spatial transcriptomics visium data (Spatial Transcriptomics Inc)
Structured Review

Spatial Transcriptomics Visium Data, supplied by Spatial Transcriptomics Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/visium+spatial+transcriptomics+data/pmc12208317-29-0-3?v=Spatial+Transcriptomics+Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Images
1) Product Images from "Cell states and neighborhoods in distinct clinical stages of primary and metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma"
Article Title: Cell states and neighborhoods in distinct clinical stages of primary and metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma
Journal: Cell Reports Medicine
doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2025.102188
Figure Legend Snippet: EAC primary and metastatic samples show a diverse landscape of TME and malignant cells in transcriptomic and epigenetic data (A) Schematic representation of the study workflow. Biopsies from 10 patients in our discovery cohort, including normal adjacent tissue (NAT), primary tissue, and metastatic samples, were subjected to single-nuclei RNA and ATAC sequencing using 10X Chromium technology. For a subset of these patients as well as three additional patients, matched primary and metastatic samples were profiled with 10X Visium and 10X Xenium spatial transcriptomics (ST) technologies. For single-nuclei data, cells were annotated by cell type and categorized into malignant and TME components. TME subtypes were linked to metastasis, with validation against an external pan-cancer fibroblast atlas. The malignant cell components underwent analysis using consensus non-negative matrix factorization (cNMF) to uncover malignant programs, which were further characterized for transcriptional and epigenetic heterogeneity at a single-cell and spatial level and candidate master transcription factors. External validation was performed in two single-cell validation cohorts, , and associations with clinical and molecular characteristics, as well as survival, were assessed in three bulk validation cohorts. , , (B) Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) representation of the full cohort in Harmony-corrected integrated transcriptomic data, with major cell type compartments labeled and cell counts indicated. (C) Proportion of major cell types in each sample based on transcriptomic data, with percentages for compartments representing over 5% of the total sample composition. (D) UMAP representation of the full cohort in Harmony-corrected integrated ATAC data, with cell type annotations transferred from the RNA annotations. “NA” denotes cells without paired associated RNA information. (E) Proportion of major cell types in each sample based on ATAC data, with percentages for compartments representing over 5% of the total sample composition.
Techniques Used: Sequencing, Biomarker Discovery, Labeling
Figure Legend Snippet: Single-nuclei-derived transcriptional programs highlight different spatial regions of EAC tumors (A) Spatial transcriptomics (ST) slides of P8 primary tumor A, colored according to cNMF program score and the CNV-derived label. For each spot, we infer the CNV profile with inferCNV and assign spots to tumor, mixed, and normal status. cNMF scores are computed as the average Z score of signature genes using the deconvolved carcinoma-specific gene expression profile of spots derived with Cell2Location. (B) Average cNMF score according to the position of the spots compared to the tumor-leading edge. For each tumor spot, we compute the distance to the edge as the shortest path to a normal or mixed spot. The distribution of cNMF scores with standard error is represented for normal spots, mixed spots, and spots of a certain distance to the edge. (C) cNMF scores for carcinoma cells and cell type annotations in a subset of Xenium-profiled samples (P4_A, P11_B, and P12_D). cNMF scores are computed as the average Z score across all carcinoma cells of signature genes included in the Xenium panel. (D) CellCharter cluster assignments for a subset of Xenium-profiled samples (P4_A, P11_B, and P12_D). (E) CellCharter cluster cell type proportion: each cell is assigned a cluster and we represent the proportion of the different cell types in each of the CellCharter clusters. (F) Distribution of cNMF scores of carcinoma cells belonging to the CellCharter clusters with a substantial amount of carcinoma cells (>5%), CC1, CC2, CC3, and CC4. For all comparisons, Mann-Whitney U p < 0.000005.
Techniques Used: Derivative Assay, Gene Expression, MANN-WHITNEY
![Comparative spatial multi-omics analysis of acute myeloid leukemia patients’ bone marrow and extramedullary tissues (A) Schematic representation of the study workflow. Paired bone marrow (BM) samples (BM1 and BM2) and extramedullary (EM) samples (EM1, from skin; and EM2, from lymph node) from 2 newly diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (PT1 and PT2) were fixed in formalin and embedded in paraffin (FFPE) and then sectioned for use in <t>Visium</t> assays (v1 and v2), and Opal multiplex fluorescent immunohistochemistry (mfIHC). The Visium spatial <t>transcriptomics</t> (ST) results were validated using GeoMx digital spatial profiling (DSP) with tissue microarrays (TMAs) of samples from 3 newly diagnosed patients with AML (PT3, PT4, and PT5). An additional 4 AML bone marrow samples that performed the Visium gene and protein expression assay are used as a validational cohort (PT6, PT7, PT8, and PT9). Image created with BioRender ( https://biorender.com ). (B) Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) plot showing our reference map consisted of 79,029 cells collected from 9 healthy BM donors and 7 patients with AML with diploid cytogenetics to match the patient cytogenetic profiles, and included both newly generated scRNA data and previous works. This map consisted of 21 cell types, including T cells (CD4 + and CD8 + naive, effector, and memory T cells, T regulatory [Treg] cells, and unconventional T cells), other immune cells (Natural killer [NK] cells, B cells and plasma cells), hematopoietic progenitors (Hematopoietic stem cells [HSCs], common lymphoid progenitors [CLPs], granulocyte-monocyte progenitors [GMPs]), myeloid cells (megakaryocytes/platelets, monocytes, early and late erythroid cells, conventional and plasmacytoid dendritic cells) and leukemic (AML) cell populations. (C) Immunohistochemical staining of CD11c, MPO, and CD3e on BM1 sections that were used for histopathological annotation. The scale bar for the main tissue panels represents 1 mm. The scale bar for the zoomed-in panels, corresponding to the boxed regions, represents 100 μm. (D) Unsupervised clustering and pathology annotation for the projected spatial map of BM1, revealing 3 distinct regions with an adjusted rand index (ARI) of 0.46. (E) Spatial deconvolution of BM1 tissue, showing erythroid and AML cell populations, with CD11c immunohistochemistry (IHC) overlaid on an image of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-staining. The dotted red lines represent regions enriched for the erythroid cell population; dotted black lines, regions enriched for the AML cell population; and solid lines, regions that overlapped with other tissue sections. (F) Heatmap of Z score normalized canonical markers in pathology annotations, with matching unsupervised cluster distributions represented as a pie chart. HBB, HBD, HBA2, GATA1/2 are erythroid genes and S100A12, FCGR3A, CD14, MS4A7, and , CD33 are monocyte/leukemic genes. (G) Representative overlay of Visium H&E staining with Opal mfIHC and the generated spot-level data for CD33, CD71, CXCL12, CXCR4, CD68, and IL-6. Boxes illustrate magnified regions showing concordance between transcript-level (Visium) and protein-level (Opal) signals at the spot level. (H) Phenotype staining on near-adjacent tissue sections for markers of leukemic (CD33), monocytic (CD68), and erythroid (CD71) populations. DAPI was used as a nuclear counterstain. The spatial distribution of these markers corroborates ST-based spot deconvolution. Scale bars: 1 mm (whole-slide panels) and 100 μm (selected region panels). (I) Box and spatial plots of mfIHC staining intensities for phenotypic markers across ST-defined clusters in BM1, highlighting the enrichment of leukemic and monocytic populations in cluster 3 and that of erythroid populations in cluster 2 at BM1. Scale bars: 1 mm (whole-slide panels) and 100 μm (selected region panels). ns, not significant. ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon rank-sum test.](https://pub-med-central-images-cdn.bioz.com/pub_med_central_ids_ending_with_6006/pmc12796006/pmc12796006__gr1.jpg)



