EventHorizon: A Foundation Model for Clinical Flow Cytometry

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Flow cytometry is an essential tool for diagnosis of hematologic malignancies, but existing clinical workflows are highly dependent on expert manual interpretation. Existing machine learning approaches typically require extensive labeled data and are sensitive to variability in panel design, instrumentation, and laboratory workflows, limiting their generalizability. We present EventHorizon , a self-supervised foundation model for clinical flow cytometry that produces unified specimen-level representations from heterogeneous multi-panel data. EventHorizon employs a two-stage hierarchical transformer architecture with marker-aware tokenization, enabling seamless integration of cells measured across different antibody panels into a single shared latent space. We pre-train the model using a DINO-inspired self-distillation strategy with a variety of flow cytometry-specific augmentations on a dataset of more than 100,000 clinical specimens across 17 distinct panels. We evaluate the resulting embeddings on three clinically relevant classification tasks spanning common and rare panels, demonstrating that simple k-nearest neighbor probing of frozen EventHorizon embeddings achieves performance comparable to a fully supervised baseline model and a prior panel-specific self-supervised model. To ensure EventHorizon is not simply shortcut learning on features such as the markers/panels run for a given specimen, we perform a graph-theoretic analysis of EventHorizon’s latent space which argues that specimen embeddings are organized primarily by biological diagnosis. Taken together, these results demonstrate that EventHorizon produces biologically meaningful, panel-agnostic specimen representations from clinical flow cytometry data which, with further development and validation, could provide a potential basis for scalable, reproducible diagnostic support across diverse clinical laboratory settings.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.