Nature CommunicationsBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article
Comparison of imaging-based single-cell resolution spatial transcriptomics profiling platforms using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples
Nejla Ozirmak LermiiD, Max Molina Ayala, Sharia D. HernandeziD, Wei LüiD, Khaja B. KhaniD, Alejandra G. SerranoiD, Idania Carolina Lubo JulioiD, Leticia HamanaiD, Katarzyna J. TomczakiD, Sean Barnes, Jinzhuang DouiD, Qingnan LiangiD, RTI Team, Ahmed Al-RawiiD, Claudio A. ArrechederaiD, Kimberly S. Ayers, Claudia Bedoya, Elizabeth M. BurtoniD, Connie A. Chon, Randy Aaron ChuiD, Shadarra D. Crosby, Jonathan Do, Cibelle Freitas Pinto LimaiD, Fu Szu-Chin, Andy Futreal, , Luisa M. Solis SotoiD
Abstract
Imaging-based spatial transcriptomics (ST) is evolving rapidly as a pivotal technology in studying the biology of tumors and their associated microenvironments. However, the strengths of the commercially available ST platforms in studying spatial biology have not been systematically evaluated using rigorously controlled experiments. In this study, we used serial 5-m sections of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma and pleural mesothelioma tumor samples in tissue microarrays to compare the performance of the single cell ST platforms CosMx, MERFISH, and Xenium (uni/multi-modal) platforms in reference to bulk RNA sequencing, multiplex immunofluorescence, GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler, and hematoxylin and eosin staining data for the same samples. In addition to objective assessment of automatic cell segmentation and phenotyping, we performed pixel-resolution manual evaluation of phenotyping to carry out pathologically meaningful comparison between ST platforms. Our study detailed the intricate differences between the ST platforms, revealed the importance of parameters such as tissue age and probe design in determining the data quality, and suggested reliable workflows for accurate spatial profiling and molecular discovery.
- organism: human
- assay: spatial transcriptomics
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: experimental assay
- Citations
- 43
- FWCI
- 12.93
- Field percentile
- top 1%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Benchmarking of spatial transcriptomics platforms across six cancer types
Sergi Cervilla, Daniela Grases, … Eduard Porta‐Pardo·bioRxiv·May 21, 2024
- Systematic benchmarking of imaging spatial transcriptomics platforms in FFPE tissues
H. Wang, R. Huang, … S. L. Farhi·bioRxiv·Dec 7, 2023
- A Comparative Analysis of Imaging-Based Spatial Transcriptomics Platforms
David P. Cook, Kirk B. Jensen, … Luciano Gastón Martelotto·bioRxiv·Dec 13, 2023
- Systematic Benchmarking of High-Throughput Subcellular Spatial Transcriptomics Platforms
Pengfei Ren, Rui Zhang, … Zexian Zeng·bioRxiv·Dec 23, 2024
- Comparison of spatial transcriptomics technologies used for tumor cryosections
Anne Rademacher, Alik Huseynov, … Karsten Rippe·Genome biologyPeer-reviewed·Jun 20, 2025
- An experimental comparison of the Digital Spatial Profiling and Visium spatial transcriptomics technologies for cancer research
T. Wang, K. Harvey, … A. Swarbrick·bioRxiv·Apr 6, 2023