Explainer · Digital pathology

One case, four workflows, one viewer.

PathPresenter, as its team presented it at the "Better Together" workshop on connected pathology workflows: a single de-identified case followed from clinical sign-out to an outside consult, into a research commons and onto a lecture screen, with each pathologist building on the work of the one before.

Follow the caseWhat sits underneath
Workshop explainer · October 2026
01 CLINICAL SIGN-OUT 04 EDUCATION 02 CONSULTATION 03 RESEARCH ONE VIEWER · ONE CASE 05 INTELLIGENCE LAYER · ANNOUNCED
Fig. 0 · One viewer, four workflowsAxonometric · not to scale

Why it matters

For some tumors, a second pair of eyes changes the treatment.

The workshop case was a round blue cell tumor in a 14-year-old, a group of tumors where the exact diagnosis decides the treatment. In a study cited during the session, pathologists agreed on the diagnosis of such tumors only 56% of the time, and in roughly 8 to 10% of cases the diagnoses differed outright, benign against malignant. Working together is not a nicety here.

01 · Clinical

Sign-out

AI-triaged worklist, full context and orders in one viewer.

02 · Consult

Second opinion

Slides, notes and report travel as data, into the consultant's LIS.

03 · Research

Discovery

A governed commons where every institution keeps its data.

04 · Education

Teaching

Slides inside the lecture; the patient can see them too.

How to read the drawings

Each drawing marks what the workshop actually showed.

We use the same evidence language as our own site drawings. Here the states describe the presentation, not a deployment we have verified.

DemonstratedShown live in the platform during the workshop.
DescribedExplained by a presenter, not demonstrated on screen.
AnnouncedOn the roadmap. Drawn dashed until it ships.
Your systemsOutside the platform: LIS, network, storage. Confirmed on site.
ContextRooms and furniture that set the scene.

The storyline · six scenes

Follow one case from the worklist to the lecture hall.

Patient14 years old, de-identified
FindingDeep mass in the forearm muscle
HistoryPrior biopsy, non-diagnostic
SlidesRound blue cell tumor

The hand-offs were enacted for the workshop; the case did not really travel. Each scene ends with what the next pathologist inherits.

00Why the workshop was staged around one case

The problem

The microscope was one instrument for everything. Digital pathology split it into systems.

A pathologist used the same microscope for a clinical case, a consult, a teaching session and a research question. Twenty years into digital pathology, each of those jobs tends to live in its own system, with its own login and its own copy of the slide. Scanning turned out to be the easy part; connecting the work is the hard part.

The format

  • One de-identified case followed from start to finish
  • Four pathologists, four institutions, four jobs
  • Each one builds on the previous one's work instead of starting over

The fragmentation

  • Clinical, consult, research and teaching tools rarely share a case
  • Every hand-off means another login and another upload
  • Work done upstream is lost downstream
Hands onA deep soft-tissue mass in a teenager's forearm, a non-diagnostic biopsy from a smaller hospital, and a round blue cell tumor on the new slides.
CLINICAL CONSULT RESEARCH TEACHING SCANNER · THE EASY PART
Fig. 1 · The problemFour logins · the case starts over each time
01Primary pathologist · academic center

Clinical sign-out

Everything about the case, in the same window as the slide.

The worklist arrives already screened by a pan-cancer AI algorithm, so the one suspicious case is read first. In the viewer the pathologist opens the case information, the radiology, gross and clinical photographs and the prior biopsy, and lays up to four slides side by side. The fellow's annotated mitoses and questions sit on the slide itself. Stains are ordered from the side panel, a notification arrives when they are ready, and the tumor area is marked for molecular testing.

Shown in the platform

  • AI-triaged worklist: stat, rush, routine
  • Case information, radiology, gross and prior biopsy in one viewer
  • Up to four slides side by side, controls on the same slide
  • Annotations and chat between fellow and attending
  • Stain orders from the viewer, with a ready notification

In the case

  • IHC panel: CD99, WT1, ETV4
  • CD99 not crisp and membranous; WT1 and ETV4 positive
  • Leading diagnosis: CIC-rearranged sarcoma
  • No NGS in house, so a second opinion is needed
Hands onThe case is tagged for an outside expert. Annotations, stains, images and the report travel with it.
WORKLIST · AI-TRIAGED VIEWER · 4 SLIDES SIDE BY SIDE CONTEXT · GROSS · RADIOLOGY · PRIOR
Fig. 2 · Clinical sign-outGreen row: AI flag · hatched: pending
02Consultant · pediatric center

Consultation

The slides travel as data; the consult arrives like any other case.

Without a portal, glass slides are packed, shipped, accessioned, read and shipped back, with a risk of breakage or loss along the way. Here the case arrives in the consultant's own worklist through their LIS, with the referring pathologist's markings, gross photographs, stains and report already attached. The two pathologists chat directly, the consultant requests a DUX4 stain and FISH, and the results come back into the same viewer. The signed consult report flows back to the referring institution.

Shown in the platform

  • Consult lands in the LIS worklist: no separate login
  • Markings, gross images, stains and report transfer with the case
  • Direct chat and a consensus conference tool
  • Extra stains and molecular tests ordered from either side
  • Report returned to the referring institution

In the case

  • The LIS stays the ground truth for patient identity
  • DUX4 strongly positive; FISH confirms the rearrangement
  • Diagnosis confirmed: CIC-rearranged sarcoma
  • Hours instead of the 24 hours or more glass needs, and far more abroad
Hands onA confirmed diagnosis on a well-documented case: ready to ask whether anyone has seen this before.
REFERRING PATHOLOGIST CONSULTANT LIS · GROUND TRUTH GLASS BY COURIER · DAYS
Fig. 3 · ConsultationGreen: slides, notes, report · same day
03Translational research

Research commons

Have we seen this before? Ask the slide, then ask the commons.

A region of the slide can be searched against similar-looking cases, the way an image search works. Beyond one institution, an AI data commons pools de-identified data under one governed, searchable index while every contributor keeps ownership in its own tenant. The demo used mock data from 35 institutions: a query for patients under 18 with this sarcoma, an access request for mitotic rate and survival, a supervised study with fixed regions of interest and labels for each mitotic figure type, annotation and review, export, and a model trained to score the index case.

Shown in the platform

  • Similar-image search from a region of interest
  • Queries across tenants; access requested per data set
  • Study builder: 1 and 2 mm² regions, mitotic labels, report forms
  • Annotation, review and export as XML or CSV
  • Model training (ResNet, random forest) and inference on a new case

In the case

  • Rare tumors need more cases than one center has
  • Contributors can use the resulting models for their own work
  • Qualitative morphology becomes a quantitative research biomarker
  • All data de-identified; permissions on every role
Hands onA case that is understood better than when it arrived, and worth teaching.
EACH INSTITUTION KEEPS ITS DATA MODEL · TRAIN · TEST INDEX CASE · RESEARCH SCORE
Fig. 4 · Research commonsGreen: 7 study slides · mock data
04Medical school · Nagasaki

Education

The slide goes inside the lecture, and the student can explore it.

With the free education model, whole slide images sit inside the lecture itself, annotated so a beginner knows what to look at in what otherwise looks like a pink ocean of blue dots. Two slides can be compared on the same page, a case is shared with a class in about 30 seconds, and nobody has to keep a hundred sets of fading glass. The same link lets a pathologist sit with a patient and show them the images their diagnosis came from.

Shown in the platform

  • Whole slide images embedded in lectures
  • Annotated slides and side-by-side comparison
  • A case shared with a class in about 30 seconds

In the case

  • Students see what the lecturer sees, at any magnification
  • No glass sets to cut, store and replace
  • Patients can see their own pathology, explained
Hands onThe same case, now teaching the next pathologists and the patient.
SLIDE INSIDE THE LECTURE SHARED IN ~30 SECONDS PATIENT CONVERSATION
Fig. 5 · EducationHatched: described, not demonstrated
05Announced, not demonstrated

What comes next

An intelligence layer for building your own agents.

The workshop closed with what is coming: an intelligence layer in the back end, a framework for building agents that track cases through the system and summarize them for the pathologist. It was announced, not shown, so on this page it is drawn dashed. The closing point was the one that started the session: pathology has always been done together, at the next microscope or the multi-headed scope, and the digital infrastructure should keep it that way.

Announced

  • Intelligence layer in the back end
  • Agents for case tracking
  • Agents for case summaries

Before you rely on it

  • Roadmap items: availability set by the vendor
  • Validate any agent before it touches a live case
  • Decide which case data an agent may read
The pointPathologists who build on each other's work, wherever they sit.
TODAY · ONE VIEWER AGENT · CASE TRACKING AGENT · CASE SUMMARY
Fig. 6 · What comes nextDashed: announced, not yet shown

What sits underneath

A viewer is only as connected as the systems beneath it.

Every scene above depends on systems the viewer does not own. The consultant's workflow worked because the LIS stayed the ground truth for patient identity; whole slide images only move as fast as the network and storage allow. This is the layer we document and connect, whichever digital pathology platform a lab chooses.

LIS · ground truth

Identity and orders

  • Patient and case identity from Epic Beaker, or another LIS such as CGM AP EASY where both vendors support it
  • Stain and molecular orders written back to the LIS
  • Consult reports filed to the right case and chart
Beaker integration story →
Network · storage

Slides as data

  • Scanner, viewer and storage traffic on its own segment
  • Bandwidth sized for whole slide images, not documents
  • Retention and archive for every scanned slide
Infrastructure phase →
Access · governance

Who may see what

  • Single sign-on and roles for staff, fellows and consultants
  • External sharing rules for consults and teaching
  • De-identification and data-use agreements before research
Intelligence & security phase →

Source: the workshop "Better Together: How Leading Centers Are Building Connected Pathology Workflows with PathPresenter", October 2026, presented by a PathPresenter co-founder, a senior advisor and practicing pathologists. The case was de-identified and its hand-offs were enacted for the demonstration; the research demo used mock data. Features are described as presented and have not been independently verified by CarolinaEMR; availability and licensing are set by the vendor. PathPresenter is a trademark of its owner; Epic and Beaker are trademarks of Epic Systems Corporation; CGM AP EASY is a trademark of CompuGroup Medical SE & Co. KGaA. CarolinaEMR is an independent consulting firm and is not affiliated with or endorsed by these vendors. Drawings are illustrative.

Planning digital pathology?

Start with the systems underneath the slides.

Before scanners and viewers arrive, we map the LIS interfaces, the network and storage path for whole slide images, and who may see which case. Then the platform you choose has something solid to connect to.

Talk to usSee Chain of Custody