MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415531408 · doi:10.1101/2025.10.23.684203

High-content live-cell time-lapse imaging predicts cells about to die via apoptosis

2025· preprint· W4415531408 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Lippincott, Jenna Tomkinson, Ibrahim Bilem, Mahomi Suzuki, Akiko Nakde, Toshiaki Endou, Simon Mathien, Felix Lavoie-Perusse, Carla Basualto-Alarcón, Gregory P. Way

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersUniversity of Colorado BoulderColorado State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsProgrammed cell deathApoptosisDynamics (music)HeLaCellProcess (computing)Live cell imagingMechanism (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cell death is a dynamic process that unfolds through time. Live-cell time-lapse imaging captures these dynamics in a way that’s impossible for static snapshots. High-content imaging (HCI), which has been developed for static microscopy, applied to time-lapse imaging can quantify how single-cell states change through time. Here we show the ability of high-content live-cell time-lapse imaging (HCLTI) to quantify the onset and progression of one form of cell death called apoptosis. We apply the Live Cell Painting assay called ChromaLIVE TM and develop an HCLTI analysis pipeline. We show that HCLTI can discern the morphology dynamics of cells undergoing apoptosis, and demonstrate that machine learning can predict apoptosis as early as 100 minutes after exposing HeLa cells to the apoptosis inducer Staurosporine. This technical advancement paves the way for future studies to better understand the dynamics of other forms of cell death. Understanding cell death dynamics is one piece of solving larger biomedical puzzles like understanding how cells resist death (e.g., therapeutic resistance of cancer cells) and how cells die too soon (e.g., neurodegeneration).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207