Pathology Foundation Models are Scanner Sensitive: Benchmark and Mitigation with Contrastive ScanGen Loss
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Computational pathology (CPath) has shown great potential in mining actionable insights from Whole Slide Images (WSIs). Deep Learning (DL) has been at the center of modern CPath, and while it delivers unprecedented performance, it is also known that DL may be affected by irrelevant details, such as those introduced during scanning by different commercially available scanners. This may lead to scanner bias, where the model outputs for the same tissue acquired by different scanners may vary. In turn, it hinders the trust of clinicians in CPath-based tools and their deployment in real-world clinical practices. Recent pathology Foundation Models (FMs) promise to provide better domain generalization capabilities. In this paper, we benchmark FMs using a multi-scanner dataset and show that FMs still suffer from scanner bias. Following this observation, we propose ScanGen, a contrastive loss function applied during task-specific fine-tuning that mitigates scanner bias, thereby enhancing the models' robustness to scanner variations. Our approach is applied to the Multiple Instance Learning task of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) mutation prediction from H&E-stained WSIs in lung cancer. We observe that ScanGen notably enhances the ability to generalize across scanners, while retaining or improving the performance of EGFR mutation prediction.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jul 2025.
Builds on
11 of 25 references.
References · 11
- 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,898
- 2018Attention-based Deep Multiple Instance Learningcited by 1,095
- 2020Dual-stream Multiple Instance Learning Network for Whole Slide Image Classification with Self-supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 478
- 2024Virchow2: Scaling Self-Supervised Mixed Magnification Models in Pathologycited by 161
- 2018StainGAN: Stain Style Transfer for Digital Histological Imagescited by 68
- 2025Current Pathology Foundation Models are unrobust to Medical Center Differencescited by 39
- 2020StainNet: a fast and robust stain normalization networkcited by 28
- 2022H&E-based Computational Biomarker Enables Universal EGFR Screening for Lung Adenocarcinomacited by 8
- 2024EXAONEPath 1.0 Patch-level Foundation Model for Pathologycited by 7
- 2023Slot-Mixup with Subsampling: A Simple Regularization for WSI Classificationcited by 3
- 2022End-to-end Learning for Image-based Detection of Molecular Alterations in Digital Pathologycited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.
7 papers.
- 2026Scanner-Induced Domain Shifts Undermine the Robustness of Pathology Foundation Modelscited by 9
- 2026Atlas 2 -- Foundation models for clinical deploymentcited by 7
- 2026Discrepancy Minimization Improves Cross-Hospital Robustness in Digital Pathologycited by 0
- 2026Robustifying pathology foundation models via fine-tuningcited by 0
- 2026Can You Trust Frozen Hematology Foundation Models under Acquisition Shift?cited by 0
- 2026EXPOSE: Explainable and Domain-Robust Embeddings from Pathology Vision Foundation Models using Sparse Autoencoderscited by 0
- 2026HERO: Histology Encoder for Robust Representation in Oncologycited by 0
- 2026HERO: Histology Encoder for Robust Representation in Oncology28 Sep 2026
- 2026EXPOSE: Explainable and Domain-Robust Embeddings from Pathology Vision Foundation Models using Sparse Autoencoders28 Aug 2026
- 2026Can You Trust Frozen Hematology Foundation Models under Acquisition Shift?25 Aug 2026
- 2026Robustifying pathology foundation models via fine-tuning24 Jul 2026
- 2026Discrepancy Minimization Improves Cross-Hospital Robustness in Digital Pathology24 May 2026
- 2026Atlas 2 -- Foundation models for clinical deployment8 Jan 2026
- 2026Scanner-Induced Domain Shifts Undermine the Robustness of Pathology Foundation Models7 Jan 2026