Personal vaccine may reduce risk of pancreatic cancer returning after surgery, small study finds
ER Productions Limited/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — A personalized mRNA vaccine may reduce the risks of pancreatic cancer returning after surgery, according to a preliminary study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.
Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive cancers, with a typical survival rate of only about a year after the diagnosis according to the study.
While the findings are encouraging, the vaccine is still in early testing and will likely take years before it becomes widely available — assuming ongoing trials continue to show success, according to Dr. Vinod P. Balachandran, lead investigator of the trial and senior author of the study.
In this small, preliminary trial of 16 patients, half had a strong immune response to the vaccine. Most of these responders remained cancer-free for more than three years, much longer than those who didn’t respond.
The vaccine works by training specialized immune system cells, known as T cells, to recognize and attack the cancer.
Researchers couldn’t track tumor shrinkage because all patients had surgery to remove visible cancer before vaccination. However, they found that the vaccine produced long-lasting T cells that may keep fighting cancer for years.
“This is one way through which you can make lots of T cells, and you can make these T cells such that they can persist for a long time in patients and retain their function,” Balachandran said.
Balachandran said “to be able to get an immune response has been very challenging,” especially when an illness like pancreatic cancer typically does not respond to vaccines, which highlights the significance of these findings.
A larger trial is now underway to confirm the results. If successful, this approach could lead to new ways to treat or even prevent pancreatic and other advanced cancers.
Overall, Balachandran said this study can “provide some important clues on how you would be able to develop vaccines more broadly for other cancers.”
“Hopefully this information that we will learn from these clinical trials will give us information to know apply vaccines in other settings, such as primary prevention, meaning preventing cancers from occurring even before they occur, with vaccines or perhaps also using it to treat patients who have more advanced disease,” Balachandran said.
Beauty influencer Ashley Stobart discusses how she got a facelift after removing fillers from her face/ABC News
(NEW YORK) — Celebrities are increasingly opening up about reversing cosmetic procedures and swearing off dermal fillers, but some have discovered it can come with unexpected consequences.
“Friends” actress Courteney Cox spoke about removing her fillers on the “Gloss Angeles” podcast in 2023.
“I was just doing too many fillers and then having to have them removed which, thank God they are removable, but I think I’ve messed — I messed up a lot and now, luckily, I can, you know, I was able to reverse most of that,” the 60-year-old said.
“IMPACT x Nightline: Facelift: After Fillers?” streams on Hulu beginning Jan. 23.
Reality TV star Lala Kent known for “Vanderpump Rules” discussed her change of heart with BravoTV.com.
“I wanna stop with the lips, I wanna stop with the fillers, you know, it’s just enough is enough,” the 34-year-old said. “I’m starting to look at the comments and compare photos, I’m not about it anymore.”
In 2023, model Blac Chyna told “Impact x Nightline” about how losing weight prompted her to have cosmetic work reversed at age 34.
“As I started to slim down, my features started to really come out, like my cheekbones and everything. So with all the filler, that started to really protrude out now that my face has become slimmer,” she said. “It served its purpose, like I’m just, I’m cutting ties with it so I can move on to the next chapter in my life.”
UK beauty influencer and podcaster Ashley Stobart shares her reflections on cosmetic procedures with followers on her podcast “Nip, Tuck, Not Giving A…” She got nonsurgical injections of lip filler when she was 18 — the earliest age it’s legal to do so in her country.
“It was just that quick fix I needed for maybe loss of volume, wanting bigger lips, bigger cheeks, the jaw filler, the chin filler, the nose filler,” she told ABC News. “I was having all the filler.”
Hyaluronic acid, which is commonly used for fillers, is a gel-like substance that’s injected into spaces to give an appearance of plumpness, according to ABC News medical correspondent Dr. Darien Sutton.
He noted that the internet is flooded with ads for med spas offering seemingly cheap deals on fillers and Botox.
“When you scroll online, you see advertisements for things like fillers — that should be a red flag,” Sutton said. “When you see people looking for customers, aka patients, trying to do procedures that they may not be fully skilled in doing, selling it at a discount, you know, these should be red flags.”
These injectables are sometimes described as dissolving over time, but Sutton said this isn’t always the case.
“We’re learning more and more that many of these substances are persistent in people’s bodies for longer than they may think,” he said. “And that exposes people to risks that we are only beginning to understand.”
When Stobart got pregnant, it meant she took a break from topping up her filler. Then she realized it hadn’t worn off.
“There were just multiple layers of treatments that I had accumulated over the years,” she said. “I’m looking bigger and puffier than ever.”
She decided to get her fillers reversed, but dissolving more than a decade’s worth of substances she had in her face left her with sagging skin. So she opted to get a face-lift at age 34.
She’s not alone. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons said that while the overwhelming majority of facelifts are still among people over 50, their members have observed an increase among people in their 40s and younger.
Even though Stobart had some of her fillers removed already, she said the face-lift surgery was grueling.
“They found a lot of hyaluronic acid, or remnants of some injectable at some point that I had had. They were pushing it out for hours,” she told ABC News. “I was in surgery for 9.5 hours in total. That wasn’t anticipated because when he opened everything up, it turned out there was still a lot left in there.”
Dr. Darien Sutton warned that the face is among the most complicated areas in the body due to the composition of blood vessels, nerves. and muscles, so the surgery requires expertise.
“The risk of complication is so high, and the risk of disfigurement is so high, that you have to make sure you’re doing it with someone who knows exactly what they’re doing,” he said.
Some people in their 20s and 30s are also sharing their surgical lift stories on social media. Ryan Joers is 26 years old, and started his cosmetic journey almost a decade ago with fillers.
“I had always seen on social media, other influencers,” he told ABC News. “Kylie Jenner, at that time was, I think, 16 years old, getting her lips done, and just seeing that kind of noise everywhere, seeing the influencers apply products to their lips that were beautiful and full was a big motivator.”
In the years that followed, Joers enjoyed being able to address perceived imperfections with filler. However, that changed when he was around 22.
“That was when I would smile — I didn’t see anything other than my lips,” he said. “I would see photos and videos of myself and just see lips.”
He acknowledged that he didn’t fully understand how fillers work when he first started getting them.
“Our knowledge on fillers was not what it was today, it was ‘fillers aren’t permanent.’ So you need more, you need more, you need more,” he said. “So I never really got the opportunity at first to understand different types of filler, how they interact differently in the body.”
After that, Joers began to undo what he had spent thousands of dollars and years of his life doing. He had some of his fillers dissolved and got a rhinoplasty, which is a plastic surgery that reshapes the nose. Then, at 25, he got a brow and eye lift.
“It was an interesting landscape, being, you know, a younger man — it comes with a lot of judgment from plastic surgeons,” he said. “You have to admit to someone not only that you made mistakes, but that you’re not happy with the way you look. And that’s a very vulnerable thing with anyone, whether it’s a friend or a doctor.”
Joers believes surgical lifts were his best option due to the limitations of the nonsurgical options available at med spas.
“I’m happier now with the way my face looks, given that surgery was an intervention or an option of altering my chin, altering my nose, altering my face in a way that naturally would have not been possible or achievable through a med spa procedure,” he said.
He hasn’t been afraid to be open and vulnerable about his journey, posting about his recovery and before-and-after shots on TikTok. His videos have been viewed hundreds of thousands of times, and he hopes telling his story will help those who are just starting their cosmetic journeys.
“I’m grateful for my experience, even the bad of it, because that’s how I got here,” he said. “Through that, I was able to learn and make better decisions when it came to permanent solutions.”
Having followed a similar path, Ashley Stobart told ABC News she hopes others learn from her story.
“I would just say, don’t rush into anything unless you’re 100% sure and you understand all of the pros and cons,” she said.
(NEW YORK) — Meta — the company that operates Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp –announced on Tuesday it was ending third-party fact-checking.
Some social media policy experts and public health experts are worried that the end of fact-checking could lead to the spread of medical and science misinformation and disinformation. This is especially worrisome as the U.S. is in the throes of respiratory virus season and is fighting the spread of bird flu.
“There’s going to be a rise in all kinds of disinformation, misinformation, from health to hate speech and everything in between,” Megan Squire, deputy director for data analytics and open-source intelligence at the Southern Poverty Law Center, told ABC News. “[Health] is supposed to be a nonpartisan issue, and … we do see people trying to leverage health [misinformation], in particular, toward a political end, and that’s a real shame.”
“I’m hopeful, but I’m also concerned that this new structure that all the Meta properties are embarking on, it’s just not going to end well,” she added.
The social network giant said it was following the footsteps of X, replacing the program with user-added community notes.
In a press release of the announcement, Joel Kaplan, chief global affairs officer for Meta, said that the choices about what was being fact-checked showed “biases and perspectives.”
How fact-checking, community notes work
Meta started fact-checking in December 2016. Meta’s fact-checking works by Meta staff identifying hoaxes or by using technology that detects posts likely to contain misinformation. The fact-checkers then conduct their own reporting to review and rate the accuracy of posts.
If a piece of content is identified as false, it receives a warning label and the content’s distribution is reduced so fewer people see it.
Fact-checkers put in place following Donald Trump’s 2016 election win were found to be “too politically biased” and have destroyed “more trust than they’ve created,” Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a video posted by the company.
By comparison, community notes work by a user adding context to a post that may be misleading. It is then upvoted or downvoted by other users.
Zeve Sanderson, executive director of NYU Center for Social Media Politics, said after the 2016 election, there was immense pressure for social medial platforms, including Meta, to commit resources to combatting misinformation.
Following the election, most posts being fact-checked were to combat political misinformation, according to Sanderson. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this was expanded to combat medical misinformation, he said.
Sanderson said there were a lot of claims going unchecked online because Meta has not had enough fact-checkers to check every post. Additionally, he said some people didn’t trust fact-checkers.
“There were groups of people online who didn’t trust fact checkers, who saw them as biased, often in a liberal direction,” he told ABC News. “This crowd-sourced content moderation program … it’s going to do different things well and different things poorly. We just don’t know how this is actually going to work in practice.”
Meta referred ABC News back to its Tuesday announcement in response to a request for comment on plans for its community notes or potential spread of misinformation.
Spread of misinformation during COVID-19
During the COVID-19 pandemic, millions were exposed to a deluge of information including news, research, public health guidance and fact sheets, which the World Health Organization referred to as an “infodemic.”
People were also exposed to misinformation and disinformation about what treatments work against COVID-19, how much of a risk the virus poses to children and whether COVID-19 vaccines are effective.
A 2023 KFF survey found that most Americans were not sure if health information they had encountered was true or false.
A report from the U.S. Surgeon General in 2021 found that misinformation led to people rejecting masking and social distancing, using unproven treatment and rejecting COVID-19 vaccines.
Experts told ABC News that members of the general public often do not have enough health literacy to determine if they should trust or not trust information they encounter online or on social media.
Squire said sometimes government agencies do not put out information in an “interesting” format, which may lead people to click on “entertaining” content from misinformation and disinformation peddlers.
“Some of these YouTube videos about health misinformation are a lot more entertaining. Their message just travels faster,” she said. “When you’re presenting scientific information — I know this firsthand as a former college professor — that’s a struggle. You have to be pretty talented at it and, a lot of times, where the expertise lies is not necessarily where the most expedient, fun videos are and stuff.”
How to combat health misinformation
Meta’s change comes as the U.S. faces an increase in bird flu cases and continues treating patients falling ill with respiratory illnesses.
As of Jan. 8, there have been 66 human cases of bird flu reported in the U.S., according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
It’s also flu season. As of the week ending Dec. 28, 2024, there have been at least 5.3 million illnesses, 63,000 hospitalizations and 2,700 deaths from flu so far this season, according to CDC estimates.
Meanwhile, health care professionals have been encouraging Americans to get their flu shot and other vaccines — including COVID and RSV — to protect themselves against serious disease.
Experts are worried that with the change from fact-checking to community notes that misinformation could spread about the effectiveness of vaccines or how serious an illness is.
“I am concerned about the sheer amount of inaccurate information that’s out there,” Dr. Brian Southwell, a distinguished Fellow at nonprofit research institute RTI International and an adjunct faculty member at Duke University, told ABC News. “That’s something that you know ought to bother all of us as we’re trying to make good decisions. But there’s a lot that could be done, even beyond, you know, the realm of social media to try to improve the information environments that are available for people.”
Southwell said one thing that public health experts and federal health agencies can do is to get an idea of the questions that users are going to have about medical topics — such as bird flu and seasonal flu — and be ready with information to answer those questions online.
To combat being exposed to information, the experts recommended paying attention to where the information is coming from, whether it’s a respected source or someone you are unfamiliar with.
“There are various skills that are important, things like lateral reading, where rather than just evaluating the claim, you do research about the source of that claim and what you can find out about them to understand what some of their incentives or track record might be,” Sanderson said.
“This is obviously something that, sadly, social media platforms are not designed in order to incentivize this sort of behavior, so the responsibility is thrust on users to sort of look out for themselves,” he added.
(NEW YORK) — Heart disease remains the leading cause of death in the United States, according to a new report.
The American Heart Association (AHA) report, published Monday in the journal Circulation, found that 941,652 Americans died from cardiovascular disease in 2022, the most recent year for which data is available. That’s an increase of more than 10,000 from the just over 931,500 reported to have died from cardiovascular disease in 2021.
It also means that a person in the U.S. dies of cardiovascular disease every 34 seconds, or nearly 2,500 people every day, according to the AHA report.
“The stats are pretty sobering from this report,” Dr. Tara Narula, ABC News chief medical correspondent and a board-certified cardiologist, said on ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Monday. “In fact, cardiovascular disease kills more Americans than all forms of cancer and accidents combined.”
Cancer and accidental deaths continue to remain the second and third leading causes of death, respectively, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The AHA report also found racial and ethnicity disparities, with Black Americans having the highest prevalence of cardiovascular disease. Between 2017 and 2020, 59% of non-Hispanic Black females and 58.9% of non-Hispanic Black males had some form of the disease, according to the report.
In addition, the report showed several heart disease risk factors continue to rise, with nearly 47% of American adults having high blood pressure and more than half, 57%, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or prediabetes.
Additionally, 72% of U.S. adults have an unhealthy weight, with nearly 42% of adults having obesity, which also is a risk factor for developing cardiovascular disease, according to the AHA report.
In an accompanying editorial, Dr. Dhruv Kazi, associate director of the Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center In Boston, said risk factors for cardiovascular disease are expected to rise over the next several years.
“Although we have made a lot of progress against cardiovascular disease in the past few decades, there is a lot more work that remains to be done,” Kazi wrote. “If recent trends continue, hypertension and obesity will each affect more than 180million U.S. adults by 2050, whereas the prevalence of diabetes will climb to more than 80 million.”
Overall, cardiovascular-related deaths have begun plateauing after ticking upward during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the AHA. The report found death rates dropped during the survey period for all 10 leading causes of death except kidney disease, which increased by 1.5%.
The good news is that 80% of cardiovascular disease is preventable, according to Narula. Ways to lower the risk include eating a heart-healthy diet, getting regular exercise, quitting smoking, managing stress, and getting adequate sleep every night.
