A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Comparison of spatial transcriptomics technologies using tumor cryosections. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: Spatial transcriptomics technologies are revolutionizing our understanding of intra-tumor heterogeneity and the tumor microenvironment by revealing single-cell molecular profiles within their spatial tissue context. The rapid development of spatial transcriptomics methods, each with unique characteristics, makes it challenging to select the most suitable technology for specific research objectives. Here, we compare four imaging-based approaches-RNAscope HiPlex, Molecular Cartography, Merscope, and Xenium-alongside Visium, a sequencing-based method. These technologies were employed to study cryosections of medulloblastoma with extensive nodularity (MBEN), a tumor chosen for its distinct microanatomical features.

Results: Our analysis reveals that automated imaging-based spatial transcriptomics methods are well-suited to delineate the intricate MBEN microanatomy and capture cell-type-specific transcriptome profiles. We devise approaches to compare the sensitivity and specificity of different methods, along with their unique attributes, to guide method selection based on the research objective. Furthermore, we demonstrate how reimaging slides after the spatial transcriptomics analysis can significantly improve cell segmentation accuracy and integrate additional transcript and protein readouts, expanding the analytical possibilities and depth of insight.

Conclusions: This study underscores important distinctions between spatial transcriptomics technologies and offers a framework for evaluating their performance. Our findings support informed decisions regarding methods and outline strategies to improve the resolution and scope of spatial transcriptomic analyses, ultimately advancing spatial transcriptomics applications in solid tumor research.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12180266PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-025-03624-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spatial transcriptomics
28
transcriptomics technologies
12
spatial
8
transcriptomics methods
8
methods unique
8
transcriptomics
7
comparison spatial
4
technologies
4
tumor
4
technologies tumor
4

Similar Publications