Extended Data Fig. 6: Single-cell spatial interactions in patients with brain tumours.

a, IMC images of interacting cells in the perivascular niche of glioblastoma and BrM samples, representative of analysis in Fig. 2d–g. First row, perivascular cancer cell proliferation in glioblastoma; second row, perivascular macrophage proliferation in glioblastoma; third row, peritumoural endothelial proliferation in BrM-cores; fourth row, peritumoural endothelial proliferation in BrM-margins. High-magnification insets are provided to the right of each image. b, Heatmap of Spearman’s correlation between cell types in glioblastoma (top rows, n = 192 images), BrM-cores (middle rows, n = 59 images) and BrM-margins (bottom rows, n = 40 images). Red, positive correlation; blue, negative correlation. c, Frequency of CD40+ MDMs and CD40- MDMs interacting with Th. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; n = 1,048 cells across 74 images; two-sided student’s t test. d, CD40 in M1-like MDMs interacting with (red) or avoiding (blue) endothelial cells in glioblastoma. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; n = 415 cells across 188 images/group; two-sided student’s t test. e, Ox40L in M2-like MDMs interacting with (red) or avoiding (blue) endothelial cells in glioblastoma. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; n = 4,248 cells across 183 images/group; Two-sided student’s t test. f, Ki67 in endothelial cells interacting with (red) or avoiding (blue) Tc cells in BrM-margins. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; n = 98 cells across 28 images; two-sided student’s t test. g, Claudin-5 in endothelial cells interacting with (red) or avoiding (blue) cancer cells in BrM-cores and -margins. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; BrM-cores, n = 1,503 cells across 61 images; BrM-margins, n = 1507 cells across 45 images; two-sided student’s t test. h, Claudin-5 expression in endothelial cells interacting with (red) or avoiding (blue) cancer cells in BrM-cores subdivided by extent of peritumoural edema. Data are mean ± s.e.m.; none/low edema, n = 369 cells across 13 images; moderate/high edema, n = 1,046 cells across 42 images; two-sided student’s t test. All images lacking pairwise interactions of interest were excluded from analysis.