Mapping the single cell spatial immune landscapes of the melanoma microenvironment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Melanoma is a highly immunogenic malignancy with an elevated mutational burden, diffuse lymphocytic infiltration, and one of the highest response rates to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, over half of all late-stage patients treated with ICIs will either not respond or develop progressive disease. Spatial imaging technologies are being increasingly used to study the melanoma tumor microenvironment (TME). The goal of such studies is to understand the complex interplay between the stroma, melanoma cells, and immune cell-types as well as their association with treatment response. Investigators seeking a better understanding of the role of cell location within the TME and the importance of spatial expression of biomarkers are increasingly turning to highly multiplexed imaging approaches to more accurately measure immune infiltration as well as to quantify receptor-ligand interactions (such as PD-1 and PD-L1) and cell-cell contacts. CyTOF-IMC (Cytometry by Time of Flight - Imaging Mass Cytometry) has enabled high-dimensional profiling of melanomas, allowing researchers to identify complex cellular subpopulations and immune cell interactions with unprecedented resolution. Other spatial imaging technologies, such as multiplexed immunofluorescence and spatial transcriptomics, have revealed distinct patterns of immune cell infiltration, highlighting the importance of spatial relationships, and their impact in modulating immunotherapy responses. Overall, spatial imaging technologies are just beginning to transform our understanding of melanoma biology, providing new avenues for biomarker discovery and therapeutic development. These technologies hold great promise for advancing personalized medicine to improve patient outcomes in melanoma and other solid malignancies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".