Episode 5: Lupus Rashes: What to Spot, What to Shield

This transcript has been edited for clarity. For more episodes, download the Medscape app or subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast provider.
Maureen A. McMahon, MD, MS: Hello. I'm Dr Maureen McMahon. Welcome to the Medscape InDiscussion podcast series on systemic lupus erythematosus. Today we'll discuss the dermatologic aspects of lupus with our guest, Dr John Edminister. Dr Edminister is a board-certified dermatologist and assistant professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. He specializes in complex medical dermatology, with clinical and research interest in autoimmune skin diseases such as dermatomyositis, lupus, and pemphigus vulgaris. Thank you for joining us today.
John R. Edminister, MD: Happy to be here.
McMahon: It's great to have you here. I'm excited to have a dermatologist so I can pick your brain a little bit.
Edminister: Absolutely. It's one of my favorite topics to talk about. I love learning about lupus — seeing it, treating it, and talking with other colleagues about it in nondermatology specialties.
McMahon: One of the things that we're always talking about, with the fellows and when we see patients in clinic, is making sure that when we are calling something a malar rash, that it really is a malar rash and not other common things we see, such as rosacea. I was wondering if you had any tips for us.
Edminister: Yes, so this is the age-old question. It's a great place to start our discussion. The malar rash is the characteristic prototypical rash of acute cutaneous lupus. When you break down how lupus affects the skin, there's ACLE, which is acute cutaneous lupus erythematosus. There's subacute cutaneous lupus. That is more of a polycyclic; these annular lesions sometimes can even be psoriasiform. And then there are other, more chronic cutaneous lesions that I am sure you and the fellows have come across, like discoid lesions.
And rosacea is one of the things that often can be misdiagnosed. I'll admit it's quite hard. Rosacea in particular is a chronic inflammatory facial rash that is often photoaggravated, but it's persistent. It can be characterized by that. We call it an erythematous telangiectatic appearance with flushing, for example.
But one of the features it has that can differentiate it is that the rash can have acne, papular pustular lesions. The presence of these acne-like papules would not be expected in lupus. That's not to say that someone with the ACLE malar rash can't have acne, to completely try to throw you off, but there are a few other things that can sort of hint you toward one way or the other.
Classically with rosacea you may have flushing, which is transient and extends past the nasal labial fold and onto the upper cutaneous lip. That is one of those other classic hints.
McMahon: I think that's helpful. I find it can be challenging because even patients with established lupus can also have rosacea. So, trying to help distinguish between a flare and background rosacea as well can be challenging.
Edminister: Very true. And it leaves you in situations where you're considering, well, do I have to do a punch biopsy on this young woman's face? Not exactly a cosmetically insensitive area to do a procedure, but we do do them. When I see patients with a new facial rash that even has the slightest possibility of being the malar rash or the acute cutaneous lupus, I will often first check the chart to see if there's a CBC, something with the recent leukopenia cytopenias.
Because if a 22-year-old woman has a malar-like rash, new-onset fatigue, joint pain, and white blood count of 2.9, then I have no qualms deferring the biopsy and just getting an (antinuclear antibody testing (ANA) and doing a laboratory-based workup pending that result. I think you can make the diagnosis without a biopsy. What I teach my residents in dermatology is that we need to look on the other side and see how rheumatologists define and categorize a diagnosis of lupus. So I teach them the ACR and EULAR criteria because if you can spare someone an extra procedure, if the first procedure didn't yield much, then the complement is low and they come back with a Smith [positive for anti-Smith antibodies] or whatever it might be, you've done your job in securing a diagnosis of SLE, based on how the lab results come back.
McMahon: I think that's helpful. Then hopefully we can help those patients reach both of us for management, on both the rheumatologic and the dermatologic side, too. You mentioned biopsy, and I think that's something else that, as rheumatologists, we're not quite as comfortable with as I assume that you are in the dermatology world. When do you find it helpful to get biopsies in these patients? Are there any tips that we should look for on the biopsy reports, as far as distinguishing between lupus and dermatomyositis?
Edminister: Yes, biopsying can be complex. There are a few different situations where it's helpful. Lupus and dermatomyositis can show almost the exact same reaction pattern on histology. That's usually something we call a vacuolar interface dermatitis pattern. There can be mucin deposition. Some dermatopathologists might comment that the interface change is a little more subtle in dermatomyositis, and perhaps there can be epidermal atrophy.
But overall, if you probably blinded the dermatopathologist and showed them lupus or dermatitis, many of them might just sign it out as compatible with a connective tissue disease. There are certain eruptions of the skin that are associated with systemic lupus, where it is helpful to have a biopsy that has features of lupus.
These are rare, but I'll give you an example. You can actually have a Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS)/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN)-like eruption of ACLE or heralding a diagnosis of SLE. I had that in a case where somebody had basically what looked like SJS, but we were able to use laboratory tests and then a biopsy to also confirm histologically that they had cutaneous lupus in addition to necrotic epidermal lesions that were more SJS-like. There are other overlapping conditions. There's an overlap of pemphigus vulgaris and lupus, which is called pemphigus erythematosus.
Biopsy would be helpful there because you're going to have direct immunofluorescence findings that support a pemphigus blister, but then you can also have findings that demonstrate a vacuolar interface dermatitis, and you're kind of clinching that dual overlapping diagnosis.
The same thing can be said with Rowell syndrome. That's known as an overlap of erythema multiforme-like lesions with cutaneous lupus as well.
The list goes on. I've recently seen a great case of bullous SLE. The bullous eruption of SLE is a tense, blistering eruption. It kind of looks like pemphigoid, meaning we get these intact blisters. And for that, it's nice to have that histologic confirmation of that blister that may, for example, show a subepithelial blistering lesion where ideally you want to get an ELISA test. If you have some other proof that the patient might have SLE, that's helpful, whether that's on a skin biopsy of another lesion they have that could be compatible with cutaneous lupus or through laboratory testing.
McMahon: Are there any other clinical features that would distinguish a bullous lupus?
Edminister: That is something we run into, for example, with epidermolysis bullosa acquisita (EBA). That is another acquired autoimmune blistering disease that does not have to do with lupus. It is a tense subepithelial blistering disease. The antibody — or the epitope, I should say — which the antibody is directed against is collagen VII, which is the same one in bullous lupus.
But the distribution is different. If you have more oral mucosal involvement, affecting the vermilion lips, that's assigned toward bullous lupus, whereas EBA can have different variations; but it can even be mechanobullous, meaning it's overlying the dorsal hands and other areas.
This is sort of like children who are born with epidermolysis bullosa as opposed to this acquired autoimmune, blistering disease. That kicker for a recent case I had was the presence of oral mucosal involvement and extending onto the vermilion lips, blistering. It was a slam-dunk type VII collagen, SLE diagnosis, anti-Smith, anti-double-stranded DNA — very, very elevated.
But it was previously thought to be EBA.
McMahon: That's a great case and a great tip, and something to keep in mind. One of the other things that I think has been a challenge is the differences between detecting rashes and managing rashes, and patients who have more white skin compared to darker skin.
I was wondering if you have any tips for us on that front.
Edminister: Yes, this is very important. Erythema is going to be the most important discussion point on that.
Erythema, even in a sort of clinical trial scoring system, signifies active damage. It's trying to tell us that there's active lupus that could lead to damage, rather than the damage is atrophy and the depigmentation, for example.
The sequelae of a chronic discoid lesion, when they're active in bright red, you're assuming that now's a good time to treat, to prevent that damage. The problem with erythema is that there's a potential for it to be miscategorized or even underrecognized by clinicians and researchers.
In Black patients, erythema was actually more often described as pink, vs in White patients, where it was described as red using a CLASI (Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index) scoring system. This was in a good write-up in JAMA Dermatology just at the end of 2024. That's concerning because with the pink designation of erythema, would it be assigned a lower rating?
At that point, you're talking about the perceived activity being lower and the associated scoring being lower, which can affect clinical trial eligibility. In skin of color, erythema can even look gray, purple, or brown. Take-home point: Look for these various hues of erythema. Take good clinical photos before you start a new systemic treatment. This is important if you are looking at all for skin changes as a parameter of improvement.
And the other thing — this is calling back on our malar rash discussion. It would be remiss of me not to mention the heliotrope rash of dermatomyositis and how that differs. While not entirely reliable, if you haven't done it, you can search for a picture of the heliotrope flower; it's purple. A heliotrope rash is historically described as a purplish eruption on the eyelids in patients who are White or have very fair skin. I've seen it look bright red, bright pink — very, very noticeable. But for patients with skin of color, it could just look like a little eyelid dermatitis or even postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, because that purplish hue doesn't stand out as much.
I know we're talking mostly about lupus, but given that it's in the differential diagnosis, periorbital edema is something that can be quite impressive in dermatomyositis. If there is rash there, it tends to hug the sides of the nodes a little bit more. So, it's very medially based, as compared to the malar rash.
That's just a way to sort of round out how you might approach the malar rash vs rosacea vs the heliotrope rash and consider the underlying skin tones as well.
McMahon: I think those are helpful points to remember and critical when we're initially evaluating these patients and making our initial diagnoses. Moving on to thinking about how we manage patients with lupus. I know one of the first things we talk about with patients who have skin involvement, and especially photosensitive skin involvement, is the importance of sun protection. I know when I talk to patients, I probably just give them a general 'use sunscreen' talk. I would love to get your take on what you tell your patients and some of the tips that you give them.
Edminister: Absolutely. You would think that as a dermatologist, this would be the majority of the time of the visit, but there are so many things we have to talk about in such a short amount of time. These visits feel like they could go for hours and you could talk about photoprotection for 20 minutes; it's something that is so important, and I try to stress it.
As an example, let's pretend that I'm having this discussion with a Black woman who has maybe some postinflammatory hyperpigmentation from some old rash. If she has lupus, we have to consider that we need to cover both UVA and UVB.
UVB is mostly blocked when we're talking about windows. However, a certain amount of UVA can come through, even through car windows. There have been some individuals who, depending on their degree of photosensitivity or even occupation, may go far as installing tinted windows. Depending on what state you live in, you might require medical clearance for that. It does move beyond UVA and UVB because in phototesting studies, they've shown that a lot of lupus patients also have sensitivity, even to visible light, which is fascinating and scary. How do you avoid that? How do you avoid visible light — aside from the sun being a huge source of it — all these indoor bulbs? There is someone smarter out there than me who could talk about the different light bulbs and how they can affect lupus. But that conversation exists. Apparently, LED lighting, light-emitting diode bulbs, are preferred.
They don't emit any ultraviolet radiation, whereas the CFLs, compact fluorescent lamps, or even the halogen bulbs, reportedly can emit low levels of UV radiation and enough that might even cause a little bit of erythema. So, I mean, you can get in the weeds. These are not conversations I have regularly with my patients.
McMahon: But in a refractory patient, it might make a difference.
Edminister: It may, that's correct. If we want to talk about general things, there's always photoprotective clothing. It is much better these days. A lot of these outdoor stores nowadays have good options. I don't fish, but I have a lot of fishing gear now. I walk my dog here in North Carolina at 1:00 PM over my lunch break, and the UV index is like 12. I will burn out there in like 15 minutes. Rather than wait 15 minutes for the sunscreen to rub into my skin and be activated, I just throw on one of these long-sleeved shirts and then a wide-brimmed hat, and I'm pretty protected. I tell my patients to have readily available clothing that is loose and comfortable to wear, even on a hot July day. For some of these conditions, like lupus, dermatomyositis, it doesn't take that much exposure.
Joe Jorizzo, who founded our department at Wake Forest, always says a short walk through the parking lot can be all it takes. And there's probably some truth to that. I've seen patients flare from spending way too much time in the sun, but it can even be just a short dose.
McMahon: We face that in Southern California as well.
Edminister: To bring it down to the very basics, now there's sunscreen. We've talked about how lupus patients potentially are sensitive to UVA, UVB, and visible light. What's going to cover those three? The answer is going to be a broad-spectrum mineral-based sunscreen with something like iron oxide in it. The added iron oxide is giving you some of that visible light coverage; the original zinc oxide formulations are more just broad-spectrum UVA. Going back to our example, say we have a young Black woman. What's great about these sunscreens is they can now match your skin tone, all the way from Fitzpatrick 6 down to someone who's 2 or 1. You can choose one of these mineral-based sunscreens that have a zinc oxide tint and find one that will rub into your skin without leaving a cast that looks unsightly or something you don't like to see.
McMahon: Finding something that patients can incorporate into their daily life and then forget about it is probably the most helpful thing.
Edminister: That's right. It goes the other way, too. When I go on runs outside, I wear the store-brand chemical sunscreen because I know it's going to be hot and I don't need some elegant sunscreen for my face. But it's also cheap.
And adherence matters. Ultimately, I walk patients through the benefits and the annoying parts of different sunscreens. I have them adopt a way of using sunscreen that fits with their life.
McMahon: I was wondering if you have any tips on, when you use topical corticosteroids, which potencies you use.
Edminister: Certainly the most important word that will come back again here, and this is showing who I trained with — Dr Steve Feldman, a dermatologist here at Wake Forest — is adherence . We can talk about potencies, and I will. But ultimately, perhaps the most important thing to talk about with patients is what they want to put on their skin.
Some people like greasy ointments. They think they feel soothing. Some people find it the most annoying thing in the world. Some people just prefer a certain feel on their skin, and whatever they prefer is what they're going to keep using. If you give someone over-the-counter hydrocortisone and they like using it, that's going to work better than giving them clobetasol, thousands of times stronger, that they don't like using.
Ultimately, that's something to consider. Two prescription corticosteroids are always going to be safe to use on facial rashes or lesions when they are there. What I tell patients is steroids are not moisturizers, but when you have a rash, it's perfectly safe to use once to twice daily, and that would be your hydrocortisone 2.5% cream, lotion, ointment — whatever you want to do.
Then there's desonide, and that's a 0.05% formulation. Perfectly safe to use on facial rashes. The flip side of steroids is that it's going to be your topical calcineurin inhibitors, like tacrolimus ointments. Those work great on the face and they don't have long-term overuse issues. At the very center, some of the discoid lesions already have atrophy, so do you want to be using something that could add to that? Just to add a point to this conversation, you could give a tacrolimus ointment and not worry about long-term overuse side effects. The dirty secret is, I know dermatologists who have used clobetasol on their face.
So, I will say that steroids on the face can cause acne, steroid acne, and that's not good. But as far as the whole atrophy thing goes, clobetasol might be a stretch, but if you use a potent or a very potent steroid ointment on a very active discoid lesion on the face, like a fluocinonide 0.05%, under supervision and when it's there, that's going to be fine.
As long as it's not prolonged use for months on end. It comes down to: Do you have enough time to explain that? Is the patient trustworthy to follow those instructions? But that's just something to consider. Last thing I'll say is that for discoid cicatricial and scarring lesions on the scalp, ointments work great. We have a lot of patients who don't mind using greasy ointments on discoid lesions on the scalp.
Whereas others might prefer a clobetasol solution, like a liquid that sort of rubs in and evaporates just due to that alcohol component. Then, lastly, there is an oil-based one, fluocinolone oil, which is great for scalp lesions and also conchal-bowl discoid lesions. There's an otic formulation of those drops. So, to prescribe, you would look up fluocinolone oil in an otic drop formulation.
McMahon: I'm thinking somewhat along those same lines. When do you move to oral agents in place of, or in adjunctive treatment with, topicals?
Edminister: When someone has an SLE diagnosis, your access to therapies is very expanded. If from a skin perspective, they just have a few discoid lesions. Honestly, for their sake and just to be a steward of the system, I'm not going to do anifrolumab infusion if their joints are fine and their kidneys are beautiful and they feel well otherwise, but they've got a couple of skin lesions. If it's localized, a few lesions, you should be able to use a combination of topical therapies, or they could come into the office and I could inject a little bit of intralesional triamcinolone.
Something to consider with DMARDs and hydroxychloroquine is some of that data suggesting that — and I know I'm sort of bouncing back, but if someone has isolated cutaneous lupus, I think there was a recent study I read and some other versions of this idea that using an antimalarial can sort of delay the progression to eventually develop SLE.
Some of our patients with isolated cutaneous disease might still have antibodies for SSA. That SSA has implications for pregnancy and other things. I would want to be on an antimalarial, probably, if I were them. I just wonder with those circulating antibodies, they probably have some systemic autoimmune interferon-based disease going on, even if it's really just manifesting mostly in their skin. I think for hydroxychloroquine, that's going to be your first line. We've all had that discussion where we accidentally freak out a patient about the retinal monitoring.
And then you quickly explain, "I want you to take a baseline eye exam." I always try to walk it back by saying, "Listen, that's just a baseline exam." But the real monitoring begins after 5 years of taking hydroxychloroquine, according to the societies. And you might not even be on this for 5 years. And then there are other drugs, like dapsone, reserved mostly in my experience for bullous lupus.
Some people will use retinoids for different lupus lesions, discoid lesions. Methotrexate, mycophenolate — they all have their own things that, again, sometimes I have to walk back. Some package inserts scare people. I understand that the medicines can have serious side effects and can make people feel quite unwell, and they all have their adverse effects.
But I always try to explain that, in some of our cases, at least when I'm prescribing some of these drugs, we're using more anti-inflammatory dosing of methotrexate.
McMahon: And not the anticancer dosing that the product labels are based off of.
Edminister: Yes. So, there are those discussions.
McMahon: And certainly, I think that those agents are used even more commonly when we have patients having other systemic manifestations. I know we always are in dialogue with our dermatologists to see what might be the best medication to kind of catch all aspects of their lupus activity.
Edminister: I love working with our rheumatologists here at Wake Forest. They're an awesome department, and we refer back and forth to each other all the time. It feels like we're always sending messages on the patient portal to each other. And a discussion that we've have often is, when should the patient get belimumab and when should they get anifrolumab? I can't speak for every dermatologist, and I just hope this is, maybe, helpful for any rheumatologist listening. Maybe this is just like my sector of the world, or only my opinion, but it feels like most dermatologists who see lupus these days prefer, and are more impressed with, anifrolumab when it comes to skin response.
Whereas I know that the underlying systemic lupus and extracutaneous manifestations might drive the rheumatology team to be like, hmm, maybe belimumab given the nephritis, or whatever it may be. There might not be enough data on anifrolumab.
McMahon: Right. Exactly. I do think it is always kind of a back-and-forth, and again, taking about the overall picture, what might be the best combination to capture all the disease manifestations that are going on.
Edminister: Absolutely. And, of course, I want the skin to be as good as it can. But the kidneys are pretty important too. So, ultimately, it's that discussion, seeing the patient's goals, how all the consulting physicians feel, and what is determined to be important to protect the patient.
McMahon: Thank you. I think we have had a lot of great tips today. I want to thank Dr Edminister for being here today.
Edminister: It was a pleasure. Thank you so much for inviting me.
McMahon: Thank you for joining us today. Please take a moment to download the Medscape app to listen and subscribe to this podcast series on systemic lupus erythematosus. This is Dr Maureen McMahon for the Medscape InDiscussion podcast.
2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Interface Dermatitis: Delineating the Diagnosis With Adaptive Immune Markers
Rowell Syndrome: A Controversial Entity
Subtype and Racial Erythema Variation for Cutaneous Lupus Trials
Integrating Skin Color Assessments Into Clinical Practice and Research: A Review of Current Approaches
Overview on Desonide 0.05%: A Clinical Safety Profile
Efficacy of Topical Tacrolimus for Treating the Malar Rash of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Cicatricial Alopecia: Discoid Lupus Erythematosus
Fluocinolone Acetonide Topical Oil for Scalp Psoriasis
Early Initiation of Hydroxychloroquine in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus to Prevent Progression to Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study
The Autoantibody Response to Ro/SSA in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus
Monitoring for Retinal Toxicity in Patients Taking Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

36 minutes ago

• Yahoo

A longer ‘winter': Public funding slowdown heightens pressure on biotech startups

This story was originally published on BioPharma Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily BioPharma Dive newsletter. Biotechnology industry watchers were hopeful at the start of 2025. Venture funding appeared to be rebounding after a lengthy slump, and a smattering of new stock offerings and company acquisitions brewed optimism that the public markets might be similarly warming up to young drugmakers. But the positivity quickly dissipated. Trump administration policies gutted scientific research funding and raised questions about U.S. drug prices. Large layoffs and upheaval at public health agencies created regulatory turmoil that added risk to what's already, by its nature, a risky sector to invest in. The results were laid out in a June report from David Windley and Tucker Remmers, two analysts at the investment bank Jefferies. According to that report, funding in public biotech companies — be it from initial public offerings, follow-on stock offerings, or 'PIPE' deals — plummeted in May. The 'political and economic uncertainties' have "cast a cloud over biotech investment,' they wrote. 'Since product development cycles can range 12-15 years in this industry, biotechs (and their boards and investors) want clarity on FDA regulation, drug pricing, and funding before committing to large, [long-term] investments,' Windley and Remmers wrote. Investors and industry insiders interviewed by BioPharma Dive say that the public slowdown is trickling down to startups that have already been under intense pressure during a prolonged pullback. Companies and investors are struggling to align on valuations, making funding rounds more difficult to close than in prior years. The uphill battle in the public markets is further delaying IPO plans, too. "People are waiting to see what happens, and it's extended that winter," said Tim Scott, the president of Biocom California, an industry trade group. To date, only seven biotech companies have priced IPOs in 2025, and no large offerings have occurred since mid-February. No biotechs have publicly disclosed IPO ambitions in several months either, and one of the last to do so, Odyssey Therapeutics, pulled its offering in May. In a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission, CEO Gary Glick wrote that it was 'not in the best interests of the company' to go public at that time. One reason IPOs have ground to a halt, experts say, is that the public markets aren't rewarding drug startups as predictably as they once were. Typically, drug companies can expect their value to climb after delivering positive clinical results. But 'even companies with good data aren't seeing a lot of movement in the public markets,' said Jonathan Norris, a managing director at HSBC Innovation Banking. As a result, Norris said, companies are looking at the time and expense it takes in the monthslong process to go public and wondering: 'What's the benefit?' 'If you have any readouts that are even eye squinting, you're going to get crushed,' he said. 'It's a tough, tough endeavor.' The shuttered IPO window is exacerbating problems for young biotechs. "If you don't have a public market opportunity, then the companies that are private have to think about ways to raise capital and stay private for longer," said Maina Bhaman, a partner at Sofinnova Partners. Feeling that burden, venture investors are becoming more conservative. While private funding hasn't plummeted as much as its public counterpart, investors are more selective and slower-moving. Funding has become increasingly consolidated into fewer and larger 'megarounds,' to the extent that more firms are compiling similar portfolios. And they're hard to finalize, even when most of a funding syndicate is already onboard, according to Norris. "People are struggling to figure out where the bottom of the market is and what's the appropriate valuation and expectation for that investment,' he said. "A lot of VCs are pencils down right now on deals they would otherwise be moving forward on,' Scott added. Pullbacks are nothing new in biotech. But what has been unusual, some say, is how long the sector has spent in the doldrums after peaking in early 2021. One reason is the most recent boom flooded the market with more companies than it could support. But another is that the ensuing correction has intensified amid regulatory and political upheaval. A report last week from Roel van den Akker, PwC's U.S. pharma and life science deals leader, predicted that companies will be 'preparing contingency plans' to account for delays in 'trial oversight' and drug applications. Drug companies are used to dealing with a high level of risk, as most experimental medicines never make it to market. But 'now you've got a lot more macro uncertainty that is being layered on top," Bhaman said. On the public side, that uncertainty has resulted in less patient investors, some of whom are pressing company boards to shut down after setbacks rather than change course. But some startups are taking drastic steps, too, such as cutting programs and staff to, some experts believe, depress their value so they can still attract investment. The "lack of surety" is pressuring biotechs to be as efficient as possible with their cash, Scott said, perhaps working on one program instead of a few. There have been multiple high-profile examples of late. Eikon Therapeutics and Insitro, two well-funded startups, both cited a need for 'prudence' in laying off staff. Norris expects more companies to proactively cut staff, or even close, as the longer-than-expected winter drags on. 'Most of those companies are not going to find the investors that they're hoping for,' he said. 'And I think that's just the unfortunate truth.' Recommended Reading Radiopharmaceutical drugmaker RayzeBio signals plans to go public

Yahoo

37 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Should You Forget Medical Properties Trust and Buy These Unstoppable Dividend Stocks Instead?

Medical Properties Trust has a 7.2% yield and a history of dividend cuts behind it. Other healthcare REITs have high yields and dividends that have withstood adversity much better. Omega Healthcare has a 7.4% yield, and LTC Properties has a 6.5% yield. 10 stocks we like better than Medical Properties Trust › Medical Properties Trust (NYSE: MPW) has a lofty 7.2% yield. That compares to the S&P 500 index's skinny little 1.2% yield, and the average real estate investment trust's (REIT's) yield of around 4.1%. On the surface, it appears to be an obvious choice. But don't jump at the chance to buy Medical Properties Trust just yet. You can get similarly large yields from healthcare REIT peers Omega Healthcare (NYSE: OHI) and LTC Properties (NYSE: LTC), and both offer a more compelling dividend story than Medical Properties. Here's what you need to know. Take a look at the chart below for Medical Properties Trust. The orange line is the quarterly dividend, and the purple line is the stock price. Notice the massive drop in both that has occurred since 2022. That was when some of the REIT's large tenants started to experience financial troubles. It was the start of a tense and complicated period when a small number of Medical Properties Trust's tenants failed, and it had no choice but to cut its dividend. For long-term dividend investors, the lofty 7.2% yield on offer from Medical Properties Trust comes with some lofty risks. It's possible that the bad news is all out, and the REIT can start to turn its business around. However, that's far from a certainty. Unless you're willing to bet that the future will look much brighter from here, most dividend investors will probably want to tread with caution. In fact, even if a turnaround is underway, it's likely to be a years-long process. There's a contrast to be made here with healthcare REITs Omega Healthcare and LTC Properties. Both of these REITs focus on senior housing, including nursing homes and assisted living facilities. During the coronavirus pandemic's height, both of these property types were hard hit. The reason was pretty simple: COVID-19 is particularly deadly for unvaccinated older adults and spreads easily in group settings. Occupancy fell for both REITs, and there was a drought of new customers. Both Omega and LTC also had to deal with tenant problems, as some of their lessees had trouble paying rent. That would seem like a perfect storm that would lead to a dividend cut. Yet neither Omega nor LTC cut their dividends. To be fair, neither of these REITs has increased their dividends in years. But a static dividend is much better than a dividend cut. Right now, Omega's yield is 7.4%, while more diversified LTC Properties has a 6.5% yield. The future is starting to look brighter for each of these healthcare REITs. Omega's adjusted funds from operations (FFO) rose year over year in the first quarter of 2025, and it increased its full-year guidance. LTC Properties, meanwhile, expects 2025's adjusted FFO per share to be flat to slightly higher. However, it's diversifying its business approach to include senior housing operating properties (SHOP). (SHOP assets are owned and operated by the REIT, though it actually hires a third party to handle day-to-day management of the asset.) As it grows, this business should increasingly benefit from the growth in demand for senior housing as the U.S. population ages. The key takeaway here, however, is that, when faced with adversity, Omega and LTC Properties held firm in their commitment to shareholders. They adjusted as needed to keep paying. Medical Properties Trust, on the other hand, couldn't manage that feat. The past doesn't predict the future, of course, but the past is all we have to go on as investors. And since all three of these healthcare REITs have faced material adversity just recently, their strengths and weaknesses have been laid bare. While the worst might be over for Medical Properties Trust, most dividend investors should probably err on the side of caution with either Omega, which has a higher yield, or LTC Properties, which has a lower yield but a far more diversified business model. Before you buy stock in Medical Properties Trust, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Medical Properties Trust wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Reuben Gregg Brewer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Should You Forget Medical Properties Trust and Buy These Unstoppable Dividend Stocks Instead? was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio

Forbes

an hour ago

• Forbes

Why Gen Z Chooses Healthcare Over Tech: A Recruiting Blueprint

Doctor, woman and tablet in hospital with holographic ux for telehealth, medical innovation and dna ... More study. Medic, mobile touchscreen for typing on app for data analysis, 3d hologram ui and research A recent study at the National Society of High School Scholars (NSHSS) has revealed a profound shift in career aspirations among younger professionals, with 3 out of 4 young Americans (Gen Z) now choosing the essential and purpose-driven world of healthcare over high-tech jobs. This isn't just a trend, it's a wake-up call for industries challenged with workforce instability, the rise of automation, and shifting generational priorities. To explore this phenomenon more deeply, I interviewed four exceptional people and future healthcare leaders, who graduated from Cornell University's Sloan Master's in Health Administration program. Through their insights, we gain a richer understanding of what fuels this generational realignment and how other industries should consider adapting to remain relevant for an employee that knows what they want, how they want it. Redefining a Meaningful Career The pursuit of meaningful work was a common thread during our discussion. For Keshaav Krishnaa Pothapur, an incoming administrative fellow at Boston Medical Center, "a meaningful career is at the intersection of empathy and impact." Having started his career as a dentist, he quickly realized the limitations of addressing individual care and pivoted toward roles where he could influence systems and communities on a larger scale. 'There are more things to fix than people's teeth,' he remarked, underscoring the draw of systems-level change and his drive to make the healthcare experience more compassionate and effective. Similarly, Lesly Leon, bound for an administrative fellowship at Kaiser Permanente in Northern California, emphasized the duality of personal and community growth in a meaningful career. Growing up in underserved communities, Lesly experienced first-hand the challenges of accessing quality care. Her values now inform her mission to work within healthcare to improve equity and uplift populations facing similar barriers. 'Healthcare allows me to give back to the communities that shaped me,' she shared, connecting her personal experiences to her professional ambitions. Natalie Stopfer, who transitioned from a career as a behavioral health nurse to now, an Associate Consultant at Chartis noted the personal motivation of meaningful work. 'I always wanted to help people, even as a kid when I stocked my desk with band-aids to help classmates,' Natalie shared with a laugh. But her career isn't just about fulfilling childhood dreams, it's about finding joy and excitement in her work every day. For Natalie, a meaningful career is one that nourishes self-growth while also enabling her to improve patient care systems at a macro level. Deevena Annavarjula, manager of value-based care at Boston Medical Center, views meaningful work as engaging with the idea of evolution. 'Our work life takes up so much of our time. It has to be something we get excited about.' Balancing personal fulfillment with professional purpose, she is highly self-aware and mindful of carefully assessing and pivoting whenever workplace environments fail to align with her values. Her confidence in evolving roles and industries is a testament to Gen Z's innovative approach to career satisfaction. Stability in Healthcare Is About More Than Job Security Traditional notions of stability, holding one job at one company for the entirety of a career, are a thing of the past for Gen Z. Lesly noted that while healthcare offers career stability through essential, purpose-driven work, 'there can often be a disconnect between expectation and reality,' particularly regarding the emotional toll of the job. Having witnessed her own mother's struggle to access adequate care, Lesly believes that reshaping healthcare to be more equitable will not only meet societal needs but also provide new generations of healthcare professionals with fulfilling roles that endure. This contrasts sharply with the instability affecting tech industries. Companies like Amazon have publicly acknowledged how AI advancements are leading to significant job cuts, creating anxiety among employees about their future roles. Amazon's own CEO Andy Jassy recognized that automation is reshaping the workforce, drawing critical attention to the growing gap in job stability in the tech sector. For healthcare professionals, such turbulence in other industries underscores the appeal of a field rooted not just in purpose but also in necessity. Deevena took the concept further, explaining that for her, stability stems from adaptability. 'It's not about staying in one job for 40 years anymore. What matters is knowing you can find your place at every phase of your career.' For her, life transitions, including moving from the insurance industry to hospitals and continuously applying skills in new ways are part of what keeps her engaged. This mindset reflects a broader trend amongst younger professionals seeing stability not as rigidity but as flexibility to grow and thrive in dynamic environments. Keshaav added another dimension by tying adaptability to the evolving innovation in healthcare. He noted that the pandemic catalyzed a shift in how healthcare is viewed, moving it from being a reactive system to one that embraces innovation. 'Tech is powerful, but healthcare is essential,' Keshaav stated. For younger professionals, stability goes beyond a steady paycheck to include opportunities to contribute to cutting-edge solutions, such as predictive algorithms and AI, which are reshaping care research and care delivery. Gen Z Is Reshaping Mentorship Dynamics One of the most striking insights from the panel was their take on mentorship. Traditionally viewed as a one-way relationship, Gen Z professionals no longer see mentors solely as providers of wisdom. Instead, mentorship has evolved into a dynamic, two-way exchange. 'Having a mentor is like having your own Google Translate for workplace jargon,' Keshaav explained, emphasizing the role mentors play in decoding the complexities of healthcare for new professionals. However, mentors also learn from their mentees. As Deevena pointed out, 'This isn't the first time healthcare has faced significant changes. Mentors help us see how challenges were addressed in the past while we offer fresh ideas for navigating today's transitions.' Lesly underscored the importance of understanding traditional structures while working toward necessary changes. 'Mentorship is a collaborative process. Even when there's a gap between generations, there's always an opportunity to learn from one another.' For Natalie, her mentors helped repurpose her clinical nursing experience to improve healthcare systems at a higher, strategic level. These dynamic relationships enrich both generations by bridging experience with innovation. Lessons for Other Industries If healthcare has become a destination for young professionals seeking purpose and stability, what can other industries learn from this shift? The answer lies in fostering environments where connections are meaningful, opportunities for growth are abundant, and individual values and beliefs are honored. Industries like tech, currently grappling with AI-driven workforce reductions, such as the cuts Amazon has disclosed, would do well to adopt some of Keshaav, Lesly, Deevena and Natalie's insights. A Call to Action for Leaders Everywhere The stories shared by these future healthcare leaders with a path forward, not just for hospitals, but for any organization striving to attract and retain Gen Z talent. Industries must evolve from transactional workplaces to environments that are transformational for both the individual and society. With this in mind, here are five key imperatives leaders need to act on today: A Future Built on Purpose and Community If industries like tech and beyond hope to remain competitive, they must ask themselves hard questions. Are they creating environments where young professionals can challenge norms, grow their skills, and thrive despite technological disruption? Are they actively aligning workplace values with the aspirations of the workforce? Without these considerations, all industries risk alienating a generation that sees purpose not as an option, but as a norm. The future belongs to sectors and leaders brave enough to prioritize innovation, purpose, and community for a Gen Z workforce that knows what they want.