Merck experimental vaccine shows promise in cancer trial: WSJ

Sun Nov 3, 2013 12:19pm EST

Related Topics

(Reuters) - Merck & Co Inc's experimental cancer vaccine appeared to provide broader protection against a cancer-causing virus than the company's Gardasil shot did in clinical trials, the Wall Street Journal said on Sunday.

The U.S. pharmaceutical company said the study results support its plan to submit the new vaccine, code-named V503, for U.S. regulatory approval by year's end, which could lead to market launch next year at the soonest, the paper said.

Officials at Merck were not immediately available to comment.

The article said Merck expects health-care providers to eventually switch to V503 if the product receives marketing approval.

Some analysts expect its annual sales could exceed $1 billion, the paper said.

Gardasil, launched in 2006, was the first vaccine to protect against human papillomavirus, or HPV, a sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer in women and other less-common types of cancer in males and females.

Merck ran clinical trials to test the new vaccine's safety and efficacy, and will present results at an HPV-focused medical meeting in Florence, Italy, this week, the paper said.

(Reporting by Scott DiSavino; Editing by Maureen Bavdek)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (3)
bachcole wrote:
You’ll do better here:

Nov 03, 2013 2:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
If approved, hopefully the vaccine will meet its expectations of curtailing cancer.

Nov 03, 2013 10:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
VaccineRisks wrote:
There are pros and cons in connection with this picture.
For a more balanced view please follow

Nov 04, 2013 5:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.