ReviewMolecular & cellular oncology2026
mRNA vaccines in oncology: personalized cancer immunization and neoantigen targeting.
Review in Molecular & cellular oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized neoantigen mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer: the role of lipid nanoparticle delivery systems.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2026Review
- mRNA Therapeutics Beyond Infectious Diseases: Expanding Therapeutic Applications and Future Perspectives.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2026Review
- Therapeutic melanoma vaccines: Platforms, neoantigen strategies, and emerging combination immunotherapies.Therapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision oncology is evolving with personalized mRNA neoantigen vaccines, although long-term clinical responses vary. These mRNA-based vaccines have facilitated the development of patient-specific neoantigens. Clinical success is dependent not only on immunogenicity but also on tumor neoantigen clonality, expression, and presentation by the vaccines. Evidence from trials conducted from 2020 to 2025 shows that indicators like minimal residual disease are crucial. The mRNA-4157 (V940) combined with pembrolizumab demonstrated improved recurrence-free survival in resected high-risk melanoma patients (18-month RFS 79% vs 62%; HR 0.56). Similarly, the autogene cevumeran triggered significant neoantigen-specific T cell responses in 8 out of 16 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, leading to a delayed recurrence for immune responders (not reached vs 13.4 months; HR 0.08). This highlights a translational model focusing on tumor clonality, antigen quality, and immune accessibility. The review also addresses (i) clonality aware neoantigen selection; (ii) AI-based predictions of antigen presentation and immunogenicity, including issues of false positives; (iii) alternative delivery systems beyond lipid nanoparticles; and (iv) real-world challenges such as turnaround time, batch variability, regulatory frameworks, and operational costs that impact implementation. A structured model for crucial events and validation plans is proposed to bridge the gap between predictions and actual clinical benefits, utilizing techniques like immunopeptidomics and functional T cell assays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.