ArticleAPL bioengineering2024
Nondestructive, quantitative viability analysis of 3D tissue cultures using machine learning image segmentation.
Article in APL bioengineering, 2024. 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.
- Organoid Intelligent Morphomics: Decoding the organoid morphome through artificial intelligence from phenotypic quantification to mechanistic insight.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- A Fully Defined GelMA-Based Matrix Allows Fine Tuning of Tissue-Relevant Biomechanical and Biochemical Cues for Organoid Culture.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Review
- A microfluidic platform for culturing and high-content imaging of adult stem cell-derived organoids.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Rapid flowing cells localization enabled by spatiotemporal manipulation of their holographic patterns.APL bioengineering · 2024Article
- Nondestructive, quantitative viability analysis of 3D tissue cultures using machine learning image segmentation.APL bioengineering · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ascertaining the collective viability of cells in different cell culture conditions has typically relied on averaging colorimetric indicators and is often reported out in simple binary readouts. Recent research has combined viability assessment techniques with image-based deep-learning models to automate the characterization of cellular properties. However, further development of viability measurements to assess the continuity of possible cellular states and responses to perturbation across cell culture conditions is needed. In this work, we demonstrate an image processing algorithm for quantifying features associated with cellular viability in 3D cultures without the need for assay-based indicators. We show that our algorithm performs similarly to a pair of human experts in whole-well images over a range of days and culture matrix compositions. To demonstrate potential utility, we perform a longitudinal study investigating the impact of a known therapeutic on pancreatic cancer spheroids. Using images taken with a high content imaging system, the algorithm successfully tracks viability at the individual spheroid and whole-well level. The method we propose reduces analysis time by 97% in comparison with the experts. Because the method is independent of the microscope or imaging system used, this approach lays the foundation for accelerating progress in and for improving the robustness and reproducibility of 3D culture analysis across biological and clinical research.
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.