Back

Tumor cell villages define the co-dependency of tumor and microenvironment in liver cancer

Liu, M.; Hernandez, M.; Castven, D.; Lee, H.-P.; Wu, W.; Wang, L.; Forgues, M.; Hernandez, J.; Marquardt, J.; Ma, L.

2025-03-12 cancer biology
10.1101/2025.03.07.642107 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Spatial cellular context is crucial in shaping intratumor heterogeneity. However, understanding how each tumor establishes its unique spatial landscape and what factors drive the landscape for tumor fitness remains significantly challenging. Here, we analyzed over 2 million cells from 50 tumor biospecimens using spatial single-cell imaging and single-cell RNA sequencing. We developed a deep learning-based strategy to spatially map tumor cell states and the architecture surrounding them, which we referred to as Spatial Dynamics Network (SDN). We found that different tumor cell states may be organized into distinct clusters, or villages, each supported by unique SDNs. Notably, tumor cell villages exhibited village-specific molecular co-dependencies between tumor cells and their microenvironment and were associated with patient outcomes. Perturbation of molecular co-dependencies via random spatial shuffling of the microenvironment resulted in destabilization of the corresponding villages. This study provides new insights into understanding tumor spatial landscape and its impact on tumor aggressiveness.

Published in Nature Communications (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

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

Nature Communications · published here
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 6%
22.4%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 4%
7.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Cell
○ 431 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Advanced Science
○ 286 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.3%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Cell Stem Cell
○ 62 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.0%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.2%
7
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 16%
3.2%
9
Nature Cell Biology
○ 118 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
10
Cancer Discovery
● 66 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.8%
11
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.6%
12
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.6%
13
Cell Systems
○ 201 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Cell Reports Medicine
○ 153 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Cancer Cell
○ 42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
16
Cancer Research
● 130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
17
Cell Genomics
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
18
Genome Medicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
19
Molecular Systems Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
20
Developmental Cell
○ 196 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
21
Nature
○ 645 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
22
Patterns
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
23
Gut
● 40 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
24
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
25
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.9%
26
Med
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
27
Molecular Cell
○ 350 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
28
Gastroenterology
○ 42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
npj Precision Oncology
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Hepatology
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%

"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.