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
March 2014—A wide-ranging set of recommended health information technology safety practices recently issued by the Department of Health and Human Services is likely to accentuate the essential role that pathologists and laboratory leaders play in minimizing the adverse consequences of health IT.
March 2014—Implementation of meaningful use and related federal regulations has spurred widespread adoption of the electronic health record, and that’s a game-changer. Every one of us will need to have competence in clinical informatics, to varying degrees.
March 2014—Q. What are the actionable mutations in melanoma that warrant routine molecular testing? Who should be tested, and what specimen should be tested? Is there a role for stat BRAF testing and for next-generation sequencing?
March 2014—Patient-access rule creates opportunities, costs for labs: A long-awaited Department of Health and Human Services rule that requires laboratories to provide completed test reports to patients upon request may strengthen the relationship patients have with their pathologists, but also will pose another compliance burden for labs in many states.
March 2014—Traditional urinalysis is messy. It’s tedious. It’s prone to variability. It’s nicknamed the “ugly stepchild” of the laboratory. Many are quick to note that it’s just a screening tool—with an emphasis on “just.” But in recent years, urinalysis has been quietly tiptoeing into a new era.
March 2014—If you had a colleague who was brilliant, experienced, and insightful, but who for some reason didn’t volunteer helpful information, you might agree with the assessment of Michael Laposata, MD, PhD: “If you only wait for people to ask you a question, that’s crazy.”
February 2014—The Cytopathology Education and Technology Consortium in 2009 issued a statement on human papillomavirus DNA test utilization that was published in multiple journals. This statement was a concise summary of the clinical indications for high-risk or oncogenic HPV testing based on guidelines of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and the American Cancer Society published from 2002 through 2007. These organizations have since published newer consensus guidelines addressing HPV testing, and the previous summary no longer reflects current screening and management guidelines.
February 2014—When are genomic tests useful? IOM seeks answers: Collaboration among key stakeholders to set clear evidentiary standards is needed to determine the clinical utility of genome-based testing in cancer care, according to a wide variety of experts participating in an Institute of Medicine workshop. Between 1969 and 1989, genomic biomarkers were mentioned in fewer than 50,000 National Library of Medicine publications. But between 2000 and 2010, more than 250,000 articles mentioned biomarkers, said a December 2013 IOM report, “Genome-Based Diagnostics: Demonstrating Clinical Utility in Oncology: Workshop Summary.”
February 2014—Pathologists and laboratories have found new administrative challenges following deep payment cuts and policy changes in the 2014 Medicare physician fee schedule. By the time the fee schedule was finalized Nov. 27, 2013, pathologists were left with little time to sort through the impact of the changes before they became effective Jan. 1.
February 2014—Call it the “Huh?” heard ’round the world: Just last month, Google spent $3.2 billion to acquire Nest Labs, a manufacturer of thermostats and smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. As Brandon Willis, director of technology at Pathagility, puts it, “Who knew Google would want a company that makes home thermostats?”
