8 ms·

Moderna Melanoma Vaccine Cuts Death Rate in Half

287 points by boiler_up800 3y ago

YellOh 3y ago
This is very neat! The effect has only been observed up to three years out, but this seems like it could become a pretty cost-effective option? Also, misc side note: I keep reading the words "Madonna" and "Cults" in the title even though they're not there. Was very confused when I first clicked the link.
- seydor 3y ago
  Can't unsee
ceejayoz 3y ago
A friend's kid had a specific rare childhood melanoma that, when Googling, showed a 90% mortality rate. Thankfully that number is apparently before recent immunotherapy advancements, but it was pretty terrifying. This article is a happy click for me.
- edc117 3y ago
  A little bittersweet for me, lost an uncle to this about 10 years ago...but still happy and a little inspired, proud of our species. I really hope ours is the last generation(s) that have to suffer through that awful disease.
briane80 3y ago
Great news, and with the 92% effective covid vaccine, Moderna are really killing it.
orwin 3y ago
Weirdly, while this is not the first time i read about this vaccine, this is the first time i read an explanation about how it work. Seems to be a tad expensive, but also generalizable. Hopefully it can replace hormone therapy for breast cancers, and be extended to all common cancers.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  Didn’t see any pricing information? Sadly all incentives are to not make it less expensive and to simply extort the institutions on the payment side and give rebates to everyone who doesn’t have an institution to back them. Much of medicine is intentionally expensive to prop up revenues (and indirectly profits while maintaining a defensible percent of revenues margin). But maybe not here - Moderna got a lot of experience with mass scale production in the pandemic. If they orient it here we could see biopsy based / pre surgical vaccination of cancer at mass scales which would require scaled out pricing.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Current personalized cancer "vaccines" arent really comparable. They typically cost millions and require the a team of scientists to harvest your cells and create tailored biologics to treat you. Even if you strip out the profit motive, you still have huge amounts of skilled human labor
    - fnordpiglet 3y ago
      Yes, but that’s the beauty of industrialization. As scales grow, manual skilled processes become automated. I’m not asserting todays mRNA based on a sequence of a single virus genome is comparable - but that the process of industrializing as a skill is in fact a skill in an enterprise that once perfected can be applied to more complex domains. The profit motive is reflected more in terms of keeping high revenue producing processes inefficient to justify higher profits with the same margin. Medicine is replete with examples of processes that can be dramatically more efficient and widely available, but are not optimized because it reduces profits by reducing gross revenues. High margins invite scrutiny, high revenues invite investment.
      - gattr 3y ago
        Hopefully, in a few decades: got cancer? Go for a biopsy, wait a week for a personalized vaccine. Even if some cells survive, mutate and start growing again, just repeat the procedure. Cancer becomes a somewhat annoying chronic illness.
fnordpiglet 3y ago
This, coupled with mass sequencing of individual cancers and pathogens, feels like the generalized way forward in medicine. I wonder how they identify the targets in each genome. Is there an optimizing expert system? Generative AI?
- chrisamiller 3y ago
  The short answer is, we sequence their genomes, identify mutations that change a protein sequence and are highly expressed, then run those all through suites of algorithms that predict how well they'll be presented to the immune system. (mostly neural networks trained on far-too-sparse experimental data). This prediction is the hard part right now - we still don't understand enough about how the immune system identifies and interacts with these altered peptides to do really accurate predictions of which ones will be most effective. Throw in that these tumors are actively suppressing the immune system in various ways, and it's complicated! There is lots of research going on, though, and lots of promising early results, like this one
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    How much of the end to end process requires artisanal human touch? In some future day, is there a chance of tailored mRNA is industrialized to the point that we go from biopsy to vaccine as a standard course of care?
    - chrisamiller 3y ago
      Absolutely. We're not there yet, but it's not inconceivable.
CoastalCoder 3y ago
I'm guessing that this vaccine is only used post-diagnosis. Anyone know if there's talk of using this profilactically, like the HPV vaccine? (I realize that viruses != cancers, but IIUC hpv can sometimes lead to cancer, which is why I thought to ask.)
- sbelskie 3y ago
  “The vaccine is custom-built based on an analysis of a patient's tumors after surgical removal. The vaccines are designed to train the immune system to recognize and attack specific mutations in cancer cells.” Looks like their is a level of personalization going on that requires actual existing cancer.
  - packetlost 3y ago
    Damn, I knew mRNA vaccines were the pretty much the end game for vaccines, but holy shit this is cool.
    - DiscourseFan 3y ago
      Well, not really, what (mass) mRNA trials have shown is that they don't deliver long term immunity, and each time you give someone an mRNA booster the immune reaction gets more severe, until the point at which it might give them serious long term side effects or even, in severe cases, kill them. It doesn't actually make sense in most cases to use mRNA over traditional vaccines--but they have been producing fascinating non-prophylactic immunotherapy treatments with mRNA, where triggering a severe, and specific, immune response would lead to positive results (like with specifically targeted cancer treatments).
      - JAlexoid 3y ago
        Way before we had COVID bring out mRNA based vaccination to mass media, I learned about mRNA as a treatment for various cancers. Moderna's research pipeline has been full of cancer medications, which seem to be very promising.
sys32768 3y ago
~20 years ago a young father on my block had a mole on his neck that ended up being a fatal melanoma. He otherwise looked so healthy. He said it might have been from sunburns when he was in the Boy Scouts. I will never forget the look on his face when I spoke with him, a look of bewilderment wrestling with anger. His wife teetered with grief and confusion, trying her best to be strong while trying to bear the sickening reality that nobody could have prepared their family for. I always get an annual dermatology checkup now because of him.
- ejb999 3y ago
  Please explain to someone that has never seen a melanoma - this person had a single 'mole-like' mark on his neck (presumably small?), and that alone killed him? or was it 'mole-like' and eventually got so big that it killed him? Having a hard time understanding how something so small, and so easily removed can kill someone. I have so many 'moles' on me, I wouldn't even know what to look for.
  - askonomm 3y ago
    I just go to a dermatologist once a year who scans my moles. Totally worth it.
  - teruakohatu 3y ago
    Just like many cancers, the cancerous cells spread and destroy vital organs. Yes they can be removed, but if the cancer has already spread then it may be too late.
    - ejb999 3y ago
      so it can be visually very small, and still kill you? Just like an iceberg I guess...
      - pas 3y ago
        my late dentist went skiing, got a nasty cough, died 2 weeks later, lung cancer. no symptoms before. just a seemingly fit and healthy normal weight 30-something guy with a wife and kids. (maybe he inhaled too much enamel dust or who knows, the point is that humans are very bad at noticing these things on themselves/others.)
rafaelero 3y ago
That's amazing news. Even cooler when you realize that Keytruda was already a relatively effective treatment!
bkummel 3y ago
Sounds like an important breakthrough! Side note: in the article, I find it a bit inappropriate that the first paragraphs only talk about the effects on the stock prices of both involved companies, before going into details of the research and how the vaccine works…
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  That's how financial news is structured. Science news go in the opposite order.
leetrout 3y ago
Wear sunscreen. Get your moles checked. My dad died in July 1996 from a nasty mole on his back. He would ask me to scratch his back and I remember being 8 or 9 years old and having to scratch around it as it was near the seam of his tank top (which likely aggravated it daily). And would make comments about it being "gross". We just didn't know what we know today. He was drying off after showering one morning and got blood all over the towel from the mole. He went to the dermatologist and was told he had malignant melanoma. This was in September 1995 and he was in the ground before the middle of July 1996. Nine months to get his affairs in order. I remember driving around and seeing his old college pals (one of which I still see once a year or so for lunch to this day). I remember him buying a bag phone, a "car phone" so we could keep in touch as he drove from Eastern KY to Duke University for experimental treatments (I believe it was the one that led to the immunotherapy treatments used today). He told my mom even if it didn't help him he hoped it would help someone. I avoid the sun with the exception of the back of my neck and the top of my hands. He has no clue (nor do the dermatologists) what caused it but, like other posts mention, likely sunburns in childhood. I am so hopeful for this treatment and thankful for the progress made on the immunotherapy fronts.
- hammock 3y ago
  >Wear sunscreen. Melanoma in adults is typically tied back to acute blistering sunburn events that happened before the age of 18 (as you seem to be aware). The most common sites of melanoma are chest and back in men and legs in women, areas that are more often than not covered by clothing and not in need of sunscreen. Cumulative sun exposure on the other hand causes the other types of skin cancer - not melanoma, which this vaccine is targeting. The most common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer themselves and are wildly overdue for FDA review and removal (that has been held up for political reasons). For those who wish to wear sunscreen I recommend non-nano zinc mineral sunscreen such as Thinksport. Look for "non-nano" and zinc oxide (not titanium oxide, which is often nano in part and also a carcinogen) on the label.
  - astockwell 3y ago
    > The most common sites of melanoma are chest and back in men and legs in women > The most common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer themselves Both of these statements are out-of-date. Recent studies show two different histological subtypes of melanoma for young adults vs older adults, each following a different common mode of presentation [1]. Melanoma in younger adults tends to present on the long limbs and is thought to have different contributing factors. Also "common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer" is a common FUD trope. Sunscreen reduces cancer mortality, full stop. Each person's circumstances vary based on their daily habits, geography, and personal/familial history. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8482997/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8482997/
victorbjorklund 3y ago
https://archive.is/wh409 https://archive.is/wh409
jseliger 3y ago
The combination treatment has won U.S. breakthrough therapy and European Medicines Agency PRIME scheme designations, regulatory programs that aim to speed development of innovative treatments. Still, Hoge said that even with the new data it would be some time before the companies can file for approval of the treatment. These delays help fill graveyards in the meantime: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/01/the-invisible-graveyard-is-invisible-no-more.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/01/th.... The tragedy goes mostly unremarked on, because the dead don't agitate or vote.
- icegreentea2 3y ago
  But also remember the other invisible graveyard - the people who aren't dead because they received ineffective treatments. I do agree that drug approval processes need to consider the negative cost of delay, but in this specific case, from further in the article we see: > Moderna is currently building a dedicated facility in Massachusetts to produce the vaccine at commercial scale, which it hopes to finish sometime next year. > "We need to make sure that we have that near completion before we could even contemplate asking for approval," Hoge said. And the reason for this is that you typically need to submit detailed manufacturing information as part of your new drug approval process. This allows the FDA assess how likely the drug you actually sell will provide the same benefits as those in the trial, as well as make sure you don't like... dunno forget to serialize stuff and ship out contaminated product.
  - JAlexoid 3y ago
    The approvals themselves are much less efficient, than they aught to be. In so many cases, the changes trigger a review of the whole process - rather than the changes.
    - pas 3y ago
      to be fair, mostly because biology/pharmacology/medicine is vexingly treacherous. but! generics can get easy approval, they need to show that their active ingredient is the same molecule and it has a very similar biological uptake profile, and that's it (at least in Europe, but as far as I know it's very much copied from the US process) so that's not that high bar. and of course "big pharma" knows damn well how to change just some little thing to have a different-but-same molecule but with a few more years of patent protection. (and again, yes, it's not that the process is super duper trivially applicant friendly, but the costs in the system are not in the filing. it's mostly because there's no real common infrastructure for the whole end-to-end iterative process. there's a lot of separate cottage industries for each step, all charging a fuckton of money, all providing mediocre services, mindboggingly shitty software for managing trials/data/patients, no incentive to improve, doc/xls based workflows, you can imagine how inefficient and slow - and thus extremely costly - these specialized services can be, etc.)
kxyvr 3y ago
This is great news. We can always use better treatments. I had a case of metastatic melanoma (III-A) in my early 20's and the drug of choice at that time was interferon, which was not a particularly pleasant experience. There were experimental vaccines at the time as well, so these new vaccines have been multiple decades in the making. As some unsolicited practical advice, yes, it's always good to protect one's self from the sun using long sleeves or sunscreen. However, melanoma can and often does occur in areas that does not receive sun exposure. This could be between your toes or inside your butt cheeks. As a result, it's worthwhile to have a dermatologist conduct a skin exam once a year. Normally, this is covered under a specialist visit for insurance and for many insurance plans this is a flat fee. Outside of a regular exam, any growth that has unusual size, shape, or color should be checked by a dermatologist, especially if it changes. My lesion was raised off the skin and red in color. It also changed and grew over time. If one can not immediately see a dermatologist, lacks insurance, or money for a visit, regular pictures of the skin blemish or growth can help track changes. If it changes, though, it really does require a dermatologist to look at it. Lastly, dermatologists can and do make mistakes. In my case, my lesion was dismissed as a benign nevus at first visit. When I revisted the physician six months later, it was larger and was finally biopsied to discover it was melanoma. It is possible that the cancer metastasized in the interim period, but we'll never know. That said, if one is concerned about a growth and the physician defers, it is very simple to tell the dermatologist that you'd feel more comfortable if we biopsied the growth just to be sure. You don't have to be mean and I've never been refused. At that point, they take a small sample of the growth and send it to the lab. Then, you know for sure. Normally, the sample is taken by using a razor blade and skimming off some of the surface. It's fast, easy, and while not painless, it is not particularly painful. Generally, this is rolled into my specialist visit fee for insurance, but they may send an additional billing code to insurance. Finally, dermatolgists can be difficult to schedule with. Honestly, their schedule is often filled with cosmetic procedures like skin peels and botox because it's so profitable. That said, any dermatologist can do a biopsy, so just call around to find one with an opening that takes your particular insurance. I apologist for the side talk. I often find the whole talk to your doc discussion regarding skin lacks details, so hopefully this helps. Great to hear that the treatments are progressing.
- 3y ago
sunshine_reggae 3y ago
[flagged]
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Different vaccine
  - sunshine_reggae 3y ago
    It's the one that literally everybody got, as I understand it.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      The thread article is about a cancer vaccine. Only a couple hundred humans in the whole world have received it
      - sunshine_reggae 3y ago
        Ok. But: An attack on the US military is still an issue every Us military member should raise with their superiors (as long as the IQ allows it).
        seattle_spring 3y ago
        They certainly should, when one actually happens. Luckily most military members are (hopefully) smart enough to tell the difference between a real threat and some fake video popularized by Bret Weinstein or Alex Jones.
deminature 3y ago
Two out of three Australians will be diagnosed with some form of skin cancer at some point their lives [1] due to the higher atmospheric UV. This is going to prevent a lot of unnecessary death. Modern medicine is fantastic. [1] https://www.phrp.com.au/media/media-releases/two-in-three-australians-will-develop-common-skin-cancers-as-incidence-rises-new-research-shows/ https://www.phrp.com.au/media/media-releases/two-in-three-au...
sexy_seedbox 3y ago
What's the point of mentioning company stocks in a vaccine article?
lawrenceyan 3y ago
Moderna BioNTech merger when?
nojvek 3y ago
Moderna and its mRNA vaccines is truly magic. Like someone born 500 years ago - if they saw what Moderna was making, they would think this is God like power. Because it is. DNA/RNA is the language of all life. Moderna is literally working at the language of life layer to produce their vaccines.

287 points by boiler_up800 3y ago

This is very neat! The effect has only been observed up to three years out, but this seems like it could become a pretty cost-effective option? Also, misc side note: I keep reading the words "Madonna" and "Cults" in the title even though they're not there. Was very confused when I first clicked the link.

seydor 3y ago
Can't unsee

ceejayoz 3y ago

A friend's kid had a specific rare childhood melanoma that, when Googling, showed a 90% mortality rate. Thankfully that number is apparently before recent immunotherapy advancements, but it was pretty terrifying. This article is a happy click for me.

edc117 3y ago
A little bittersweet for me, lost an uncle to this about 10 years ago...but still happy and a little inspired, proud of our species. I really hope ours is the last generation(s) that have to suffer through that awful disease.

briane80 3y ago

Great news, and with the 92% effective covid vaccine, Moderna are really killing it.

orwin 3y ago

Weirdly, while this is not the first time i read about this vaccine, this is the first time i read an explanation about how it work. Seems to be a tad expensive, but also generalizable. Hopefully it can replace hormone therapy for breast cancers, and be extended to all common cancers.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
Didn’t see any pricing information? Sadly all incentives are to not make it less expensive and to simply extort the institutions on the payment side and give rebates to everyone who doesn’t have an institution to back them. Much of medicine is intentionally expensive to prop up revenues (and indirectly profits while maintaining a defensible percent of revenues margin). But maybe not here - Moderna got a lot of experience with mass scale production in the pandemic. If they orient it here we could see biopsy based / pre surgical vaccination of cancer at mass scales which would require scaled out pricing.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Current personalized cancer "vaccines" arent really comparable. They typically cost millions and require the a team of scientists to harvest your cells and create tailored biologics to treat you. Even if you strip out the profit motive, you still have huge amounts of skilled human labor
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    Yes, but that’s the beauty of industrialization. As scales grow, manual skilled processes become automated. I’m not asserting todays mRNA based on a sequence of a single virus genome is comparable - but that the process of industrializing as a skill is in fact a skill in an enterprise that once perfected can be applied to more complex domains. The profit motive is reflected more in terms of keeping high revenue producing processes inefficient to justify higher profits with the same margin. Medicine is replete with examples of processes that can be dramatically more efficient and widely available, but are not optimized because it reduces profits by reducing gross revenues. High margins invite scrutiny, high revenues invite investment.
    - gattr 3y ago
      Hopefully, in a few decades: got cancer? Go for a biopsy, wait a week for a personalized vaccine. Even if some cells survive, mutate and start growing again, just repeat the procedure. Cancer becomes a somewhat annoying chronic illness.

fnordpiglet 3y ago

This, coupled with mass sequencing of individual cancers and pathogens, feels like the generalized way forward in medicine. I wonder how they identify the targets in each genome. Is there an optimizing expert system? Generative AI?

chrisamiller 3y ago
The short answer is, we sequence their genomes, identify mutations that change a protein sequence and are highly expressed, then run those all through suites of algorithms that predict how well they'll be presented to the immune system. (mostly neural networks trained on far-too-sparse experimental data). This prediction is the hard part right now - we still don't understand enough about how the immune system identifies and interacts with these altered peptides to do really accurate predictions of which ones will be most effective. Throw in that these tumors are actively suppressing the immune system in various ways, and it's complicated! There is lots of research going on, though, and lots of promising early results, like this one
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  How much of the end to end process requires artisanal human touch? In some future day, is there a chance of tailored mRNA is industrialized to the point that we go from biopsy to vaccine as a standard course of care?
  - chrisamiller 3y ago
    Absolutely. We're not there yet, but it's not inconceivable.

CoastalCoder 3y ago

I'm guessing that this vaccine is only used post-diagnosis. Anyone know if there's talk of using this profilactically, like the HPV vaccine? (I realize that viruses != cancers, but IIUC hpv can sometimes lead to cancer, which is why I thought to ask.)

sbelskie 3y ago
“The vaccine is custom-built based on an analysis of a patient's tumors after surgical removal. The vaccines are designed to train the immune system to recognize and attack specific mutations in cancer cells.” Looks like their is a level of personalization going on that requires actual existing cancer.
- packetlost 3y ago
  Damn, I knew mRNA vaccines were the pretty much the end game for vaccines, but holy shit this is cool.
  - DiscourseFan 3y ago
    Well, not really, what (mass) mRNA trials have shown is that they don't deliver long term immunity, and each time you give someone an mRNA booster the immune reaction gets more severe, until the point at which it might give them serious long term side effects or even, in severe cases, kill them. It doesn't actually make sense in most cases to use mRNA over traditional vaccines--but they have been producing fascinating non-prophylactic immunotherapy treatments with mRNA, where triggering a severe, and specific, immune response would lead to positive results (like with specifically targeted cancer treatments).
    - JAlexoid 3y ago
      Way before we had COVID bring out mRNA based vaccination to mass media, I learned about mRNA as a treatment for various cancers. Moderna's research pipeline has been full of cancer medications, which seem to be very promising.

sys32768 3y ago

~20 years ago a young father on my block had a mole on his neck that ended up being a fatal melanoma. He otherwise looked so healthy. He said it might have been from sunburns when he was in the Boy Scouts. I will never forget the look on his face when I spoke with him, a look of bewilderment wrestling with anger. His wife teetered with grief and confusion, trying her best to be strong while trying to bear the sickening reality that nobody could have prepared their family for. I always get an annual dermatology checkup now because of him.

ejb999 3y ago
Please explain to someone that has never seen a melanoma - this person had a single 'mole-like' mark on his neck (presumably small?), and that alone killed him? or was it 'mole-like' and eventually got so big that it killed him? Having a hard time understanding how something so small, and so easily removed can kill someone. I have so many 'moles' on me, I wouldn't even know what to look for.
- askonomm 3y ago
  I just go to a dermatologist once a year who scans my moles. Totally worth it.
- teruakohatu 3y ago
  Just like many cancers, the cancerous cells spread and destroy vital organs. Yes they can be removed, but if the cancer has already spread then it may be too late.
  - ejb999 3y ago
    so it can be visually very small, and still kill you? Just like an iceberg I guess...
    - pas 3y ago
      my late dentist went skiing, got a nasty cough, died 2 weeks later, lung cancer. no symptoms before. just a seemingly fit and healthy normal weight 30-something guy with a wife and kids. (maybe he inhaled too much enamel dust or who knows, the point is that humans are very bad at noticing these things on themselves/others.)

rafaelero 3y ago

That's amazing news. Even cooler when you realize that Keytruda was already a relatively effective treatment!

bkummel 3y ago

Sounds like an important breakthrough! Side note: in the article, I find it a bit inappropriate that the first paragraphs only talk about the effects on the stock prices of both involved companies, before going into details of the research and how the vaccine works…

BurningFrog 3y ago
That's how financial news is structured. Science news go in the opposite order.

leetrout 3y ago

Wear sunscreen. Get your moles checked. My dad died in July 1996 from a nasty mole on his back. He would ask me to scratch his back and I remember being 8 or 9 years old and having to scratch around it as it was near the seam of his tank top (which likely aggravated it daily). And would make comments about it being "gross". We just didn't know what we know today. He was drying off after showering one morning and got blood all over the towel from the mole. He went to the dermatologist and was told he had malignant melanoma. This was in September 1995 and he was in the ground before the middle of July 1996. Nine months to get his affairs in order. I remember driving around and seeing his old college pals (one of which I still see once a year or so for lunch to this day). I remember him buying a bag phone, a "car phone" so we could keep in touch as he drove from Eastern KY to Duke University for experimental treatments (I believe it was the one that led to the immunotherapy treatments used today). He told my mom even if it didn't help him he hoped it would help someone. I avoid the sun with the exception of the back of my neck and the top of my hands. He has no clue (nor do the dermatologists) what caused it but, like other posts mention, likely sunburns in childhood. I am so hopeful for this treatment and thankful for the progress made on the immunotherapy fronts.

hammock 3y ago
>Wear sunscreen. Melanoma in adults is typically tied back to acute blistering sunburn events that happened before the age of 18 (as you seem to be aware). The most common sites of melanoma are chest and back in men and legs in women, areas that are more often than not covered by clothing and not in need of sunscreen. Cumulative sun exposure on the other hand causes the other types of skin cancer - not melanoma, which this vaccine is targeting. The most common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer themselves and are wildly overdue for FDA review and removal (that has been held up for political reasons). For those who wish to wear sunscreen I recommend non-nano zinc mineral sunscreen such as Thinksport. Look for "non-nano" and zinc oxide (not titanium oxide, which is often nano in part and also a carcinogen) on the label.
- astockwell 3y ago
  > The most common sites of melanoma are chest and back in men and legs in women > The most common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer themselves Both of these statements are out-of-date. Recent studies show two different histological subtypes of melanoma for young adults vs older adults, each following a different common mode of presentation [1]. Melanoma in younger adults tends to present on the long limbs and is thought to have different contributing factors. Also "common chemical sunscreen ingredients cause cancer" is a common FUD trope. Sunscreen reduces cancer mortality, full stop. Each person's circumstances vary based on their daily habits, geography, and personal/familial history. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8482997/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8482997/

victorbjorklund 3y ago

https://archive.is/wh409 https://archive.is/wh409

jseliger 3y ago

The combination treatment has won U.S. breakthrough therapy and European Medicines Agency PRIME scheme designations, regulatory programs that aim to speed development of innovative treatments. Still, Hoge said that even with the new data it would be some time before the companies can file for approval of the treatment. These delays help fill graveyards in the meantime: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/01/the-invisible-graveyard-is-invisible-no-more.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/01/th.... The tragedy goes mostly unremarked on, because the dead don't agitate or vote.

icegreentea2 3y ago
But also remember the other invisible graveyard - the people who aren't dead because they received ineffective treatments. I do agree that drug approval processes need to consider the negative cost of delay, but in this specific case, from further in the article we see: > Moderna is currently building a dedicated facility in Massachusetts to produce the vaccine at commercial scale, which it hopes to finish sometime next year. > "We need to make sure that we have that near completion before we could even contemplate asking for approval," Hoge said. And the reason for this is that you typically need to submit detailed manufacturing information as part of your new drug approval process. This allows the FDA assess how likely the drug you actually sell will provide the same benefits as those in the trial, as well as make sure you don't like... dunno forget to serialize stuff and ship out contaminated product.
- JAlexoid 3y ago
  The approvals themselves are much less efficient, than they aught to be. In so many cases, the changes trigger a review of the whole process - rather than the changes.
  - pas 3y ago
    to be fair, mostly because biology/pharmacology/medicine is vexingly treacherous. but! generics can get easy approval, they need to show that their active ingredient is the same molecule and it has a very similar biological uptake profile, and that's it (at least in Europe, but as far as I know it's very much copied from the US process) so that's not that high bar. and of course "big pharma" knows damn well how to change just some little thing to have a different-but-same molecule but with a few more years of patent protection. (and again, yes, it's not that the process is super duper trivially applicant friendly, but the costs in the system are not in the filing. it's mostly because there's no real common infrastructure for the whole end-to-end iterative process. there's a lot of separate cottage industries for each step, all charging a fuckton of money, all providing mediocre services, mindboggingly shitty software for managing trials/data/patients, no incentive to improve, doc/xls based workflows, you can imagine how inefficient and slow - and thus extremely costly - these specialized services can be, etc.)

kxyvr 3y ago

This is great news. We can always use better treatments. I had a case of metastatic melanoma (III-A) in my early 20's and the drug of choice at that time was interferon, which was not a particularly pleasant experience. There were experimental vaccines at the time as well, so these new vaccines have been multiple decades in the making. As some unsolicited practical advice, yes, it's always good to protect one's self from the sun using long sleeves or sunscreen. However, melanoma can and often does occur in areas that does not receive sun exposure. This could be between your toes or inside your butt cheeks. As a result, it's worthwhile to have a dermatologist conduct a skin exam once a year. Normally, this is covered under a specialist visit for insurance and for many insurance plans this is a flat fee. Outside of a regular exam, any growth that has unusual size, shape, or color should be checked by a dermatologist, especially if it changes. My lesion was raised off the skin and red in color. It also changed and grew over time. If one can not immediately see a dermatologist, lacks insurance, or money for a visit, regular pictures of the skin blemish or growth can help track changes. If it changes, though, it really does require a dermatologist to look at it. Lastly, dermatologists can and do make mistakes. In my case, my lesion was dismissed as a benign nevus at first visit. When I revisted the physician six months later, it was larger and was finally biopsied to discover it was melanoma. It is possible that the cancer metastasized in the interim period, but we'll never know. That said, if one is concerned about a growth and the physician defers, it is very simple to tell the dermatologist that you'd feel more comfortable if we biopsied the growth just to be sure. You don't have to be mean and I've never been refused. At that point, they take a small sample of the growth and send it to the lab. Then, you know for sure. Normally, the sample is taken by using a razor blade and skimming off some of the surface. It's fast, easy, and while not painless, it is not particularly painful. Generally, this is rolled into my specialist visit fee for insurance, but they may send an additional billing code to insurance. Finally, dermatolgists can be difficult to schedule with. Honestly, their schedule is often filled with cosmetic procedures like skin peels and botox because it's so profitable. That said, any dermatologist can do a biopsy, so just call around to find one with an opening that takes your particular insurance. I apologist for the side talk. I often find the whole talk to your doc discussion regarding skin lacks details, so hopefully this helps. Great to hear that the treatments are progressing.

3y ago

sunshine_reggae 3y ago

[flagged]

s1artibartfast 3y ago
Different vaccine
- sunshine_reggae 3y ago
  It's the one that literally everybody got, as I understand it.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    The thread article is about a cancer vaccine. Only a couple hundred humans in the whole world have received it
    - sunshine_reggae 3y ago
      Ok. But: An attack on the US military is still an issue every Us military member should raise with their superiors (as long as the IQ allows it).
      - seattle_spring 3y ago
        They certainly should, when one actually happens. Luckily most military members are (hopefully) smart enough to tell the difference between a real threat and some fake video popularized by Bret Weinstein or Alex Jones.

deminature 3y ago

Two out of three Australians will be diagnosed with some form of skin cancer at some point their lives [1] due to the higher atmospheric UV. This is going to prevent a lot of unnecessary death. Modern medicine is fantastic. [1] https://www.phrp.com.au/media/media-releases/two-in-three-australians-will-develop-common-skin-cancers-as-incidence-rises-new-research-shows/ https://www.phrp.com.au/media/media-releases/two-in-three-au...

sexy_seedbox 3y ago

What's the point of mentioning company stocks in a vaccine article?

lawrenceyan 3y ago

Moderna BioNTech merger when?

nojvek 3y ago

Moderna and its mRNA vaccines is truly magic. Like someone born 500 years ago - if they saw what Moderna was making, they would think this is God like power. Because it is. DNA/RNA is the language of all life. Moderna is literally working at the language of life layer to produce their vaccines.