MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362596929 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2023-5640

Abstract 5640: Identifying pathophysiological features of mouse tumors using imaging mass cytometry

2023· article· en· W4362596929 on OpenAlexaff
Qanber Raza, Liang Lim, Thomas D. Pfister, Nick Zabinyakov

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsIntegrity Testing Laboratory (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTumor microenvironmentContext (archaeology)Mass cytometryImmune systemCancer researchMedicinePathologyBiologyImmunologyPhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mouse tumor models are widely utilized for cancer studies and preclinical drug development. An obstacle in predicting therapeutic drug efficacy is the ability to quantitatively evaluate the multi-parametric post-treatment response in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Identification of immuno-oncological processes that dictate tumor growth, metastasis, and immune response is essential for selecting promising drug candidates for further clinical evaluation. Imaging Mass Cytometry™ (IMC™) is a vital and proven high-plex imaging technology that enables deep characterization of the complexity and diversity of tumor tissue without disrupting spatial context. The Hyperion™ Imaging System utilizes IMC technology to simultaneously assess 40-plus individual structural and functional markers in tissues, providing unprecedented insight into the organization and function of the TME. We have previously demonstrated the application of IMC in combination with Maxpar® and Maxpar OnDemand™ antibodies to highlight cellular composition of normal mouse tissues. Here, we showcase the Maxpar OnDemand Mouse Immuno-Oncology IMC Panel Kit for application on a variety of mouse tumor tissues. We compiled the antibody panel to quantitatively assess IO-related processes and applied it to a tissue microarray (TMA) containing a large variety of mouse tumors. Antibodies in panel kits were selected from the Maxpar and Maxpar OnDemand catalogs. We digitized high-plex data from mouse tissues using the Hyperion Imaging System and generated images demonstrating the detailed layout of the TME. We further conducted single-cell analysis to identify specific populations of tumor and immune cells in the TME. The Mouse Immuno-Oncology IMC Panel Kit successfully identified pathophysiological processes such as immune cell infiltration and activation, signaling pathway activation, biomarkers of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), metabolic activity, growth, and the tissue architecture of the TME. Single-cell analysis of several highly relevant tumor types separated distinct cellular clusters representing tumor, immune, stromal, and vascular cells. Activation of cellular processes associated with signaling, growth, and metastasis were identified in tumor cells. In addition, cytotoxic and inflammatory activation in lymphoid and myeloid immune cell subtypes were detected. Application of IMC based multiparametric analysis successfully identified the spatial landscape of the TME at single-cell resolution. Quantitative analysis of tumor composition revealed critical insights regarding prognostic parameters such as metastatic and growth potential of tumors, and identification and activation of immune cell infiltrates. Overall, we demonstrate the power of IMC and provide evidence of its successful application in mouse tumor models. For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures. Citation Format: Qanber Raza, Liang Lim, Thomas D. Pfister, Nick Zabinyakov, Christina Loh. Identifying pathophysiological features of mouse tumors using imaging mass cytometry. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 5640.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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