In 1977, British epidemiologist Richard Peto reasoned that large-bodied, long-lived animals should be at greater risk of developing cancer by virtue of undergoing more cell divisions, each of which has the potential to introduce somatic mutations. But, in reality this correlation was not observed across species with, for example, elephants and mice having equal probabilities of getting cancer — a conundrum known as Peto’s paradox. Yet, definitive evidence for this phenomenon has been missing, mainly owing to small sample sizes and complexities related to estimating cancer incidences in wild animal species. Now in the largest study to date of cancer risk in mammals, Vincze et al. provide empirical proof that Peto’s paradox holds true.
展开▼
