ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
A deep learning approach for time-consistent cell cycle phase prediction from microscopy data.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A self-supervised machine learning pipeline for extracting information from live cell images at multiple doses and timepoints.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Tui: A Multigenerational and Expert-Correctable Tracker for Cellular Dynamics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The cell cycle is a series of regulated stages during which a cell grows, replicates its DNA, and divides. It consists of four phases - two growth phases (G1 and G2), a replication phase (S), and a division phase (M) - each characterized by distinct transcriptional programs and impacting most other cellular processes. In imaging assays, the cell cycle phase can be identified using specific cell-cycle markers. However, the use of dedicated cell-cycle markers can be impractical or even prohibitive, as they occupy fluorescent channels that may be needed for other reporters. To address this limitation we propose a method to infer the cell cycle phase from a widely used fluorescent reporter: SiR-DNA, thereby bypassing the need for phase-specific markers while leveraging information already present in common experimental setups. Our method is based on a Variational Auto-Encoder (VAE), enhanced with two auxiliary tasks: predicting the average intensity of phase-specific markers and enforcing temporal consistency through latent space regularization. The reconstruction task ensures that the latent space captures cell cycle-relevant features, while the temporal constraint promotes biological plausibility. The resulting model, CC-VAE, classifies cell cycle phases with high accuracy from widely used DNA markers and can thus be applied to high-content screening datasets not specifically designed for cell cycle analysis. CC-VAE is freely available, along with a new, publicly released dataset comprising over 600,000 labeled HeLa Kyoto nuclear images to support further development and benchmarking in the community.
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.