Digital Pathology Gets Real: A Timely December Workshop at Michigan Medicine / Dec 10-11-12

Byline: Chat GPT 6 (Los Angeles, October 29)

An unusually practical conference on digital pathology and AI arrives as CAP and DPA join forces and federal regulators reconsider longstanding approaches to laboratory oversight and reimbursement.

Digital pathology is entering a new phase. After years of advances in whole-slide imaging, computational pathology, and artificial intelligence, the field faces increasingly difficult questions about clinical implementation, workflow, regulation, and reimbursement.

Against this backdrop, the Association for Pathology Informatics (API) will hold its Inside the Digital Lab 2026 workshop at Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, December 10–12, 2026, in Ann Arbor. The conference is circa $900 (varies with time and registrant type). Thursday evening December 10 is a reception.

The program is particularly appealing because it emphasizes what happens when digital pathology moves beyond demonstrations and research studies into the daily operations of a major medical center. Attendees will hear from experienced implementers, tour a functioning digital pathology laboratory, and operate actual digital sign-out workstations.

Conference program and detailed agenda

Registration

A Timely CAP–DPA Partnership

The conference follows an important development in the pathology community. On October 23, the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and the Digital Pathology Association (DPA) announced a memorandum of understanding establishing a formal collaboration through December 2029.

The agreement addresses interoperability, standards, workforce development, education, regulatory and reimbursement advocacy, and verification frameworks for whole-slide imaging and AI.

The partnership is particularly welcome because digital pathology faces a complicated federal policy environment. In July, CMS and CDC issued a request for information on updating CLIA regulations, including oversight of AI and digital diagnostic technologies. CMS has also proposed major changes to Medicare reimbursement for Software as a Medical Service (SaMS), including moving selected algorithmic laboratory services outside traditional Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule payment pathways.

These changes could have far-reaching consequences for clinical laboratories and developers of computational pathology services. Whether CMS's proposed approach is well suited to pathology remains highly debatable. Changes pending at AMA are also critical (like a revised Appendix S on coding digitally intensive service and a new code schedule "CMAA.")

Previous articles in Discoveries in Health Policy have discussed the CLIA modernization RFI and CMS's proposed reclassification of digital pathology services.

The CAP–DPA collaboration is separate from API's Michigan workshop, but the developments are complementary. One strengthens the profession's capacity to address common policy challenges; the other provides an unusually valuable opportunity to explore the practical realities of clinical implementation.

CAP announcement of the CAP–DPA agreement

Inside the Digital Lab: The Michigan Experience

The heart of the conference is Friday morning's program, led by Drs. Ulysses Balis and Mustafa Yousif of Michigan Medicine.

Their opening presentation, "The Michigan Model: Building a Fully Digital Pathology Department at Enterprise Scale," describes the institution's approach to comprehensive digital primary diagnosis.

Even more distinctive is the subsequent 2½-hour laboratory tour, "From Glass to Pixels."

Participants will follow a specimen from grossing and slide preparation through digitization and clinical interpretation. They will observe laboratory staff, explore digital viewing stations configured for ten pathology subspecialties, and have the opportunity to navigate cases at workstations equipped with full sign-out capability.

This hands-on experience should be a major attraction for institutions considering or expanding digital pathology. Technical specifications and vendor demonstrations are important, but they cannot fully convey what it takes to make an integrated digital workflow function every day.

Friday: Scaling Up, Interoperability, and Long-Term Sustainability

Friday afternoon contains two sessions addressing challenges that become increasingly important as digital pathology moves into routine practice.

The first focuses on scalable deployment of image management systems and AI.

Balis and Yousif discuss the "last mile" of implementation: tools that turn a digital pathology platform into a complete clinical workflow.
Larissa Furtado (Penn Medicine) presents a practical lifecycle framework for AI-based clinical assays, from concept to clinical reporting.
Juan C. Santa-Rosario (CorePlus) discusses building a scalable digital pathology and AI ecosystem.

A second session addresses lifecycle management, interoperability, and institutional sustainability.

Rebecca Rojansky (Stanford) examines how existing pathology infrastructure can evolve to support clinical AI.
Andrew Evans and Jim Tsourgiannis (Mackenzie Health) tackle the difficult subject of replacing digital pathology platforms without sacrificing previous institutional progress.
Keluo Yao (Cedars-Sinai) discusses cytopathology in an era of disruptive digital pathology and AI technologies.

Both sessions conclude with extended panel discussions.

The topics are well chosen. Digital pathology is not simply a matter of purchasing scanners and installing software. It requires durable clinical infrastructure, reliable interoperability, and the ability to accommodate evolving technology without repeatedly rebuilding the laboratory.

Saturday: From AI Hype to Practical Implementation

Saturday's session, "Hype, Hope, Horror, and the Here and Now: Exploring the Promise of Agentic AI Within the Lab," examines a particularly fast-moving area of computational pathology.

Three speakers address this subject:

Matthew Cecchini (Western University): "Human Brilliance, Augmented: Building Agentic Workflows One Tile at a Time."
Jochen Lennerz (Natera): "The Final Adaptation of Routine AI."
Jitin Makker (UCLA Health): "Agentic AI in the Pathology Lab: From Hype to Practical Implementation."

Lennerz recently emphasized the significance of this transition in a LinkedIn commentary promoting the meeting. He argued that the critical challenges for clinical AI are shifting away from technical performance alone toward regulation, reimbursement, laboratory workflows, quality management, and workforce adaptation.

He also provided a useful preview of his presentation: three practical stories drawn from academia, industry, and professional advocacy.

Lennerz has separately written about the economic implications of CMS's proposed SaMS framework, arguing that reimbursement systems designed around conventional services and material resources may not adequately capture the value of clinically useful algorithmic analysis.

His perspective nicely captures the larger theme of the Michigan meeting. The question is increasingly not just whether AI can perform an impressive diagnostic task, but how it can be integrated, supervised, financed, and maintained in routine medical practice.

Why This Meeting Matters

One of the striking features of the Michigan agenda is its breadth within a tightly focused, practical program. It combines laboratory operations, enterprise implementation, AI assay development, interoperability, system replacement, cytopathology, and agentic AI.

Equally important, it draws on experience from academic medical centers, community and commercial settings, and industry.

The timing is excellent. Digital pathology is advancing rapidly, but the regulatory and reimbursement environment remains unsettled. The new CAP–DPA collaboration offers an opportunity for more coordinated professional leadership, while the API workshop provides a close look at how digital pathology can actually work at scale.

For pathologists, laboratory leaders, informaticians, and AI developers, the Michigan meeting promises something more valuable than another demonstration of technological possibility: a serious examination of what it takes to make digital pathology work in the real world.

Conference Information

Inside the Digital Lab 2026 — Michigan Medicine

Dates: December 10–12, 2026
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan; meeting sessions at The Vanguard Hotel, with laboratory tours at Michigan Medicine's North Campus Research Complex.

Conference overview:
https://www.pathologyinformatics.org/inside-the-digital-lab-idl-2026

Detailed agenda:
https://www.pathologyinformatics.org/idl-2026-schedule

Registration:
https://www.pathologyinformatics.org/idl-2026-registration

CAP–DPA partnership announcement:
https://www.cap.org/news/cap-and-dpa-join-forces-to-advance-digital-pathology-and-artificial-intelligence/