Laboratory News

More Comparative Pathologists Needed to Handle Genetically Modified Mice

Are there too many or too few pathologists currently practicing in the United States? That's a question that has proved difficult to answer by the pathology chairs of academic programs over the past decade.  However, there is widespread recognition that the move to genetic medicine will increase the demand for pathologists with skills in the analysis of DNA, RNA, and proteins.

Now comes news that one field has an absolute shortage of pathologists with the needed subspecialty skills. The biotechnology industry has hit a major roadblock, according to the article Too Many Mice, Too Few Pathologists  in Genetic Engineering News.  It turns out that the biotech industry has too many genetically modified mice and too few comparative pathologists.  "National and international attempts to unravel the mysteries of the human genome will produce a flood of transgenic and knockout mice but not the resources for their characterization," said authors Robert D. Cardiff, M.D., Ph.D., and Bruce W. Altrock, Ph.D. Cardiff is Professor of Anatomic Pathology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, at UC Davis in Davis, California. Altrock is microbiologist and an independent consultant.

Comparative pathologists study diseases in humans by comparing human disease outbreaks and characteristics to those in animals.  Existing biotechnology programs that require such pathologists have no plans for developing the intellectual and scientific workforce needed to phenotype mutant mice.  Genetically modified mice have numerous unexpected and hidden phenotypes that are often missed by the untrained eye.  A misdiagnosis could impact years of research and millions of dollars in lost opportunity costs. 

Comparative pathologists possess a unique set of skills and a knowledge base not possessed by standard pathologists.  They must be familiar with both the nuances of the mouse, and the knowledge of whatever human condition is being emulated by the mouse model(s).  The good news for pathology graduates is that the private sector can recruit them straight out of college at exorbitant prices, hoping to provide the necessary training on the job.

Authors Cardiff and Altrock suggest that an electronic consortium of existing experts in mouse pathology whose collective wisdom could be shared with interested young pathologists using appropriate distance-learning tools should be created.  Once stable funding is developed, the consortium should include NIH funding for workshops and continuing education in mouse pathology, support for additional publication materials in mouse comparative pathology, and a review of all comparative pathology grant proposals and manuscripts by competent comparative pathologists.

The message for Dark Daily readers is at there is that the exploding volume of research into genetic technology is fueling a demand for pathologists with knowledge in biotechnology and genetic medicine.  However, this can have an unfortunate side effect, if the already dwindling clinical pathology workforce becomes even smaller as private-sector companies woo young pathologists graduating from medical school with large salaries and utilize them in such research specialties as comparative pathology. 

Related Articles: 

• Too Many Mice, Too Few Pathologists 
• Comparative Pathology