Moderna, Merck Say mRNA Vaccine Prevents Melanoma From Returning
- Reference: 0185054150
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/08/19/1725205/moderna-merck-say-mrna-vaccine-prevents-melanoma-from-returning
- Source link:
> Moderna [3]developed the vaccine with Merck and tested it together with immunotherapy drug Keytruda, a widely used treatment for melanoma. [...] This is the first positive late-stage trial result for an mRNA cancer vaccine, which trains a patient's immune system to fight tumors by targeting specific mutations in those cells and the first such study to show that adding a treatment to Keytruda worked better than that therapy alone. Similar approaches are being tested against lung, breast and pancreatic cancers.
>
> [...] The cancer treatment combines Merck's Keytruda with a made-to-order mRNA vaccine from Moderna that is based on an analysis of mutations found in the patients' own tumors. The trial enrolled 1,137 high-risk patients with stage IIB-IV melanoma that had been surgically removed. Volunteers were randomized to receive up to nine doses of Keytruda plus the personalized vaccine or Keytruda alone for about one year. The companies said no new safety signals have emerged in the trial. In January, the companies announced results of a mid-stage trial of the treatment showing that it reduced the risk of recurrence or death by 49% after five years.
Karen Knudsen, CEO of the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, said the Moderna results could signal a new era for treating solid-tumor cancers. "The positive hit here leads us into truly this next phase in immunotherapy," Knudsen said. "This is an auspicious start -- this is where things begin."
Moderna [4]shares more than doubled on the news, adding about $30 billion to its market value.
[1] https://x.com/moderna_tx/status/2090029002735882492
[2] https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/merck-moderna-say-melanoma-skin-cancer-vaccine-meets-goals-large-trial-2026-08-19/
[3] https://www.merck.com/news/merck-and-moderna-announce-phase-3-interpath-001-trial-of-intismeran-autogene-plus-keytruda-met-endpoints-of-recurrence-free-survival-rfs-and-distant-metastasis-free-survival-dmfs-in-patient/
[4] https://slashdot.org/google.com/finance/beta/quote/MRNA:NASDAQ
How this may play out (Score:4, Insightful)
If this works well, similar methods will likely work for other cancers also. Unfortunately, since it requires an individual design for a specific person, it likely is going to not benefit much from economies of scale, so it may remain very expensive. Also, given that it uses mRNA, it is likely that parts of the US right will either refuse to use it or will try to block it. Given RFK Jr. being in the Secretary of Health, what should be a slam dunk may end up becoming an uphill battle. On the bright side, some of the anti-vaxxers seem to be ok with mRNA systems once someone already has a disease.
Re: (Score:2)
Worst case once it is approved and being used in Europe the regulatory reciprocity will kick in and our own oligarchs will demand its availability here once they discover the peptides and dewormer did not prevent their own cancers.
Re: (Score:2)
> our own oligarchs will demand its availability here
Why would they? They can get the vaccine for themselves from overseas (obviously, FDA rules don't apply to them) or travel to Europe to get the shot (and also pay European prices). Making the vaccine available in the USA would mean the hoi polloi wouldn't get some preventable diseases and won't need to keep paying the oligarchs.
Re: (Score:2)
> given that it uses mRNA, it is likely that parts of the US right will either refuse to use it or will try to block it.
Self correcting problem. Since cancer is not contagious, I have no problem with people choosing not to seek treatment for themselves. The collateral damage of their family members is unfortunate.
Re: (Score:2)
If idiots with non-communicable health problems decide to self-select out of the gene pool, I'm fine with it.
My problem comes when you decide to self-select out of preventative medicine that makes you an attack vector to others. That makes you a selfish git dumbass.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly? I think your last statement there is a key point that should receive a little more attention. It seems possible --- heck, even prudent -- for a person to question possible negative outcomes from mRNA vaccines, while still fully recognizing that it makes good sense to use one on an existing disease. Even in a nearly worst-case scenario? You're talking about cancer, which surely kills a person if not treated, vs a theoretical risk of some long-term problems from an mRNA vaccine (some of which even
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, we've already seen people refuse to take treatments for deadly diseases even when they have them. In the 1980s and 1990s you had a very loud HIV-AIDS denial movement which often got people to refuse to take anti-HIV drugs, claiming that the drugs were what we're making people sick. See for example Continuum [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_(magazine) [wikipedia.org] where the magazine ironically had to stop publication because all the editors and major contributors had died from AIDS. And one already
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_(magazine)
Re: (Score:2)
> Unfortunately, since it requires an individual design for a specific person, it likely is going to not benefit much from economies of scale
I'm not seeing that announced clearly. [1]The PR [merck.com] says KEYTRUDA targets PD-1. It seems as likely that they only needed to do a biopsy and genetic analysis of the cancer to determine whether targeting PD-1 would be effective. This is already fairly common, though it's not done for every patient today.
[1] https://www.merck.com/news/merck-and-moderna-announce-phase-3-interpath-001-trial-of-intismeran-autogene-plus-keytruda-met-endpoints-of-recurrence-free-survival-rfs-and-distant-metastasis-free-survival-dmfs-in-patient/
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's correct? Possibly I'm misreading this, but it looks like the study involved giving two things, both the Keytruda, and a separate personalized vaccine.
Re:How this may play out (Score:4, Interesting)
> I don't think that's correct? Possibly I'm misreading this, but it looks like the study involved giving two things, both the Keytruda, and a separate personalized vaccine.
You're not misreading it. It is individualized. Different cancers express different antigens, and the mRNA vaccine needs to construct something that expresses those same antigens to train the immune system to attack them.
The nice thing about mRNA, is that it is potentially relatively cheap to synthesize mRNA strands and replicate them. It won't be hundreds of dollars, but it won't be millions, either. Right now, I think it's hundreds of thousands per patient, but that will go down over time as they streamline the process of taking a sample of the tumor and determining an mRNA gene sequence that matches said cancer. And economies of scale on the equipment will also probably help.
It may also be the case that it becomes less individualized over time. At some point, we might reach the point where they have a bunch of pre-sequenced antigens that are all ready to go, and someone just keys in a list of antigens, and a piece of software spits out the mRNA sequence. At that point, it is still individualized, but with a much, much more streamlined process for generating it.
Note that I don't work in this field, so take all of this as the opinion of an educated layperson observer. :-)
But you don't want to turn magnetic (Score:2)
Do you???
This is amazing news! (Score:3, Insightful)
... or would be, under any other presidential administration.
Still, the rest of the world can certainly benefit from it.
Re: (Score:1)
Is there a Godwin type law for childish, irrelevant Trump comments?
BTW, prescription drug prices record sharpest drop in more than 60 years
[1]https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2026/08/13/prescription-drug-prices-record-sharpest-drop-more-than-60-years/
Re: This is amazing news! (Score:1)
One of the worst, most underhanded things you csn do in modern Murica is to accurately quote a Republican. And, of course it was Bidenâ(TM)s law that brought the drug prices down. If Trump continues to blame everything bad happening now on Biden it is only fair if Biden gets credit for this.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, under what legislation led to this price drop?
This is a custom vaccine - likely very $$$ (Score:3)
I would not be surprised if it becomes the most expensive drug on the market. Not that the high price is necessarily bad. Individuals will either pay or die but at least they now have a choice. And with time the price will come down and the availability increase.
Re: (Score:2)
Technology could disrupt that though - DNA sequencing can be automated and presumably vaccine synthesis can be automated. For all I know, by 2030 there might be a custom vaccine machine in every doctor's office just like there is a crown making machine in every dentist's office today.
Re: (Score:2)
True, economics of scale could probably get an automated setup into medical equipment realms of expense e.g. the sorts of 'cyberknife' equipment that only the best hospitals have anyhow. With this you could presumably ship the samples, as well.
Re: (Score:2)
> I would not be surprised if it becomes the most expensive drug on the market.
In the USA.
mRNA is not worth the risks (Score:1)
Once again the public are treated as nothing more than sheep/cows to be profited from. No surprise there.
Don't want your skin cancer to return? Take cheap, safe horse paste and use it topically in the affected areas. Oh wait, they don't make any money on that..!!
BTW- mRNA 'vaccines' aren't really vaccines. They're inherently dangerous and anyone who knows about silicon chip manufacturing knows that there is ZERO chance these things are not getting massively CONTAMINATED with all kinds of random DNA from the
Re: (Score:2)
Going outside, touching that elevator button, driving your car, eating that cheeseburger, dining on fresh dolphin meat... all increases your chances of any one of a billion different diseases and infections and contaminations and accidents. Oh, Noes!
How many people died _solely because of_ the COVID vaccine, and not some underlying health condition?
Medicine is always about the money... whether it's a vaccine for melanoma or treating you for pneumonia... it's going to cost you. You don't necessarily have t
Re: (Score:1)
Please, don't get it. Better yet, don't get any medicine. The rest of the world will be thankful.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing but ivermectin and colloidal silver for that guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, Robert, drink some raw milk, relax, and go back to filming the Real Food Show. Everything will be fine, friend. And if it's not, why not try to eat some roadkill bear? It'll undoubtedly make you feel better.
Did anyone else read the headline as: (Score:1)
"mRNA Vaccine Prevents Melania From Returning"
Re: (Score:2)
"mRNA Vaccine Prevents Melodrama From Returning"
Sad that a company that actually does something (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it's sad that once again we have a company that is providing a direct benefit to the world and they're worth only $30b when you have shitty AI companies that make the world a worse place that are worth many times that.
Re: (Score:2)
It is sad, but most vaccines don't make money. The real money is treating something forever and ever, like blood pressure medication. Actually preventing someone from getting sick is, sadly, a money loser, because, I feel GREAT, why should I give you money now?
Re: (Score:1)
This is why a lot of chronic diseases will NEVER have cures. It's more profitable to treat than to cure. Treat someone over a lifetime and milk 100k out of them. Treat someone once and present them with a 100k price tag to pay all at once and the consumer or insurance company will balk at the cost.
Re: (Score:3)
The article links to another article that deals a bit more with the actual study and they report the cost of the Keytruda at $200,000 with the thought that the vaccine would be similar.
Re: (Score:3)
> This is why a lot of chronic diseases will NEVER have cures. It's more profitable to treat than to cure. Treat someone over a lifetime and milk 100k out of them. Treat someone once and present them with a 100k price tag to pay all at once and the consumer or insurance company will balk at the cost.
It's a fun conspiracy theory, but this is actually just how biology works.
There's basically four kinds of things that can go wrong with our bodies. Infections, mechanical issues, system errors, and cancer.
Infections we can cure by helping the body to kill off the infection, it's only some rare stubborn ones like AIDS that are chronic like you describe.
Mechanical issues we can fix with surgery.
System errors? That's stuff like genetic disorders where our body creates too much of hormone A or doesn't create th
Re: (Score:2)
There's a balance here, specially with the de-aging treatments we're coming up with.
If you make someone live to 150 somehow, that will be 110 years of de-aging treatment.
And there's no definitive cure for aging, not one that you can afford anyway.
Cancers can be pretty profitable, but they will also kill your patient pretty quickly in most cases.
Re: (Score:2)
And better yet, AI has no morals so if they think that it will solve all the world's problems, they're probably forgetting it'll take one look at a few statistics sets and say something like "execute all homeless people, sterilize anyone who might be a bad parent, and put in prison people with X color skin, and anyone in this exact demographic and crime as well and terrorism, crime, addiction, theft, and assault will go down 90%!" It's not that simple but some people are dumb enough to listen that shit. Jus
Re: (Score:2)
"sterilize anyone who might be a bad parent,"
IOW making less than $250,000