ArticleScientific reports2022
Machine learning-based detection of label-free cancer stem-like cell fate.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanotherapeutic strategies exploiting biological traits of cancer stem cells.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Mitosis detection in histopathological images using customized deep learning and hybrid optimization algorithms.PloS one · 2025Article
- Cancer stem cells in personalized therapy: mechanisms, microenvironment crosstalk, and therapeutic vulnerabilities.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Cancer Stem Cells from Definition to Detection and Targeted Drugs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Small hand-designed convolutional neural networks outperform transfer learning in automated cell shape detection in confluent tissues.PloS one · 2023Article
- Deep learning models for cancer stem cell detection: a brief review.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The detection of cancer stem-like cells (CSCs) is mainly based on molecular markers or functional tests giving a posteriori results. Therefore label-free and real-time detection of single CSCs remains a difficult challenge. The recent development of microfluidics has made it possible to perform high-throughput single cell imaging under controlled conditions and geometries. Such a throughput requires adapted image analysis pipelines while providing the necessary amount of data for the development of machine-learning algorithms. In this paper, we provide a data-driven study to assess the complexity of brightfield time-lapses to monitor the fate of isolated cancer stem-like cells in non-adherent conditions. We combined for the first time individual cell fate and cell state temporality analysis in a unique algorithm. We show that with our experimental system and on two different primary cell lines our optimized deep learning based algorithm outperforms classical computer vision and shallow learning-based algorithms in terms of accuracy while being faster than cutting-edge convolutional neural network (CNNs). With this study, we show that tailoring our deep learning-based algorithm to the image analysis problem yields better results than pre-trained models. As a result, such a rapid and accurate CNN is compatible with the rise of high-throughput data generation and opens the door to on-the-fly CSC fate analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.