5 ms·

"The data show encouraging signs of clinical activity and an increased persistence of cancer-specific CAR-T cells when combined with CARVac." Not sure why this

by refurb 3y ago

"The data show encouraging signs of clinical activity and an increased persistence of cancer-specific CAR-T cells when combined with CARVac." Not sure why this is all that interesting to HN. It's a very early trial and the outcome is "encouraging". Other than a proof of concept that it might work, there is nothing here.

acdha 3y ago
Cancer is a pretty major health concern for most people and the idea of this general treatment is interesting even if it’s understood to be a very hard problem. HN also has a lot of people who have worked in or adjacent to scientific research so I think there’s always an appreciative upvote for something which starts to look like positive results from something generations of scientists have worked towards.
- elromulous 3y ago
  +1 Also something showing positive results in humans. So many things have been cured in mice, but don't translate.
  - pie420 3y ago
    Any major examples? I've heard a lot about animal trials succeeding and then the human trials failing, but would love to read into it if you have any sources.
- refurb 3y ago
  But what makes this unique versus the hundreds of other early studies that show "encouraging results"? The technique of CAR-T isn't exactly groundbreaking any more with 3 products already on the market. And the ORR of 59% is kinda of in line with current CAR-Ts. I'm going to ESMO and this would be interesting but certainly not the highlight of the data releases. Don't get me wrong, this may turn out to be very exciting, but it's very early data, and similar to other development programs has a 90% chance of failing.
  - f6v 3y ago
    CAR T hasn’t achieved much success in solid tumors yet. Making it work for non-blood cancers would be truly a major milestone for humanity.
  - acdha 3y ago
    Your initial question was why the link was getting upvotes. I don’t think anyone is claiming it’s a medical revolution but a lot of people have or know someone who has been affected by cancer, and anything which offers hope for the future is going to get attention. I don’t mind that, it’s a pleasant change from yet another JavaScript framework.
ulfw 3y ago
Because cancer is one of the most common most deadly and least treatable diseases out there. I've lost loved ones / family to cancer. Haven't lost any to Covid e.g. Whatever we can do to treat the various cancers out there, the better it is for humanity. I'd much rather have money flow in this that in the next financial / crypto scam.
nyagaga 3y ago
Employee in a CAR-T company here. More than proof of concept if they went with such a statement to the press. Also, ongoing Phase 1/2 means that by 5-10 years this therapy may become commercial, the initial target being refractory/relapsing tumours as stated in the announcement. It may take some time for the therapeutic target population to be expanded, but this is not a minimal achievement. My view is that this being an autologous therapy (the patient's very own leucocytes are being engineered: the entire manufacturing cycle [I speculate 30-50 days] is done for just a single patient), this will be very expensive and probably only covered on an insurance basis in certain countries only. Still better than nothing, and even science has to make money. The real breakthrough will be arriving to heterologous therapies, where healthy donors leucocytes can be engineered and administered to any patient.
- konschubert 3y ago
  In the next five years, how many people will die of a cancer that this could have prevented? Why do we accept this, and aren’t willing to bring it to market faster?
  - itishappy 3y ago
    Liability. This is a perverse incentive structure, but it's not an easy problem. If people die due to your inaction, you are not liable. If people die due to your actions, you very much are. Even a minor issue can end up being harmful. If you have a cancer treatment that's safe and effective, but you haven't fully vetted it and it turns out to be less effective than another available option, then your drug would cause harm. It's safer to test these things, otherwise you get sued, go to jail, your company folds, and nobody gets cancer treatments anymore.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      I think it should be allowed that, for people with illnesses that end up inevitably fatal in a high percent range, they be allowed to get early access to experimental medication once it's passed some sort of verification. Right now, only those very rich have that chance, they pay the pharma companies (and a host of outright quacks)... I'd love to see cancer medication being accessible for everyone, no matter the amount of money on their bank account.
omarhaneef 3y ago
I think the exciting part is this: “BNT211 continues to show encouraging antitumor activity in patients with CLDN6-positive relapsed or refractory advanced solid tumors” <- interesting because they finally demo some effect in solid tumors in humans “Follow-up of efficacy data at 1x108 CAR-T cells with or without CARVac shows an overall response rate (“ORR”) of 59% and a disease control rate (“DCR”) of 95%, with the CARVac cohort demonstrating a prolonged persistence of CAR-T cells” <- interesting because those are high response rate. Let’s hope it lasts and they can increase those rates but as a patient, you would take this.
jjtheblunt 3y ago
It’s interesting to HN because BioNTech uses techniques to update a running (biological) system with analogues of patch files, temporarily lived cellular rootkits, etc.
- jjtheblunt 3y ago
  It makes me wonder, what will the analogue of a REPL look like in a biological system, and how will it be realized? reason i thought to ask that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37996164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37996164

by refurb 3y ago

acdha 3y ago

Cancer is a pretty major health concern for most people and the idea of this general treatment is interesting even if it’s understood to be a very hard problem. HN also has a lot of people who have worked in or adjacent to scientific research so I think there’s always an appreciative upvote for something which starts to look like positive results from something generations of scientists have worked towards.

elromulous 3y ago
+1 Also something showing positive results in humans. So many things have been cured in mice, but don't translate.
- pie420 3y ago
  Any major examples? I've heard a lot about animal trials succeeding and then the human trials failing, but would love to read into it if you have any sources.
refurb 3y ago
But what makes this unique versus the hundreds of other early studies that show "encouraging results"? The technique of CAR-T isn't exactly groundbreaking any more with 3 products already on the market. And the ORR of 59% is kinda of in line with current CAR-Ts. I'm going to ESMO and this would be interesting but certainly not the highlight of the data releases. Don't get me wrong, this may turn out to be very exciting, but it's very early data, and similar to other development programs has a 90% chance of failing.
- f6v 3y ago
  CAR T hasn’t achieved much success in solid tumors yet. Making it work for non-blood cancers would be truly a major milestone for humanity.
- acdha 3y ago
  Your initial question was why the link was getting upvotes. I don’t think anyone is claiming it’s a medical revolution but a lot of people have or know someone who has been affected by cancer, and anything which offers hope for the future is going to get attention. I don’t mind that, it’s a pleasant change from yet another JavaScript framework.

ulfw 3y ago

Because cancer is one of the most common most deadly and least treatable diseases out there. I've lost loved ones / family to cancer. Haven't lost any to Covid e.g. Whatever we can do to treat the various cancers out there, the better it is for humanity. I'd much rather have money flow in this that in the next financial / crypto scam.

nyagaga 3y ago

Employee in a CAR-T company here. More than proof of concept if they went with such a statement to the press. Also, ongoing Phase 1/2 means that by 5-10 years this therapy may become commercial, the initial target being refractory/relapsing tumours as stated in the announcement. It may take some time for the therapeutic target population to be expanded, but this is not a minimal achievement. My view is that this being an autologous therapy (the patient's very own leucocytes are being engineered: the entire manufacturing cycle [I speculate 30-50 days] is done for just a single patient), this will be very expensive and probably only covered on an insurance basis in certain countries only. Still better than nothing, and even science has to make money. The real breakthrough will be arriving to heterologous therapies, where healthy donors leucocytes can be engineered and administered to any patient.

konschubert 3y ago
In the next five years, how many people will die of a cancer that this could have prevented? Why do we accept this, and aren’t willing to bring it to market faster?
- itishappy 3y ago
  Liability. This is a perverse incentive structure, but it's not an easy problem. If people die due to your inaction, you are not liable. If people die due to your actions, you very much are. Even a minor issue can end up being harmful. If you have a cancer treatment that's safe and effective, but you haven't fully vetted it and it turns out to be less effective than another available option, then your drug would cause harm. It's safer to test these things, otherwise you get sued, go to jail, your company folds, and nobody gets cancer treatments anymore.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    I think it should be allowed that, for people with illnesses that end up inevitably fatal in a high percent range, they be allowed to get early access to experimental medication once it's passed some sort of verification. Right now, only those very rich have that chance, they pay the pharma companies (and a host of outright quacks)... I'd love to see cancer medication being accessible for everyone, no matter the amount of money on their bank account.

omarhaneef 3y ago

I think the exciting part is this: “BNT211 continues to show encouraging antitumor activity in patients with CLDN6-positive relapsed or refractory advanced solid tumors” <- interesting because they finally demo some effect in solid tumors in humans “Follow-up of efficacy data at 1x108 CAR-T cells with or without CARVac shows an overall response rate (“ORR”) of 59% and a disease control rate (“DCR”) of 95%, with the CARVac cohort demonstrating a prolonged persistence of CAR-T cells” <- interesting because those are high response rate. Let’s hope it lasts and they can increase those rates but as a patient, you would take this.

jjtheblunt 3y ago

It’s interesting to HN because BioNTech uses techniques to update a running (biological) system with analogues of patch files, temporarily lived cellular rootkits, etc.

jjtheblunt 3y ago
It makes me wonder, what will the analogue of a REPL look like in a biological system, and how will it be realized? reason i thought to ask that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37996164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37996164