ReviewVeterinary sciences2026
Mechanistic Insights into Wildlife Cancer and Conservation Strategies Under the One Health Framework.
Review in Veterinary sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer is increasingly recognized as an emerging concern in wildlife health and biodiversity conservation in the Anthropocene. Although traditionally viewed as an individual disease associated primarily with aging, wildlife cancer is shaped by complex interactions among environmental changes, species-specific evolutionary adaptations, and ecological processes. This review synthesizes current knowledge on the ecological and evolutionary drivers of wildlife cancer by integrating evidence from comparative oncology, environmental toxicology, wildlife pathology, and conservation biology. We examine how anthropogenic stressors, including pollution, habitat degradation, climate change, and infectious agents, influence cancer susceptibility in wild populations, and summarize intrinsic mechanisms underlying interspecific variation in cancer vulnerability, including Peto's paradox, enhanced tumor suppression, and adaptive immune surveillance. We further highlight major methodological challenges, including limited surveillance capacity, fragmented datasets, taxonomic biases, and insufficient integration between cancer biology and conservation science. Finally, we discuss emerging interdisciplinary approaches, such as standardized monitoring frameworks, multi-omics technologies, artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis, and One Health-based strategies, to advance wildlife cancer research and management. Collectively, this review positions wildlife cancer as an important ecological and evolutionary phenomenon and provides perspectives for incorporating cancer surveillance into biodiversity conservation and ecosystem health assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.