Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33024107›Full record

ArticleNature communications2020

Predicting cell-to-cell communication networks using NATMI.

Rui Hou, Elena Denisenko, Huan Ting Ong, Jordan A Ramilowski, Alistair R R Forrest

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 198 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
198citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

198 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

138 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rui HouHarry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6571-1514
Elena DenisenkoHarry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.
Huan Ting OngEar Science Institute Australia, and Ear Sciences Centre, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1214-9198
Jordan A RamilowskiAdvanced Medical Research Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Kanagawa, 236-0004, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3156-6416
Alistair R R ForrestHarry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia. alistair.forrest@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4543-1675

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Development of high throughput single-cell sequencing technologies has made it cost-effective to profile thousands of cells from diverse samples containing multiple cell types. To study how these different cell types work together, here we develop NATMI (Network Analysis Toolkit for Multicellular Interactions). NATMI uses connectomeDB2020 (a database of 2293 manually curated ligand-receptor pairs with literature support) to predict and visualise cell-to-cell communication networks from single-cell (or bulk) expression data. Using multiple published single-cell datasets we demonstrate how NATMI can be used to identify (i) the cell-type pairs that are communicating the most (or most specifically) within a network, (ii) the most active (or specific) ligand-receptor pairs active within a network, (iii) putative highly-communicating cellular communities and (iv) differences in intercellular communication when profiling given cell types under different conditions. Furthermore, analysis of the Tabula Muris (organism-wide) atlas confirms our previous prediction that autocrine signalling is a major feature of cell-to-cell communication networks, while also revealing that hundreds of ligands and their cognate receptors are co-expressed in individual cells suggesting a substantial potential for self-signalling.

Indexed as

Cell CommunicationSoftwareAge FactorsAnimalsAutocrine CommunicationComputational BiologyDatabases, FactualData VisualizationFemaleLigandsMammary Glands, AnimalMiceProteinsSingle-Cell AnalysisUser-Computer InterfaceLigandsProteins

Identifiers

PMID33024107
PMCPMC7538930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.