ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
Statistical analysis of multiple regions-of-interest in multiplexed spatial proteomics data.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct Spatial Immune Architectures in Tumor and Tumor-Adjacent Tissues of Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Spatial immune atlas of breast cancer brain metastasis reveals CD163Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Article
- Topological Data Analysis of Spatial Protein Expression in Multiplexed Spatial Proteomics Studies.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Multiplexed spatial proteomics reveals the spatial organization of cells in tumors, which is associated with important clinical outcomes such as survival and treatment response. This spatial organization is often summarized using spatial summary statistics, including Ripley's K and Besag's L. However, if multiple regions of the same tumor are imaged, it is unclear how to synthesize the relationship with a single patient-level endpoint. We evaluate extant approaches for accommodating multiple images within the context of associating summary statistics with outcomes. First, we consider averaging-based approaches wherein multiple summaries for a single sample are combined in a weighted mean. We then propose a novel class of ensemble testing approaches in which we simulate random weights used to aggregate summaries, test for an association with outcomes, and combine the $P$-values. We systematically evaluate the performance of these approaches via simulation and application to data from non-small cell lung cancer, colorectal cancer, and triple negative breast cancer. We find that the optimal strategy varies, but a simple weighted average of the summary statistics based on the number of cells in each image often offers the highest power and controls type I error effectively. When the size of the imaged regions varies, incorporating this variation into the weighted aggregation may yield additional power in cases where the varying size is informative. Ensemble testing (but not resampling) offered high power and type I error control across conditions in our simulated data sets.
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.