# Clinician Perspectives on Digital and Computational Pathology: Clinical Benefits, Concerns, and Willingness to Adopt

## TL;DR

This study explores how clinicians view digital and computational pathology tools, finding optimism about their benefits despite low current use and awareness.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into clinicians' perspectives on adopting DP/CP tools, highlighting their anticipated role in future clinical workflows.

## Key findings

- Only 17% of clinicians are very aware of DP/CP, and current utilization of CP-based tests is low.
- Clinicians believe DP/CP can reduce turnaround times and improve therapy selection, but barriers like cost and regulatory issues remain.
- Despite limited awareness, 90% of clinicians are potential adopters of CP-based companion diagnostics.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Precision medicine has transformed how we manage cancer patients. As treatments and drug targets become more complex, the associated diagnostic technologies must also evolve to actualize the benefit of these therapeutic innovations. Digital and computational pathology (DP/CP) play a pivotal role in this evolution, offering enhanced analytical techniques and addressing workflow constraints in pathology labs. This study aims to understand clinicians’ awareness, utilization, and willingness to adopt DP/CP-based tools, as well as the role they perceive themselves playing in the adoption of CP-based tests. Methods: A double-blinded, online quantitative survey was conducted among 101 U.S.-based medical oncologists. Results: Awareness of DP/CP varied among clinicians, with only 17% identifying as very aware. Subsequently, the current utilization of CP-based tests is also low. Despite this, clinicians are optimistic about the potential benefits of DP/CP, including reduced turnaround times, improved therapy selection, and more consistent slide review. To achieve full adoption, clinicians recognize that barriers must be addressed, including cost, regulatory guidance and, to a lesser extent, concerns with the “black box” nature of CP algorithms. While the focus for the adoption of DP has centered on pathologists, clinicians anticipate playing a more significant role in the adoption of CP-based tests. Finally, clinicians demonstrated clear willingness to utilize a CP-based CDx, with 90% of respondents identifying as potential adopters. Conclusions: This study highlights a positive outlook for the adoption of DP/CP among clinicians, despite varied awareness and low current utilization. Clinicians recognize the potential benefits of DP/CP but also acknowledge barriers to adoption. Addressing these barriers through education, regulatory approval, and collaboration with pathologists and biopharma is essential for successfully integrating DP/CP technologies into clinical practice.