ReviewActa neuropathologica communications2026
Spatial omics in high-grade glioma: study design, analytical pitfalls, and standards for reproducible neuro-oncology.
Review in Acta neuropathologica communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-grade gliomas (HGGs), particularly glioblastoma (GBM), remain highly lethal despite extensive molecular profiling and attempts at therapeutic innovation. Treatment failure is driven in part by spatially organized heterogeneity, including hypercellular cores, infiltrative margins, perivascular niches, and hypoxic/perinecrotic zones that concentrate stress adaptation, immune suppression, and therapy tolerance. Spatial omics can map these programs in situ, but reported findings often diverge because pre-analytical variation, sampling bias, platform artifacts, segmentation/spot mixing, and inappropriate spatial assumptions can dominate apparent biology, especially in necrotic, hemorrhagic, and myelin-rich brain tissue. Here, we propose a reproducibility framework for spatial omics in HGGs that links compartment-aware study design, platform selection, and robust analysis and validation. We outline study designs aligned to diagnostic, mechanistic, translational, and trial-embedded questions; compare major spatial transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic platforms with glioma-specific failure modes; and propose practical pipelines for QC, segmentation, deconvolution, multimodal integration, and spatial interaction modeling. Finally, we provide a glioma-tailored reporting checklist to improve comparability across multicenter and clinical translation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.