OPTIMAL: An OPTimized Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis framework for benchmarking segmentation and data exploration.

Analysis of imaging mass cytometry (IMC) data and other low-resolution multiplexed tissue imaging technologies is often confounded by poor single-cell segmentation and suboptimal approaches for data visualization 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 "OPTimized Imaging Mass cytometry AnaLysis (OPTIMAL)" framework to benchmark any approaches for cell segmentation, parameter transformation, batch effect correction, data visualization/clustering, and spatial neighborhood analysis. Using a panel of 27 metal-tagged antibodies recognizing well-characterized phenotypic and functional markers to stain the same Formalin-Fixed Paraffin Embedded (FFPE) human tonsil sample tissue microarray over 12 temporally distinct batches we tested several cell segmentation models, a range of different arcsinh cofactor parameter transformation values, 5 different dimensionality reduction algorithms, and 2 clustering methods. Finally, we assessed the optimal approach for performing neighborhood 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" bivariate data display techniques. The optimal arcsinh cofactor for parameter transformation was 1 as it maximized the statistical separation between negative and positive signal distributions and a simple Z-score normalization 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 neighborhood analysis was influenced by the method used for finding neighboring 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 and allows for single-cell exploration to be conducted using a wide variety of accessible software and algorithms familiar to conventional flow cytometrists.

Integration of datasets for individual prediction of DNA methylation-based biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Epigenetic scores (EpiScores) can provide biomarkers of lifestyle and disease risk. Projecting new datasets onto a reference panel is challenging due to separation of technical and biological variation with array data. Normalisation can standardise data distributions but may also remove population-level biological variation. RESULTS: We compare two birth cohorts (Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936 - nLBC1921 = 387 and nLBC1936 = 498) with blood-based DNA methylation assessed at the same chronological age (79 years) and processed in the same lab but in different years and experimental batches. We examine the effect of 16 normalisation methods on a novel BMI EpiScore (trained in an external cohort, n = 18,413), and Horvath's pan-tissue DNA methylation age, when the cohorts are normalised separately and together. The BMI EpiScore explains a maximum variance of R2=24.5% in BMI in LBC1936 (SWAN normalisation). Although there are cross-cohort R2 differences, the normalisation method makes a minimal difference to within-cohort estimates. Conversely, a range of absolute differences are seen for individual-level EpiScore estimates for BMI and age when cohorts are normalised separately versus together. While within-array methods result in identical EpiScores whether a cohort is normalised on its own or together with the second dataset, a range of differences is observed for between-array methods. CONCLUSIONS: Normalisation methods returning similar EpiScores, whether cohorts are analysed separately or together, will minimise technical variation when projecting new data onto a reference panel. These methods are important for cases where raw data is unavailable and joint normalisation of cohorts is computationally expensive.