A Bibliometric Analysis of the Spatial Transcriptomics Literature from 2006 to 2023.

In recent years, spatial transcriptomics (ST) research has become a popular field of study and has shown great potential in medicine. However, there are few bibliometric analyses in this field. Thus, in this study, we aimed to find and analyze the frontiers and trends of this medical research field based on the available literature. A computerized search was applied to the WoSCC (Web of Science Core Collection) Database for literature published from 2006 to 2023. Complete records of all literature and cited references were extracted and screened. The bibliometric analysis and visualization were performed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, Bibliometrix R Package software, and Scimago Graphica. A total of 1467 papers and reviews were included. The analysis revealed that the ST publication and citation results have shown a rapid upward trend over the last 3 years. Nature Communications and Nature were the most productive and most co-cited journals, respectively. In the comprehensive global collaborative network, the United States is the country with the most organizations and publications, followed closely by China and the United Kingdom. The author Joakim Lundeberg published the most cited paper, while Patrik L. Ståhl ranked first among co-cited authors. The hot topics in ST are tissue recognition, cancer, heterogeneity, immunotherapy, differentiation, and models. ST technologies have greatly contributed to in-depth research in medical fields such as oncology and neuroscience, opening up new possibilities for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases. Moreover, artificial intelligence and big data drive additional development in ST fields.

Quantitative systems pharmacology modeling of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer for translational efficacy evaluation and combination assessment across therapeutic modalities.

HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is highly aggressive and a major threat to human health. Despite the significant improvement in patients' prognosis given the drug development efforts during the past several decades, many clinical questions still remain to be addressed such as efficacy when combining different therapeutic modalities, best treatment sequences, interindividual variability as well as resistance and potential coping strategies. To better answer these questions, we developed a mechanistic quantitative systems pharmacology model of the pathophysiology of HER2+ mBC that was extensively calibrated and validated against multiscale data to quantitatively predict and characterize the signal transduction and preclinical tumor growth kinetics under different therapeutic interventions. Focusing on the second-line treatment for HER2+ mBC, e.g., antibody-drug conjugates (ADC), small molecule inhibitors/TKI and chemotherapy, the model accurately predicted the efficacy of various drug combinations and dosing regimens at the in vitro and in vivo levels. Sensitivity analyses and subsequent heterogeneous phenotype simulations revealed important insights into the design of new drug combinations to effectively overcome various resistance scenarios in HER2+ mBC treatments. In addition, the model predicted a better efficacy of the new TKI plus ADC combination which can potentially reduce drug dosage and toxicity, while it also shed light on the optimal treatment ordering of ADC versus TKI plus capecitabine regimens, and these findings were validated by new in vivo experiments. Our model is the first that mechanistically integrates multiple key drug modalities in HER2+ mBC research and it can serve as a high-throughput computational platform to guide future model-informed drug development and clinical translation.

Quality evaluation of metabolic and bariatric surgical guidelines.

Objective: To evaluate the quality of surgical guidelines on bariatric/metabolic surgery. Methods: Four independent reviewers used the AGREE II (The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) tool to assess the methodological quality of the included guidelines and conducted a comparative analysis of the main recommendations for surgical methods of these guidelines. Results: Nine surgical guidelines were included in this study. Five articles with AGREE II scores over 60% are worthy of clinical recommendation. The field of rigor of development was relatively low, with an average score of 50.82%. Among 15 key recommendations and the corresponding best evidence in the guidelines, only 4 key recommendations were grade A recommendations. Conclusions: The quality of metabolic and bariatric guidelines is uneven, and there is much room for improvement.