Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36585784›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2023

Evaluation of single-cell RNAseq labelling algorithms using cancer datasets.

Erik Christensen, Ping Luo, Andrei Turinsky, Mia Husić, Alaina Mahalanabis, Alaine Naidas, Juan Javier Diaz-Mejia, Michael Brudno, Trevor Pugh, Arun Ramani and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Erik ChristensenDepartment of Computer Science, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Ping LuoPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Andrei TurinskyCentre for Computational Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Mia HusićCentre for Computational Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alaina MahalanabisCentre for Computational Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alaine NaidasChildren's Health Research Institute, Lawson Research Institute, London, ON, Canada.
Juan Javier Diaz-MejiaPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Michael BrudnoDepartment of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Trevor PughPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Arun RamaniCentre for Computational Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Parisa ShooshtariDepartment of Computer Science, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2273-1034
Hospital for Sick Children · CAOntario Institute for Cancer Research · CAUniversity Health Network · CAWestern University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

Genome Canada and Ontario Genomics OGI-167Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada DGECR-2021-00298Ontario Institute for Cancer Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) clustering and labelling methods are used to determine precise cellular composition of tissue samples. Automated labelling methods rely on either unsupervised, cluster-based approaches or supervised, cell-based approaches to identify cell types. The high complexity of cancer poses a unique challenge, as tumor microenvironments are often composed of diverse cell subpopulations with unique functional effects that may lead to disease progression, metastasis and treatment resistance. Here, we assess 17 cell-based and 9 cluster-based scRNA-seq labelling algorithms using 8 cancer datasets, providing a comprehensive large-scale assessment of such methods in a cancer-specific context. Using several performance metrics, we show that cell-based methods generally achieved higher performance and were faster compared to cluster-based methods. Cluster-based methods more successfully labelled non-malignant cell types, likely because of a lack of gene signatures for relevant malignant cell subpopulations. Larger cell numbers present in some cell types in training data positively impacted prediction scores for cell-based methods. Finally, we examined which methods performed favorably when trained and tested on separate patient cohorts in scenarios similar to clinical applications, and which were able to accurately label particularly small or under-represented cell populations in the given datasets. We conclude that scPred and SVM show the best overall performances with cancer-specific data and provide further suggestions for algorithm selection. Our analysis pipeline for assessing the performance of cell type labelling algorithms is available in https://github.com/shooshtarilab/scRNAseq-Automated-Cell-Type-Labelling.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsSingle-Cell Gene Expression AnalysisAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisGene Expression ProfilingHumansSequence Analysis, RNASingle-Cell AnalysisTumor Microenvironmentautomated algorithmscancerlabellingmachine learningsingle-cell RNA-seq

Identifiers

PMID36585784
PMCPMC9851326
OpenAlexW4313320766

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.