1300 North 17th Street, Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22209, USA
+1-703- 475-9217
http://dicom.nema.org
E-mail: dicom@medicalimaging.org
M I N U T E S-rev1
DICOM WORKING GROUP TWENTY-SIX
(Pathology)
September 3, 2013
Called to order: 9:00 AM Local Time
Meeting closed: 12:45 PM Local time
Location: Room IV / V Centro Congresso, Lisbon, Portugal
Presiding Officer: Mikael Wintell, Co-Chair
Voting Members Represented
3DHistech
DAKO North America
GE Healthcare /Omnyx
JAHIS
Philips Healthcare
TRIBVN
Vastra Gotalandsregionen
Victor Varga
Joachim Schmid
Michael Meissner
Megumi Kondo
Hans Van Wijngaarden
Jacques Klossa
Mikael Wintell
Voting Members Not Represented
ADICAP
ALCON Research
British Columbia Provincial Lab.
Coordinating Office
CAP
CAP/Northshore Med Ctr.
Corista, LLC
DMetrix, Inc.
Leica Microsystems/Aperio
1
Daniel Christel
Simin Shoari
Joanne Philley
Mark Whitsitt
Bruce Beckwith
Eric Wirch
Michael Descour
Ole Eichhorn
Spelling and editorial corrections
1
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011
Mass General Hospital
Newport Instruments
Nikon Instruments
Objective Pathology Services
Panasonic
Servicio de Anatomia Patologia
Takashi Univ. of Health&Welfare
Ohio State University
John Gilbertson
Robert Leif
Stanley Schwartz
Kemp Watson
Thomas Wedi
Marcial Garcia Rojo
Ikuo Tofokui
Tony Pan
Alternate Voters, Observers, Guests Present
Maya Costa *
Antoine Discher
Laszlo Gevely
Anders Greve *
Dan Hosseinzadeh
Bas Hulsken
Arvydas Laurinavicius
Ole Feldballe Rasmussen *
Ernesto Moro Rodriguez
Bikash Sabata
VENTANA
Hamamatsu Photonics
3DHistech
DAKO North America
PathCore, Inc
Philips Healthcare
Lithuania Natl Pathology Ctr
DAKO North America
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
VENTANA
* Guest, not on WG email list
ASSIGNMENTS SUMMARY:
Work Items assigned and this meeting:
1. Michael to coordinate meeting room for CAP meeting
2. Michael to coordinate meeting room for US CAP meeting
3. Michael to ask JD Nolan for an update on unique specimen ID
4. Mikael to follow-up with Steven on patent update and possibly have him join the next
WG26 meeting
5. Ole to see if Aperio/Leica can share a high-level summary of the IP terms
6. Michael to re-share strategy document of WG26
7. Mikael and Joachim to share their workflow proposal (over the coming weeks)
8. Jacques to invite Mary Kennedy and other from IHE to our CAP meeting this fall
Work item(s) from previous meeting(s):
1. Jon G to get CAP join DICOM WG26
2. Michael to publish link to IHE conference calendar
3. Michael to ask WG26 for participants in a trial implementation of LIS, stainer, and
imaging device
4. Soren + Donal + Bikash to follow-up on IHE device automation integration profiles, as
mentioned by Christel
2
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011
5. On hold: Bas H to work with Bas R and translate multi-spectral proposal into DICOM
6. On hold: Bas H to check with WG26 listserve who would be interested in a trial
implementation of multi-spectral presentation state.
1. Opening:
The meeting began with a welcome and brief introduction to the planned agenda of the meeting.
We welcomed those present, asked people to introduce themselves, and re-stated the antitrust
rules. The Agenda was approved. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved.
1. HL7/IHE Update:
Bikash mentioned there was a meeting in Atlanta but no further details on content as nobody
from this group was present.
2. Meeting with IHE:
Jacques proposed to have the spring meeting in May in Paris (European Digital Pathology
Congress June 18-21 2014), together with the IHE teams, better connecting the efforts and
bringing more industry participation to IHE. Mikael commented that some of the integration
profiles and proposals need more participation by industry stakeholders and that Workflow of
a fully digital pathology use case needs to be focus of WG26. Group agreed.
3. WSI Patent:
Dan raised the issue and wanted to know if any status update was known. Bikash mentioned
that Leica has not come back on their request to honor the original commitment Ole E made
in the WG26 back then. Dan also said that he has not gotten any feedback after contacting
Leica. Same for Victor from 3DHistech. Mikael reported that initially Aperio had filed the
patent to secure the IP to provide it to the community. Question is on license fee (to cover
cost). Conference call with Ole, Steven V, and Mikael was on educating Steven on the
subject. High-level take-away was to provide the IP as originally communicated in WG26
and that vendors could obtain a license directly. Generally, DICOM as an organization is not
getting involved in Legal matters between companies but the matter is still being investigated
by Steven V and NEMA. Several people voiced opinions (not Legal opinions) that
Supplement 145 won’t be endangered by the patent. Mikael to follow-up with Steven.
Bikash said that without Legal clarification, (some) companies might not move forward with
implementation of Supplement 145 which means this industry is at a stand-still. Dan
mentioned there is a second patent that is on viewing of tiled images and the patent is also
from Aperio: Storage Patent https://www.google.com/patents/US8086077 and
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=8086077B2&KC=B
2&FT=D. Viewing Patent http://www.google.ca/patents/US20120099769.
Joachim asked whether there are any examples from other DICOM working groups along the
same lines. Mikael mentioned of a situation where this was the case but the patent was
granted to the community. Question came up on reasonable cost for license. Bikash
commented that the requested license was per seat / install … and thus would provide
competitive information which is unacceptable. A simple base fee would be more in line with
reasonably covering the cost of the patent. Need to follow-up wit Steven V at NEMA. Dan
and Victor said they approached Leica on the patent … but did not get a response. Again,
need to close the loop with Steven V and determine what the next options could be.
3
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011
Dan raised the potential to nullify the patent by approaching the patent office with existing
prior art or obviousness material. Joachim shared his experience where this takes time,
money, and might not lead to anything.
Some companies feel more risk averse than others and if they cannot support the standard
then that defeats the purpose of the standard. It is about open communication and data
exchange between all vendors.
Would be interesting to see what the status of the European patent filing is.
Secretary’s note: After the meeting, Michael Meissner called Ole Eichorn at Aperio and Ole
apologized for any communication gaps that occurred. He suggested to
always copy him on any communication to Aperio / Leica so he can help
in such instances. Ole said that the intent is still to license the IP to
everybody with the same terms for everybody. Michael asked Ole for a
high-level summary of the terms to share with WG26. Ole wanted to
follow-up.
4. Presentation state for Multi-Spectral:
Bas reported from the FDA color summit in Washington, DC. Good meeting and an ICC
workgroup for pathology has been started. Focus will be on medical color space, calibration
slides, and multi-spectral handling.
Work on DICOMization of the multi-spectral proposal is on hold. Waiting on outcome of the
ICC working group and whether or not there are changes coming from ICC on that proposal /
waiting for ICCv5 which will have extensions that would be suitable for multi-spectral.
Decision is needed whether or not a “true color” image is the end-goal, e.g. for multi-spectral.
If not, it might not be the right choice.
Victor commented that true color makes sense for visible light. For multi-spectral, we are
likely not mature enough to talk about / measure photons but true color seems not reasonable
there. He questioned the need of yet another color space. Bas commented that for visible
light we already have everything we need (good to go as is). Discussion continued on
multispectral and question for right approach. Victor commented that multi-spectral is more
used by researchers than routine clinical use. Hence, does it make sense to look into this
without a true use case. Mikael commented that this was an issue in radiology, too. Once info
is sent to PACS, it should be visibly reproducible. Bikash asked whether a slide scanner on
two different scanners would be reproducible today. Victor answered “no” due to the many
differences in the scanner. Discussion evolved around purpose of working group and whether
this is in or out of scope. Reviewed strategy document to clarify the forward looking nature
and confirmed this is a topic of interest. Question remains whether ICCv5 is something we
could/should wait for … or push ahead now. Bas summarized it is a question of trying to
calibrate for spectral emission or dose. After a discussion, a quantitative fluorescence IHC
algorithm would need to be calibrated on dose while for generic fluorescence use would need
the spectral emission data. Bas to share ICCv5 with the working group 26 and fluorescence
scanner vendors to review whether this could work long term foundation. If not, share
feedback with ICC. In general both paths (spectral emission or dose) are not highest priority
for the working group.
4
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011
5. Calibration Slide for histopathology:
Bas reported from the progress being made in the recently founded working group of ICC to
come up with calibration color target to facilitate calibration of devices. Numerical aperture,
mounting media, cover slip, etc. are all impacting color. FDA has representatives on that
committee. Joachim asked question on scope. Bas commented that it is being defined right
now and likely will be histopathology and cytology with a broader spectrum of stains beyond
H&E. Discussion evolved around purpose … finding a color target that can be used by all
vendors and discussing light source variations, patch stability over time, etc. Steps of ICC are
for photography and can this working group is dealing with the procedure deviations
necessary to make it work for microscopy. Anybody interested should reach out to Craig
Revie at ICC (Michael can provide introduction). ICC does require membership which is
currently being waved but will apply in the not too distant future. Joachim pointed out earlier
work from Grenoble that should be considered in the ICC working group. Bikash asked for
targets for multi-spectral targets and there is a separate working group. If you are interested,
ask Bas and he can connect you to the working group organizer.
6. IHE Workflow:
Mikael reported on the analysis of the workflow that was originally raised as an issue in
Venice. Workflow is rather academic and there are gaps that require more vendor
participation. Mikael and Joachim will take a stab at defining workflow and present
priorities for buy-in in the coming months (ETA: October).
7. JAHIS Update:
Translation to English was completed, can provide an electronic copy. Michael upload the
documentation to the DICOM ftp server under the Lisbon meeting folder.
8. Upcoming meetings:
Mikael suggested a refresh of the annual meeting cadence with two physical meetings and
sub-groups to run efforts off-line between meetings, making progress and publishing tangible
outcomes. Michael commented on where that worked well and where it doesn’t and topics
keep dragging on. Jacques said the workflow one is an important one as tenders are coming
out that ask for compliance with e.g. IHE. General agreement to do this and workflow being
an important component. Workflow is fairly generic, need to dive deeper on what specific
aspects to focus on. Some of this will overlap with the IHE integration profiles … will aim to
connect with IHE at the Paris meeting in spring (Jacques to organize with Mikael). Need to
focus on the basic routine anatomical pathology workflow. Need to make sure we do have a
solid representation of LIS vendors as the integration profiles can only work with their
support.
a. Planned Meetings:
i. CAP in Orlando, October 13-16 … find meeting room for 2 hours
ii. US CAP in spring: follow-up on Workflow (~2 hours meeting)
iii. European Digital Pathology Congress June 18-21 2014, Paris, France
iv. TBD
5
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011
Reported by:
Michael Meissner, Co-Chair
September 3, 2013
Reviewed by legal counsel: CRS 2013-09-30
6
_______________________
DICOM WG-26 – Pathology
September 3, 2011