Training-Time Domain Transfer for Generator-Free Diagnostics on Novel Modalities in Computational Pathology
Authors: Julia A. Mielcarz, Andrea Camilloni, Nita Mulliqi, Jessica A. Frank, Anders Blilie, Emilius A. M. Janssen, Martin Eklund, Kimmo Kartasalo
Organizations: Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden · Harvard Medical School, USA · Department of Pathology, Stavanger University Hospital, Norway · Department of Chemistry, Bioscience and Environmental Engineering, University of Stavanger, Norway · Institute for Biomedicine and Glycomics, Griffith University, Australia · ELLIS Institute Finland · Department of Computing, Faculty of Technology, University of Turku, Finland · Science for Life Laboratory (SciLifeLab), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
Novel imaging modalities promise improved diagnostics, but AI development is constrained by scarce training data. Inference-time domain transfer can address this by mapping novel modalities to established ones, enabling reuse of existing diagnostic models. However, this introduces hallucination risks, computational overhead, and regulatory complexity. Inspired by sim-to-real transfer, we propose training-time domain transfer, generating synthetic target-domain training data from archived routine samples to enable direct diagnosis on real inputs without inference-time generation. Using unstained prostate histopathology as a proof-of-concept, we compare this approach with inference-time virtual staining and conventional H&E-based cancer detection. Training-time transfer achieved higher concordance with the conventional benchmark than virtual staining for both raw (Cohen's κ=0.59 vs. 0.37; Gwet's AC1=0.73 vs. 0.29) and deparaffinized tissue (κ=0.66 vs. 0.61; AC1=0.73 vs. 0.64), supporting its potential for emerging diagnostic modalities.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison of conventional diagnostic AI, inference-time generation, and the proposed training-time domain transfer.
STHLM3-SFH
Diagnostic training
Diagnostic tuning
Train raw
Train DP
Test
STHLM3
SUH
STG
STHLM3
KUH
RUMC
Patients
250
117
67
2,711
710
70
24
73
72
Slides
250
117
79
29,527
4,589
247
276
330
195
WSIs
250
117
79
32,609
4,591
247
276
330
195
Age ≤ 49
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
4 (0.1)
13 (1.8)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
2 (2.7)
–
Age 50–54
15 (6.0)
6 (5.1)
8 (11.9)
216 (8.0)
35 (4.9)
1 (1.4)
1 (4.2)
5 (6.8)
–
Table 1: Patient and slide characteristics of the generative and diagnostic model datasets (N, (%)).
Approach
AUC
F1
Sens.
Spec.
p
κ
AC1
Real H&E
0.970
0.933
0.875
1.000
–
–
–
VS (raw)
0.859
0.609
0.438
1.000
0.016
0.368
0.294
VS (DP)
0.932
0.804
0.672
1.000
0.161
0.606
0.643
TTDT (raw)
0.904
0.894
0.859
0.733
0.079
0.585
0.728
TTDT (DP)
0.922
0.860
0.766
0.933
0.142
0.658
0.728
Table 2: Diagnostic performance against pathologist labels and agreement with the H&E model ( κ , AC1). DeLong’s p-values compare AUCs with real H&E. VS: virtual staining; TTDT: training-time domain transfer.
Figure 2: Test set (n=79): ROC curves (left) and slide-level predictions vs. the pathologist reference (right).
Histopathological examination primarily relies on hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining. Although IHC provides critical molecular information, it is costly and requires specialized expertise. Stain transfer provides an efficient alternative by computationally generating IHC from H&E images, but remains challenged by unified and interpretable modeling for heterogeneous biomarkers under pixel-unaligned supervision. We propose DMCoStain, a novel Data-Model Co-optimization framework for Stain transfer. It iteratively co-refines training data and model capability, improving staining accuracy and interpretability in both pathological and structural consistency. To refine training data in a clinically meaningful manner, it incorporates the Multimodal Expert-Guided Finer Selection (MEGFS) strategy, built upon a pioneering IHC-positive-expression (IPE) vision-language model (VLM) that emulates pathologist reasoning. To support MEGFS, we construct ImmunoInstruction, the first large-scale IPE instruction-following dataset with 150K VQA samples. Extensive experiments on multiple tissues and biomarkers demonstrate that DMCoStain achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) accuracy. This paradigm offers strong practical value, and MEGFS also functions as a specialized evaluation tool for future model development. Dataset, code, and more details are in https://github.com/SikangSHU/DMCoStain.
Siyuan Xu, Yan Wang, Haofei Song +7
East China Normal University Shanghai, China · Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine Shanghai, China · Hangzhou Hyperspectral Imaging Technology Co., Ltd. Hangzhou, China +1
Many medical vision--language models (VLMs) are publicly available, but a site adopting one for a new imaging task rarely has the labeled real data needed to compare them. Because synthetic CT has ground truth by construction, a site could instead rank candidate models on synthetic scans, if the ranking carries over to real data. We study when it does for lung CT, using five public VLMs and three routine screening tasks, namely detecting a nodule, locating its lobe, and estimating its size, on 85,021 synthetic and 26,085 real slices from seven datasets. For nodule presence and size, the synthetic ranking matches the real one with a rank correlation of 0.98. For lobe, the ranking is only moderately preserved, with a rank correlation of 0.80. We also propose TrialCouncil, a training-free method that uses synthetic accuracy to select one model, combine several, or defer uncertain cases. On real CT, it outperforms standard voting methods in every lobe and size setting and outperforms the best synthetic model on lobe, while selecting the best synthetic model works better for presence. Synthetic CT can therefore serve as a first safeguard when choosing a medical VLM without labeled real data.
Fakrul Islam Tushar, Geoffrey D. Rubin
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Arizona
Magnification shift is a major obstacle to robust histopathology classification, because models trained on one imaging scale often generalize poorly to another. Here, we evaluated this problem on the BreaKHis dataset using a strict patient-disjoint leave-one-magnification-out protocol, comparing supervised baseline, baseline augmented with DCGAN-generated patches, and a gradient-reversal domain-general model designed to preserve discriminative information while suppressing magnification-specific variation. Across held-out magnifications, the domain-general model achieved the strongest overall discrimination and its clearest gain was observed when 200X was held out. By contrast, GAN augmentation produced inconsistent effects, improving some folds but degrading others, particularly at 400X. The domain-general model also yielded the lowest Brier score at 0.063 vs 0.089 at baseline. Sparse embedding analysis further revealed that domain-general training reduced average signature size more than three-fold (306 versus 1,074 dimensions) while preserving equivalent predictive performance (AUC: 0.967 vs 0.965; F1: 0.930 vs 0.931). It also increased cross-fold signature reproducibility from near-zero Jaccard overlap in the baseline to 0.99 between the 100X and 200X folds. These findings show that calibrated, compact, and transferable representations can be learned without added architectural complexity, with clear implications for the reliable deployment of computational pathology models across heterogeneous acquisition settings.