SWAN -- Enabling Fast and Mobile Histopathology Image Annotation through Swipeable Interfaces

The annotation of large scale histopathology image datasets remains a major bottleneck in developing robust deep learning models for clinically relevant tasks, such as mitotic figure classification. Folder-based annotation workflows are usually slow, fatiguing, and difficult to scale. To address these challenges, we introduce SWipeable ANnotations (SWAN), an open-source, MIT-licensed web application that enables intuitive image patch classification using a swiping gesture. SWAN supports both desktop and mobile platforms, offers real-time metadata capture, and allows flexible mapping of swipe gestures to class labels. In a pilot study with four pathologists annotating 600 mitotic figure image patches, we compared SWAN against a traditional folder-sorting workflow. SWAN enabled rapid annotations with pairwise percent agreement ranging from 86.52% to 93.68% (Cohen's Kappa = 0.61-0.80), while for the folder-based method, the pairwise percent agreement ranged from 86.98% to 91.32% (Cohen's Kappa = 0.63-0.75) for the task of classifying atypical versus normal mitotic figures, demonstrating high consistency between annotators and comparable performance. Participants rated the tool as highly usable and appreciated the ability to annotate on mobile devices. These results suggest that SWAN can accelerate image annotation while maintaining annotation quality, offering a scalable and user-friendly alternative to conventional workflows.

Benchmarking Deep Learning and Vision Foundation Models for Atypical vs. Normal Mitosis Classification with Cross-Dataset Evaluation

Atypical mitoses mark a deviation in the cell division process that can be an independent prognostically relevant marker for tumor malignancy. However, their identification remains challenging due to low prevalence, at times subtle morphological differences from normal mitoses, low inter-rater agreement among pathologists, and class imbalance in datasets. Building on the Atypical Mitosis dataset for Breast Cancer (AMi-Br), this study presents a comprehensive benchmark comparing deep learning approaches for automated atypical mitotic figure (AMF) classification, including baseline models, foundation models with linear probing, and foundation models fine-tuned with low-rank adaptation (LoRA). For rigorous evaluation, we further introduce two new hold-out AMF datasets - AtNorM-Br, a dataset of mitoses from the The TCGA breast cancer cohort, and AtNorM-MD, a multi-domain dataset of mitoses from the MIDOG++ training set. We found average balanced accuracy values of up to 0.8135, 0.7696, and 0.7705 on the in-domain AMi-Br and the out-of-domain AtNorm-Br and AtNorM-MD datasets, respectively, with the results being particularly good for LoRA-based adaptation of the Virchow-line of foundation models. Our work shows that atypical mitosis classification, while being a challenging problem, can be effectively addressed through the use of recent advances in transfer learning and model fine-tuning techniques. We make available all code and data used in this paper in this github repository: https://github.com/DeepMicroscopy/AMi-Br_Benchmark.

A Histologic Dataset of Normal and Atypical Mitotic Figures on Human Breast Cancer (AMi-Br)

Assessment of the density of mitotic figures (MFs) in histologic tumor sections is an important prognostic marker for many tumor types, including breast cancer. Recently, it has been reported in multiple works that the quantity of MFs with an atypical morphology (atypical MFs, AMFs) might be an independent prognostic criterion for breast cancer. AMFs are an indicator of mutations in the genes regulating the cell cycle and can lead to aberrant chromosome constitution (aneuploidy) of the tumor cells. To facilitate further research on this topic using pattern recognition, we present the first ever publicly available dataset of atypical and normal MFs (AMi-Br). For this, we utilized two of the most popular MF datasets (MIDOG 2021 and TUPAC) and subclassified all MFs using a three expert majority vote. Our final dataset consists of 3,720 MFs, split into 832 AMFs (22.4%) and 2,888 normal MFs (77.6%) across all 223 tumor cases in the combined set. We provide baseline classification experiments to investigate the consistency of the dataset, using a Monte Carlo cross-validation and different strategies to combat class imbalance. We found an averaged balanced accuracy of up to 0.806 when using a patch-level data set split, and up to 0.713 when using a patient-level split.