REVIEW 1 cited by
Unsupervised Foundation Model-Agnostic Slide-Level Representation Learning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Unsupervised Foundation Model-Agnostic Slide-Level Representation Learning
read the original abstract
Representation learning of pathology whole-slide images (WSIs) has primarily relied on weak supervision with Multiple Instance Learning (MIL). This approach leads to slide representations highly tailored to a specific clinical task. Self-supervised learning (SSL) has been successfully applied to train histopathology foundation models (FMs) for patch embedding generation. However, generating patient or slide level embeddings remains challenging. Existing approaches for slide representation learning extend the principles of SSL from patch level learning to entire slides by aligning different augmentations of the slide or by utilizing multimodal data. By integrating tile embeddings from multiple FMs, we propose a new single modality SSL method in feature space that generates useful slide representations. Our contrastive pretraining strategy, called COBRA, employs multiple FMs and an architecture based on Mamba-2. COBRA exceeds performance of state-of-the-art slide encoders on four different public Clinical Protemic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) cohorts on average by at least +4.4% AUC, despite only being pretrained on 3048 WSIs from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Additionally, COBRA is readily compatible at inference time with previously unseen feature extractors. Code available at https://github.com/KatherLab/COBRA.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Atlas 2 -- Foundation models for clinical deployment
Atlas 2 and its distilled variants set new average state-of-the-art results across 80 pathology benchmarks, with larger robustness margins over prior models.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.