Benjamin Lockshin, MD, FAAD, outlines the clinical and practical factors driving the dominance of IL-23 inhibitors in biologic initiation, highlighting their favorable safety profile, ease of patient counseling, and versatility in managing psoriatic comorbidities.
Two-year data confirm DOR/ISL delivers durable viral suppression—even in patients with high viral loads or advanced disease.
Collapsing the very-low-risk category reflects broader acceptance of active surveillance for Gleason 6 disease, while PARP inhibitor eligibility now requires genetic testing at the hormone-sensitive stage.
Nonsteroidal topicals like roflumilast are enabling proactive, long-term psoriasis control across a broad range of patients, reducing reliance on corticosteroids and minimizing the need for systemic escalation.
Phase 3 data show DOR/ISL matches standard INSTI-based therapy in efficacy and safety, signaling a potential shift in first-line HIV treatment.
Real-world evidence complements clinical trial data by capturing how psoriasis therapies perform across diverse patient populations and treatment contexts in everyday practice.
New FDA approvals and emerging trial data drive two pivotal 2026 NCCN guideline updates: lutetium-177 PSMA-617 for taxane-naive mCRPC and PARP inhibitors in the hormone-sensitive setting.
How payers curb inappropriate ATTR-CM therapy use with better scans, prior auth, real-world outcomes, and telemedicine to speed access.
Experts weigh prior authorization, step therapy, and 12‑month coverage to balance access and cost for high‑value long‑term therapies.
Subcutaneous cancer therapy cuts chair time and IV needs, but brings site reactions, volume limits, and policy hurdles clinics must solve.
Real-world evidence and claims data compare amyloidosis therapies, linking outcomes and symptom burden to total cost of care.
In this episode, ‘Assessing Clinical and Economic Factors in Treatment Selection and Payer Decision-Making,’ the panelists explore the key clinical and economic considerations that drive therapy selection across the three available ATTR-CM treatments. Dr. Alexander opens by emphasizing shared decision-making as a foundational principle, noting that in the absence of head-to-head data, patient preferences carry significant weight alongside clinical judgment. He outlines several practical factors influencing treatment choice, including route of administration, as vutrisiran is a quarterly injection given in a healthcare setting, acoramidis is a twice-daily oral pill, and tafamidis is a once-daily oral pill, each presenting distinct advantages depending on patient circumstances such as pill burden or transportation access.
Subcutaneous cancer therapy trims chair time and costs, but volume limits and reactions matter—learn how clinics streamline workflows.
Experts decode NSCLC PD‑L1 trials, when immunotherapy alone works, why crossover matters, and who still benefits from adding chemotherapy.
Long-term ATTR-CM trial data show durable benefits with early tafamidis or acoramidis, fewer deaths/hospitalizations, and manageable safety.
Learn how TTR stabilizers and gene silencers curb amyloid buildup in ATTR-CM, with trial evidence for fewer hospitalizations and better survival.
Clinicians weigh dual immunotherapy vs monotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, comparing CheckMate 227 and POSEIDON efficacy, PD‑L1 subsets, and toxicity.
Experts explain stage IV lung cancer goals, PD‑L1-driven therapy choices, and when to intensify with chemo plus dual immunotherapy.
In the final episode, Near-Term Priorities for Transforming Clinical Practice in IgA Nephropathy, the panelist explored the following critical question: What do you hope to see in the next 1–2 years in terms of clinical practice change?
This episode, titled Rethinking KDIGO Guidance and Payer Models in the Era of Targeted IgA Nephropathy Therapies, features expert nephrologists discussing the following critical questions: What updates to KDIGO will likely need to be made in view of these novel therapies being approved? How should payers and health systems think differently about treating this disease?
Experts explain stage IV lung cancer goals, PD‑L1-driven therapy choices, and when to intensify with chemo plus dual immunotherapy.
Experts weigh neoadjuvant vs adjuvant immunotherapy in resectable lung cancer, balancing PD‑L1, pCR, surgery timing, and toxicity.
In Advocacy Strategies and the Expanding Role of Novel Therapies in IgA Nephropathy, our panel delves into the following critical questions: What strategies can clinicians use to advocate for access or navigate step edits? How might real-world data and ongoing registries (like RaDaR) support broader adoption and payer confidence?
In this episode, Overcoming Access Barriers and Step-Edit Challenges in IgA Nephropathy Care, the panelists explore the following questions: What barriers exist to real-world use, particularly around payer policies or access? Many plans require a systemic steroid step-edit; why might this be inappropriate for IgAN?
Experts weigh lung cancer perioperative immunotherapy trials, debating adjuvant nivolumab, ctDNA guidance, and chemo choices versus pembrolizumab data.
Experts discuss the promising advancements in HER2-mutant lung cancer treatments, emphasizing the importance of molecular testing and clinical trials.
How EGFR, ALK and PD-L1 biomarker results shape neoadjuvant lung cancer therapy—and what CheckMate-816 means for survival.
Experts discuss the evolving role of PD-L1 in guiding perioperative treatment decisions for resectable NSCLC and review the pivotal CheckMate 816 trial, which established neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy as a standard-of-care option based on improved pathologic response and event-free survival outcomes.
