Back

The Overlooked Role of Specimen Preparation in Bolstering Deep Learning-Enhanced Spatial Transcriptomics Workflows

Fatemi, M. Y.; Lu, Y.; Diallo, A. B.; Srinivasan, G.; Azher, Z. L.; Christensen, B. C.; Salas, L. A.; Tsongalis, G. J.; Palisoul, S. M.; Perreard, L.; Kolling, F. W.; Vaickus, L. J.; Levy, J. J.

2023-10-09 pathology
10.1101/2023.10.09.23296700 medRxiv
Show abstract

The application of deep learning methods to spatial transcriptomics has shown promise in unraveling the complex relationships between gene expression patterns and tissue architecture as they pertain to various pathological conditions. Deep learning methods that can infer gene expression patterns directly from tissue histomorphology can expand the capability to discern spatial molecular markers within tissue slides. However, current methods utilizing these techniques are plagued by substantial variability in tissue preparation and characteristics, which can hinder the broader adoption of these tools. Furthermore, training deep learning models using spatial transcriptomics on small study cohorts remains a costly endeavor. Necessitating novel tissue preparation processes enhance assay reliability, resolution, and scalability. This study investigated the impact of an enhanced specimen processing workflow for facilitating a deep learning-based spatial transcriptomics assessment. The enhanced workflow leveraged the flexibility of the Visium CytAssist assay to permit automated H&E staining (e.g., Leica Bond) of tissue slides, whole-slide imaging at 40x-resolution, and multiplexing of tissue sections from multiple patients within individual capture areas for spatial transcriptomics profiling. Using a cohort of thirteen pT3 stage colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, we compared the efficacy of deep learning models trained on slide prepared using an enhanced workflow as compared to the traditional workflow which leverages manual tissue staining and standard imaging of tissue slides. Leveraging Inceptionv3 neural networks, we aimed to predict gene expression patterns across matched serial tissue sections, each stemming from a distinct workflow but aligned based on persistent histological structures. Findings indicate that the enhanced workflow considerably outperformed the traditional spatial transcriptomics workflow. Gene expression profiles predicted from enhanced tissue slides also yielded expression patterns more topologically consistent with the ground truth. This led to enhanced statistical precision in pinpointing biomarkers associated with distinct spatial structures. These insights can potentially elevate diagnostic and prognostic biomarker detection by broadening the range of spatial molecular markers linked to metastasis and recurrence. Future endeavors will further explore these findings to enrich our comprehension of various diseases and uncover molecular pathways with greater nuance. Combining deep learning with spatial transcriptomics provides a compelling avenue to enrich our understanding of tumor biology and improve clinical outcomes. For results of the highest fidelity, however, effective specimen processing is crucial, and fostering collaboration between histotechnicians, pathologists, and genomics specialists is essential to herald this new era in spatial transcriptomics-driven cancer research.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.7%
2
Journal of Pathology Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
3
Modern Pathology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.9%
4
Laboratory Investigation
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
5
The American Journal of Pathology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
6
The Journal of Pathology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
7
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 23%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
8
Cancer Research Communications
51 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.3%
9
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
10
BioTechniques
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
11
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.8%
12
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
13
Biological Imaging
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
14
Translational Oncology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
15
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
16
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.3%
17
Breast Cancer Research
36 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
18
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
19
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
npj Precision Oncology
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
22
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
23
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.8%
25
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
26
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
27
npj Breast Cancer
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
28
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
29
npj Systems Biology and Applications
125 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%