Tuesday, November 10, 2026, 1:00 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 Samuel Caughron, MD, FCAP, Chief Strategy Officer, MAWD Pathology, Medical Director of Laboratory, AdventHealth Kansas City, Medical Director of Laboratory, Labcorp, President, Member & Director, Pathology Ventures, LLC
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. This program is intended for US healthcare professionals. This program is being sponsored by 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
Wednesday, November 18, 2026, 12:00 PM-1 PM ET
Join leading pathology experts, Savitri Krishnamurthy, MD, and Marilyn Bui, MD, PhD, for a webinar exploring potential challenges in HER2 IHC testing for breast cancer, emerging evidence supporting digital and computational pathology as assistive tools for pathologists in HER2 IHC assessment, and practical considerations for real-world implementation and adoption.
Webinar presenters Savitri Krishnamurthy, MD, Professor of Pathology, Department of Anatomical Pathology The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, and Marilyn Bui, MD, PhD, Surgical Pathologist and Cytopathologist Member and Professor, Departments of Pathology, Machine Learning, and Translational Pathology, Scientific Director, Analytic Microscopy Core Chair, Women in Oncology Executive Board Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
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 speakers are being compensated for their presentations. The program is not CME accredited and may not be used for CME credit.
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
Wednesday, December 9, 2026, 12 PM-1 PM ET
Hear an expert pathologist discuss the role of HER2 IHC testing and scoring in solid tumors including endometrial, ovarian, cervical, bladder, non-small cell lung, colorectal, and biliary cancers
Webinar presenter Michelle Shiller, DO, MSPT, Baylor Sammons Cancer Center; Fulgent Genetics; Texas Cancer Interception Institute
CAP TODAY does not endorse any of the products or services named within. This program is intended for US healthcare professionals. This program is being sponsored by 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
October 2014—The Food and Drug Administration’s plan to subject many laboratory-developed tests to a new layer of regulatory requirements over the course of the next decade is drawing sharply contrasting reactions from stakeholders who view it as either an essential step to improve patient safety or a hindrance that will stifle diagnostic innovation and test improvement.
October 2014—Laboratory medicine is a human endeavor with zero tolerance for error. “Human endeavor” and “zero error” make for an awkward pairing, but those are the rules and they’re good ones. So we create systems to protect quality, sustain excellence, and provide education. We are vigilant. CAP quality assurance programs are instruments of that vigilance and of our member-driven commitment to patient safety.
October 2014—My laboratory reports the color of a body fluid after it’s spun down. So bloody fluid may be reported as “color: yellow, appearance = bloody.” Is this common practice? We have had phone calls from a neurologist who questioned the color and pointed out that it doesn’t make sense, except for spinal fluid when it’s important to record xanthochromia versus a bad tap.
October 2014—Leading pathologists and the CAP are encouraging laboratory professionals to use the social media website Twitter as a way to amplify lab medicine’s voice among clinicians, policymakers, news organizations, patients, and the public. It is advice that at least one prominent social media expert and nonpathology physician says lab professionals ought to heed. “Pathologists have a problem being recognized by society because we don’t see patients directly. This is an opportunity for us to get out there in society and to contribute value in that regard,” says Timothy Craig Allen, MD, JD, a newly elected member of the CAP’s Board of Governors and director of anatomic pathology at the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston.
October 2014—Benefits of green tea extract to brain connectivity during working memory processing: Green tea extract or its main ingredient has been shown to have a beneficial impact on cognitive functioning and prevention of cognitive decline. The benefit to cognition could be related to altered brain activity in regions engaged during higher order cognitive functioning. Some recent studies demonstrated increased brain activation in the fronto-parietal regions during working memory processing.
October 2014—Role of STAT6 immunohistochemistry in diagnosis of solitary fibrous tumors: Solitary fibrous tumor is an uncommon fibroblastic neoplasm. Although histologic characteristics and frequent CD34 expression allow for an accurate diagnosis in the majority of solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) cases, a wide histologic spectrum and occasional unexpected immunophenotype may pose diagnostic challenges. Molecular analyses have shown that almost all SFTs harbor a NAB2-STAT6 fusion gene, which is considered specific to this tumor type.
October 2014—A conundrum: teaching pathology informatics to residents: Just as high schoolers are prone to protest, “We’re never going to need to use quadratic equations/literary theory/the periodic table in real life,” pathology residents have been known to question the value of subjects for which they don’t envision a practical application—such as pathology informatics.
October 2014—A gene panel to examine mosaic somatic mutations in cerebral malformations: Somatic mutations are widely recognized in cancer, often affecting prognosis and determining candidacy for use of molecular targeted treatments. These somatic mutations may lead to a mosaic population of cells. Recent advances in technology involving deep next-generation sequencing have allowed for detection and quantification of these mosaic variants.
September 2014—Simple blood tests, colossal contrasts on price: California hospitals have a pricing range for common blood tests so wide that it brings to mind the vast span of that state’s world wonder, the Golden Gate Bridge. Among the 150 hospitals whose blood test charges were examined in a recent study, the price for a basic metabolic test ranged from $35 to $7,303, depending on the hospital, with a median charge of $214. The biggest price difference was in charges for a lipid panel.
September 2014—Occasionally on certain patients, when we draw for a CBC in the early morning, we get a low Hgb of 6 or 7 g/dL. We draw the same patient for a CBC in the afternoon and we get a higher Hgb by at least 1–1.5 g/dL. Can you explain the reason for this difference? We would like to standardize reference ranges throughout our system of regional facilities, using our main laboratory to establish the ranges. How does the CAP view using the transference process as described in CLSI document C28-A3C, Defining, Establishing, and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline? Is this an approved method for establishing reference ranges? Is it an acceptable process once the laboratory director approves it?
