Linkedin X-twitter Youtube
Launch Digital Edition

Webinars and Sponsored Roundtables — Register Now

Thursday, May 28, 2026, 1:00–2:00 PM ET
This session is designed to improve understanding and application of recent updates to synoptic pathology reporting protocols such as the latest Reporting Template for Reporting Results of Biomarker Testing of Specimens from Patients with Carcinoma of the Breast. These changes reflect evolving clinical guidelines that directly influence diagnostic accuracy and treatment selection in breast cancer care.

Webinar presenters Thaer Khoury, MD, FCAP, Chair, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Cente, and Colin Murphy,  CEO of mTuitive.

Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY

Register Now

Wednesday, June 24, 2026, 1:00–2:00 PM ET
Hear an expert discuss the expanded clinical utility of HER2 IHC scoring in metastatic
breast cancer and its impact on your practice

Webinar presenter Michelle Shiller, DO, AP, CP, MGP, FACP, Baylor University Medical Center

Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY

Register Now

Subspecialties

Interactive Product Guides

All Issues

Molecular Pathology Selected Abstracts

Overall survival rates for lung cancer patients receiving osimertinib

Guidelines recommend testing patients with advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) alterations because targeted treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is available for patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions or L858R point mutations. Osimertinib is a third-generation, irreversible, oral EGFR-TKI that selectively inhibits EGFR-TKI–sensitizing and EGFR p.Thr790Met-resistance mutations.

D-dimer trifecta: clarity on units, values, and use

January 2020—D-dimer has a problem. Several problems, in fact. Many, some might say. Let’s start with the basics regarding D-dimer assays: unit and magnitude. Setting up the equation is easy, and the digits are small: 2 × 4. When applied to D-dimer testing, however, the answer often means far-flung problems for laboratories and clinicians. Parsed out (for fans of James Thurber, this means channeling schoolmarm Miss Groby), D-dimer has two different units of measure. Some assays report fibrinogen equivalent units (FEU), and others measure D-dimer units (DDU).

No-blot testing charts new course for Lyme Dx

January 2020—“You can eliminate blots altogether!” may sound like a pitch for a cleaning product. But it’s a line from a webpage of Zeus Scientific touting the new algorithm for Lyme disease testing that ditches Western immunoblot in favor of a two-enzyme immunoassay test sequence. The new algorithm, which the CDC recommended last year, is the first approved alternative to the standard algorithm in 25 years.

Carcinoma of unknown primary case reviewed in tumor board session

January 2020—A molecular oncology tumor board session at CAP19 explored a case of cancer of unknown primary, presented by medical oncologist Alexander Drilon, MD, research director of early drug development at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Rondell P. Graham, MBBS, head of GI/liver pathology at Mayo Clinic Rochester.

Study: Subpar reporting of biomarker characteristics

January 2020—Since the Journal of Irreproducible Results arrived on the scene in 1955, founded by a physicist and a virologist, its parodies of scientific research have amused and skewered many in the scientific community. But in the world of clinical research, irreproducibility is a less than whimsical idea.

At NCI, on the trail of drug-induced liver injury

January 2020—When looking at a liver biopsy, always suspect there might be drug-induced liver injury. “But then try hard to prove there isn’t. It’s always a diagnosis of exclusion and pattern evaluation,” says David E. Kleiner, MD, PhD, reference pathologist for the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network. In that role, he pieces together clues that point to a drug having injured a liver—or not. Drug-induced liver injury is rare, and few pathologists see it. “The incidence is between one in 100,000 and one in a million, depending on what survey you read,” Dr. Kleiner says.

New edition of toxicology testing guide now out

January 2020—CAP Publications released this month the second edition of Clinical Toxicology Testing—A Guide for Laboratory Professionals, edited by Barbarajean Magnani, PhD, MD; Tai C. Kwong, PhD; Gwendolyn A. McMillin, PhD; and Alan H.B. Wu, PhD. The first edition was published in 2012. The book has 29 chapters divided into three sections: toxicology testing in the clinical setting, toxicokinetics and methodologies for the toxicology laboratory, and specific analytes (drugs and drug classes). CAP TODAY spoke with Dr. Magnani about the new book. She is director of toxicology and chief of clinical pathology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, and professor of anatomic and clinical pathology, and professor of medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston. Here is what she told us. (See excerpt below.)

Cytopathology in focus: Non-small cell lung carcinoma

January 2020—Requests for predictive biomarkers in oncology patients are becoming increasingly common in the cytology laboratory. At the time of rapid on-site evaluation, cytologists are now keenly aware of the need to collect adequate material not just for a diagnosis of malignancy but also for diagnostic and predictive molecular and immunohistochemical testing. This article provides an overview of current practices and some of the recent literature regarding predictive testing for immunotherapy in cytologic preparations in non-small cell lung carcinoma.

Cytopathology in focus: Self-collected Pap tests in the U.S. market

January 2020—The authors of an article published in the Journal of the American Society of Cytopathology participated in a public hearing at the Food and Drug Administration in January 2018. The hearing advised the FDA about what research would be required to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a self-collected Papanicolaou test device. In the article, Staats, et al., review the literature on self-collected Pap tests. The authors also provide a review of published studies on self-collected HPV tests. They pose important questions that surround the self-collected Pap test; most remain only partially answered, given the limited evidence examining such tests in the literature.

Cytopathology in focus: Review of FDA-approved molecular testing platforms for HPV

January 2020—The Food and Drug Administration approved in 2001 the first testing modality for the detection of HPV in gynecological cytological specimens. To date, there are now five FDA-approved testing modalities, and molecular testing for high-risk HPV has become commonplace. Numerous studies have shown that high-risk HPV testing is more sensitive in detecting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade two and above (HSIL/CIN2+) than cytology alone, but that cytology is more specific.

MARKETPLACE

TRENDING