The COVID-19 pandemic left many people stunned by the conduct of medical professionals and their advocacy, as the entire period was marked by misinformation, false statements, unnecessary measures and even proactive interventions that made day to day life way more difficult than supposed to, not to even mention the vaccines. In the history of modern health care we have never seen vaccines developed and approved as quickly as the COVID-19 vaccines were advanced. As a result of the rapid rollout and the mandatory policies adopted in the majority of countries, a significant number of innocent people have suffered its consequences. According to submissions recorded in global reporting systems such as Vigiase, VAERS and EudraVigilance nearly 40 percent of those who chose to take the vaccine were hospitalized either for longer term conditions or short term illness, and approximately 0.4 percent were reported to have lost their life, while those who refused it may have lost their remaining trust in governments. But what if this was the first and the largest clinical trial in modern history, presented to the world as a global pandemic?

The real reason behind the opposition to the COVID vaccines was not unfounded fear but a fundamental distrust of their core technology, the concept of mRNA vaccines. Although the idea of such vaccines emerged long ago, dating back to 1961, no mRNA vaccine had ever received regulatory approval for human use before Covid-19. Numerous research efforts and preclinical tests were conducted over the years, yet none achieved approval before the pandemic.

History of mRNA

The concept of mRNA vaccines originated from the discovery of messenger RNA in 1961, with research into therapeutic use starting in the 1970s, including early vaccine experiments in 1978. Significant advancements occurred in the 1990s, leading to the first mRNA flu vaccine tested in mice, and breakthroughs in the 2000s addressed mRNA stability and immune response issues, paving the way for companies like BioNTech and Moderna. Human clinical trials began in 2001 for cancer therapy, with infectious disease trials starting in 2013. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, no mRNA vaccines received regulatory approval, but foundational research facilitated rapid development in 2020.

Advertisements

However, all major contributor countries involved in producing the COVID vaccines have apparently pursues their own research into mRNA based cancer vaccines since 2020, with some having already achieved clinical clearance in 2025, and the rest projected to reach potential rollout by the end of the 2026.

Germany stands as the leader in mRNA based vaccine developments, predominantly through BioNTech SE, the same company that created the mRNA platform used for the COVID vaccines. The United States follows closely and launched an extensive pipeline of mRNA based research after 2020, through companies such as Moderna and institutions including MD Anderson, Memorial Sloan Kettering (MKS) and Dana Farber, once again institutions that were active developers of the COVID vaccines mRNA base. More than 32 active mRNA cancer vaccine trials are underway in the United States as of 2025, targeting a wide range of cancers, with more than 120 global trials taking place in countries including Russia, China, the United Kingdom and several other smaller countries that were major contributors to the COVID vaccines. In addition some hospitals are already offering their late stage patients participation in clinical trials for intensive forms of cancers such as Autogene cevumeran, high risk muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma, adjuvant ctDNA positive, stage two and three colorectal cancer and many more.

China reportedly maintain the largest global pipeline for therapeutic mRNA oncology vaccines with multiple biotechs involved since 2020. Although fundraising has been static in 2025, the country has outlined a defined rollout plan by the end of 2026 and are actively conducting clinical trials for personalized mRNA vaccines. In a similar but distinct direction, Russia and the United Kingdom have both launched initiatives to promote the technology and highlight its projected accessibility, with the United Kingdom preparing to offer it through the NHS and Russia advancing it through the Federal Medical and Biological Agency. President Putin has already issued public statements describing the technology as capable of delivering 100% success and that it is as a sort of “universal cure” backed by experts such as Dr Patric Ott and Dr Leonard Lee. While each of these countries currently permits only clinical trial use Germany Russia and the United Kingdom all have plans to integrate these vaccines into their public health systems by the end of 2026 , indicating late phases of clinical testing . But how do these vaccines actually work , we all ask.

The vaccines in each case will be offered as personalized mRNA treatments. Although we were told over the years that mRNA platforms (and the COVID vaccine) are not able to directly encode our cellular processes , this is precisely the mechanism these vaccines are claimed to so effective and it is also important to remember that this line of research began in 2020. The personalized vaccines use mRNA to encode tumor specific proteins or neoantigens previously identified though patient biotopsies. These proteins are intended to stimulate the immune system’s CD4 and CD8 T cell responses to attack the cancer cells. It is claimed to provide a complete cure for cancer, however at this stage it is still administered alongside certain checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab, atezolizumab, pembrolizumab and other immunotherapies to achieve maximum efficiency. Studies conducted suggest that these combination can reset immune cycles and sensitize tumors to treatment.

While there is broad agreement that curing such illnesses is a global priority, it remains crucial to step back and examine the available information. Even if there is no confirmed direct link between the cancer vaccines currently being developed and the COVID vaccine, the rapid progression of mRNA technology has at minimum been indirectly influenced by the COVID era, since no mRNA based vaccine had ever been approved before 2019. Supporters of this argument often refer to global reporting systems such as VigiBase, VAERS and EudraVigilance, as well as independent analyses that attempt to account for underreporting. Based on these sources, they argue that if one calculates doses rather than individuals, with many people receiving four or five injections, the combined data suggest an incident rate of approximately 9.17 percent and a mortality rate of roughly 0.0833 percent, which is viewed as considerably lower than the previously cited figures of about 38 percent and 0.4 percent when counted per person . They also maintain that even without a direct connection the unprecedented worldwide use of mRNA Durring the pandemic created scale data column and technical momentum that have enabled the rapid advancement of the cancer vaccines now being developed. Yet it should also be noted that although public statements frequently describe the personalized cancer vaccines as capable of achieving complete success, preclinical results reportedly demonstrated response and relapse prevention rates somewhat above sixty percent.

The rapid advancement of mRNA technology post COVID holds promise for revolutionizing cancer treatment offering personalized cures that could transform public health by 2026 however, it also demands unwavering vigilance to avoid repeating the missteps of the pandemic era. Critics and supported both alike must prioritise transparent data base analysis from systems like VAERS and VigiBase understanding that while the technology could potentially save millions of lives, it could also costs that many. Ultimately all we can do now is follow how these vaccines advance from trials to widespread use, balancing innovation with ethical oversight.

If you wish to stay informed about developments in mRNA and the global clinical trial outcomes expected through 2026 subscribe to our newsletter or visit the official portals of the European Medicines Agency and the U.S National Cancer institute for continuously updated date and guidance