Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40166578›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025

Benchmarking pathology foundation models for non-neoplastic pathology in the placenta.

Zehao Peng, Marina A Ayad, Yaxing Jing, Teresa Chou, Lee A D Cooper, Jeffery A Goldstein

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zehao Peng
Marina A Ayad
Yaxing Jing
Teresa Chou
Jeffery A GoldsteinORCID 0000-0002-4086-057X

Funding

Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Science Institute (NUCATS)UL1TR001422 · NCATS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI D'AQUILA, RICHARD · 2015 to 2023
$56.8M
NUCATS CTSA UM1 at Northwestern UniversityUM1TR005121 · NCATS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI Sara Becker, Richard D'Aquila · 2024 to 2026
$23.4M
Enriching ECHO Cohorts with High-risk Pregnancies and Children with Disabilities (Enriching ECHO)UG3OD035546 · OD · HACKENSACK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ASCHNER, JUDY LYNN, HAMVAS, AARON · 2023 to 2024
$5.7M
Brain Digital Slide Archive: An Open Source Platform for data sharing and analysis of digital neuropathologyU24NS133949 · NINDS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Lee Cooper, Brittany Nicole Dugger · 2023 to 2026
$4.3M
Guiding humans to create better labeled datasets for machine learning in biomedical researchR01LM013523 · NLM · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI COOPER, LEE, ENQUOBAHRIE, ANDINET ASMAMAW · 2021 to 2024
$2.3M
Improving placenta imaging in women living with HIVR01EB030130 · NIBIB · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI GERNAND, ALISON D, GOLDSTEIN, JEFFERY A · 2022 to 2025
$2.0M
Informatics Tools for Quantitative Digital Pathology Profiling and Integrated Prognostic ModelingU01CA220401 · NCI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI COOPER, LEE, FLOWERS, CHRISTOPHER R · 2018 to 2021
$1.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001422NCATS NIH HHS UM1 TR005121NCI NIH HHS U01 CA220401NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB030130NIH HHS UG3 OD035546NINDS NIH HHS U24 NS133949NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013523
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) applications within diagnostic histopathology have been extremely successful. While many successful models have been built using general-purpose models trained largely on everyday objects, there is a recent trend toward pathology-specific foundation models, trained using histopathology images. Pathology foundation models show strong performance on cancer detection and subtyping, grading, and predicting molecular diagnoses. However, we have noticed lacunae in the testing of foundation models. Nearly all the benchmarks used to test them are focused on cancer. Neoplasia is an important pathologic mechanism and key concern in much of clinical pathology, but it represents one of many pathologic bases of disease. Non-neoplastic pathology dominates findings in the placenta, a critical organ in human development, as well as a specimen commonly encountered in clinical practice. Very little to none of the data used in training pathology foundation models is placenta. Thus, placental pathology is doubly out of distribution, representing a useful challenge for foundation models. We developed benchmarks for estimation of gestational age, classifying normal tissue, identifying inflammation in the umbilical cord and membranes, and in classification of macroscopic lesions including villous infarction, intervillous thrombus, and perivillous fibrin deposition. We tested 5 pathology foundation models and 4 non-pathology models for each benchmark in tasks including zero-shot K-nearest neighbor classification and regression, content-based image retrieval, supervised regression, and whole-slide attention-based multiple instance learning. In each task, the best performing model was a pathology foundation model. However, the gap between pathology and non-pathology models was diminished in tasks related to inflammation or those in which a supervised task was performed using model embeddings. Performance was comparable among pathology foundation models. Among non-pathology models, ResNet consistently performed worse, while models from the present decade showed better performance. Future work could examine the impact of incorporating placental data into foundation model training.

Identifiers

PMID40166578
PMCPMC11957174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.