Standardization of the Histopathology Cancer Report: An Ontological Approach

EasyChair Preprint 386

Abstract

Background In recent years, the complexity of cancer pathology reporting has increased significantly. The pathology report covers not only general information such as the presence or absence of cancer, but includes a collection of specific parameters such as tumor size, grade, margin, lymphatic or vascular involvement as well as molecular testing e.g. proteomics and genomics (Figure 1). Soon, biomarkers and immune profiling will play an increasingly more important role in determining the eligibility for particular therapies, along with genetic predisposition and social risk factors. The increased use of digital pathology, which allows streamlined sharing of images, has highlighted the importance of clear communication of the information displayed in the pathology report. In the past years, significant effort has been devoted to redefining the way that histopathology report information is recorded. The College of American Pathologists (CAP) (http://www.cap.org/), a leading organization of board-certified pathologists, introduced synoptic cancer reports, a structured checklist to standardize clinical documentation. Despite continuous improvement and generation of electronic reports, formal representation [1] is still lacking. This lack of standardization limits the ability to integrate pathology information with other genomic and proteomic data and often results in loss of information.

Keyphrases: Histopathology Cancer, Histopathology report, Ontology, Pathology, Pathology standard, Tumor, cancer

@booklet{EasyChair:386,
  author    = {Anna Maria Masci and Shannon McCall and Alessandro Racioppi and Helena Judge Ellis and Jihad S. Obeid and Barry Smith and Christian Stoeckert and Jie Zheng},
  title     = {Standardization of the Histopathology Cancer Report: An Ontological Approach},
  howpublished = {EasyChair Preprint 386},
  year      = {EasyChair, 2018}}