High-content live-cell time-lapse imaging predicts cells about to die via apoptosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".