Ross W Simpson1, Michael A Berman, Philip R Foulis, Dimitrios X G Divaris, George G Birdsong, Jaleh Mirza, Richard Moldwin, Samantha Spencer, John R Srigley, Patrick L Fitzgibbons. 1. From the Department of Pathology, Park Nicollet-Methodist Hospital, St Louis Park, Minnesota (Dr Simpson); the Department of Pathology, Jefferson Regional Medical Center, Jefferson Hills, Pennsylvania (Dr Berman); the University of South Florida Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, Tampa (Dr Foulis); the Department of Laboratory Medicine, Grand River Hospital, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada (Dr Divaris); the Department of Pathology, Grady Health System/Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia (Dr Birdsong); Capability & Specialty Advancement, College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois (Drs Mirza, Moldwin, and Spencer); the Laboratory Medicine and Genetics Program, Trillium Health Partners, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (Dr Srigley); and the Department of Pathology, St Jude Medical Center, Fullerton, California (Dr Fitzgibbons).
Abstract
CONTEXT: The College of American Pathologists has been producing cancer protocols since 1986 to aid pathologists in the diagnosis and reporting of cancer cases. Many pathologists use the included cancer case summaries as templates for dictation/data entry into the final pathology report. These summaries are now available in a computer-readable format with structured data elements for interoperability, packaged as "electronic cancer checklists." Most major vendors of anatomic pathology reporting software support this model. OBJECTIVES: To outline the development and advantages of structured electronic cancer reporting using the electronic cancer checklist model, and to describe its extension to cancer biomarkers and other aspects of cancer reporting. DATA SOURCES: Peer-reviewed literature and internal records of the College of American Pathologists. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate and usable cancer biomarker data reporting will increasingly depend on initial capture of this information as structured data. This process will support the standardization of data elements and biomarker terminology, enabling the meaningful use of these datasets by pathologists, clinicians, tumor registries, and patients.
CONTEXT: The College of American Pathologists has been producing cancer protocols since 1986 to aid pathologists in the diagnosis and reporting of cancer cases. Many pathologists use the included cancer case summaries as templates for dictation/data entry into the final pathology report. These summaries are now available in a computer-readable format with structured data elements for interoperability, packaged as "electronic cancer checklists." Most major vendors of anatomic pathology reporting software support this model. OBJECTIVES: To outline the development and advantages of structured electronic cancer reporting using the electronic cancer checklist model, and to describe its extension to cancer biomarkers and other aspects of cancer reporting. DATA SOURCES: Peer-reviewed literature and internal records of the College of American Pathologists. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate and usable cancer biomarker data reporting will increasingly depend on initial capture of this information as structured data. This process will support the standardization of data elements and biomarker terminology, enabling the meaningful use of these datasets by pathologists, clinicians, tumor registries, and patients.
Authors: Kelly Dufraing; Kaat Van Casteren; Joke Breyne; Nicky D'Haene; Claude Van Campenhout; Sara Vander Borght; Karen Zwaenepoel; Etienne Rouleau; Ed Schuuring; Jan von der Thüsen; Elisabeth Dequeker Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Matthew J Rioth; David B Staggs; Lauren Hackett; Erich Haberman; Mike Tod; Mia Levy; Jeremy Warner Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-01-26 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Vanda F Torous; Ross W Simpson; Jyoti P Balani; Alexander S Baras; Michael A Berman; George G Birdsong; Giovanna A Giannico; Gladell P Paner; Jason R Pettus; Zack Sessions; S Joseph Sirintrapun; John R Srigley; Samantha Spencer Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2021-01
Authors: Elizabeth M Ward; Recinda L Sherman; S Jane Henley; Ahmedin Jemal; David A Siegel; Eric J Feuer; Albert U Firth; Betsy A Kohler; Susan Scott; Jiemin Ma; Robert N Anderson; Vicki Benard; Kathleen A Cronin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Megan A Renshaw; Scott A Renshaw; Mercy Mena-Allauca; Patricia P Carrion; Xiaorong Mei; Arniris Narciandi; Edwin W Gould; Andrew A Renshaw Journal: J Pathol Inform Date: 2017-03-10
Authors: Carol C Cheung; Penny Barnes; Gilbert Bigras; Scott Boerner; Jagdish Butany; Fiorella Calabrese; Christian Couture; Jean Deschenes; Hala El-Zimaity; Gabor Fischer; Pierre O Fiset; John Garratt; Laurette Geldenhuys; C Blake Gilks; Marius Ilie; Diana Ionescu; Hyun J Lim; Lisa Manning; Adnan Mansoor; Robert Riddell; Catherine Ross; Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri; Alan Spatz; Paul E Swanson; Victor A Tron; Ming-Sound Tsao; Hangjun Wang; Zhaolin Xu; Emina E Torlakovic Journal: Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol Date: 2019 Nov/Dec