Features fusion or not: harnessing multiple pathological foundation models using Meta-Encoder for downstream tasks fine-tuning
Gao, R.; Yang, Z.; Yuan, X.; Wang, Y.; Xia, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zheng, B.; Gong, Y.; Yue, Y.; Yu, Z.
Show abstract
The emergence of diverse pathological foundation models has empowered computational pathology tasks, including tumor classification, biomarker prediction, and RNA expression prediction. However, variations in model architecture and data sources lead to inconsistent downstream performance and complicate centralized training. Specifically, the lack of data sharing makes retraining foundation models with pooled data infeasible. Alternatively, the release of model parameters enables combining multiple models during fine-tuning. Inspired by the meta-analysis method, we propose the Meta-Encoder framework, which integrates features from multiple foundation models to generate a comprehensive representation, improving downstream fine-tuning task performance. Comparative experiments demonstrate that Meta-Encoder is more effective than individual foundation models, with its strengths more pronounced in handling complex tasks. While single models may perform sufficiently well for simple tasks, Meta-Encoder can match or even surpass the best-performing single model, alleviating concerns over model selection. Moderately challenging tasks benefit from Meta-Encoders concatenation or self-attention strategies, with the latter demonstrating superior performance in more challenging scenarios. For highly complex tasks, such as high-dimensional gene expression prediction, self-attention proves to be the most effective Meta-Encoder strategy, balancing feature integration and computational efficiency. For three patch-level spatial gene expression prediction tasks (HEST-Benchmark, CRC-inhouse, and Her2ST), the self-attention strategy improved the Pearson correlation by 38.58%, 26.06%, and 20.39%, respectively, compared to the average performance of three patch-level single models. Similarly, for the TCGA-BRCA, TCGA-NSCLC, and TCGA-CRC WSI-level bulk gene expression prediction tasks, the Pearson correlation increased by 14.36%, 9.27%, and 42.55%, respectively, compared to the average performance of two WSI-level single models. By leveraging multiple pathological foundation models using Meta-Encoder, it can further improve molecular characterization in pathology images to advance precision oncology.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- uniPort: a unified computational framework for single-cell data integration with optimal transport 97%
- Learning interpretable cellular and gene signature embeddings from single-cell transcriptomic data 96%
- scMODAL: A general deep learning framework for comprehensive single-cell multi-omics data alignment with feature links 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Construction of a 3D whole organism spatial atlas by joint modeling of multiple slices 96%
- Delineating the Effective Use of Self-Supervised Learning in Single-Cell Genomics 95%
- Inferring spatial single-cell-level interactions through interpreting cell state and niche correlations learned by self-supervised graph transformer 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- An in-depth comparison of linear and non-linear joint embedding methods for bulk and single-cell multi-omics 96%
- SHEST: Single-cell-level artificial intelligence from haematoxylin and eosin morphology for cell type prediction and spatial transcriptomics reconstruction 95%
- HyGAnno: Hybrid graph neural network-based cell type annotation for single-cell ATAC sequencing data 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Learning multi-cellular representations of single-cell transcriptomics data enables characterization of patient-level disease states 95%
- scCausalVI disentangles single-cell perturbation responses with causality-aware generative model 95%
- scTrace+: enhance the cell fate inference by integrating the lineage-tracing and multi-faceted transcriptomic similarity information 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.