ArticleGenome biology2026
Benchmarking tools for deciphering cellular crosstalk in spatially-resolved transcriptomics.
Article in Genome biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Benchmarking tools for deciphering cellular crosstalk in spatially-resolved transcriptomics.Genome 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCell-cell communication via ligand-receptor signaling is a fundamental mechanism shaping multicellular organization and functional heterogeneity within tissue microenvironments. Recent advances in spatial transcriptomics (ST) have enabled unprecedented opportunities to systematically infer such interactions under the native spatial context. While prior studies have summarized or compared existing cell-cell interaction (CCI) inference methods, comprehensive benchmarking of tools specifically developed for ST applications remains limited.
resultsHere, we present a comprehensive evaluation of nine computational CCI inference methods on a series of realistic simulation settings and nine real ST datasets from three independent studies, spanning Visium, Stereo-seq, and Xenium platforms. Method performance was assessed based on ligand-receptor prediction accuracy, spatial coherence of interactions, biological relevance via pathway enrichment, and computational efficiency.
conclusionsOur results demonstrate substantial variability in tool performance across spatial resolutions, tissue contexts, and platforms, offering practical guidance for tool selection. This study also highlights key challenges in applying existing tools to real ST data and provides insights to inform future advances in spatially resolved cell-cell interaction analysis.
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.