2D spatial tissue analysis often misrepresents true biological patterns of 3D tissues
Le, D.; Kaplan, D. I.; Trigos, A. S.
Show abstract
Spatial omics technologies and analysis methods that profile tissue sections are widespread in biomedical research, but how well these methods capture 3D tissue biology is unknown. Using 3D spatial simulations and data, coupled with virtual tissue sectioning, we found that spurious associations, misrepresentation of biological trends and false negative findings are common in 2D spatial analyses. Understanding the limitations of 2D spatial analyses is needed to avoid misinterpreting research findings.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- stLearn: integrating spatial location, tissue morphology and gene expression to find cell types, cell-cell interactions and spatial trajectories within undissociated tissues 95%
- Characterizing cell-type spatial relationships across length scales in spatially resolved omics data 95%
- SpaIM: Single-cell Spatial Transcriptomics Imputation via Style Transfer 95%
"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.