MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200296814 · doi:10.1186/s13058-021-01475-y

Quantitative single-cell analysis of immunofluorescence protein multiplex images illustrates biomarker spatial heterogeneity within breast cancer subtypes

2021· article· en· W4200296814 on OpenAlexafffund
Alison Cheung, Dan Wang, Kela Liu, Tyna Hope, Mayan Murray, Fiona Ginty, Sharon Nofech‐Mozes, Anne L. Martel, Martin J. Yaffe

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteSunnybrook Research Institute
KeywordsBreast cancerTissue microarrayProgesterone receptorImmunohistochemistryBiomarkerEstrogen receptorPathologyBiologyTriple-negative breast cancerCancer researchCancerSurgical oncologyOncologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The extent of cellular heterogeneity in breast cancer could have potential impact on diagnosis and long-term outcome. However, pathology evaluation is limited to biomarker immunohistochemical staining and morphology of the bulk cancer. Inter-cellular heterogeneity of biomarkers is not usually assessed. As an initial evaluation of the extent of breast cancer cellular heterogeneity, we conducted quantitative and spatial imaging of Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR), Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2 (HER2), Ki67, TP53, CDKN1A (P21/WAF1), CDKN2A (P16INK4A), CD8 and CD20 of a tissue microarray (TMA) representing subtypes defined by St. Gallen surrogate classification. METHODS: Quantitative, single cell-based imaging was conducted using an Immunofluorescence protein multiplexing platform (MxIF) to study protein co-expression signatures and their spatial localization patterns. The range of MxIF intensity values of each protein marker was compared to the respective IHC score for the TMA core. Extent of heterogeneity in spatial neighborhoods was analyzed using co-occurrence matrix and Diversity Index measures. RESULTS: On the 101 cores from 59 cases studied, diverse expression levels and distributions were observed in MxIF measures of ER and PR among the hormonal receptor-positive tumor cores. As expected, Luminal A-like cancers exhibit higher proportions of cell groups that co-express ER and PR, while Luminal B-like (HER2-negative) cancers were composed of ER+, PR- groups. Proliferating cells defined by Ki67 positivity were mainly found in groups with PR-negative cells. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) exhibited the highest proliferative fraction and incidence of abnormal P53 and P16 expression. Among the tumors exhibiting P53 overexpression by immunohistochemistry, a group of TNBC was found with much higher MxIF-measured P53 signal intensity compared to HER2+, Luminal B-like and other TNBC cases. Densities of CD8 and CD20 cells were highest in HER2+ cancers. Spatial analysis demonstrated variability in heterogeneity in cellular neighborhoods in the cancer and the tumor microenvironment. CONCLUSIONS: Protein marker multiplexing and quantitative image analysis demonstrated marked heterogeneity in protein co-expression signatures and cellular arrangement within each breast cancer subtype. These refined descriptors of biomarker expressions and spatial patterns could be valuable in the development of more informative tools to guide diagnosis and treatment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer ResearchSame topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207