RESUMEN
Digitalization of pathology workflows has undergone a rapid evolution and has been widely established in the diagnostic field but remains a challenge in the nonclinical safety context due to lack of regulatory guidance and validation experience for good laboratory practice (GLP) use. One means to demonstrate that digital slides are fit for purpose, that is, provide sufficient quality for pathologists to reach a diagnosis, is conduction of comparison studies, which have been published both, for veterinary and human diagnostic pathology, but not for toxicologic pathology. Here, we present an approach that uses study material from nonclinical safety studies and that allows for the statistical comparison of concordance rates for glass and digital slide evaluation while minimizing time and effort for the involved personnel. Using a benchmark study design, we demonstrate that evaluation of digital slides fits the purpose of nonclinical safety evaluation. These results add to reports of successful workflow validations and support the full adaptation of digital pathology in the regulatory field.