Cited by 459Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationGene Regulatory Network Analysis

Benchmarking spatial and single-cell transcriptomics integration methods for transcript distribution prediction and cell type deconvolution

Li, Bin, Zhang, Wen, Guo, Chuang, Xu, Hao, Li, Longfei, Fang, Minghao, Hu, Yinlei, Zhang, Xinye +9 more·2022·Nature Methods

Abstract

Spatial transcriptomics approaches have substantially advanced our capacity to detect the spatial distribution of RNA transcripts in tissues, yet it remains challenging to characterize whole-transcriptome-level data for single cells in space. Addressing this need, researchers have developed integration methods to combine spatial transcriptomic data with single-cell RNA-seq data to predict the spatial distribution of undetected transcripts and/or perform cell type deconvolution of spots in histological sections. However, to date, no independent studies have comparatively analyzed these integration methods to benchmark their performance. Here we present benchmarking of 16 integration methods using 45 paired datasets (comprising both spatial transcriptomics and scRNA-seq data) and 32 simulated datasets. We found that Tangram, gimVI, and SpaGE outperformed other integration methods for predicting the spatial distribution of RNA transcripts, whereas Cell2location, SpatialDWLS, and RCTD are the top-performing methods for the cell type deconvolution of spots. We provide a benchmark pipeline to help researchers select optimal integration methods to process their datasets.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41592-022-01480-9

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tangram outperformed other imputation methods such as gimVI and SpaGE with respect to various accuracy metrics and scalability.

    “It was shown to outperform other imputation methods such as gimVI225 and SpaGE226 with respect to various accuracy metrics and scalability215.”

    From Best practices for single-cell analysis across modalities (2023) · cites this paper as [215]

  • On real data sets, SpatialDWLS and RCTD performed best in overall accuracy among cell-type deconvolution methods.

    “For simulated data sets, cell2location outperformed other approaches for cell-type deconvolution, but requires more computational resources, whereas for real data sets, SpatialDWLS and RCTD performed best in terms of the overall accuracy score based on four different accuracy metrics215,216.”

    From Best practices for single-cell analysis across modalities (2023) · cites this paper as [215]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, B., Zhang, W., Guo, C., Xu, H., Li, L., Fang, M., Hu, Y., Zhang, X., Yao, X., Tang, M., Liu, K., Zhao, X., Lin, J., Cheng, L., Chen, F., Xue, T., & Qu, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
Qu, Kun
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2022-05-16
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
662-670
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W4280533477
Cited by
459
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 96 · 2025: 111 · 2024: 149 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 1
FWCI
31.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (T2125012, 91940306, 31970858, 31771428, 32170668)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
Keywords
spatial transcriptomics, single-cell RNA sequencing, multi-omics integration, benchmarking, cell type deconvolution, tangram, simulated data
MeSH terms
RNA, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Benchmarking, Single-Cell Analysis, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review