age' itself. We argue that by incorporating richer biological detail to create more integrative predictive models, we can gain insight into expected future distributions of aging within populations, and better understand the molecular and demographic context in which selection has given rise to variability in aging. We provide an overview of existing models that address heterogeneity, and outline future directions and applications that would advance this key area in aging and biomedical research.

Background and objectives: Somatic mutation patterns in cancer remain largely unexplored outside humans, despite their significance for aging and oncogenesis. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), sharing >98% genomic similarity with humans, display markedly different cancer spectra. To gain comparative insights into cancer susceptibility and resistance, we sequenced chimpanzee hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) genomes and analyzed their mutational profiles alongside human counterparts.

Methodology: HCC and matched non-cancerous tissues from five chimpanzees were examined using histopathology, immunohistochemistry (β-catenin, ARID1A, TSC2, FAP, vimentin, TGF-β), whole-genome sequencing (one pair), and whole-exome sequencing (four pairs). Somatic variants were identified with GATK MuTect2, annotated with Ensembl VEP, and analyzed for functional enrichment. Comparative analyses were performed with subsets of human HCC datasets (TCGA, ICGC) including TSC2-positive and TSC2-negative cases.

Results: Chimpanzee HCCs exhibited histological and immunohistochemical features similar to human tumors but displayed sharply divergent genomic landscapes. Chimpanzee tumors carried significantly higher coding mutation loads (mean 5632 per sample vs. 96-275 in humans). Non-synonymous TSC2 mutations occurred in 80% of chimpanzees, versus ~7% in human HCC, suggesting a species-specific oncogenic pathway linked to the scirrhous subtype. Additional recurrently mutated genes included ARID1A, FAT1-4, TP53, and FGA . Despite greater heterogeneity in chimpanzee tumors, humans showed stronger enrichment of non-synonymous single nucleotide variants, implying more intense positive selection. Shared alterations across species involved canonical drivers such as TP53, CTNNB1, FAT4, and TTN.

Conclusions and implications: Chimpanzee HCCs are defined by high mutational burden and frequent TSC2 alterations, contrasting with the more selectively constrained mutation spectrum of human HCC. Divergent evolutionary patterns highlight species-specific oncogenic routes while underscoring conserved pathways. Comparative primate cancer genomics offers novel insights into cancer evolution, biomarkers, and therapeutic targets.

Background and objectives: Are psychiatric conditions linked to Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) lifestyles, akin to other "diseases of civilization", or have they always been part of human variation? Are psychiatric traits always harmful and selected against, or can they be neutral or adaptive in some contexts? Addressing such core questions in evolutionary psychiatry requires examining and quantifying psychiatric symptoms and their subclinical manifestation in radically different cultural and ecological settings, such as small-scale subsistence societies. Available tools designed for the global North are often ill-suited for these communities, failing to translate and to reflect culturally-specific experiences. Here, we present a multi-stage approach for assessing subclinical psychopathological and personality traits among the Tsimane', an Indigenous forager-horticulturalist population in lowland Bolivia.

Methodology: Building on established questionnaires, we reviewed over 400 items through extensive collaboration with local research assistants, focus groups, and cognitive interviews. We grounded each item in culturally relevant examples and translated them into Tsimane', ensuring both conceptual accuracy and comprehensibility.

Results: The final instrument consists of 117 items associated in Global North settings with autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizotypy, depression, anxiety, trauma, substance use, and personality.

Conclusions and implications: This study provides a model for developing culturally sensitive tools to measure mental health traits in small-scale societies. It contributes to evolutionary psychiatry by laying the groundwork for quantifying subclinical psychopathology and personality traits, enabling rigorous tests of evolutionary hypotheses.

Background: Evolutionary medicine applies principles of evolutionary biology to elucidate the origins of human health and disease. Despite rapid growth since its emergence in the 1990s, the field lacks systematic bibliometric evaluation.

Methods: We conducted the first comprehensive bibliometric analysis of evolutionary medicine using the Web of Science Core Collection. Two search strategies captured general literature (n = 885) and publications from Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health (EMPH, n = 358). We analyzed citation patterns, thematic clusters, and collaboration networks using Bibliometrix and VOSviewer.

Results: The field exhibits steady growth, with high citation impact from review articles and a dominant presence of contributions from the USA, UK, and Germany. Six major keyword clusters were identified: drug resistance, infection, evolutionary mismatch, cancer, cognition, and mental health. However, topics such as clinical translation, One Health, Planetary Health, and race-related issues remain underrepresented. Moreover, standard database queries failed to capture most EMPH articles, highlighting a lack of field identification in metadata.

Conclusions: This bibliometric overview reveals strengths and gaps in the evolutionary medicine literature. To enhance visibility, equity, and clinical relevance, future research should promote interdisciplinary integration, broader international collaboration, and more consistent field labeling in publications. These efforts are vital to advancing evolutionary perspectives in global biomedical and public health discourse.