Back

PathEdit: Diagnostic-Preserving Counterfactual Medical Image Editing through State-Factorized Generative Intervention

Chen, J.; Chen, W.

2026-09-22 biochemistry
10.64898/2026.09.21.753387 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Counterfactual medical images are useful only when a requested clinical change is introduced without silently altering patient characteristics that should remain fixed. Existing diffusion editors can produce convincing images, but realism or target-classifier flips do not establish that an edit is localized, diagnosis-specific, anatomically faithful, or useful on real clinical data. We introduce PATHEDIT, a state-factorized counterfactual editing framework that decomposes an abdominal CT representation into pathology, anatomy, acquisition, and residual context before performing a clinically specified latent intervention. A pathology editor modifies only the target factor, while non-target factors are explicitly copied and preservation losses penalize collateral drift. The edited state is decoded jointly into an image, a report level description, and diagnostic readouts. Weak supervision from lesion masks, organ segmentations, and naturally occurring longitudinal lesion changes anchors edit direction and spatial support without requiring pixel-aligned counterfactual ground truth. We evaluate four properties that are often conflated in medical image editing: target edit success, non-target preservation, anatomical identity, and real-data utility. In our evaluation protocol, PATHEDIT achieves 94.2% target success while reducing mean off-target diagnostic change to 3.0%, yields substantially stronger alignment with observed lesion changes, and improves rare-lesion recognition and shortcut robustness on held-out real CT. These results motivate astricter view of counterfactual medical imaging: a useful edit must prove not only what changed, but also what did not.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.