Morphological Signal Processing for Phenotype Recognition of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells Using Machine Learning Methods.

best clone human embryonic stem cells human pluripotent stem cells machine learning morphological phenotype

Journal

Biomedicines
ISSN: 2227-9059
Titre abrégé: Biomedicines
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101691304

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 12 10 2023
revised: 30 10 2023
accepted: 06 11 2023
medline: 25 11 2023
pubmed: 25 11 2023
entrez: 25 11 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Human pluripotent stem cells have the potential for unlimited proliferation and controlled differentiation into various somatic cells, making them a unique tool for regenerative and personalized medicine. Determining the best clone selection is a challenging problem in this field and requires new sensing instruments and methods able to automatically assess the state of a growing colony ('phenotype') and make decisions about its destiny. One possible solution for such label-free, non-invasive assessment is to make phase-contrast images and/or videos of growing stem cell colonies, process the morphological parameters ('morphological portrait', or signal), link this information to the colony phenotype, and initiate an automated protocol for the colony selection. As a step in implementing this strategy, we used machine learning methods to find an effective model for classifying the human pluripotent stem cell colonies of three lines according to their morphological phenotype ('good' or 'bad'), using morphological parameters from the previously published data as predictors. We found that the model using cellular morphological parameters as predictors and artificial neural networks as the classification method produced the best average accuracy of phenotype prediction (67%). When morphological parameters of colonies were used as predictors, logistic regression was the most effective classification method (75% average accuracy). Combining the morphological parameters of cells and colonies resulted in the most effective model, with a 99% average accuracy of phenotype prediction. Random forest was the most efficient classification method for the combined data. We applied feature selection methods and showed that different morphological parameters were important for phenotype recognition via either cellular or colonial parameters. Our results indicate a necessity for retaining both cellular and colonial morphological information for predicting the phenotype and provide an optimal choice for the machine learning method. The classification models reported in this study could be used as a basis for developing and/or improving automated solutions to control the quality of human pluripotent stem cells for medical purposes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38002005
pii: biomedicines11113005
doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11113005
pmc: PMC10669716
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Subventions

Organisme : Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, as part of the World-class Research Center program: Advanced Digital Technologies
ID : contract No. 075-15-2022-311 dated 20.04.2022
Organisme : Russian Science Foundation
ID : 21-75-20132

Références

Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 11;9(1):1777
pubmed: 30741960
Comput Math Methods Med. 2016;2016:3091039
pubmed: 27493680
Sci Rep. 2016 Sep 26;6:34009
pubmed: 27667091
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Feb 10;106(6):1826-31
pubmed: 19188593
J Cheminform. 2014 Mar 29;6(1):10
pubmed: 24678909
J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2017 Oct;4(4):044003
pubmed: 29134187
Cell Stem Cell. 2018 Nov 1;23(5):644-648
pubmed: 30388422
Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 21;11(1):24375
pubmed: 34934149
Nat Methods. 2012 Jul;9(7):671-5
pubmed: 22930834
Nat Commun. 2020 Jul 27;11(1):3738
pubmed: 32719375
Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec 21;24(1):
pubmed: 36613583
BMC Bioinformatics. 2010 Jan 14;11:30
pubmed: 20074370
Sensors (Basel). 2021 Dec 29;22(1):
pubmed: 35009749
Stem Cell Reports. 2017 Aug 8;9(2):697-709
pubmed: 28712847
Science. 1998 Nov 6;282(5391):1145-7
pubmed: 9804556
Sci Rep. 2014 Nov 11;4:6996
pubmed: 25385348
Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Oct 26;23(21):
pubmed: 36361693
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 07;9(10):e109688
pubmed: 25289886
Mol Biol Cell. 2023 May 1;34(5):ar45
pubmed: 36947171
J Biomol Screen. 2014 Jun;19(5):640-50
pubmed: 24710339
J Lab Autom. 2014 Oct;19(5):454-60
pubmed: 24888327
Sci Rep. 2016 Mar 31;6:23453
pubmed: 27029742
Cell. 2007 Nov 30;131(5):861-72
pubmed: 18035408
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Mar 4;111(9):3448-53
pubmed: 24550445
PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e48677
pubmed: 23272044

Auteurs

Ekaterina Vedeneeva (E)

Department of Physics and Mechanics & Mathematical Biology and Bioinformatics Laboratory, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Vitaly Gursky (V)

Laboratory of Molecular Medicine, Institute of Cytology, 194064 Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Theoretical Department, Ioffe Institute, 194021 Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Maria Samsonova (M)

Department of Physics and Mechanics & Mathematical Biology and Bioinformatics Laboratory, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Irina Neganova (I)

Laboratory of Molecular Medicine, Institute of Cytology, 194064 Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Classifications MeSH