Be wary of science by press releases.
In a mid‑stage study of high‑risk melanoma patients who had undergone surgery, the vaccine combined with Merck’s Keytruda reduced the risk of recurrence or death by 49% after five years, consistent with the three-year follow-up data in 2023.
So, they had surgery, plus Ketruda.
@$200,000, few will be able to afford this and insurance will not cover it.
Generally, surgery for melanoma is not very hardcore. Since we’re talking about the skin, they just cut out the area. It’s not a complicated procedure and is the standard treatment for melanoma.
Cancer treatments often gave multiple components to them. Ex: someone gets chemo and then surgery as part of a standard for certain types of cancers at certain stages.
It wouldn’t make any sense for someone to get this vaccine and for them to leave the cancer on the patient.
This is huge news, contrary to what you say. Melanoma has a crazy mortality rate. Cutting it in half is a huge success.
Is it affordable yet? Clearly not. But that doesn’t mean that it can’t get there eventually.
Only phase 2 trial, but still hopeful.
49% reduction, customized to patient’s cancer, and $200k.
Cancer treatment can cost a lot more, so here’s hoping.
This really puts a hole in “they aren’t curing cancer because it’s not profitable” argument. Insurance companies love cures because it’s a lot cheaper for them to pay once than for ongoing treatment, when the only thing you’re paying is the premium (and copay or whatever).
Assuming they actually pay for treatment, which they will often try to avoid in as many ways as possible. Even delaying treatment is successful for insurance companies, as by the time all the paperwork is sorted and an insurance company finally agrees to pay for treatment, it can be too late.
What insurance companies love is not paying out money - for treatment or a cure.
no one said cure.
Cure is the most abused term in medicine.