A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal

Staining normalization in histopathology: Method benchmarking using multicenter dataset




AuthorsKhan, Umair; Härkönen, Jouni; Friman, Marjukka; Hakimnejad, Hesam; Latonen, Leena; Kuopio, Teijo; Ruusuvuori, Pekka

Publication year2026

Journal: Scientific Reports

Article number11097

Volume16

Issue1

eISSN2045-2322

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-40943-3

Publication's open availability at the time of reportingOpen Access

Publication channel's open availability Open Access publication channel

Web address https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-40943-3

Self-archived copy’s web addresshttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/515761745

Self-archived copy's licenceCC BY

Self-archived copy's versionPublisher`s PDF


Abstract

Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) has been the gold standard in tissue analysis for decades, however, tissue specimens stained in different laboratories vary, often significantly, in appearance. This variation poses a challenge for both pathologists’ and AI-based downstream analysis. Minimizing stain variation computationally is an active area of research. To further investigate this problem, we collected a unique multi-center tissue image dataset, wherein tissue samples from colon, kidney, and skin tissue blocks were distributed to 66 different labs for routine H&E staining. To isolate staining variation, other factors affecting the tissue appearance were kept constant. Further, we used this tissue image dataset to compare the performance of eight different stain normalization methods, including four traditional methods, namely, histogram matching, Macenko, Vahadane, and Reinhard normalization, and two deep learning-based methods namely CycleGAN and Pixp2pix, both with two variants each. We used both quantitative and qualitative evaluation to assess the performance of these methods. The dataset’s inter-laboratory staining variation could also guide strategies to improve model generalizability through varied training data.


Downloadable publication

This is an electronic reprint of the original article.
This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Please cite the original version.




Funding information in the publication
Financial support from Research Council of Finland (PR, LL), Cancer Foundation Finland (PR, LL), Sigrid Juselius Foundation (PR), University of Turku Graduate School (UK) is gratefully acknowledged.


Last updated on 10/04/2026 10:22:21 AM