Back

Resolution of in situ inflammation in human lupus nephritis into principal immune cell trajectories

Casella, G.; Torcasso, M.; Ai, J.; Cao, T.; Hara, S.; Andrade, M.; Ghosh, D.; Chang, A.; Ko, K.; Chong, A. S.; Giger, M.; Clark, M.

2025-02-21 immunology
10.1101/2025.02.17.638655 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In human lupus nephritis (LuN), tubulointerstitial inflammation (TII) is prognostically more important than glomerular inflammation. However, a comprehensive understanding of both TII complexity and heterogeneity is lacking. Herein, we used high-dimensional confocal microscopy and specialized computer vision techniques to quantify immune cell populations and localize these within normal and diseased renal cortex structures. With these tools, we compared LuN to renal allograft rejection (RAR) and normal kidney. In both LuN and RAR, the 33 characterized immune cell populations formed discrete subgroups whose constituents co-varied in prevalence across biopsies. In both diseases, these co-variant immune cell subgroups organized into the same unique niches. Therefore, inflammation could be resolved into trajectories representing the relative prevalence and density of cardinal immune cell members of each co-variant subgroup. Indeed, in any one biopsy, the inflammatory state could be characterized by quantifying constituent immune cell trajectories. Remarkably, LuN heterogeneity could be captured by quantifying a few myeloid immune cell trajectories while RAR was more complex with additional T cell trajectories. Our studies identify rules governing renal inflammation and thus provide an approach for resolving LuN into discrete mechanistic categories. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=89 SRC="FIGDIR/small/638655v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (36K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@109dd33org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@995037org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@161525dorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@6692d8_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOGraphical AbstractC_FLOATNO C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.