Delineating spatial cell-cell interactions in the solid tumour microenvironment through the lens of highly multiplexed imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth and metastasis of solid tumours is known to be facilitated by the tumour microenvironment (TME), which is composed of a highly diverse collection of cell types that interact and communicate with one another extensively. Many of these interactions involve the immune cell population within the TME, referred to as the tumour immune microenvironment (TIME). These non-cell autonomous interactions exert substantial influence over cell behaviour and contribute to the reprogramming of immune and stromal cells into numerous pro-tumourigenic phenotypes. The study of some of these interactions, such as the PD-1/PD-L1 axis that induces CD8 + T cell exhaustion, has led to the development of breakthrough therapeutic advances. Yet many common analyses of the TME either do not retain the spatial data necessary to assess cell-cell interactions, or interrogate few (<10) markers, limiting the capacity for cell phenotyping. Recently developed digital pathology technologies, together with sophisticated bioimage analysis programs, now enable the high-resolution, highly-multiplexed analysis of diverse immune and stromal cell markers within the TME of clinical specimens. In this article, we review the tumour-promoting non-cell autonomous interactions in the TME and their impact on tumour behaviour. We additionally survey commonly used image analysis programs and highly-multiplexed spatial imaging technologies, and we discuss their relative advantages and limitations. The spatial organization of the TME varies enormously between patients, and so leveraging these technologies in future studies to further characterize how non-cell autonomous interactions impact tumour behaviour may inform the personalization of cancer 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".