Deep topographic proteomics of a human brain tumour
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it