Cited by 29Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene Regulatory Network AnalysisGene expression and cancer classification

scPRAM accurately predicts single-cell gene expression perturbation response based on attention mechanism

Open access
Jiang, Qun, Chen, Shengquan, Chen, Xiaoyang, Jiang, Rui·2024·Bioinformatics

Abstract

MOTIVATION: With the rapid advancement of single-cell sequencing technology, it becomes gradually possible to delve into the cellular responses to various external perturbations at the gene expression level. However, obtaining perturbed samples in certain scenarios may be considerably challenging, and the substantial costs associated with sequencing also curtail the feasibility of large-scale experimentation. A repertoire of methodologies has been employed for forecasting perturbative responses in single-cell gene expression. However, existing methods primarily focus on the average response of a specific cell type to perturbation, overlooking the single-cell specificity of perturbation responses and a more comprehensive prediction of the entire perturbation response distribution. RESULTS: Here, we present scPRAM, a method for predicting perturbation responses in single-cell gene expression based on attention mechanisms. Leveraging variational autoencoders and optimal transport, scPRAM aligns cell states before and after perturbation, followed by accurate prediction of gene expression responses to perturbations for unseen cell types through attention mechanisms. Experiments on multiple real perturbation datasets involving drug treatments and bacterial infections demonstrate that scPRAM attains heightened accuracy in perturbation prediction across cell types, species, and individuals, surpassing existing methodologies. Furthermore, scPRAM demonstrates outstanding capability in identifying differentially expressed genes under perturbation, capturing heterogeneity in perturbation responses across species, and maintaining stability in the presence of data noise and sample size variations. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/jiang-q19/scPRAM and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10935038.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btae265

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Optimal transport-based methods' applicability has been limited by strong assumptions and poor scalability.

    “Optimal transport (OT)-based methods that map unperturbed to perturbed populations have also been proposed, but their applicability has been limited by strong assumptions and poor scalability.”

    From Predicting cellular responses to perturbation across diverse contexts with State (2026) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Introduction describes CellOT as an optimal transport method that maps undisturbed to perturbed cells and says its direct-mapping performance declines on new data types. Section 2.3 states a uniform-distribution assumption for scPRAM’s own optimal transport step, but the paper does not say that strong assumptions or poor scalability limit the applicability of OT-based methods. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Becht E, McInnes L, Healy J et al Dimensionality reduction for visualizing single-cell data using UMAP. Nat Biotechnol 2019; 37: 38– 44. 30531897
  2. Borgwardt KM, Gretton A, Rasch MJ et al Integrating structured biological data by kernel maximum mean discrepancy. Bioinformatics 2006; 22: e49– 57. 16873512
  3. Brennecke P, Anders S, Kim JK et al Accounting for technical noise in single-cell RNA-seq experiments. Nat Methods 2013; 10: 1093– 5. 24056876
  4. Bunne C, Stark SG, Gut G et al Learning single-cell perturbation responses using neural optimal transport. Nat Methods 2023; 20: 1759– 68. 37770709 PMC10630137
  5. Burkhardt DB, Stanley JS, Tong A et al Quantifying the effect of experimental perturbations at single-cell resolution. Nat Biotechnol 2021; 39: 619– 29. 33558698 PMC8122059
  6. Chen P, Fan Y, Man T-K et al Enrichr: interactive and collaborative HTML5 gene list enrichment analysis tool. BMC Bioinform 2013; 14: S1– 14. PMC3637064 23586463
  7. Cuturi M. Sinkhorn distances: lightspeed computation of optimal transport. Adv Neural Inform Process Syst 2013; 26: 2292– 300.
  8. Dal Molin A, Di Camillo B. How to design a single-cell RNA-sequencing experiment: pitfalls, challenges and perspectives. Brief Bioinform 2019; 20: 1384– 94. 29394315
  9. Ding S, Chen X, Shen K. Single‐cell RNA sequencing in breast cancer: understanding tumor heterogeneity and paving roads to individualized therapy. Cancer Commun (Lond) 2020; 40: 329– 44. 32654419 PMC7427308
  10. Flamary R, Courty N, Gramfort A et al Pot: python optimal transport. J Mach Learn Res 2021; 22: 3571– 8.
  11. Gao Z, Chen X, Li Z et al scEpiTools: a database to comprehensively interrogate analytic tools for single-cell epigenomic data. J Genet Genomics 2023; 51: 462– 5. 37769837
  12. Gillespie M, Jassal B, Stephan R et al The reactome pathway knowledgebase 2022. Nucleic Acids Res 2022; 50: D687– 92. 34788843 PMC8689983
  13. Goodfellow I, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M et al Generative adversarial networks. Commun ACM 2020; 63: 139– 44.
  14. Haber AL, Biton M, Rogel N et al A single-cell survey of the small intestinal epithelium. Nature 2017; 551: 333– 9. 29144463 PMC6022292
  15. Hagai T, Chen X, Miragaia RJ et al Gene expression variability across cells and species shapes innate immunity. Nature 2018; 563: 197– 202. 30356220 PMC6347972
  16. Kingma DP, Welling M. Auto-encoding variational bayes. ICLR 2014.
  17. Lauschke VM, Ingelman-Sundberg M. The importance of patient-specific factors for hepatic drug response and toxicity. Int J Mol Sci 2016; 17: 1714. 27754327 PMC5085745
  18. Lotfollahi M, Wolf FA, Theis FJ. scGen predicts single-cell perturbation responses. Nat Methods 2019; 16: 715– 21. 31363220
  19. Makkuva A, Taghvaei A, Oh S et al Optimal transport mapping via input convex neural networks. PMLR 2020; 119: 6672– 81.
  20. Metzker ML. Sequencing technologies—the next generation. Nat Rev Genet 2010; 11: 31– 46. 19997069
  21. Nault R, Saha S, Bhattacharya S et al Benchmarking of a bayesian single cell RNAseq differential gene expression test for dose–response study designs. Nucleic Acids Res 2022; 50: e48. 35061903 PMC9071439
  22. Panaretos VM, Zemel Y. Statistical aspects of wasserstein distances. Annu Rev Stat Appl 2019; 6: 405– 31.
  23. Peidli S, Green TD, Shen C et al scPerturb: Harmonized single-cell perturbation data. Nat Methods 2024; 21: 531– 40. PMC12220817 38279009
  24. Rapaport F, Khanin R, Liang Y et al Comprehensive evaluation of differential gene expression analysis methods for RNA-seq data. Genome Biol 2013; 14: R95– 13. 24020486 PMC4054597
  25. Santambrogio F. Optimal transport for applied mathematicians. Birkäuser, NY 2015; 55: 94.
  26. Sohn K, Lee H, Yan X. Learning structured output representation using deep conditional generative models. Adv Neural Informat Process Syst 2015; 28: 3483– 91.
  27. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N et al Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Informat Process Syst 2017;6000–10.
  28. Villani C. Optimal Transport: Old and New. Berlin: springer, 2009; 338: 23.
  29. Wang X, Xu Y, Sun Q et al New insights from the single-cell level: tumor associated macrophages heterogeneity and personalized therapy. Biomed Pharmacother 2022; 153: 113343. 35785706
  30. Wei X, Dong J, Wang F. scPreGAN, a deep generative model for predicting the response of single-cell expression to perturbation. Bioinformatics 2022; 38: 3377– 84. 35639705
  31. Wills QF, Livak KJ, Tipping AJ et al Single-cell gene expression analysis reveals genetic associations masked in whole-tissue experiments. Nat Biotechnol 2013; 31: 748– 52. 23873083
  32. Wolf FA, Angerer P, Theis FJ. SCANPY: large-scale single-cell gene expression data analysis. Genome Biol 2018; 19: 15. 29409532 PMC5802054

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jiang, Q., Chen, S., Chen, X., & Jiang, R.
Affiliations
  • Beijing National Research Center for Information Science and Technology (CN)
  • Nankai University (CN)
Corresponding author
Jiang, Rui
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2024-04-15
Volume
40
Issue
5
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W4394853345
Cited by
29
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2021YFF1200902, 2023YFF1204802)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (62203236, 62273194)
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 Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
single-cell gene expression, perturbation response prediction, attention mechanism, variational autoencoder, optimal transport, drug response, bacterial infection, differentially expressed genes, cell type specificity
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Humans, Gene Expression, Computational Biology, Gene Expression Profiling, Single-Cell Analysis

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