Deep topographic proteomics of a human brain tumour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial organisation of cellular protein expression profiles within tissue determines cellular function and is key to understanding disease pathology. To define molecular phenotypes in the spatial context of tissue, there is a need for unbiased, quantitative technology capable of mapping proteomes within tissue structures. Here, we present a workflow for spatially-resolved, quantitative proteomics of tissue that generates maps of protein abundance across tissue slices derived from a human atypical teratoid-rhabdoid tumour at three spatial resolutions, the highest being 40 µm, to reveal distinct abundance patterns of thousands of proteins. We employ spatially-aware algorithms that do not require prior knowledge of the fine tissue structure to detect proteins and pathways with spatial abundance patterns and correlate proteins in the context of tissue heterogeneity and cellular features such as extracellular matrix or proximity to blood vessels. We identify PYGL, ASPH and CD45 as spatial markers for tumour boundary and reveal immune response-driven, spatially-organised protein networks of the extracellular tumour matrix. Overall, we demonstrate spatially-aware deep proteo-phenotyping of tissue heterogeneity, to re-define understanding tissue biology and pathology at the molecular level.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".