Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41458999›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2025

Celline: a flexible tool for one-step retrieval and integrative analysis of public single-cell RNA sequencing data.

Yuya Sato, Toru Asahi, Kosuke Kataoka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Yuya SatoGraduate School of Advanced Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.
Toru AsahiGraduate School of Advanced Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.
Kosuke KataokaComprehensive Research Organization, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has generated a rapidly expanding collection of public datasets that provide insight into development, disease, and therapy. However, researchers lack an end-to-end solution for seamlessly retrieving, preprocessing, integrating, and analyzing these data because existing tools address only isolated steps and require manual curation of accessions, metadata, and technical variability, known as batch effects. In this study, we developed Celline, a Python package that executes an entire workflow using a single-line commands per step. Celline automatically gathers raw single-cell RNA-seq data from multiple public repositories and extracts metadata using large language models. It then wraps established tools, including Scrublet for doublet removal, Seurat and Scanpy for quality control and cell-type annotation, Harmony and scVI for batch correction, and Slingshot for trajectory inference, into one-line commands, enabling seamless integrative analyses. To validate Celline-acquired data quality and the integrated framework's practical utility, we applied it to 2 mouse brain cortex datasets from embryonic days 14.5 and 18. Technical validation demonstrated that Celline successfully retrieved data, standardized metadata, and enabled standard analyses that removed low-quality cells, annotated 11 major cell types, improved integration quality (scIB score +0.22), and completed trajectory analysis. Thus, Celline transforms scattered public scRNA-seq resources into unified, analysis-ready datasets with minimal effort. Its modular design allows pipeline extension, encourages community-driven advances, and accelerates the discovery of single-cell data.

Indexed as

data managementintegrationpipelinepublic databasespythonsingle-cell RNA-seq

Identifiers

PMID41458999
PMCPMC12738925

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.