ArticleFunctional & integrative genomics2026
Donor-aware integrative single-cell analysis distinguishes consistent memory B-cell programmes from donor-sensitive state boundaries in untreated rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Functional & integrative genomics, 2026. 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
Single-cell transcriptomics resolves immune-cell heterogeneity, but whether cluster boundaries or coordinated programmes are the more transferable unit across donors remains uncertain. We reanalyzed 14,414 circulating memory B cells from four untreated rheumatoid arthritis donors. Harmony increased mean local donor entropy from 0.506 to 0.912, while original labels showed only moderate agreement with uncorrected and Harmony reclustering (adjusted Rand indices 0.508 and 0.473). Conditional label permutations and analyses based on pan-B-centred residuals or state-marker genes supported donor-level consistency for most major states, but identified C3-PECAM1 and the rare C10-IFN state as weakly specific or quality-control-sensitive. In training-only donor-held-out transfer, accuracy was 66.0-70.5% and adjusted Rand index was 0.432-0.525, indicating partial transfer rather than independent state recovery. Removal of DoubletFinder-predicted doublets preserved 15-20 of each state's top 20 pseudobulk markers and did not change programme rank order across states. Rank-based UCell scores agreed with AddModuleScore in both datasets. In an independent cohort of 5,725 memory B cells from 34 donors, adapted programme scores could be quantified, but no disease-activity or serological association remained significant after correction; treatment and unavailable disease-duration data limited clinical interpretation. These results distinguish recurrent donor-level transcriptional structure from analysis-sensitive state boundaries and support programme-level interpretation without claiming independent cell-state validation or biomarker utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867554What 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.