Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39102821›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024

Cellular proliferation biases clonal lineage tracing and trajectory inference.

Becca Bonham-Carter, Geoffrey Schiebinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Becca Bonham-CarterDepartment of Mathematics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0163-4673
Geoffrey SchiebingerDepartment of Mathematics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8290-7997

Funding

New Frontiers in Research Fund Exploration GR003572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationLineage tracing and trajectory inference from single-cell RNA-sequencing data hold tremendous potential for uncovering the genetic programs driving development and disease. Single cell datasets are thought to provide an unbiased view on the diverse cellular architecture of tissues. Sampling bias, however, can skew single cell datasets away from the cellular composition they are meant to represent.

resultsWe demonstrate a novel form of sampling bias, caused by a statistical phenomenon related to repeated sampling from a growing, heterogeneous population. Relative growth rates of cells influence the probability that they will be sampled in clones observed across multiple time points. We support our probabilistic derivations with a simulation study and an analysis of a real time-course of T-cell development. We find that this bias can impact fate probability predictions, and we explore how to develop trajectory inference methods which are robust to this bias. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code for the simulated datasets and to create the figures in this manuscript is freely available in python at https://github.com/rbonhamcarter/simulate-clones. A python implementation of the extension of the LineageOT method is freely available at https://github.com/rbonhamcarter/LineageOT/tree/multi-time-clones.

Indexed as

Cell LineageCell ProliferationSingle-Cell AnalysisAnimalsHumansSequence Analysis, RNASoftwareT-Lymphocytes

Identifiers

PMID39102821
PMCPMC11316616

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.