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
Tuesday, June 9, 2026, 1:00–2:00 PM ET
In this webinar, we will examine how immune recognition after allogeneic HCT can influence leukemia relapse and disease progression. The session will highlight the clinical relevance of HLA loss of heterozygosity (LOH), approaches used for its detection, and how LOH findings may support transplant strategies, including considerations for donor selection in subsequent transplantation.
Webinar presenter Alberto Cardoso Martins Lima, PhD, Clinical consulting scientist in histocompatibility,
specializing in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) at IGEN/AFIP São Paulo and CHC/UFPR in Curitiba, Brazil
Moderated by: Bob McGonnagle, Publisher, CAP TODAY
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
July 2022—Good slides in, good images out. Liron Pantanowitz, MD, MHA, explained how to get those good images in a recent webinar on preanalytics quality control in digital pathology, sponsored by Sunquest and made available by the Association for Pathology Informatics.
September 2020—Bill Gates was just 10 years old and the Beatles were still playing live concerts when the concept of patient-based real-time quality control was proposed in 1965. At the time, patient-based real-time QC (PBRTQC) was based on the “average of normals,” a precursor of moving averages.
August 2020—For quality management in the laboratory, it’s not enough to have checks and balances. The checks and balances have to work to improve quality. That’s how Stephen J. Sarewitz, MD, vice chair of the CAP Checklists Committee, characterizes the changes to the quality management requirements in the 2020 laboratory general checklist, released in June.
July 2020—Unveiled in 2018, HistoQC, an open-source quality control tool for digital pathology slides, was an “awakening to a problem” and the kickoff of a conversation, says Andrew Janowczyk, PhD, its main investigator. And while it’s hard to measure the tool’s use because it’s freely available, he says, reception has been strong. “It’s been a pretty good ride,” he says of its first two years.
May 2020—Like a top 40 radio hit, test utilization is a topic that can sometimes seem to be overplayed. But the COVID-19 pandemic brings into sharp relief its importance. “What we’ve seen is organizations that have more mature test utilization efforts in place may be better able to handle these crises,” says Peter L. Perrotta, MD, professor and chair of pathology, anatomy, and laboratory medicine at West Virginia University School of Medicine and director of pathology services, West Virginia University Health System.
October 2018—It happened for next-generation sequencing. It was an important step for in vivo microscopy. And now it’s taking place with imaging mass spectrometry. The milestone: development and adoption of a set of specialized checklist requirements for laboratories that want CAP accreditation. Imaging mass spectrometry, an adjunct methodology to help pathologists analyze areas of interest in tissue specimens, is, at this point, used in a small number of research laboratories in the U.S., says CAP Checklists Committee member Christopher M. Lehman, MD, clinical professor of pathology, University of Utah College of Medicine, and medical director of the University of Utah Hospital Laboratory.
October 2017—The challenge for all clinical laboratories is to produce the highest quality in vitro diagnostic results in the most efficient manner. Fortunately, high quality and high efficiency are not mutually exclusive, and the direct correlation between the two is well documented.1,2 As the quality of processes increases, so does process efficiency, which ultimately drives down costs.
February 2017—“Quality management” is the practice of continually evaluating, identifying, and improving the diagnostic process. It refers not only to retrospective action taken after mistakes have been made but also to evaluating near misses and opportunities for improvement in every facet of practice.
May 2016—Practically speaking, there’s a limit to the number of balls a human can juggle. And there’s probably a limit to how complex a quality control plan a point-of-care testing coordinator can handle. Last year, many POC coordinators felt that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services would be pushing that limit pretty hard with its new Individualized Quality Control Plan.
April 2016—For many point-of-care testing coordinators, the prospect of developing Individualized Quality Control Plans is far from enticing. But there has never been much chance that laboratories could opt out of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ new quality control framework for much of their nonwaived testing.
