Victoria Johnson joined MJH Life Sciences in 2020 and has written for NeurologyLive, CGTLive, and is now an assistant managing editor for HCPLive and RheumatologyLive. She doesn’t have enough time for her numerous hobbies. You can reach her at vjohnson@mjhlifesciences.com.

Brepocitinib, an investigational oral therapy targeting TYK2 and JAK1 produced rapid, sustained improvements in global disease activity, skin disease, itch, and physical function in adults with dermatomyositis who had failed multiple prior treatments, prompting the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) to grant the therapy Priority Review with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target action date in the third quarter of 2026.

The new data, from the phase 3 VALOR trial, were published March 28 in the 

 and simultaneously presented as a late-breaking abstract at the 

2026 American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) Annual Meeting

 held in Denver, Colorado, from March 27-31.

Brepocitinib 30 mg (Priovant Therapeutics) achieved a statistically significant 15.3-point greater improvement in mean Total Improvement Score at week 52 compared with placebo — meeting the primary endpoint and all nine key secondary endpoints — while enabling nearly twice as many patients to meaningfully reduce background corticosteroid use, findings that position the drug as potentially the first targeted therapy approved for the disease.¹

Dermatomyositis is a rare systemic autoimmune disease characterized by proximal muscle weakness, recalcitrant cutaneous eruptions, disabling pruritus, and risks of interstitial lung disease and malignancy. Current standard-of-care relies on systemic glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and intravenous immunoglobulin — agents with limited efficacy, significant toxicity, and no targeted mechanism specific to dermatomyositis pathogenesis. Most patients require multiple therapies, often achieving only partial disease control while accumulating steroid-related morbidity.¹

Brepocitinib is a first-in-class oral selective inhibitor of TYK2 and JAK1. This dual-targeting profile suppresses type I and type II interferon signaling, IL-6, IL-12, and IL-23, all cytokine pathways implicated in dermatomyositis pathogenesis.⁴ Preclinical work demonstrated that type I interferon drives myotube damage and dermal microvascular injury in dermatomyositis, both of which were attenuated by brepocitinib at clinically relevant concentrations — providing the mechanistic rationale for the VALOR trial.⁴

VALOR (NCT05437263) was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolling 241 adults with definite or probable dermatomyositis across 90 global sites. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to brepocitinib 30 mg once daily, brepocitinib 15 mg once daily, or placebo for 52 weeks. Stable background therapy with a single antimalarial agent, a single DMARD, or both was permitted. Patients on glucocorticoids at baseline tapered to ≤20 mg prednisone-equivalent before randomization, with further protocol-guided tapering from weeks 12 to 36.¹

The population was heavily pretreated and refractory: mean age was 50.6 years, 77.6% were women, 81.3% had moderate-to-severe disease activity at baseline, and approximately 2/3 were receiving 2 or more background agents at enrollment.¹ The primary endpoint was mean Total Improvement Score (TIS) at week 52 — a validated composite myositis index scored 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting greater clinical improvement across six core measures of disease activity.¹

Brepocitinib 30 mg met the primary endpoint with a mean TIS of 46.5 at week 52 versus 31.2 with placebo, a least-squares mean difference of 15.3 points (95% CI, 6.7–24.0; 

 <.001).¹ The 15 mg dose achieved a mean TIS of 37.5 — a 6.3-point difference versus placebo that did not reach statistical significance.¹

Treatment effects with brepocitinib 30 mg were evident as early as week 4 and sustained at every visit through week 52. More than 2/3 of patients in the 30 mg arm achieved TIS ≥40, twice the minimum clinically important difference; more than half achieved TIS ≥40 while simultaneously reducing corticosteroid use to ≤2.5 mg/day prednisone-equivalent — a composite outcome reflecting both disease control and meaningful steroid-sparing benefit.²,³ Brepocitinib 30 mg also demonstrated statistically significant improvements on all nine key secondary endpoints, including muscle strength, CDASI-A skin disease activity, functional disability, and corticosteroid tapering, with nearly twice as many patients reducing background corticosteroids compared with placebo.¹,²,³

The AAD late-breaking presentation by Ruth Ann Vleugels, MD, MBA, MPH, of Mass General Brigham and Harvard Medical School, extended the VALOR dataset with skin-specific and patient-reported outcomes not fully captured in the 

Among patients with a baseline pruritus numeric rating scale (PP-NRS) score of ≥4, 54.0% achieved a ≥2-point improvement in itch at week 4 with brepocitinib 30 mg versus 9.5% with placebo. An 18.9% greater proportion achieved itch remission (PP-NRS ≤1) at week 4 (95% CI: 5.0–32.9), with benefits sustained through week 52.²

Skin-related quality of life, assessed by Skindex-16, showed a mean change of −12.9 in the brepocitinib 30 mg arm versus −0.9 with placebo at week 4, with continued improvements sustained across the trial.² Among the 64% of patients with moderate-to-severe skin disease at baseline — a population particularly refractory to existing therapies — brepocitinib 30 mg was associated with a 26.6% higher rate of functional skin remission by CDASI-A compared with placebo (95% CI: 7.6–45.5; 

 =.0060), and a 23.9% higher rate of Cutaneous Dermatomyositis Investigator Global Assessment "Clear" or "Almost Clear" status with ≥2-grade improvement (45.7% vs 21.8%).²

Serious infections occurred more frequently with brepocitinib 30 mg than with placebo (10% vs 1%), the most clinically meaningful safety signal in the trial. These events resolved with medical management and treatment was completed in most cases.¹ Adverse events leading to discontinuation occurred more frequently in the placebo arm, as did malignancies, cardiovascular events, and thromboembolic events — findings the 

 authors attribute to the elevated baseline disease burden and chronic immunosuppressive treatment carried by the placebo population rather than a protective drug effect.¹ The overall brepocitinib safety profile across more than 2,000 patients in the clinical development program was characterized as consistent with approved JAK and TYK2 inhibitors.³

"I anticipate that the VALOR trial results… will be practice-changing for patients with dermatomyositis," Vleugels said in a statement.

 "These findings underscore the need to move beyond the historical paradigm of suboptimal disease control and reliance on systemic corticosteroids toward a patient-centric model focused on rapid, sustained, steroid-sparing efficacy with a modern, targeted therapy."³

If approved, brepocitinib would be the first targeted therapy specifically approved for dermatomyositis, addressing a disease where the clinical trial landscape has been marked by repeated failures of immunosuppressants and biologic agents.

Vleugels RA, Paik JJ, Bauer Ventura I, et al. A phase 3 trial of brepocitinib in dermatomyositis. 

 Published March 28, 2026. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2503531

Vleugels RA. Brepocitinib achieves rapid and sustained control of cutaneous disease activity, itch, and skin-related quality of life in dermatomyositis: results from the phase 3 VALOR trial. Late-breaking abstract 78745 presented at: 2026 American Academy of Dermatology Annual Meeting; March 27–31, 2026; Denver, CO.

Priovant Therapeutics. New England Journal of Medicine publishes positive phase 3 VALOR trial results of brepocitinib in dermatomyositis. News release. March 28, 2026. 

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/03/28/3264202/34323/en/New-England-Journal-of-Medicine-Publishes-Positive-Phase-3-VALOR-Trial-Results-of-Brepocitinib-in-Dermatomyositis.html

Paik JJ, Vencovský J, Charles-Schoeman C, et al. Brepocitinib, a potent and selective TYK2/JAK1 inhibitor: scientific and clinical rationale for dermatomyositis. 

 2025;43(2):354–363. doi:10.55563/clinexprheumatol/eeglsa

Articles

Results from the phase 3 trial were published in NEJM and simultaneously presented as a late-breaking abstract at AAD 2026.

News

news page, resources on the topics of disease- and specialty-specific medical news and expert insight can be found. Content includes articles, interviews, videos, podcasts, and breaking news on health care research, treatment, and drug development.

Dermatology

The HCPLive dermatology page is a resource for medical news and expert insights on skin disease. This page features expert-led coverage, articles, videos and research on the therapies and development of treatments for dermatologic conditions, and more.

Clinical

clinical page is a resource for content on every specialty, disease, and topic available on our medical news site.

Conference

 conference coverage page features articles, videos, and expert-led live coverage from major medical meetings throughout the year.

VALOR: Brepocitinib AAD Data Support Priority Review for Dermatomyositis

Nicholas Marston, MD, MPH, is a cardiologist and an assistant professor of medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Evolocumab Reduces CV Risk in Non-Atherosclerotic Patients With Diabetes, With Nicholas Marston, MD, MPH

Evolocumab has the capacity to reduce the risk of first major cardiovascular event (MACE) in patients without known significant 

, according to a secondary analysis of the VESALIUS-CV trial.

American College of Cardiology (ACC) Scientific Sessions 2026

 in New Orleans, Louisiana, by Nicholas Marston, MD, MPH, a preventive cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, these data highlight the investigational oral PCSK9 inhibitor’s capacity for expanding treatment to patients without a history of major cardiovascular events. The analysis demonstrates the importance of targeting lower LDL-C goals across high-risk primary patients.

“We often think about diabetes as a CAD equivalent,” Marston told 

 in an exclusive interview. “But if you look at the guidelines, we aren’t as aggressive with treating LDL-C levels in patients with diabetes as we are in those who are secondary prevention with coronary disease, especially if they’ve had an event. I think these results demonstrate that we really should be treating them more similarly, at least in terms of their LDL-C goals.”

VESALIUS-CV was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of evolocumab, involving 12,257 patients with qualifying atherosclerosis or high-risk diabetes. The latter was defined as ≥10 years’ duration, daily insulin use, or microvascular disease. Eligible patients also had to present with no prior myocardial infarction or stroke, an LDL-C level ≥90 mg/dL, a non-HDL-C level ≥120 mg/dL, and an apolipoprotein-B (apoB) level ≥80 mg/dL.

In the present analysis, Marston and colleagues examined outcomes in patients without known significant atherosclerosis, which was defined as any arterial stenosis ≥50% or CAC ≥100. The study included dual primary endpoints – the first was a composite of coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke (3-P MACE), while the other was 3-P MACE plus ischemia-driven arterial revascularization (IDR) (4-P MACE). Secondary endpoints included the following composites:

Myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or IDR

Coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction, or IDR

Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke

Coronary heart disease death or myocardial infarction

The sub-analysis cohort included a total of 3655 patients with a median age of 65 years, followed for a median of 4.8 years. Median body mass index was 31.4 (interquartile range [IQR], 28-35.6), most patients had hypertension, and nearly all patients had diabetes. The median baseline LDL-C level was 132 mg/dL (IQR, 108-156).

Ultimately, a 3-P MACE occurred in 83 patients in the evolocumab group compared to 117 in placebo (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.91; 

 = .009; between-group risk difference, 2.1%; 95% CI, 0.4-3.8%). A 4-P MACE occurred in 127 patients in the evolocumab group versus 178 in the placebo group (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.86; 

 = .001; between-group risk difference, 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.9-4.9%). Evolocumab’s effect was also more apparent after the first year of treatment, with 41% (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.81) and 39% (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79) reductions in the risk of 3- and 4-P MACE afterwards, respectively.

“Because this patient population was high-risk primary prevention with diabetes, we do have to keep that caveat in terms of generalizability; however, I think we can certainly say that these data support intensifying treatment and LDL-C goals in those patients,” Marston said. “Really, what we should be doing is treating these high-risk diabetes patients to the kind of targets that we reserve for secondary prevention.”

Editors’ Note: Marston reports disclosures with Ionis, Lilly, Arrowhead, Janssen, Amgen, New Amsterdam, and others.

Marston N, Bohula E, Bhatia A, et al. Evolocumab Reduces Risk of First Major Cardiovascular Events by 31% in Patients Without Significant Atherosclerosis: Results from VESALIUS-CV. Abstract presented at the American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions 2026, New Orleans, LA. March 28-30, 2026.

Marston NA, Bohula EA, Bhatia AK, et al. Evolocumab to Reduce First Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients Without Known Significant Atherosclerosis and With Diabetes: Results From the VESALIUS-CV Trial. 

Videos

Marston discusses his sub analysis of the VESALIUS-CV trial, which indicated reduced MACE risk in patients with diabetes and no atherosclerosis after evolocumab treatment.

Cardiology

Cardiology condition center page is a comprehensive resource for clinical news and insights on cardiovascular and cardiometabolic diseases. This page consists of interviews, articles, podcasts, and videos on the research, treatment and development of therapies for heart disease and cardiovascular events, as well as associated diabetes, renal failure, and more...

Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

Type 2 Diabetes

Strategic Alliance Partnership

Layla Van Doren, MD, MBA, is an assistant professor of medicine at Yale School of Medicine and a classical hematologist at Smilow Cancer Hospital.

Valentina Restrepo-Espinosa, MD is a postdoctoral associate at Yale School of Medicine.

Burnout rates were 60% among hematology-oncology physicians who treat 

compared to 43% among those who did not, despite no significant difference in grit and resilience between groups.

Findings from a cross-sectional, nationwide survey highlight disparities among providers who treat SCD, including reduced job pride and recreation time directly associated with increased burnout, and 64% of these providers earn less than $350,000 annually compared to 40% of their colleagues.

“At a high level, our study shows that sickle cell providers experience more burnout despite no meaningful differences in the personal factors that typically drive it,” said study investigator Valentina Restrepo-Espinosa, MD, a postdoctoral associate at Yale School of Medicine. “What we conclude from that is that systemic factors are likely responsible.”

Study investigators deemed burnout as an important area of investigation due to its direct association with physician attrition, medical errors, decreased productivity, and their personal experiences.

“In this role, you're often a one-person show: advocate, educator, researcher, and administrator, all while delivering the highest level of care to medically complex patients,” Layla Van Doren, MD, MBA, assistant professor of medicine at Yale School of Medicine and a classical hematologist at Smilow Cancer Hospital, said in an interview with 

“Educating colleagues and entire institutions about sickle cell disease and healthcare bias typically falls to us as well.”

The survey included responses from 159 hematology-oncology physicians, 55 of whom treated SCD. Overall, 71% identified as female, and 59% of white and sickle cell providers were more likely to identify as Black than non-sickle cell providers (24% vs 4%).

Additionally, providers who treated SCD had more years in practice, and more often worked in academia or leadership roles (

< .05). Moreover, recreation and job pride mediated burnout in SCD physicians.

Van Doren and Restrepo-Espinosa are currently conducting a follow-up study examining the specific systemic factors driving burnout among sickle cell providers, including institutional infrastructure, compensation equity, emotional exhaustion, compassion fatigue, compassion satisfaction, and moral distress. Stay tuned for part 2 of our interview, where they discuss findings and the path forward.

For now, here’s part 1 of our Q&A with both investigators:

 What led you and your colleagues to assess burnout in hematology-oncology physicians treating sickle cell disease, and what were you expecting to see?

 The impetus came from my own experience treating sickle cell disease and recognizing that people living with this condition are medically complex, not only because of the disease process itself, but because of the significant social support needs that come with having a lifelong illness.

My own struggles with burnout were also a driving factor. In this role, you're often a one-person show: advocate, educator, researcher, and administrator, all while delivering the highest level of care to medically complex patients. Educating colleagues and entire institutions about sickle cell disease and healthcare bias typically falls to us as well.

We focused on hematology-oncology-trained sickle cell providers because we needed a control group, general hematology-oncology providers. Many non-hematology-trained clinicians also care for sickle cell patients, but a comparable control group was essential to the study design.

The results weren't unexpected to me, I live this every day. What did surprise me was the degree of burnout: 60%. I was also struck, though not surprised, that sickle cell providers showed just as much grit and resilience as their non-sickle cell counterparts.

 Can you walk us through the key findings and what they suggest about the lived experience of physicians who treat sickle cell disease?

 At a high level, our study shows that sickle cell providers experience more burnout despite no meaningful differences in the personal factors that typically drive it. What we conclude from that is that systemic factors are likely responsible.

We saw no difference in grit or resilience, key personal protective factors against burnout. We also found no significant differences in work hours, exercise, or sleep. So this does not appear to be a personal failing. It appears to be driven by the environment these providers work in. That distinction matters because it means there are actionable targets, things that can actually be improved within systems and processes to better support sickle cell providers.

 I want to emphasize that point. When people experience burnout, they often ask themselves, "What can I do differently? What do I need to change?" But when it's a systems problem, there's often very little an individual can do on their own. That's what this study reflects. The follow-up work will focus on identifying exactly which systematic and programmatic factors are driving this.

 For more context on the study design, how did you define grit, resilience, and burnout when examining individual versus systemic factors?

 I'll let Valentina speak to the specifics, but I'll note that adding grit and resilience to the study was her idea, and I loved it. Around the time we were designing the study, I had read Angela Duckworth's 

, and I was struck by how she described the concept and developed a validated tool to measure it. I'll hand it over to Valentina to explain how these measures have been validated in the physician workforce.

 We wanted objective, validated instruments, nothing subjective. For grit, we used Angela Duckworth's Short Grit Scale, an 8-item instrument that has been extensively validated across healthcare workers, including physicians and nurses. For resilience, we used the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, or CD-RISC.

The CD-RISC has three versions: 25-item, 10-item, and 2-item, all by the same author. To avoid survey fatigue, we used the 2-item version, which has also been extensively validated in physicians. That version focuses specifically on the ability to bounce back after hardship, which was the dimension most relevant to our questions.

 We used the single-item burnout instrument from the Physician Work Life Study, which is widely used in physician surveys precisely because it's a single item, minimizing survey fatigue, and has been extensively validated in physicians and healthcare workers.

The more commonly known alternative is the Maslach Burnout Inventory, which measures burnout across three domains. But we weren't interested in parsing which domain was most affected. We wanted a clear yes-or-no answer: are these providers burned out? From there, we could focus on understanding why, which meant casting a wide net around contributing factors rather than drilling into burnout subtypes.

Editor’s Note: Van Doren and Restrepo report no relevant disclosures.

Restrepo-Espinosa V, Van Doren L. Burnout in Sickle Cell Physicians Linked to Systemic Barriers. 

https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2025018338/567099

Higher burnout rates among physicians who treat sickle cell disease. EurekAlert! Published March 12, 2026. Accessed March 30, 2026. 

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1119293

Hematology

Sickle Cell

Sickle Cell condition center page, resources on the topics of medical news and expert insight into sickle cell disease can be found. Content includes articles, interviews, videos, podcasts, and breaking news on sickle cell research, treatment, and drug development.

Burnout in Sickle Cell Physicians Hits 60% While Grit and Resilience Stand Strong

Linda Stein Gold, MD, is a dermatologist at Henry Ford Health. 

Eingun James Song, MD, is the director of clinical research for Frontier Dermatology. 

Evaluating Treatment Selection in Psoriasis

In "Evaluating Treatment Selection in Psoriasis," our panel delves into the decision making process for selecting the most appropriate biologic therapy for patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, and the growing challenges posed by insurance driven treatment requirements and biosimilar step therapy.

The panel begins by outlining a practical framework for treatment selection, starting with identifying contraindications such as active inflammatory bowel disease, malignancy, or multiple sclerosis to narrow down viable options. From there, the discussion centers on categorizing patients as skin predominant, joint predominant, or both. For skin predominant disease, IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors are both considered excellent options. For joint predominant disease, IL-17 inhibitors or occasionally TNF inhibitors are favored, with IL-17 inhibitors being the clear preference when axial disease is present. Patient preferences around dosing frequency and speed of response are also noted as important personalization factors.

The panel largely agrees that TNF inhibitors have been largely phased out of routine practice due to concerns around long term efficacy loss, laboratory monitoring requirements, and potential risks such as skin cancer in sun damaged patients, though a small subset of patients with predominantly joint disease may still respond best to this class.

The conversation then shifts to the impact of biosimilars and insurance formulary restrictions on clinical practice. The panel expresses measured acceptance of initiating biosimilar therapy when formulary access is limited, but raises concerns about forced switching between biosimilars, particularly given the immunogenicity risks and the potential for drug antibody formation that can reduce efficacy over time. The panel also questions whether biosimilar step therapy truly saves money in psoriasis when more effective therapies will likely be needed eventually, and highlights the lack of robust interchangeability data between biosimilars as an additional concern.

Our next episode, "Analyzing IL-23 Inhibitors in Psoriasis," further explores psoriasis highlighting the emerging pipeline of IL-23 targeted therapies, including a promising oral IL-23 receptor blocker and next generation TYK2 inhibitors, alongside a candid discussion of the real world adherence and efficacy considerations of oral versus injectable biologics.

Video Series

Luisa Campos, Global Heme Lead, Medical & Scientific Affairs at Thermo Fisher Scientific.

Cancer care has changed substantially in the past few years, and molecular diagnostics have been central to that shift. However, 

, such as acute myeloid leukemia (AML), multiple myeloma, and certain lymphomas, remain challenging to manage.

In rapidly progressing blood cancers, treatment decisions often need to be made within days, and genomic data is most valuable when biomarker results are available early enough to inform the initial treatment plan. The challenge in precision oncology is delivering actionable molecular insights to clinicians quickly enough. Rapid, reliable diagnostic tools are essential to ensure the right information is available precisely when it matters most for patient care.

Molecular characterization with precision diagnostics

Hematologic malignancies frequently demonstrate complex clonal architectures, with co-occurring mutations that can influence disease behavior, including treatment response. This means 2 patients with the same diagnosis may end up needing different treatment plans.

Comprehensive, multi-gene testing with sensitive next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels allows simultaneous detection of clinically relevant variants in a single assay. When designed appropriately, targeted panels balance breadth and depth, capturing key alterations while maintaining analytical sensitivity for low variant allele frequency (VAF) events. The utility of such testing is highly dependent on timing.

Establishing clinical value with a rapid turnaround time

2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations

 emphasize that molecular results identifying therapeutically actionable targets should be available as quickly as possible—ideally within 3–5 days—to inform initial treatment strategy.

Rapid NGS can meaningfully reduce the turnaround time to actionable results while providing broad molecular profiling, helping clinicians align patients with therapies targeted to their specific alterations. For instance, early identification of 

 mutations can support timely consideration of approved target therapies in the appropriate setting or match patients to an optimal clinical trial. Rapid-NGS panels complement other established core diagnostics, such as cytogenetics and flow cytometry, by capturing additional molecular alterations that are not detectable by these tests.

Similar considerations can apply across other hematologic malignancies, where molecular features are increasingly incorporated into classifications, risk models, and treatment selection. Depending on panel design and sensitivity, NGS can also support diagnosis in challenging cases (e.g., suspected “triple-negative” myeloproliferative neoplasm or complex lymphoma cases), detect low-level adverse subclonal variants (e.g., 

), Ig/TCR clonality assessment, informing risk and treatment decisions. In selected settings, profiling may also identify trackable biomarkers for minimal residual disease response monitoring.

In each case, for rapid testing to translate into clinical value, results need to be clear, consistent, and integrated into the established clinical workflows. Unclear reporting can delay decisions and may require confirmatory or additional testing, adding time in situations where decisions are time-sensitive.

The technical capability for rapid NGS now exists in many regions. Automation, streamlined library preparation, and integrated bioinformatics have reduced hands-on time and improved reproducibility.

Yet, adoption remains uneven. Often, barriers to precision medicine in hematology are operational: staffing, interpretation capacity, validation and reporting, and funding or reimbursement determine whether genomic data arrives in time and is usable.

Running these technologies requires specialist expertise and resources to validate assays, manage high-throughput analysis, and interpret findings. However, expertise is not evenly available across institutions. While professional guidelines exist, reporting practices vary across laboratories.

Roadblocks around affordability and equitable access are persistent challenges across healthcare that also complicate the adoption of NGS. While large academic centers are often better positioned to build and maintain in-house NGS services, community hospitals and rural clinics rely more on regional networks or external testing and may have limited local specialist capacity. As a result, access to rapid genomic profiling can vary widely.

Another contributing factor to the slower integration of NGS technologies is that coverage and funding haven’t been consistent across payers and health systems. Even when testing is clinically indicated, inconsistent coverage and prior authorization can delay ordering and make it difficult for laboratories to sustain rapid, in-house workflows and for smaller labs to justify the investment.

Enabling broader access to rapid molecular profiling

Wider access to NGS technologies is achievable. Automated specimen-to-report systems can reduce manual steps, support more predictable turnaround times, and enable standardized analysis and reporting across laboratories. While automation does not solve everything, such as reimbursement, local policies, and the availability of clinical expertise, it can make decentralized in-house rapid molecular profiling more feasible.

Curated disease-focused targeted panels are often the most practical choice for rapid clinical decision-making. By concentrating on clinically actionable genes, they reduce interpretive burden and allow faster analysis without compromising clinical relevance. Partnerships with academic institutions and regional networks can also extend interpretive expertise to community settings, helping bridge disparities in access.

The precision-medicine trials program myeloMATCH (Myeloid Malignancies Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) in AML and MDS illustrates how rapid molecular profiling can be operationalized at scale. Early reports demonstrate the feasibility of collecting and returning clinical and molecular data quickly to support the matching of patients to genomically defined treatment studies.

Closing the gap between capability and access

Further transformation in the care of hematologic malignancies is likely to occur over the coming years, as rapid genomic testing becomes more integrated into routine practice. For many disease settings, the technology is ready for broader use, and the body of clinical evidence supporting its use continues to expand.

Because access, turnaround time, and consistency still vary across health systems, closing this gap will require investment in molecular diagnostic capacity, including validated workflows, quality systems, staffing, and automation. Equally important are education and ongoing support so clinicians and laboratory teams can order and interpret results consistently. Clearer reimbursement pathways and continued progress toward more standardized reporting can further reduce delays and variability across sites.

For hematologic malignancies, precision medicine is no longer aspirational—it is increasingly embedded in classification systems, risk models, and many treatment pathways. The remaining imperative is ensuring that genomic insight arrives in time to influence the decisions that matter most.

Döhner H, Wei AH, Appelbaum FR, et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2022 recommendations from an international expert panel on behalf of the ELN. 

Rapid NGS and streamlined workflows are critical to delivering timely, actionable genomic insights in blood cancers, but access, reimbursement, and expertise gaps persist.

Timing Is Everything: Advancing Genomic Testing in Hematologic Malignancies

Understanding the Psoriasis Treatment Landscape and Available IL-23 Inhibitors

This interview with David Cotter, MD, PhD, highlights recent findings and new data in the psoriasis treatment space highlighted at AAD 2026.

Plaque Psoriasis

The HCPLive plaque psoriasis page is a resource for medical news and expert insights on psoriasis. This page features expert-led coverage, articles, videos and research on the therapies and development of treatments for psoriatic disease, and more.

Positive Results Identified for Risankizumab and Other Psoriasis Drugs, With David Cotter, MD, PhD

Alessia Fornoni, MD, PhD, is a Professor of Medicine, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology, and Biochemistry at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Director and Chair of the Peggy and Harold Katz Drug Discovery Center.

NEPTUNE and CureGN are advancing precision nephrology, linking molecular data to outcomes and enabling targeted therapies and smarter clinical trial design.

Nephrology

The HCPLive nephrology page is a resource for medical news and expert insights on kidney disease. This page features expert-led coverage, articles, videos and research on the therapies and development of treatments in nephrology, and more.

Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis

The HCPLive focal segmental glomerulosclerosis page is a resource for medical news and expert insights on FSGS. This page features expert-led coverage, articles, videos and research on the therapies and development of treatments in FSGS, and more. 

​​NEPTUNE and CureGN Driving Precision Nephrology Forward, With Alessia Fornoni, MD, PhD

CAR-T therapy in lupus may shift earlier in care, but challenges in access, logistics, and patient selection remain as the field moves toward precision treatment.

The Future of CAR-T in Lupus Nephritis Treatment, With Brad Rovin, MD

Priya Verghese, MBBS (MD), MPH, is the Division Head of Pediatric Nephrology, and Professor of Pediatrics at Northwestern University, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital.

FSGS recurrence threatens transplant success, yet clinicians still lack reliable predictors, mechanisms, and effective prevention strategies.

The Search for Answers in FSGS Recurrence, With Priya Verghese, MBBS (MD), MPH

Melinda Gooderham, MD, is a dermatologist and the medical director at the SKiN Centre for Dermatology.

New late-breaking phase 3 data suggest zasocitinib may help reshape the oral treatment landscape for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Sustained PASI Responses Observed Through Week 60 with Zasocitinib, With Melinda Gooderham, MD

William Fearon, MD, is a professor of medicine and the director of interventional cardiology at Stanford University School of Medicine.

Fearon discusses results from the ALL-RISE trial, which demonstrated the FFRangio’s efficacy in assessing lesions for patients with coronary artery disease.

FFR Angiography Noninferior to Pressure-Wire Strategy in CAD Analysis, With William Fearon, MD

Stay updated with the latest healthcare breakthroughs, including late breaking data from 3 conferences, in this week’s essential news roundup. 

The HCPFive: Top News for Healthcare Providers from the Week of 03/22

Patrick Campbell is the editorial director of HCPLive. Patrick has spent years spearheading coverage surrounding cardiometabolic health and rheumatic disease for MJH Life Sciences. Before joining MJH Life Sciences in 2019, he spent time as a beat reporter and/or multimedia specialist with the Pocono Record, Star News Group, and NJ Advance Media. He is the executive producer for multiple HCPLive podcasts, including Diabetes Dialogue, Don't Miss a Beat, Kidney Compass, Medical Ethics Unpacked, The Medical Sisterhood, and Skin of Color Savvy. 


Follow him on Twitter @RealPatCampbell or reach him via email at PCampbell@mjhlifesciences.com.

Results of the MOMENTUM trial suggest the prevalence of hypercortisolism in resistant hypertension could be greater than previous estimates have indicated.

Hypertension

The HCPLive hypertension page is a resource for medical news and expert insights on high blood pressure. This page features expert-led coverage, articles, videos and research on the therapies and development of treatments for hypertension, and more.

MOMENTUM: Hypercortisolism Present in 1-in-4 with Resistant Hypertension

Navin Kapur, MD, is the director of the Acute Circulatory Support Program and associate director of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory at Tufts Medical Center.

Although not statistically significant, the reduction represents a potential new pathway for treating patients with STEMI.

Latest News

VALOR: Brepocitinib AAD Data Support Priority Review for Dermatomyositis

Evolocumab Reduces CV Risk in Non-Atherosclerotic Patients With Diabetes, With Nicholas Marston, MD, MPH

Burnout in Sickle Cell Physicians Hits 60% While Grit and Resilience Stand Strong

Evaluating Treatment Selection in Psoriasis

Timing Is Everything: Advancing Genomic Testing in Hematologic Malignancies