Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

OPTIMAL: An OPTimised Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis framework for Segmentation and Data Exploration

View ORCID ProfileBethany Hunter, View ORCID ProfileIoana Nicorescu, View ORCID ProfileEmma Foster, View ORCID ProfileDavid McDonald, View ORCID ProfileGillian Hulme, View ORCID ProfileAmanda Thomson, View ORCID ProfileCatharien M.U. Hilkens, Joaquim Majo, View ORCID ProfileLuke Milross, View ORCID ProfileAndrew Fisher, View ORCID ProfileJohn Wills, View ORCID ProfilePaul Rees, View ORCID ProfileAndrew Filby, View ORCID ProfileGeorge Merces
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.21.526083
Bethany Hunter
1Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
2Biosciences Institute, Innovation, Methodology and Application (IMA) research Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bethany Hunter
Ioana Nicorescu
3Translational & Clinical Research Institute, Immunity & Inflammation Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ioana Nicorescu
Emma Foster
4Image Analysis Unit, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Emma Foster
David McDonald
1Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
2Biosciences Institute, Innovation, Methodology and Application (IMA) research Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for David McDonald
Gillian Hulme
1Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
2Biosciences Institute, Innovation, Methodology and Application (IMA) research Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Gillian Hulme
Amanda Thomson
1Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
3Translational & Clinical Research Institute, Immunity & Inflammation Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Amanda Thomson
Catharien M.U. Hilkens
3Translational & Clinical Research Institute, Immunity & Inflammation Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Catharien M.U. Hilkens
Joaquim Majo
5Cellular Pathology, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Luke Milross
6Transplantation and Regenerative Medicine, Newcastle University Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Luke Milross
Andrew Fisher
6Transplantation and Regenerative Medicine, Newcastle University Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Andrew Fisher
John Wills
7Department of Veterinary Medicine, Cambridge University, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES, UK
8Department of Biomedical Engineering, Swansea University, Fabian Way, Crymlyn Burrows, Swansea SA1 8EN, Wales, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for John Wills
Paul Rees
8Department of Biomedical Engineering, Swansea University, Fabian Way, Crymlyn Burrows, Swansea SA1 8EN, Wales, UK
9Imaging Platform, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, 415 Main Street, Boston, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Paul Rees
  • For correspondence: George.merces@ncl.ac.uk andrew.filby@newcastle.ac.uk P.Rees@swansea.ac.uk
Andrew Filby
1Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
2Biosciences Institute, Innovation, Methodology and Application (IMA) research Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Andrew Filby
  • For correspondence: George.merces@ncl.ac.uk andrew.filby@newcastle.ac.uk P.Rees@swansea.ac.uk
George Merces
2Biosciences Institute, Innovation, Methodology and Application (IMA) research Theme, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
4Image Analysis Unit, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for George Merces
  • For correspondence: George.merces@ncl.ac.uk andrew.filby@newcastle.ac.uk P.Rees@swansea.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Analysis of Imaging Mass Cytometry (IMC) data and other low-resolution multiplexed tissue imaging technologies is often confounded by poor single cell segmentation and sub-optimal approaches for data visualisation and exploration. This can lead to inaccurate identification of cell phenotypes, states or spatial relationships compared to reference data from single cell suspension technologies. To this end we have developed the “OPTIMAL” framework to determine the best approaches for cell segmentation, parameter transformation, batch effect correction, data visualisation/clustering and spatial neighbourhood analysis. Using a panel of 27 metal-tagged antibodies recognising well characterised phenotypic and functional markers to stain the same FFPE human tonsil sample Tissue Microarray (TMA) over 12 temporally distinct batches we tested a total of four cell segmentation models, a range of different arcsinh cofactor parameter transformation values, five different dimensionality reduction algorithms and two clustering methods. Finally we assessed the optimal approach for performing neighbourhood analysis. We found that single cell segmentation was improved by the use of an Ilastik-derived probability map but that issues with poor segmentation were only really evident after clustering and cell type/state identification and not always evident when using “classical” bi-variate data display techniques. The optimal arcsinh cofactor for parameter transformation was 1 as it maximised the statistical separation between negative and positive signal distributions and a simple Z-score normalisation step after arcsinh transformation eliminated batch effects. Of the five different dimensionality reduction approaches tested, PacMap gave the best data structure with FLOWSOM clustering out-performing Phenograph in terms of cell type identification. We also found that neighbourhood analysis was influenced by the method used for finding neighbouring cells with a “disc” pixel expansion outperforming a “bounding box” approach combined with the need for filtering objects based on size and image-edge location. Importantly OPTIMAL can be used to assess and integrate with any existing approach to IMC data analysis and, as it creates .FCS files from the segmentation output, allows for single cell exploration to be conducted using a wide variety of accessible software and algorithms familiar to conventional flow cytometrists.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted February 21, 2023.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
OPTIMAL: An OPTimised Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis framework for Segmentation and Data Exploration
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
OPTIMAL: An OPTimised Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis framework for Segmentation and Data Exploration
Bethany Hunter, Ioana Nicorescu, Emma Foster, David McDonald, Gillian Hulme, Amanda Thomson, Catharien M.U. Hilkens, Joaquim Majo, Luke Milross, Andrew Fisher, John Wills, Paul Rees, Andrew Filby, George Merces
bioRxiv 2023.02.21.526083; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.21.526083
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
OPTIMAL: An OPTimised Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis framework for Segmentation and Data Exploration
Bethany Hunter, Ioana Nicorescu, Emma Foster, David McDonald, Gillian Hulme, Amanda Thomson, Catharien M.U. Hilkens, Joaquim Majo, Luke Milross, Andrew Fisher, John Wills, Paul Rees, Andrew Filby, George Merces
bioRxiv 2023.02.21.526083; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.21.526083

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Bioinformatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4380)
  • Biochemistry (9571)
  • Bioengineering (7084)
  • Bioinformatics (24832)
  • Biophysics (12595)
  • Cancer Biology (9949)
  • Cell Biology (14344)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7943)
  • Ecology (12095)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15980)
  • Genetics (10915)
  • Genomics (14730)
  • Immunology (9862)
  • Microbiology (23636)
  • Molecular Biology (9472)
  • Neuroscience (50824)
  • Paleontology (369)
  • Pathology (1538)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2678)
  • Physiology (4009)
  • Plant Biology (8653)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1508)
  • Synthetic Biology (2389)
  • Systems Biology (6422)
  • Zoology (1345)