ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Effects of segmentation errors on downstream-analysis in highly-multiplexed tissue imaging.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spotlight on challenges and novel methods in highly multiplexed tissue imaging-based spatial proteomics.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- The good, the bad, and the ugly: opportunities, challenges, and pitfalls in spatial proteomics modeling.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Spatially-smoothed quantification improves cell typing in imaging mass cytometry datasets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Resolving phenotyping discordance with SPACEMAP, an integrated machine learning framework.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Highly multiplexed single-cell imaging technologies have revolutionized our ability to capture spatial protein expression at the single-cell level, thereby enabling a deeper understanding of tissue organization and function. However, these advancements rely on accurate cell segmentation, which defines cell boundaries to generate expression profiles. Despite its importance, there is a gap in quantifying how segmentation inaccuracies propagate through analytical pipelines, particularly affecting cell clustering and phenotyping. We introduce a framework that uses affine transformations to simulate realistic segmentation errors. Our approach mimics the variations induced by segmentation algorithms, allowing us to evaluate the robustness of downstream analyses under controlled perturbation conditions. We show that even moderate segmentation errors can significantly distort estimated protein profiles and disrupt cellular neighborhood relationships in feature space. Effects are most pronounced in clustering analyses, where both unsupervised k-Means and graph-based Leiden algorithms exhibit reduced consistency with increasing perturbation - especially with smaller neighborhood sizes. Similarly, cell phenotyping via Gaussian Mixture Models is adversely impacted, with higher levels of segmentation error leading to notable misclassifications between closely related cell types. These results highlight the importance of ensuring high-quality segmentation and careful data processing strategies to mitigate spurious results for downstream analysis tasks. Considering segmentation inaccuracies, possibly in a probabilistic modeling framework, will improve the reliability and reproducibility of findings in multiplexed tissue imaging studies.
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.