MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912666525 · doi:10.1101/549592

Multidimensional Profiling of Drug-Treated Cells by Imaging Mass Cytometry

2019· preprint· en· W2912666525 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Bouzekri, Amanda Esch, Olga Ornatsky

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsFluidigm (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass cytometryNocodazoleCytometryFlow cytometryDrug discoveryHigh-content screeningBiologyMitosisComputational biologyCellChemistryCell biologyBioinformaticsMolecular biologyCytoskeletonBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In pharmaceutical research, high-content screening is an integral part of lead candidate development. Drug response in vitro over 40 parameters including biomarkers, signaling molecules, cell morphological changes, proliferation indexes and toxicity in a single sample could significantly enhance discovery of new therapeutics. As a proof of concept, we present a workflow for multidimensional Imaging Mass Cytometry™ (IMC™) and data processing with open source computational tools. CellProfiler was used to identify single cells through establishing cellular boundaries, followed by histoCAT™ (histology topography cytometry analysis toolbox) for extracting single-cell quantitative information visualized as t-SNE plots and heatmaps. Human breast cancer-derived cell lines SKBR3, HCC1143 and MCF-7 were screened for expression of cellular markers to generate digital images with a resolution comparable to conventional fluorescence microscopy. Predicted pharmacodynamic effects were measured in MCF-7 cells dosed with three target-specific compounds: growth stimulatory EGF, microtubule depolymerization agent nocodazole and genotoxic chemotherapeutic drug etoposide. We show strong pairwise correlation between nuclear markers pHistone3 S28 , Ki-67 and p4E-BP1 T37/T46 in classified mitotic cells and anti-correlation with cell surface markers. Our study demonstrates that IMC data expands the number of measured parameters in single cells and brings higher-dimension analysis to the field of cell-based screening in early lead compound discovery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207