Neal Lindeman, M.D. is Vice Chair of Laboratory Medicine and Molecular Pathology, and Faculty Distinguished Professor in Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine.
Question: You completed your fellowship in molecular genetic pathology at Harvard Medical School. What drew you to that field? What did you find engaging and challenging about it?
Dr. Lindeman: Back in the '90s, I was a resident at UCSF in San Francisco, and I found myself frustrated by how subjective surgical pathology could be. There were limits to what we could determine just by looking through a microscope—limits that affected patient care and prognosis. I started to wonder if we were missing information—something deeper that our tools at the time couldn't uncover. That curiosity led me toward molecular diagnostics.
I'm just a regular MD—I don't have a PhD, and I didn't spend years in a basic science lab. But I had this instinct that the genetic code of cancers must play a significant role in outcomes. Ironically, years later, when I took over the fellowship program from my predecessor, she handed me back the essay I’d written when I applied. I had completely forgotten about it. But in that essay, I talked about using molecular tools to study cancer outcomes—specifically lung cancer. And that’s exactly what I ended up doing, even though I hadn’t planned it that way.
Since I didn’t have a strong background in biology, I decided to do a fellowship, which brought me to Harvard. I was the first fellow in the new molecular pathology program. There was a research year built in, which I turned into a postdoc. So eventually, I did spend three years doing bench work, but I didn’t enter the field from that perspective.
Question: Your current research focuses on the intersection of cancer diagnostics, molecular diagnostics, and genomics. What excites you about those fields today?
Dr. Lindeman: For one, it’s dynamic. It’s always evolving—growing and changing. Pathology has remained fairly static over time, but molecular diagnostics is different. I like that. I don’t enjoy sitting still.
Also, unlike many areas of the lab that are dominated by commercial assays, molecular diagnostics still allows us to build things ourselves. That’s incredibly rewarding: reading the literature, designing assays, validating them within regulatory frameworks, and then using them to help patients. It’s unique, especially these days.
And it works. We've developed tests over the years that are now helping patients live longer. We haven’t cured cancer, but in some cases, we've turned previously fatal cancers into conditions people can live with for two, three, even five years. That makes a huge difference—for patients and for their families.
Question: How has artificial intelligence impacted the work you do?
Dr. Lindeman: It really hasn’t—yet. But I think its first big impact will be in helping us interpret the clinical or scientific significance of genetic variants. For example, we have a test right now that looks at 523 genes at once. We’re building one that looks at 2,000, and some groups are looking at all 20,000. No one can memorize all that information.
So, when we find a new variant, figuring out what it means usually requires a deep dive into the literature. That can be fun—but it’s also time-consuming. AI could really help with that.
Where AI could truly shine is in helping figure out the best treatments or predicting patient outcomes more accurately. When I got into molecular pathology in the '90s, a lot of older colleagues told me it was a fad. They said not to go into it—that it wouldn’t go anywhere. I think they meant well, but you can’t fight progress. AI is coming, whether we want it to or not.
So, the goal is to use it responsibly. That means understanding what it can and can’t do—not forcing it into roles it’s not ready for. And yes, there will be mistakes, like with any technology. But that’s how we learn and grow.
Question: You have been here for about two and a half years. How has the experience differed from what you expected—both in coming back to New York and joining Weill Cornell Medicine?
Lindeman: That’s a great question. People often ask me to compare it to Boston, and that always makes me a little uncomfortable because I really like both places—they’re just completely different.
But compared to what I expected—first, I love being back home. I’d never lived in Manhattan before, and I’m really enjoying it. Also, my wife had been living here for two years while I was still in Boston, and that commute was rough.
At the institution, I’ve felt very welcomed, and I truly appreciate that. Here, I’m in a leadership role, but I’m still figuring out how things work—and my old ways of getting things done don’t always apply. So, I’m still adjusting to that.
Question: What do you see as your vision or goals for the department?
Dr. Lindeman: I think about that a lot. I don’t want to sound too grandiose, but I believe in creating a department that is both scientifically rigorous and deeply humanistic. That means fostering a culture where we deliver outstanding clinical care, support innovative research, and, just as importantly, create an environment where people feel valued and heard.
One of my guiding principles is transparency. People want to understand how decisions are made and what the priorities are. I try to communicate those clearly—what we’re aiming for, why certain things matter, and how each person contributes to the bigger picture.
Another key goal is building bridges across departments. Pathology can sometimes feel isolated, but our work touches nearly every patient. I want us to be integrated partners in the broader mission of the medical center—collaborating with clinicians, researchers, and educators to drive better outcomes.
Also, I want to make space for people to grow. That applies to faculty, trainees, and staff. We should be thinking about how to help people develop in their careers, support their ideas, and give them room to innovate. I don’t want a culture of hierarchy for hierarchy’s sake. I want a culture of contribution, collaboration, and purpose.
Question: How do you balance your administrative responsibilities with staying involved in the science and clinical work?
Lindeman: It’s a constant juggling act, and I don’t always get it right. There are days when the administrative work takes over, and I must consciously carve out time for the science. But I’m happiest when I’m doing both—when I get to stay connected to the lab, review clinical cases, and think deeply about where the field is going.
That connection to the science is critical. It informs the decisions I make as an administrator. I don’t want to lead from a distance—I want to lead from inside the work, with an understanding of the challenges and opportunities people face on the ground.
Also, the science energizes me. It’s why I got into this field in the first place. So even when things get busy, I try to protect time for it. It helps me stay grounded and reminds me why all the other work—the budgets, meetings, policies—matters in the first place.
Question: You mentioned wanting to build a department that’s both scientifically rigorous and humanistic. What does that humanistic side look like in practice?
Lindeman: It starts with listening. Everyone in the department—faculty, trainees, staff—has a perspective that matters. I try to be approachable, to create space where people feel comfortable sharing their concerns or ideas. That’s not just about being “nice”; it’s about creating a culture where people feel safe enough to do their best work.
Medicine is fundamentally about people. Even in pathology, where we don’t always interact with patients directly, the work we do has real consequences for real lives. A humanistic culture keeps that front and center. It reminds us that behind every slide, every specimen, there’s a person—and often a family—waiting for answers.
It also means recognizing that our colleagues are people too, with complex lives outside of work. I want our department to be a place where people feel supported—not just professionally, but personally. That includes being mindful of work-life balance, supporting people through difficult times, and celebrating their successes.
Question: What advice would you give to someone entering the field today?
Lindeman: First, stay curious. This field changes constantly, and if you’re not curious, you’ll get left behind—or you’ll get bored. Curiosity is what drives innovation, and it’s what makes the work exciting.
Second, don’t be afraid to ask questions or admit what you don’t know. I’ve built a career on asking questions, many of which started with “Why are we doing it this way?” or “Could we try something different?” Sometimes the answer is that there’s a good reason, but sometimes it leads to real change.
Also, find mentors who support you—not just the version of you they want you to be, but the person you actually are. And when you’re further along, be that kind of mentor for someone else.
Finally, remember that the work we do matters. It can be easy to lose sight of that in the day-to-day, but every test we run, every result we interpret, can make a difference in someone’s life. That’s a privilege—and a responsibility.
Question: As we wrap up, is there anything else you’d like to share about your work, or your journey in this field?
Lindeman: I’ll just say that, for me, it’s always been about the combination of science and service. We’re using cutting-edge technology to better understand and treat diseases, but the goal is to improve patients’ lives. I’ve had the privilege of working with amazing people, and I truly believe that the best work comes from collaborative environments where everyone feels valued.
When I look back at my career—whether it was starting out frustrated by the limitations of traditional pathology or now leading a team in a constantly evolving field—I’m reminded of how far we’ve come, and how much further we can go. We haven’t solved all the problems, but I’m excited to be part of a field that’s advancing so rapidly. There’s always something new to learn, and the possibilities for improving patient care are endless.
And finally, I want to emphasize that no matter what challenges we face, we must keep pushing forward, stay curious, and, above all, keep the patients at the center of everything we do. That’s what keeps me going.