Prediction of standard cell types and functional markers from textual descriptions of flow cytometry gating definitions using machine learning
Background A key step in clinical flow cytometry data analysis is gating, which involves the identification of cell populations. The process of gating produces a set of reportable results, which are typically described by gating definitions. The non‐standardized, non‐interpreted nature of gating def...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry Clinical cytometry, 2022-05, Vol.102 (3), p.220-227 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
A key step in clinical flow cytometry data analysis is gating, which involves the identification of cell populations. The process of gating produces a set of reportable results, which are typically described by gating definitions. The non‐standardized, non‐interpreted nature of gating definitions represents a hurdle for data interpretation and data sharing across and within organizations. Interpreting and standardizing gating definitions for subsequent analysis of gating results requires a curation effort from experts. Machine learning approaches have the potential to help in this process by predicting expert annotations associated with gating definitions.
Methods
We created a gold‐standard dataset by manually annotating thousands of gating definitions with cell type and functional marker annotations. We used this dataset to train and test a machine learning pipeline able to predict standard cell types and functional marker genes associated with gating definitions.
Results
The machine learning pipeline predicted annotations with high accuracy for both cell types and functional marker genes. Accuracy was lower for gating definitions from assays belonging to laboratories from which limited or no prior data was available in the training. Manual error review ensured that resulting predicted annotations could be reused subsequently as additional gold‐standard training data.
Conclusions
Machine learning methods are able to consistently predict annotations associated with gating definitions from flow cytometry assays. However, a hybrid automatic and manual annotation workflow would be recommended to achieve optimal results. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1552-4949 1552-4957 |
DOI: | 10.1002/cyto.b.22065 |