Generating and Analyzing High-Parameter Histology Images with Histoflow Cytometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The usage of histology to investigate immune cell diversity in tissue sections such as those derived from the central nervous system (CNS) is critically limited by the number of fluorescent parameters that can be imaged at a single time. Most immune cell subsets have been defined using flow cytometry by using complex combinations of protein markers, often requiring four or more parameters to conclusively identify, which is beyond the capabilities of most conventional microscopes. As flow cytometry dissociates tissues and loses spatial information, there is a need for techniques that can retain spatial information while interrogating the roles of complex cell types. These issues are addressed here by creating a method for expanding the number of fluorescent parameters that can be imaged by collecting the signals of spectrally overlapping fluorophores and using spectral unmixing to separate the signals of each individual fluorophore. These images are then processed using an analysis pipeline to take high-parameter histology images and extract single cells from these images so that the unique fluorescent properties of each cell can be analyzed at a single-cell level. Using flow cytometry-like gating strategies, cells can then be profiled into subsets and mapped back onto the histology sections to not only quantify their abundance, but also establish how they interact with the tissue environment. Overall, the simplicity and potential of using histoflow cytometry to study complex immune populations in histology sections is demonstrated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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".