Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2509.02482

Multiomics Tissue Segmentation via Spatially-Informed Nested Biclustering Methods

Abstract

Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionisation Mass Spectrometry Imaging (MSI) is a powerful technique for spatially resolved molecular profiling and cancer biomarker discovery. Recent advances, including a novel multiomics workflow, enable multiple rounds of MSI on the same tissue section, extracting diverse molecular classes, e.g., lipids, peptides, and N-glycans, while preserving spatial resolution. This innovation is particularly valuable for studies with limited tissue sample availability, such as rare diseases or small tumors. However, the resulting data are high-dimensional, spatially structured, and the various molecular types share the same pixel grid. To address these challenges, we propose Poseidon, a Bayesian nonparametric nested biclustering model that simultaneously segments the common tissue pixels and clusters molecular signals within each molecular class, leveraging the shared spatial structure. A separately exchangeable framework is first considered, and then extended to handle spatial data via hidden Markov random fields. For scalability, we implement an efficient mean-field variational inference algorithm tailored for multi-dataset analysis. After validating the efficacy of our method on simulated scenarios, we demonstrate the applicability of our model in a real-world case study, where multiomics measurements were performed on kidney tissue affected by clear cell renal cell carcinoma. The nested, hierarchical structure of Poseidon, combined with its principled inferential framework, allows the extraction of interesting biological insights, such as clear tissue segmentation and biomarker detection.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Francesco Denti, Cecilia Balocchi, Vanna Denti, Giulia Capitoli. 2025-09-02. Multiomics Tissue Segmentation via Spatially-Informed Nested Biclustering Methods. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.02482

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Considerations for the Integration of Randomized Controlled Trials and Real-World Data

As clinical decision-making increasingly moves toward individualized and context-specific treatment recommendations, reliance on any single evidence source, randomized or observational, may be insufficient. Principled integration of randomized controlled trials and real-world data, grounded in explicit causal frameworks, offers a path toward evidence that is both internally credible and externally relevant. In this article, we describe distinct objectives for the integration of randomized controlled trials and real-world data and discuss how these objectives shape key design and analytic considerations, illustrating the resulting choices through example estimands. We highlight practical issues that commonly arise in applied settings, including data relevance and curation, cross-source comparability, estimand specification, and sensitivity analysis. We aim for this article to help readers evaluate and implement principled approaches to integrating randomized controlled trials and real-world data in ways that can support more reliable treatment recommendations while maintaining regulatory-grade evidentiary standards.

stat.ME

Validity of MMRM-based hypothesis testing under missing-not-at-random mechanisms

In randomized clinical trials with longitudinal continuous outcomes, missing-not-at-random (MNAR) missingness often motivates conservative alternatives to mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM). Such caution is important for estimation, but estimation and testing need not require identical assumptions. Moreover, overly conservative primary analyses may reduce power, increase required sample size, and raise trial costs. We investigated the validity of MMRM-based testing under the global null of identical longitudinal outcome distributions across groups. Because valid testing minimally requires treatment-effect estimators to converge to the null under the null hypothesis, we investigated sufficient conditions for this property. We introduced a proportional observation condition requiring ratios of observation probabilities relative to a reference group, conditional on the full outcome vector, to be outcome-independent, and showed that, with arbitrary post-baseline visits and monotone missingness, this condition is sufficient for convergence to the null value. The condition allows observation to depend on unobserved outcomes and permits between-group differences in overall observation probabilities through outcome-independent dropout, making it clinically interpretable while accommodating outcome-dependent MNAR missingness. Synthetic and data-based bootstrap simulations showed negligible bias and empirical test sizes near 0.05, including nonmonotone missingness. Thus, MNAR missingness does not by itself imply that a more conservative primary testing procedure is required. This result does not justify treatment-effect estimation under alternatives, which still requires estimand-based interpretation and sensitivity analyses.

stat.ME

Optimized variance estimation under interference and complex experimental designs

Unbiased and consistent variance estimators generally do not exist for design-based treatment effect estimators because experimenters never observe more than one potential outcome for any unit. The problem is exacerbated by interference and complex experimental designs. Experimenters must accept conservative variance estimators in these settings, but they can strive to minimize the conservativeness. In this paper, we show that the task of constructing a minimally conservative variance estimator can be interpreted as an optimization problem that aims to find the lowest estimable upper bound of the true variance given the experimenter's risk preferences and knowledge of the potential outcomes. We characterize the set of admissible bounds in the class of quadratic forms, and we demonstrate that the optimization problem is a convex program for many natural objectives. The resulting variance estimators are guaranteed to be conservative regardless of whether the background knowledge used to construct the bound is correct, but the estimators are less conservative if the provided information is reasonably accurate. Numerical results show that the resulting variance estimators can be considerably less conservative than existing estimators, allowing experimenters to draw more informative inferences about treatment effects.

stat.ME