Live data from Hacker News

Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

twitter.com

121–130 of 330 posts

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#121
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if it doubles after that, I may even beat a passive S&P 500 investment.

You know many stocks have done better than the SP500, right?

invest only in the ones that are going to go up - why didn't i think of that?!

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#122
post #88

This is great news! I think people forget how anti-skin cancer protocols even as simple as applying suntan lotion weren't as popular as recent as 50-60 years ago. Lots of "sun children" of the 50s and 60s are now feeling the repercussions of only applying baby oil and are getting hit with lots of melanoma.

What’s funny is before the 50s and 60s everyone knew you should cover up and women wore bonnets. That too much sun was bad for you. Laura Ingalls Wilder of Little House fame (I mention this a lot as I read these to my children as an adult, and they’re a fascinating look at 1880s America) has lots of places where her mother says “put on your bonnet! Don’t get too much sun!”. We act like people in the past were ignoran…

> We act like people in the past were ignorant but people in the 50s and 60s were just a very special type of arrogant,

I’d be curious to know if tetraethyllead in gasoline has anything to do with people from that time being cavalier about exposure to the sun, or if the science was just not there to make the connection between sun exposure and skin cancer.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#123
post #57

Substantially better link: https://www.merck.com/news/merck-and-moderna-announce-phase-... Still no actual Phase 3 data presented.

Yes, however the trial succeeded. But by "how much", is not yet released. This trial was not against placebo, but the already existing, and effective Keytruda treatment.

I believe both were done with Keytruda. Control was Keytruda without the mRNA treatment.

So this should answer the question of "how much better is this with the best we currently have".

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#124
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s funny is before the 50s and 60s everyone knew you should cover up and women wore bonnets. That too much sun was bad for you. Laura Ingalls Wilder of Little House fame (I mention this a lot as I read these to my children as an adult, and they’re a fascinating look at 1880s America) has lots of places where her mother says “put on your bonnet! Don’t get too much sun!”. We act like people in the past were ignoran…

No I think you’re looking at this wrong. They thought too much sun was bad for you because back then tanned skin was considering a mark of being poor and pale skin was a mark of being wealthy since rich people didn’t have to work outside. They also had puritanical Victorian notions of modesty and covering up. There was no knowledge linking sun exposure to cancer or negative health effects. People in the past indeed w…

Pretty sure a bad sunburn sucked back then as much as now, and was something one tried to avoid.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#125

I listened to a great podcast on this just a month ago - too bad that I thought all of this would obviously be priced in already… https://virological.podigee.io/51-21-cancer-vaccines-how-the...

It was priced in, the share price prior to the news being released was taking into account a probability measurement of the trial succeeding or failing. You can’t price in both options of a binary outcome simultaneously, so part of the equity price was functionally equivalent to a call option on the outcome of the drug trial that only resolved after the trial results are announced.

It’s similar to the situation where a company puts out a public offer to buy another company at say, $50 a share on a day that the acquisition target is trading at $40/share.

If the stock of the target company is trading at $46/share, the market is pricing in the probability of the acquisition not happening. If the market knew the acquisition would happen with 100% certainty, the price of the target company shares would be equal to the buyout share price offer. You can assume the risk of the acquisition not happening by purchasing shares at $46, and if it does end up going through, you earn $4 a share from assuming that risk.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#126
post #69

Will this targeted approach be beneficial to other cancer types? Is there any data or theory about this class of drugs as a more general therapy?

Individualized immune cancer therapy has been touted as the next big thing for half a century. It's nothing new, and with few exceptions, such as skin cancer, has failed to yield much. scientists, for decades, have tired to harness the immune system to attackcancer and it almost never works.

> and with few exceptions

Those few exceptions have been monumental in how they've changed cancer treatment. Skin cancer has been particularly well treated with immunotherapy, but other cancers have also benefited from the exact same research and drugs (as it turns out, the specific mutations the immunotherapies like Keytruda target express in other cancers). The reason skin cancer gets so much attention is because it's one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated cancers. (Colon is more common, I believe, but it often doesn't get detected. Get your colonoscopies folks).

It has moved fast enough that I've heard from multiple oncologists that the all 5 year survivability numbers are dated because the treatments are newer than the studies.

We've come a LONG way in a very short period in terms of cancer treatment. It still sucks, but not as much as it once did.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#127
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if it doubles after that, I may even beat a passive S&P 500 investment.

You know many stocks have done better than the SP500, right?

I am in fact aware that some of my stock investments have beaten the market while others have underperformed the market.

MRNA, as it happens, is the latter.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individualized immune cancer therapy has been touted as the next big thing for half a century. It's nothing new, and with few exceptions, such as skin cancer, has failed to yield much. scientists, for decades, have tired to harness the immune system to attackcancer and it almost never works.

Personalized mRNA vaccines are in fact, extremely new, and only made possible by recent advances across multiple fields. This comment reveals a total lack of basic understanding on this topic.

I believe the comment was talking specifically about immunotherapy rather than personalized mRNA. But I'd agree it's still misinformed as immunotherapy has been a game changer across multiple cancers.

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#129

This is great news! I think people forget how anti-skin cancer protocols even as simple as applying suntan lotion weren't as popular as recent as 50-60 years ago. Lots of "sun children" of the 50s and 60s are now feeling the repercussions of only applying baby oil and are getting hit with lots of melanoma.

[flagged]

Re: Moderna reports first positive Phase 3 for mRNA neoantigen therapy in melanoma

#130

This is great news! I think people forget how anti-skin cancer protocols even as simple as applying suntan lotion weren't as popular as recent as 50-60 years ago. Lots of "sun children" of the 50s and 60s are now feeling the repercussions of only applying baby oil and are getting hit with lots of melanoma.

+1. Also, just to call out, it doesn't need to be _warm_ for you to need sunblock. Even when it's cooler / cloudier out there you can still get skin damage. Look for UV rating rather than temperature. Conversely, it being hot doesn't imply high-UV either.

I’ve always wondered about this. I have fair skin, and I tend to burn somewhat easily in very sunny environments like the beach.

However, I’ve never gotten so much as a whisper of sunburn / suntan / anything on an actually cloudy day where sun wasn’t hitting me directly. Is the damage a different type that’s imperceptible? Or is this a public health comms strategy where they assume people will see a single cloud in the sky and decide it’s fine to skip sunscreen, so they talk about how you should slather yourself with sunscreen 24/7, even if the sun is obscured?

Post reply on HN