Back

STITCH links cellular morphology and gene expression in spatial transcriptomics

Kumar, S.; Shi, Y.; Vallius, T.; Day, C.-P.; Absil, P.- A.; Srivastava, A.; Hannenhalli, S.; Gopalan, V.

2026-06-11 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.06.07.730714 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In situ spatial (ISS) sequencing can uncover co-variation between cellular morphology and gene expression in vivo. However, a principled and interpretable mathematical representation of morphology has not yet been applied in this context. In particular, current deep learning-based representations of cell images confound a cells shape with its size. We present an interpretable representation of cellular boundary contours, based on tangent principal component analysis (TPCA) in a Kendall shape manifold, that captures size-independent contour shape features. This approach successfully recovers shape-perturbing genes in an RNAi screen than a previous metric geometry-based approach. We build on TPCA to develop STITCH (Shape-TranscriptomIc Correlation and Harmonization), an approach to reveal covariation between cell morphology with gene expression in ISS datasets. In a Xenium dataset, STITCH outperforms a deep learning-based approach in both recovering the layered organization of keratinocytes and a spatial gradient in nuclear eccentricity. Across samples in a melanoma CosMx dataset, STITCH reproducibly associates elongated and triangular fibroblasts with proximity to malignant cells and myofibroblast-like transcriptional program. Finally, STITCH independently recovers a known link between mesenchymal-like malignant cell states and increased cell area in two melanoma cohorts. STITCH can thus yield interpretable morphology-transcriptome relationships across cell types, patients, and spatial transcriptomics platforms.

Matching journals

The top 2 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.