Digital pathology operations at a tertiary cancer center: Infrastructure requirements and operational cost.

Whole slide imaging is revolutionizing the field of pathology and is currently being used for clinical, educational, and research initiatives by an increasing number of institutions. Pathology departments have distinct needs for digital pathology systems, yet the cost of digital workflows is cited as a major barrier for widespread adoption by many organizations. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) is an early adopter of whole slide imaging with incremental investments in resources that started more than 15 years ago. This experience and the large-scale scan operations led to the identification of required framework components of digital pathology operations. The cost of these components for the 2021 digital pathology operations at MSK were studied and calculated to enable an understanding of the operation and benchmark the accompanying costs. This paper describes the unique infrastructure cost and the costs associated with the digital pathology clinical operation use cases in a large, tertiary cancer center. These calculations can serve as a blueprint for other institutions to provide the necessary concepts and offer insights towards the financial requirements for digital pathology adoption by other institutions.

Integrating digital pathology into clinical practice.

The field of anatomic pathology has been evolving in the last few decades and the advancements have been largely fostered by innovative technology. Immunohistochemistry enabled a paradigm shift in discovery and diagnostic evaluation, followed by booming genomic advancements which allowed for submicroscopic pathologic characterization, and now the field of digital pathology coupled with machine learning and big data acquisition is paving the way to revolutionize the pathology medical domain. Whole slide imaging (WSI) is a disruptive technology where glass slides are digitized to produce on-screen whole slide images. Specifically, in the past decade, there have been significant advances in digital pathology systems that have allowed this technology to promote integration into clinical practice. Whole slide images (WSI), or digital slides, can be viewed and navigated comparable to glass slides on a microscope, as digital files. Whole slide imaging has increased in adoption among pathologists, pathology departments, and scientists for clinical, educational, and research initiatives. Integration of digital pathology systems requires a coordinated effort with numerous stakeholders, not only within the pathology department, but across the entire enterprise. Each pathology department has distinct needs, use cases and blueprints, however the framework components and variables for successful clinical integration can be generalized across any organization seeking to undergo a digital transformation at any scale. This article will review those components and considerations for integrating digital pathology systems into clinical practice.

Integrated digital pathology at scale: A solution for clinical diagnostics and cancer research at a large academic medical center.

OBJECTIVE: Broad adoption of digital pathology (DP) is still lacking, and examples for DP connecting diagnostic, research, and educational use cases are missing. We blueprint a holistic DP solution at a large academic medical center ubiquitously integrated into clinical workflows; researchapplications including molecular, genetic, and tissue databases; and educational processes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We built a vendor-agnostic, integrated viewer for reviewing, annotating, sharing, and quality assurance of digital slides in a clinical or research context. It is the first homegrown viewer cleared by New York State provisional approval in 2020 for primary diagnosis and remote sign-out during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic. We further introduce an interconnected Honest Broker for BioInformatics Technology (HoBBIT) to systematically compile and share large-scale DP research datasets including anonymized images, redacted pathology reports, and clinical data of patients with consent. RESULTS: The solution has been operationally used over 3 years by 926 pathologists and researchers evaluating 288 903 digital slides. A total of 51% of these were reviewed within 1 month after scanning. Seamless integration of the viewer into 4 hospital systems clearly increases the adoption of DP. HoBBIT directly impacts the translation of knowledge in pathology into effective new health measures, including artificial intelligence-driven detection models for prostate cancer, basal cell carcinoma, and breast cancer metastases, developed and validated on thousands of cases. CONCLUSIONS: We highlight major challenges and lessons learned when going digital to provide orientation for other pathologists. Building interconnected solutions will not only increase adoption of DP, but also facilitate next-generation computational pathology at scale for enhanced cancer research.

Digital Pathology Operations at an NYC Tertiary Cancer Center During the First 4 Months of COVID-19 Pandemic Response.

Implementation of an infrastructure to support digital pathology began in 2006 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The public health emergency and COVID-19 pandemic regulations in New York City required a novel workflow to sustain existing operations. While regulatory enforcement discretions offered faculty workspace flexibility, a substantial portion of laboratory and digital pathology workflows require on-site presence of staff. Maintaining social distancing and offering staggered work schedules. Due to a decrease in patients seeking health care at the onset of the pandemic, a temporary decrease in patient specimens was observed. Hospital and travel regulations impacted onsite vendor technical support. Digital glass slide scanning activities onsite proceeded without interruption throughout the pandemic, with challenges including staff who required quarantine due to virus exposure, unrelated illness, family support, or lack of public transportation. During the public health emergency, we validated digital pathology systems for a remote pathology operation. Since March 2020, the departmental digital pathology staff were able to maintain scanning volumes of over 100 000 slides per month. The digital scanning team reprioritized archival slide scanning and participated in a remote sign-out validation and successful submission of New York State approval for a laboratory developed test. Digital pathology offers a health care delivery model where pathologists can perform their sign out duties at remote location and prevent disruptions to critical pathology services for patients seeking care at our institution during emergencies. Development of standard operating procedures to support digital workflows will maintain turnaround times and enable clinical operations during emergency or otherwise unanticipated events.

Validation of a digital pathology system including remote review during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Remote digital pathology allows healthcare systems to maintain pathology operations during public health emergencies. Existing Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments regulations require pathologists to electronically verify patient reports from a certified facility. During the 2019 pandemic of COVID-19 disease, caused by the SAR-CoV-2 virus, this requirement potentially exposes pathologists, their colleagues, and household members to the risk of becoming infected. Relaxation of government enforcement of this regulation allows pathologists to review and report pathology specimens from a remote, non-CLIA certified facility. The availability of digital pathology systems can facilitate remote microscopic diagnosis, although formal comprehensive (case-based) validation of remote digital diagnosis has not been reported. All glass slides representing routine clinical signout workload in surgical pathology subspecialties at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were scanned on an Aperio GT450 at ×40 equivalent resolution (0.26 µm/pixel). Twelve pathologists from nine surgical pathology subspecialties remotely reviewed and reported complete pathology cases using a digital pathology system from a non-CLIA certified facility through a secure connection. Whole slide images were integrated to and launched within the laboratory information system to a custom vendor-agnostic, whole slide image viewer. Remote signouts utilized consumer-grade computers and monitors (monitor size, 13.3-42 in.; resolution, 1280 × 800-3840 × 2160 pixels) connecting to an institution clinical workstation via secure virtual private network. Pathologists subsequently reviewed all corresponding glass slides using a light microscope within the CLIA-certified department. Intraobserver concordance metrics included reporting elements of top-line diagnosis, margin status, lymphovascular and/or perineural invasion, pathology stage, and ancillary testing. The median whole slide image file size was 1.3 GB; scan time/slide averaged 90 s; and scanned tissue area averaged 612 mm2. Signout sessions included a total of 108 cases, comprised of 254 individual parts and 1196 slides. Major diagnostic equivalency was 100% between digital and glass slide diagnoses; and overall concordance was 98.8% (251/254). This study reports validation of primary diagnostic review and reporting of complete pathology cases from a remote site during a public health emergency. Our experience shows high (100%) intraobserver digital to glass slide major diagnostic concordance when reporting from a remote site. This randomized, prospective study successfully validated remote use of a digital pathology system including operational feasibility supporting remote review and reporting of pathology specimens, and evaluation of remote access performance and usability for remote signout.

Implementation of Digital Pathology Offers Clinical and Operational Increase in Efficiency and Cost Savings.

CONTEXT.­: Digital pathology (DP) implementations vary in scale, based on aims of intended operation. Few laboratories have completed a full-scale DP implementation, which may be due to high overhead costs that disrupt the traditional pathology workflow. Neither standardized criteria nor benchmark data have yet been published showing practical return on investment after implementing a DP platform. OBJECTIVE.­: To provide benchmark data and practical metrics to support operational efficiency and cost savings in a large academic center. DESIGN.­: Metrics reviewed include archived pathology asset retrieval; ancillary test request for recurrent/metastatic disease; cost analysis and turnaround time (TAT); and DP experience survey. RESULTS.­: Glass slide requests from the department slide archive and an off-site surgery center showed a 93% and 97% decrease, respectively. Ancillary immunohistochemical orders, compared in 2014 (52%)-before whole slide images (WSIs) were available in the laboratory information system-and 2017 (21%) showed $114 000/y in anticipated savings. Comprehensive comparative cost analysis showed a 5-year $1.3 million savings. Surgical resection cases with prior WSIs showed a 1-day decrease in TAT. A DP experience survey showed 80% of respondents agreed WSIs improved their clinical sign-out experience. CONCLUSIONS.­: Implementing a DP operation showed a noteworthy increase in efficiency and operational utility. Digital pathology deployments and operations may be gauged by the following metrics: number of glass slide requests as WSIs become available, decrease in confirmatory testing for patients with metastatic/recurrent disease, long-term decrease in off-site pathology asset costs, and faster TAT. Other departments may use our benchmark data and metrics to enhance patient care and demonstrate return on investment to justify adoption of DP.

Whole slide imaging equivalency and efficiency study: experience at a large academic center.

Whole slide imaging is Food and Drug Administration-approved for primary diagnosis in the United States of America; however, relatively few pathology departments in the country have fully implemented an enterprise wide digital pathology system enabled for primary diagnosis. Digital pathology has significant potential to transform pathology practice with several published studies documenting some level of diagnostic equivalence between digital and conventional systems. However, whole slide imaging also has significant potential to disrupt pathology practice, due to the differences in efficiency of manipulating digital images vis-à-vis glass slides, and studies on the efficiency of actual digital pathology workload are lacking. Our randomized, equivalency and efficiency study aimed to replicate clinical workflow, comparing conventional microscopy to a complete digital pathology signout using whole slide images, evaluating the equivalency and efficiency of glass slide to whole slide image reporting, reflective of true pathology practice workloads in the clinical setting. All glass slides representing an entire day's routine clinical signout workload for six different anatomic pathology subspecialties at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were scanned on Leica Aperio AT2 at ×40 (0.25 µm/pixel). Integration of whole slide images for each accessioned case is through an interface between the Leica eSlide manager database and the laboratory information system, Cerner CoPathPlus. Pathologists utilized a standard institution computer workstation and viewed whole slide images through an internally developed, vendor agnostic whole slide image viewer, named the "MSK Slide Viewer". Subspecialized pathologists first reported on glass slides from surgical pathology cases using routine clinical workflow. Glass slides were de-identified, scanned, and re-accessioned in the laboratory information system test environment. After a washout period of 13 weeks, pathologists reported the same clinical workload using whole slide image integrated within the laboratory information system. Intraobserver equivalency metrics included top-line diagnosis, margin status, lymphovascular and/or perineural invasion, pathology stage, and the need to order ancillary testing (i.e., recuts, immunohistochemistry). Turnaround time (efficiency) evaluation was defined by the start of each case when opened in the laboratory information system and when the case was completed for that day (i.e., case sent to signout queue or pending ancillary studies). Eight pathologists participated from the following subspecialties: bone and soft tissue, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, breast, gynecologic, and dermatopathology. Glass slides signouts comprised of 204 cases, encompassing 2091 glass slides; and digital signouts comprised of 199 cases, encompassing 2073 whole slide images. The median whole slide image file size was 1.54 GB; scan time/slide, 6 min 24 s; and scan area 32.1 × 18.52 mm. Overall diagnostic equivalency (e.g., top-line diagnosis) was 99.3% between digital and glass slide signout; however, signout using whole slide images showed a median overall 19% decrease in efficiency per case. No significant difference by reader, subspecialty, or specimen type was identified. Our experience is the most comprehensive study to date and shows high intraobserver whole slide image to glass slide equivalence in reporting of true clinical workflows and workloads. Efficiency needs to improve for digital pathology to gain more traction among pathologists.