Webinars and Sponsored Roundtables — Register Now

Wednesday, June 24, 2026, 12:00–1:00 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

Wednesday, July 15, 2026, 1:00-2:00 PM ET
Hear an expert discuss how to integrate Kappa and Lambda in situ hybridization testing into your standard hematopathology workflow to accurately assess B-cell and plasma cell clonality. You will also gain the skills to recognize testing pitfalls in challenging reactive versus neoplastic proliferations and apply ancillary tools to resolve complex cases.

Webinar presenter Xiaojun Wu, MD, PhD, Assistant professor, Director of Hematopathology Section at NCR of Johns Hopkins Medicine Department of Pathology, SOM at Johns Hopkins University

Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY

Tuesday, July 21, 2026, 11:00-11:30 AM CT

Learning Objectives:
  • Explain how transparency and manufacturer partnerships improve quality, consistency, and decision-making confidence in specimen management.
  • Evaluate blood collection tubes beyond cost and commodity assumptions, incorporating clinical impact and risk into decision-making.
  • Assess the potential risk points when using a blood collection device that has not been cleared for a specific purpose.

Roundtable presenters Nick Fingland, PhD, PMP, Senior Director, R&D Operations and Science, BD, and Chris Farnsworth, PhD, D(ABCC), Section Head of Clinical Chemistry, Professor of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine.

Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY

Subspecialties

Interactive Product Guides

November 2013

Results reporting in microbiology: What’s needed, what’s not?

November 2013—After the patient specimens have been collected and the tests have been performed, after the legwork is complete and the results are in hand, reporting clinical microbiology findings should in theory be the easy part—the final step before an effective treatment plan is formed. But as any seasoned clinical microbiologist knows, that couldn’t be further from the truth.

In predicting CKD risk, eGFR better when based on cystatin C

November 2013—Like turning around an ocean-going tanker, changing widely accepted testing practices in kidney disease, one of the nation’s most common disorders, may have to be done gradually. But the latest study comparing the biomarkers cystatin C and creatinine, published in the Sept. 5 New England Journal of Medicine (2013;369:932–943), is the most sweeping study to date and should provide new impetus to wider use of cystatin C.

From the President’s Desk: PT for the passionate and the savvy, 11/13

November 2013—PT for the passionate and the savvy I believe that most pathologists and laboratory professionals enjoy refining systems and processes to further promote quality practices in their laboratories. We may not think about discipline and precision when somebody mentions passion, but passion is what those inclinations represent. While passionate pathology can manifest in a host of ways, this month I’d like to talk about how it drives excellence in CAP Surveys or proficiency testing (PT) programs.

Keys to curbing tube interference with test results

November 2013—There’s nothing flashy about specimen tubes, which may look like the most mass-produced, commonplace items in the laboratory, but appearances can be deceptive. All tubes are not created equal. “We know that preanalytical errors account for the majority of errors in the laboratory, and many of those errors derive from the tube type in which you collect your sample,” says Leslie J. Donato, PhD, co-director of the hospital clinical laboratory and point of care at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn.

Q & A, 10/13

October 2013—We are standardizing procedures across our system. In thrombocytopenic patients with low platelet counts, some sites perform manual platelet counts using the Unopette system; others perform slide estimates to confirm an automated count. The need for improved turnaround times and greater accuracy and precision is clear. Are there studies that have evaluated the true accuracy of a low platelet count via a manual dilution technique versus the many automated techniques, and is there a true value in performing the time-consuming manual platelet count?