Linkedin Youtube
Launch Digital Edition

Webinars and Sponsored Roundtables — Register Now

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

Register Now

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

Register Now

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

Register Now

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

Register Now

Subspecialties

Interactive Product Guides

Manage Subscription

To receive CAP TODAY magazine, please subscribe here.
For change of address, mail new information to: CAP TODAY Circulation, 325 Waukegan Road, Northfield, IL 60093-2750 or visit here.

Columns

Molecular pathology selected abstracts

July 2020—Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DiHS/DRESS) is a rare but well-known full-body inflammatory skin condition that leads to life-threatening complications if untreated. The authors conducted a case study that involved a 44-year-old male who developed DiHS/DRESS after taking the combined antibiotic trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Following standard treatment for this condition, the patient was started on high-dose prednisone, which provided no benefit. Subsequent tapering of prednisone advanced the disease to a toxic epidermal necrolysis-like condition. The patient was then given etanercept and high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin, without benefit. Next, the patient received cyclosporine, which resulted in some improvement but led to uncontrollable renal hypertension.

Q&A column

Q. Is it acceptable for a clinical laboratory to calculate ionized (free) calcium if calcium ion-selective electrode is not available? Are results of calculated ionized (free) calcium of acceptable accuracy in clinical practice? And what is the recommended formula for performing this calculation? Read answer.
Q. Under checklist requirement COM.04250 “Comparability of Instruments and Methods —Nonwaived Testing,” what is the minimum number of samples that should be analyzed and which acceptance criteria should be used for the comparison? In addition, what parameters in the complete blood count do not apply for comparison purposes?
Read answer.
Q. I read an article about phlebotomy that stated for proper patient care, the recommended maximum number of blood draw attempts is four. The hospital at which I work recently implemented a procedure in which the nurses perform blood draws, instead of laboratory personnel. The procedure requires a nurse to attempt a blood draw twice and, if not successful, ask another nurse, and then ask the nursing supervisor before finally calling the laboratory. This policy has been difficult for hospital staff, and I feel terrible for patients who get stuck numerous times. Can you provide feedback that I can use to express my concerns to hospital administration? Read answer.

Newsbytes

July—In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the University of California, Berkeley’s Innovative Genomics Institute decided to rapidly shift gears from conducting research to testing the community for SARS-CoV-2, some insiders may have thought the university was biting off more than it could chew under a tight timeframe. Yet a look at the lab 23 days later surely had any doubters eating their words.

Put It on the Board

AMP recommends PGx alleles for genotyping testing for warfarin response July 2020—The Association for Molecular Pathology published in May consensus, evidence-based recommendations to aid in the design, validation, and interpretation of clinical genotyping tests for the prediction of warfarin response. The new guideline on clinical warfarin sensitivity genotyping allele selection completes a series of three reports intended to facilitate testing and promote standardization for frequently used pharmacogenetics genotyping assays. Developed by the AMP PGx Working Group with organizational representation from

From the President’s Desk: Getting through the pandemic

June 2020—Like so many CAP TODAY readers, I have been spending the vast majority of my time working on COVID-19. In Georgia we have the dubious distinction of having a county with one of the highest per capita death rates due to COVID-19 in the country—at least as of early May when I wrote this. Things are moving so fast with this pandemic that by the time you read this, much will have changed.

Clinical Pathology Selected Abstracts

June 2020—More than 1.7 million new diagnoses of cancer occur in the United States each year, and they are almost exclusively made by pathologists who evaluate patient specimens and issue a written diagnostic report. These patients often are not given the opportunity to talk with the pathologist who made the diagnosis or view their tissue through a microscope. There is little published data on patient-pathologist consultation programs in which patients can review their reports and slides with the pathologist. In addition, the number of patients who may be interested in this service is not known. The authors conducted a study to quantify patients’ interest in patient-pathologist consultation programs and qualitatively analyze their motivations for interest or disinterest.

Anatomic Pathology Selected Abstracts

June 2020—The authors conducted a study in which they independently evaluated the utility and prognostic value of tumor budding according to International Tumour Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) criteria in a large well-characterized European gastric cancer cohort. They assessed tumor budding according to the ITBCC criteria for 456 consecutive, surgically treated gastric cancers using the scoring system Bd0 (no buds), Bd1 (one to four buds), Bd2 (five to nine buds), and Bd3 (10 or more buds). Cases with tumor budding were divided into low-budding (Bd1/Bd2) and high-budding (Bd3) groups. The tumor budding score was analyzed in relation to clinicopathological parameters, overall survival, and tumor-specific survival. The authors found that 115 (25.2 percent) cases had no tumor budding, 104 (22.8 percent) had low tumor budding, and 237 (52 percent) had high tumor budding.

Molecular Pathology Selected Abstracts

June 2020—The COVID-19 pandemic has focused the world’s attention on using sensitive high-throughput molecular diagnostic testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus as a public health tool for “flattening the curve” of the infection. Although initial shortages of specialized polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing reagents that plagued the early weeks of the pandemic have slowly improved (as of CAP TODAY press time), an obstacle to universal testing continues to be the first-step bottleneck of collecting respiratory tract samples for virus-specific reverse transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR) testing. The traditional gold standard sample for COVID-19 testing has been a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab. However, nationwide shortages of NP swabs, personal protective equipment (PPE), and viral transport media have intermittently delayed the testing process. In an attempt to alleviate these critical sample-collection issues and promote more widespread testing, the medical community and other entities have been investigating alternative sample-collection procedures.

Q&A column

Q. Are there high-specificity IHC stains for diagnosing mesothelioma that differ from those recommended in the “Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: 2012 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group”? Read answer.
Q. For our hospital tissue and blood committee, we would like to expand the tissue component to look at more preoperative versus postoperative diagnoses (acute appendicitis, for example) and anything else that should be evaluated, such as adequacy of tissue and blood samples. Is there a resource that provides a list of tissue-related quality metrics that we can evaluate?
Read answer.

Newsbytes

June 2020—The global market for health care chatbots has been growing at a fairly rapid pace in recent years, but “COVID-19 is the thing that’s going to make chatbots mainstream,” says Greg Kefer, chief marketing officer at the chatbot company LifeLink Health. A 2019 Allied Market Research report, released just months prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, projected the health care chatbot industry would reach $345.3 million by 2026, a steep rise from 2018, when it garnered $116.9 million (www.allied​market​research.​com/healthcare-chatbots-market). But now, the COVID-19 pandemic has put into sharp relief one of the key value propositions of chatbots—unlimited scale, which means the timeline for adoption “just got massively compressed,” says Kefer, whose software-as-a-service company develops enterprise-level chatbots for large health care organizations.

MARKETPLACE

TRENDING