Thursday, October 29, 2026, 1 PM-2 PM ET
Hear an expert discuss the evolving role of PD-L1 testing in HNSCC and ovarian cancer.
Webinar presenter Georgios Deftereos, MD, Professor of Pathology, Associate Director of the Clinical Cancer Genomics Laboratory, Director of Molecular Cytopathology, University of California, San Francisco
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. The webinar is made possible by a special educational grant from Agilent.
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
Tuesday, November 3, 2026, 1 PM-2 PM ET
Hear an expert discuss the challenges of detecting NRG1 fusions and how RNA-based testing can support more comprehensive fusion identification in clinical practice.
Webinar presenter Benjamin Weinberg, MD, Associate Professor of Medicine and Attending Physician
specializing in gastrointestinal medical oncology
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. The webinar is made possible by a special educational grant from Diaceutics.
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
Tuesday, November 10, 2026, 1 PM-2 PM ET
Join us for a session to help improve diagnostic accuracy in your practice when scoring HER2 IHC 0 with faint, incomplete membrane staining in ≤10% of tumor cells vs IHC 0 with no membrane staining detected in patients with mBC.
Webinar presenter Jeffrey Gregg, MD, University of Nevada
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. This program is being sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. and AstraZeneca. The speaker is being compensated for the presentation. The program is not CME accredited and may not be used for CME accreditation.
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
Monday, November 16, 2026, 12:30 PM-2 PM ET
Hear experts discuss a multidisciplinary approach to oncopathology for HER2
assessments for solid tumors in the absence of a companion diagnostic.
Webinar presenters Funda Meric-Bernstam, MD, Chair, Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics Medical Director, Institute for Personalized Cancer Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, and Emina E. Torlakovic, MD, PhD, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canadian Biomarker Quality Assurance, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, and Carol Cheung, MD, PhD, JD, FRCPC, Deputy Director, Canadian Biomarker Quality, Assurance—Programme canadien d’assurance de la qualité des biomarqueurs
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. This program is being sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. and AstraZeneca. The speaker is being compensated for the presentation. The program is not CME accredited and may not be used for CME accreditation.
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
April 2014—It can be hard to remember a time when GPS was not available in cars, the Web didn’t exist, and only eight diagnostic tests were classified as waived and able to be performed at the point of care. But after CLIA’s enactment in 1988, those were some basic realities of location and speed.
April 2014—Dr. Nayar, professor of pathology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, is co-chair of the Cytopathology Education and Technology Consortium, president of the American Society of Cytopathology, and a member of the CAP Cytopathology Committee. She spoke with CAP TODAY recently about the FDA advisory committee’s recommendation on cervical cancer screening.
April 2014—Talk to a few microbiology laboratories about why they feel the need to automate and you hear common themes: people, space, quality, and, most of all, time to detection. Microbiology may be late to join the bandwagon, but whether laboratories are making partial or full-scale moves to automate, they are dramatically making up for lost time, in all senses of the phrase. That’s because turnaround time savings are no longer measured in minutes. “Our goal is to be able to give some of these answers out in one to four hours rather than 24 hours, or much longer for some culture-based methods,” says Randall T. Hayden, MD, director of clinical and molecular microbiology at St. Jude Children’s Hospital in Memphis.
April 2014—Despite warfarin’s continued presence near the top of the FDA’s list of adverse drug events and the availability of competing agents, the drug continues to be a mainstay of anticoagulant therapy, particularly among general practitioners. Its narrow therapeutic window and intra- and interpatient variability require regular measurement of the international normalized ratio. This, along with the large genetic component to warfarin response, principally contributed by variants in the genes VKORC1 (–1639G ➞ A) and CYP2C9 (*2 and *3), led many to hypothesize that pharmacogenetics could improve warfarin safety.
April 2014—In what may be a first for the burgeoning field of next-generation sequencing, this powerful new technology was used to identify the cause of encephalitis in a teenage boy who had been critically ill in the intensive care unit for several weeks. Diagnosis suggested a specific treatment. Within two weeks of initiating therapy, the boy had recovered and was discharged. It is becoming common practice to use NGS to detect mutations that can help select drug therapy in cancer cases and to find genetic variations responsible for inherited diseases. However, NGS has not previously been considered a useful tool in critical care situations, where a short turnaround time is crucial.
April 2014—Most pathologists are trained to think of hypotensive transfusion reactions as rare events, and for the most part they are. But one pathologist’s experience suggests these reactions may be underreported, and perhaps on the rise. Greater recognition of these events could provide valuable information and help improve patient outcomes. “People often report these reactions as possibly related to transfusions, but the challenge to the pathologist is that the transfusion reaction workups are negative, for the most part. So they’re in a quandary as to whether the drop in blood pressure was because of the transfusion or other causes,” says Richard M. Scanlan, MD, clinical professor, vice chair of laboratory medicine, and director of the transfusion medicine service at Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU).
April 2014—Soon CAP members will receive the online Practice Characteristics Survey, designed to provide evidence of the value we contribute to health care and the many ways we serve our patients. This is the ninth time since 1994 that we have conducted this survey, which informs our policy, advocacy, and planning for member services. If every CAP member makes a commitment to complete and return the survey, the results will greatly refine and enlighten our work to serve, promote, and represent your best interests. But every is the key word. Each member has a role in building a robust response rate that will give our findings the depth and level of credibility that inform and educate.
April 2014—It’s not a race, but you gotta keep pace or risk losing face (and customers and revenue). While this rhyme isn’t an axiom, for vendors of laboratory-provider linking software, it might as well be. “It seems like a new health care initiative, best practice, or regulation is announced every year,” says Tim Kowalski, president and CEO of Halfpenny Technologies. “That makes it crucial to choose laboratory vendor partnerships and solutions that are designed to withstand this ever-changing industry.”
April 2014—I have a question about the meaning of the word “guideline” versus “procedure.” Checklist requirement ANP. 11670 Specimen—Gross Examination says the following: “Documented instructions or guidelines are readily available in the laboratory for the proper dissection, description, and histologic sampling of various specimen types (e.g. mastectomy, colectomy, hysterectomy, renal biopsy, etc.).” This leads me to question whether the word guideline means the same as procedure. Procedures need to be signed biennially. Does the same apply to guidelines? The formatting is different for procedures. Could guidelines also mean references?
April 2014—CommonWell executing pilot phase of interoperability project: Competition is considered a positive force in business, but when patients are the consumers, cooperation sometimes trumps competition. For the founding members of the CommonWell Health Alliance, all major players in the competitive arena of health information technology, enabling clients to share patient data across disparate care settings and competing electronic health record systems is viewed as a common-sense move that boosts cost-effectiveness and benefits patients.
