Castle Biosciences Celebrates Skin Cancer Awareness Month
Aaron Farberg, M.D., FAAD, double board-certified dermatologist, Mohs surgeon and chief medical officer of Bare Dermatology in Dallas, will lead the discussion, joined by dermatology interest group students Mitchell Hanson and Brianna Speigel. Topics will include navigating a diagnosis, emotional support resources, survivorship planning and how patients and caregivers can more effectively advocate for melanoma care. Registration details can be found here .
Empowering Patients and Caregivers: IMPACT Melanoma Virtual Patient Symposium Castle is proud to continue its long-standing partnership with IMPACT Melanoma by sponsoring the organization's upcoming virtual patient symposium, 'Melanoma Diagnosis: A Toolkit to Support the Journey.' The event will be held on Wednesday, May 21, 2025, at 6 p.m. ET , and has been designed to provide individuals newly diagnosed with melanoma — and their support networks — with practical tools, resources and compassionate guidance to navigate the melanoma journey.
'At Castle, our mission is rooted in delivering clinically actionable information to patients and their clinical care teams — and that begins with awareness and education,' said Derek Maetzold, president and chief executive officer of Castle Biosciences. 'By supporting organizations like IMPACT Melanoma and sharing real patient stories like Leah's, we aim to drive conversations around early detection and personalized risk assessment in an effort to help improve patient outcomes.'
FRIENDSWOOD, Texas, May 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Castle Biosciences, Inc. (Nasdaq: CSTL), a company improving health through innovative tests that guide patient care, is recognizing Skin Cancer Awareness Month this May by supporting a series of initiatives designed to raise awareness, educate patients and families and empower those impacted by skin cancer.
Story Continues
'This symposium was created to meet people where they are — at a vulnerable moment in their lives,' said Deb Girard, executive director of IMPACT Melanoma. 'We want everyone who attends, whether they are just beginning their journey or supporting someone who is, to walk away feeling more informed, supported and empowered.'
Leah's Story: Living Confidently with the Support of DecisionDx®-Melanoma
Improving patient care is at the heart of Castle's mission. This month, Castle is sharing the powerful story of Leah Adams, a melanoma survivor who used Castle's DecisionDx-Melanoma test to better understand her predicted risk of recurrence. 'People don't understand how serious melanoma is,' said Adams. 'The DecisionDx-Melanoma test allows you to really see your risk of recurrence — whether it's high- or low-risk — so you can do everything possible to protect your largest organ. Having the reassurance of the low-risk result helps me move forward and be able to show up for my family and for myself.'
Leah's full story can be viewed here.
Walking Together Toward a Cure: Castle Rallies for Melanoma Awareness Across the Nation
As part of its commitment to advancing skin cancer awareness, Castle is proud to continue its support of AIM at Melanoma and the Melanoma Research Foundation by participating in multiple advocacy walks throughout the month of May. Taking place across the country, these events bring together survivors, caregivers, clinicians and advocates to raise critical funds for research, education and outreach — united by a shared goal of finding a cure.
Raising National Awareness: USA TODAY 2025 Skin Health Campaign
Castle is also participating in the 2025 Skin Health Campaign by USA TODAY. The Company is collaborating on an article titled 'Transforming Skin Cancer and Melanoma Outcomes,' which will appear in the May 30 print edition of USA TODAY and in the digital campaign on usatoday.com and Future of Personal Health. The article features Shannon Trotter, D.O., FAAD, board-certified dermatologist and host of the Derm-it Trotter! Don't Swear About Skincare podcast, and melanoma advocate Leah Adams, and highlights the growing role of diagnostic testing in guiding personalized care decisions for individuals diagnosed with melanoma.
More information about Castle's tests for patients with skin cancer can be found at www.CastleBiosciences.com.
About IMPACT Melanoma
IMPACT Melanoma, a national non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, is the nation's leading non-profit dedicated to significantly reducing melanoma in the United States and saving lives. The focus is on prevention education programs that include customized and integrated programs for communities. In addition to skin cancer prevention education and programs, the organization is committed to supporting melanoma patients and their families and advocating for and influencing urban development policies to address shade equity in America. To learn more about IMPACT Melanoma, visit https://impactmelanoma.org/.
About AIM at Melanoma
Founded in 2004, AIM at Melanoma is a global foundation dedicated to finding more effective treatments and, ultimately, the cure for melanoma. By directing and funding paradigm-shifting research initiatives — educating patients, healthcare professionals, and the public — and advocating for survivors and their families, AIM at Melanoma's goal is to end this disease in our lifetime while improving the lives of those it affects. AIM at Melanoma is dedicated to innovation in melanoma research, information and support, and legislation, policy and advocacy. For more information, visit AIMatMelanoma.org.
About Melanoma Research Foundation
The Melanoma Research Foundation (MRF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization and the largest independent organization devoted to melanoma. Committed to the support of medical research to develop effective treatments and eventually a cure for melanoma, the MRF also educates patients and physicians about the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cutaneous melanoma and the melanoma rare subtypes. The MRF is a dedicated advocate for the melanoma community, helping to raise awareness of this disease and the need for a cure. To learn more about the MRF, visit https://melanoma.org/.
About DecisionDx-Melanoma
DecisionDx-Melanoma is a 31-gene expression profile risk stratification test. It is designed to inform two clinical questions in the management of cutaneous melanoma: a patient's individual risk of sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity and a patient's personal risk of melanoma recurrence and/or metastasis. By integrating tumor biology with clinical and pathologic factors using a validated proprietary algorithm, DecisionDx-Melanoma is designed to provide a comprehensive and clinically actionable result to guide risk-aligned patient care. DecisionDx-Melanoma has been shown to be associated with improved patient survival and has been studied in more than 10,000 patient samples. DecisionDx-Melanoma's clinical value is supported by more than 50 peer-reviewed and published studies, providing confidence in disease management plans that incorporate the test's results. Through March 31, 2025, DecisionDx-Melanoma has been ordered more than 200,000 times for patients diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma. More information about the test and disease can be found at https://CastleBiosciences.com/.
About Castle Biosciences
Castle Biosciences (Nasdaq: CSTL) is a leading diagnostics company improving health through innovative tests that guide patient care. The Company aims to transform disease management by keeping people first: patients, clinicians, employees and investors.
Castle's current portfolio consists of tests for skin cancers, Barrett's esophagus and uveal melanoma. Additionally, the Company has active research and development programs for tests in these and other diseases with high clinical need, including its test in development to help guide systemic therapy selection for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis seeking biologic treatment. To learn more, please visit www.CastleBiosciences.com and connect with us on LinkedIn, Facebook, X and Instagram.
DecisionDx-Melanoma, DecisionDx-CMSeq, i31-SLNB, i31-ROR, DecisionDx-SCC, MyPath Melanoma, TissueCypher, DecisionDx-UM, DecisionDx-PRAME and DecisionDx-UMSeq are trademarks of Castle Biosciences, Inc.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which are subject to the 'safe harbor' created by those sections. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning: Castle's ability to (i) raise awareness, educate patients and families and empower those impacted by skin cancer and (ii) deliver actionable information to patients and their clinical care teams; and DecisionDx-Melanoma's ability to (i) provide comprehensive, personalized results to guide risk-aligned management decisions for patients with stage I-III cutaneous melanoma and (ii) help clinicians make more informed, more precise treatment decisions. The words 'believe,' 'can,' 'could,' 'potential' and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in the forward-looking statements that we make. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements, including, without limitation: subsequent study or trial results and findings may contradict earlier study or trial results and findings or may not support the results obtained in these studies, including with respect to the discussion of our tests in this press release; actual application of our tests may not provide the aforementioned benefits to patients; and the risks set forth under the heading 'Risk Factors' in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each filed or to be filed with the SEC, and in our other filings with the SEC. The forward-looking statements are applicable only as of the date on which they are made, and we do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, except as may be required by law.
Investor Contact:
Camilla Zuckero
czuckero@castlebiosciences.com
Media Contact:
Allison Marshall
amarshall@castlebiosciences.com
Source: Castle Biosciences Inc.
A video accompanying this announcement is available at
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/c6e1c2a7-5df4-42dc-9cbe-bf5f94dce809
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Omada goes public in second recent digital health IPO
This story was originally published on Healthcare Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Healthcare Dive newsletter. Omada Health went public Friday, marking the second recent digital health IPO after a dry spell for the sector. The digital chronic condition management company opened at $23 per share, a 21% bump over its public offering price of $19 per share. Omada's debut comes on the heels of virtual musculoskeletal company Hinge Health's IPO last month. 'I think it is definitely a promising bellwether for the industry,' John Beadle, co-founder and managing partner of Aegis Ventures, told Healthcare Dive. Omada, which was founded in 2011 and has raised hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital funding, offers digital management programs for conditions like diabetes, obesity and hypertension. Care teams also work with patients to build treatment plans and equip users with connected devices like blood pressure cuffs or digital scales. The company filed to go public in May. Now, Omada is trading on Nasdaq under the ticker symbol 'OMDA,' having raised $150 million in its IPO. The firm's public offering price of $19 was at the midpoint of the expected range it released Thursday. Omada's IPO comes as the digital health sector has seen few public offerings in recent years. A surge of companies notched public exits in 2021, but the number has declined significantly in recent years. Many digital health companies that went public during the boom — particularly ones that used mergers with special purpose acquisition companies — performed poorly, and may have been better off as strategic M&A targets, Beadle said. However, the industry seemed poised for more companies to make the leap this year, and their performance could push others to follow in their footsteps, experts told Healthcare Dive late last year. Now, two digital health companies have gone public in recent weeks. Hinge debuted on the New York Stock Exchange in May, opening 23% above its public offering price. Still, the sector isn't seeing a flood of digital health companies moving to go public like in 2021, Beadle said. 'I don't think there's that many companies that are ready and have the operational maturity, growth trajectory [and] outcomes that Hinge and Omada do,' he said. 'But I think both companies were exceptionally well prepared to do well when they went public.' Though Hinge had given back most of its early post-IPO gains by the time of Omada's pricing, its performance still provided a 'good tailwind' for the chronic conditions management firm, Edward Best, co-chair of the capital markets practice at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, said via email. Still, larger macroeconomic conditions will also impact whether more digital health companies decide to make the leap to the public markets. Some technology companies decided to delay their IPOs this spring after tariffs announced by President Donald Trump roiled the markets. Stability is key to the IPO market, as investors will likely choose safer investments during periods of volatility, Best said. Companies need to think about their own operations and readiness to go public as well as broader conditions. 'The IPO market has periods when the window is more open than others. A company that is ready and wants or needs to go public when the window is open should certainly take a long hard look within,' he said. 'Waiting too long could mean missing the window.' Recommended Reading Hinge Health goes public in positive signal for digital health IPOs
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Virtual Care Firm Omada Health Leverages GLP-1 Trend For $150 Million NASDAQ Debut
Omada Health, Inc. (NASDAQ:OMDA) closed its first day of trading at $23 per share on Friday, a 21% jump from the IPO price of $19 per share. On Thursday, Omada Health priced its initial public offering of 7.9 million at $19/share. The company filed its initial prospectus in May and updated the document with an expected pricing range of $18 to $20 per share. The company raised $150 million in its IPO. Reuters reported Omada Health's valuation hit $1.28 billion. Omada's revenue increased 57% in the first quarter of 2025 to $55 million from $35.1 million a year earlier, according to its prospectus. For 2024, revenue rose 38% to $169.8 million from $122.8 million the previous company's net loss narrowed to $9.4 million in the first quarter from $19 million a year ago. Omada launched its initial virtual program in diabetes prevention and weight health in 2012. The company delivers virtual care between doctor visits, providing an engaging, personalized, and integrated experience for members designed to improve their health while delivering value for employers, health plans, health systems, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), and other entities that cover the cost of programs. According to its S-1 filing, the company had 2,000 customers and more than 679,000 members enrolled in one or more programs as of 31 March. Omada says it has supported more than 1 million members since its launch. The company expanded its virtual care programs to target prediabetes, hypertension, and musculoskeletal conditions. The company estimates that about 20 million people have benefits coverage for one or more Omada programs. According to the company's S-1 filing, this represents about 14% of the self-insured insurance market, 9% of the fully insured market, 1% of the Medicare Advantage market, and 1% of the PBM market. Wall Street Journal, citing President Wei-Li Shao, writes that Omada leadership sees the current moment as the perfect time for an IPO, as GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Mounjaro have sparked a renewed focus on health problems that can stem from obesity. GLP-1s are expected to be a significant tailwind as more employers are rolling out reimbursement plans for the drugs, CEO Sean Duffy told WSJ. Omada, which signs contracts with employers to offer as a benefit to their workers, aims to be a complementary service that helps patients navigate taking GLP-1s. Omada's IPO is the second digital health IPO in weeks following an extended drought for the industry. In May, digital physical therapy startup Hinge Health Inc. (NYSE:HNGE) debuted on the New York Stock Exchange. Hinge Health priced its IPO of 13.7 million shares at $32 per share. Price Action: OMDA stock is trading lower by 0.43% to $22.90 premarket at last check Monday. Read Next:Photo via Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Virtual Care Firm Omada Health Leverages GLP-1 Trend For $150 Million NASDAQ Debut originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Making Sense of Melanoma Care Without OS Data
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Welcome back, everybody. My name is Teresa Amaral, and it's a pleasure as always to have you here for this melanoma series on Medscape. We will finalize this series on where we should go, and what's next in terms of immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting, by looking into the two other aspects that we need to consider when we discuss the factthat there is no overall survival benefit nor are there data on the overall survival benefit for patients treated with immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting. We discussed the first one, which was the fact that there might be some discussions or some uncertainties in terms of the reimbursement because these data are not available yet and might only be available in 2028. We also discussed the number of patients that are needed to treat to prevent a recurrence, especially when we are talking about stage II disease. As well as the fact that this might lead to some uncertainty, both from the treating physicians and the patients, when they need to decide whether they will receive adjuvant therapy or when they will offer adjuvant therapy to their patients. The final point that I would like to bring to the discussion is that this uncertainty might lead to a potential shift to using targeted therapy instead of immunotherapy in patients that have a BRAF V600 mutation. Why is this the case? We have data provided by the COMBI-AD study that investigated targeted therapy, in this case, dabrafenib and trametinib, in patients with BRAF V600–mutated melanoma. We saw that, similar to what we see in immunotherapy, there is a benefit in terms of relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival. We also saw that there was no overall survival benefit for the whole population, but there was a higher benefit when we look numerically at 3, 5, and 7 years, especially for patients with BRAF V600E mutations. It came as a surprise, I would say, that patients with BRAF V600K not only didn't benefit from targeted therapy in the long run in terms of overall survival, despite having a benefit in terms of relapse-free survival, but when the overall survival analysis was conducted, we actually saw a detrimental effectfor patients with BRAF V600K when we compared the treatment with placebo. For these patients, we should not provide adjuvant therapy with targeted therapy. When we compare targeted therapy with immunotherapy in a real-world setting — and this will be the topic for our next series — we see that patients who had received target therapy might have a larger benefit when we look into relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival compared with patients who received I'm only talking about patients who have a BRAF V600 mutation. Finally, some patients may prefer targeted therapies and oral therapy compared with immunotherapy that is given intravenously in the hospital. We see three points that might be associated with the absence of data on overall survival benefit for immunotherapy: the fact that there might be some reimbursement discussions that are associated with this aspect; the fact that in some cases, despite this therapy being recommended in the guidelines, there might be some uncertainty from the doctors and the patients onreceiving and on proposing this therapy; and a potential shift in the use of targeted therapy in favor of immunotherapy for patients with BRAF -mutated melanoma. If we don't have an overall survival benefit, why are we recommending this therapy? What is the benefit of having a relapse-free survival and a distant metastasis-free survival benefit? I would argue that for the patients, this is quite an important event. We have shown that diagnosis of recurrence is the aspect that most impacts the quality of life. When the patients are diagnosed with a recurrence, the quality of life decreases significantly. These data were, for example, mentioned during the COMBI-AD quality of life analysis. Obviously, the fact that the patients live longer without disease might provide them access to new therapies currently being investigated that were not available at the time they were treated with the adjuvant therapy, but might be available for them if they live longer without recurrence. In real-world data, we also see that approximately 50% of patients who are diagnosed with stage IIIB melanoma will be diagnosed with metastatic disease. Although in some cases we might be able to provide surgical resection, neoadjuvant therapy, or other local therapies, such as radiotherapy, for example, the fact is that some patients will have unresectable disease or will be diagnosed with metastatic and inoperable stage IV melanoma, which is quite important and in some cases is associated with a worse outcome.A longer time without evidence of recurrence is important and might lead to a better outcome in the long run. In conclusion, from our discussion so far, we can say that trial data are eagerly awaited, and mature trial data are necessary. In the meantime, we might be able to use real-world data to compensate for that and to analyze and maybe inform the way that we use programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) in the real-world setting in our daily practice. When we look into the absence of overall survival benefit, we also need to consider access in terms of therapies post-recurrence. When the patients recur, they might have access to all the approved therapies or not. This also highlights the importance of deciding the kind of control arm that we use when we design trials in the advancedsetting. Depending on the type of control arm and the access of patients to these types of clinical trials, we might influence the overall survival benefit in these cases. There is currently a dual strategy for treating patients diagnosed with stage IIIB or higher might be neoadjuvant therapy if we have macroscopically diagnosed disease, or it can be adjuvant therapy if we have a patient who has microscopic disease and therefore is not a candidate for immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. We expect these patients to be around 40%, but also there will be patients diagnosed with stage IIIA and patients with stage IIB and IIC that will be candidates for adjuvant therapy. Finally, the absence of overall survival data, and also the presence of relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival data associated with the toxicity profile of these therapies, are important to be discussed and are part of this shared decision in terms of the treatment that these patients can be offered at this timepoint that we're discussing. With that, I thank you for your attention and I look forward to seeing you again in the near future. Thank you.
