Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37311768›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2023

Reference-based cell type matching of in situ image-based spatial transcriptomics data on primary visual cortex of mouse brain.

Yun Zhang, Jeremy A Miller, Jeongbin Park, Boudewijn P Lelieveldt, Brian Long, Tamim Abdelaal, Brian D Aevermann, Tommaso Biancalani, Charles Comiter, Oleh Dzyubachyk and 8 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Spatial transcriptomics in health and disease.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

18 authors.

Yun Zhang *J. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Jeremy A Miller *Allen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jeongbin Park *School of Biomedical Convergence Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan, Korea.
Boudewijn P LelieveldtLKEB, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Brian LongAllen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, WA, USA.
Tamim AbdelaalLKEB, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Brian D AevermannJ. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Tommaso BiancalaniBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Charles ComiterBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Oleh DzyubachykLKEB, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jeroen EggermontLKEB, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Christoffer Mattsson LangsethScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Viktor PetukhovBiotech Research and Innovation Centre, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Gabriele ScaliaBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Eeshit Dhaval VaishnavBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Yilin ZhaoAllen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, WA, USA.
Ed S LeinAllen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, WA, USA.
Richard H ScheuermannJ. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA. rscheuermann@jcvi.org.

Funding

A Community Framework for Data-driven Brain Transcriptomic Cell Type Definition, Ontology, and NomenclatureRF1MH123220 · NIMH · ALLEN INSTITUTE · PI HAWRYLYCZ, MICHAEL, LEIN, ED · 2020 to 2020
$2.8M
NIH HHS RF1MH123220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the advent of multiplex fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and in situ RNA sequencing technologies, spatial transcriptomics analysis is advancing rapidly, providing spatial location and gene expression information about cells in tissue sections at single cell resolution. Cell type classification of these spatially-resolved cells can be inferred by matching the spatial transcriptomics data to reference atlases derived from single cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) in which cell types are defined by differences in their gene expression profiles. However, robust cell type matching of the spatially-resolved cells to reference scRNA-seq atlases is challenging due to the intrinsic differences in resolution between the spatial and scRNA-seq data. In this study, we systematically evaluated six computational algorithms for cell type matching across four image-based spatial transcriptomics experimental protocols (MERFISH, smFISH, BaristaSeq, and ExSeq) conducted on the same mouse primary visual cortex (VISp) brain region. We find that many cells are assigned as the same type by multiple cell type matching algorithms and are present in spatial patterns previously reported from scRNA-seq studies in VISp. Furthermore, by combining the results of individual matching strategies into consensus cell type assignments, we see even greater alignment with biological expectations. We present two ensemble meta-analysis strategies used in this study and share the consensus cell type matching results in the Cytosplore Viewer ( https://viewer.cytosplore.org ) for interactive visualization and data exploration. The consensus matching can also guide spatial data analysis using SSAM, allowing segmentation-free cell type assignment.

Indexed as

Primary Visual CortexTranscriptomeAlgorithmsAnimalsGene Expression ProfilingIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMice

Identifiers

PMID37311768
PMCPMC10264402

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.