ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Spatially-smoothed quantification improves cell typing in imaging mass cytometry datasets.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Accurate cell type annotation in imaging mass cytometry (IMC) and related technologies critically depends on preprocessing steps such as normalization, segmentation, and marker aggregation. More distinct separation between negative and positive signals enables more precise cell boundary inference and more robust marker assignment to single cells. However, inherent limitations in spatial resolution and uncertain cell boundaries can lead to spillover, where signal leaks from one cell to a neighboring cell, distorting marker intensities and leading to incorrect cell type annotation. To address these challenges, we first systematically investigated the impact of spatial resolution and segmentation variability on per-cell marker aggregation using simulated IMC datasets, establishing upper limits for reliable marker separation in cell type annotation. We further analyzed technical biases in large scale studies, demonstrating that appropriate normalization approaches can significantly reduce batch effects without compromising biological variability. Finally, we benchmarked multiple spillover correction strategies across both (semi-)simulated and real IMC datasets. Our results revealed two simple methods: spatial smoothing of intensity images followed by mean marker aggregation, or resampling of cell masks followed by mean marker aggregation and median calculation, both of which improved annotation performance. Other methods often performed worse than the baseline of simple mean aggregation. Together, these findings underscore the central importance of spatial resolution, normalization, and marker aggregation in IMC data preprocessing for accurate single-cell annotation.
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.