Donna was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer at age 66 when she and her husband were visiting one of their daughters in Australia. When they returned to the U.S., they immediately came to MSK for care, where she learned she was eligible for an investigational vaccine trial, to prevent pancreatic cancer from returning after surgery.
MSK hepatopancreatobiliary surgeon Dr. @Jeffrey_Drebin, physician-scientist @TheVinodLab, and medical oncologist @EileenMOReilly walked Donna through each step.
“They described how they would take part of my tumor to make a personalized vaccine, and it sounded amazing,” Donna says. “My husband and I had a moment of concern about delaying chemotherapy, but all the doctors made me feel so comfortable that we took the leap of faith and said, ‘Go for it.’”
Over the next few months, Donna received an immunotherapy drug and eight doses of the vaccine, followed by chemotherapy, and then a final vaccine dose.
Today, Donna is 72 and recently celebrated her 50th anniversary with her husband in Sicily and spends as much time as she can with her daughters and six grandchildren.
Learn more about this clinical trial, presented at the 2026 American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting: https://t.co/C0IwK11OaA
#AACR26
@iskander Hi - I am curious what is the advantage of this method over the netMHC family of methods? I have used those in the past for my research but am not familiar with the nuances of the methods and how they differ. Thanks!
Excited to share my latest research! Thanks to @andimscience and @bengrbm for giving me the opportunity to work on this project and for the mentorship along the way
How different are self and nonself? This is a central question in immunology.
In our latest work just published in @PRX_Life we demonstrate that at the peptide-level statistical differences between host and pathogen proteomes are minor
@ZKForTre Fair enough -- I just think it's important to highlight the difference between promoting questionable scientific interventions to the exclusion of scientific ones vs. in addition to scientific ones!
@calleymeans I get you want changes to public health spending and care about children eating healthy in schools. But how is it productive to malign someone who spent their life making low cost vaccines for the developing world (and has received death threats) because of how he looks
Tri-i CBM held our annual retreat 10/27-28. We welcomed the new first years, had wonderful talks and discussions, and enjoyed rejuvenating group bonding time⭐️!
Application portals are now open for perspective applicants, and we invite you to join our CBM family!
Peter Seidler, none of this is happening without you. San Diego loves you and will love you forever. Miss you every day. Thank you for all the joy you’ve brought us.
@calleymeans@pmarca Why is your position that nobody under any circumstances should be prescribed obesity drugs but that everyone should take psilocybin regardless of psychiatric need? This idea that shrooms are “natural” and pharmaceuticals are “synthetic” doesn’t automatically mean one is healthy
I am willing to publish my two 2018 papers on the world first gene edited babies, however it must be published in either Nature or Science. It is one of the greatest medical breakthroughs in history, it deserves the honor to be published in Nature or Science.
Just finished “The Deadly Rise of Anti-Science” by the inspiring @PeterHotez . A depressing but important book - I think a must read for aspiring scientists like myself
https://t.co/aGGrioHQzt
@calleymeans If it’s molecularly the same as regular meat and (eventually) better for the planet then what is your opposition to it? I’m seriously asking, I’m not sure I see the issue