Skip to main content
. 2026 Oct 1;16:1919412. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2026.1919412

Figure 1.

Panel A displays a flowchart of the study design and continuous-model workflow, detailing steps from literature-informed program selection and dataset discovery to scoring, program evaluation, adjudication, spatial evaluation, and single-cell contextualization. Panel B shows a red-and-white heatmap of gene membership across six programs, highlighting shared versus unique gene involvement. Panel C lists datasets with sample sizes, assay types, and their analytical roles in the study. Panel D presents horizontal bar charts for six programs, illustrating proportions of membership sourced by direct-source core, author-curated, and source-phenotype support.

Definition and evidence provenance of the continuous program model. (A–C) Study design, six-program membership matrix (132 memberships; 121 unique genes; 11 shared memberships) and cohort scope. (D) Program-level provenance composition for the six literature-informed curated composite programs. Bars show direct-source-core, author-curated and source-phenotype-supported memberships: Macrophage-rich 17/5/0; T cell-inflamed 15/7/0; Antigen-presentation 8/14/0; Stromal/fibrotic 16/6/0; Immune-cold/exclusion 0/19/3; and Proliferative/cycling 9/13/0. Each program retains 22 memberships. Immune-cold/exclusion has no direct-source core, so its direct-source-core sensitivity is structurally non-evaluable. Bulk scores are transcriptomic single-sample scores and do not reconstruct spatial architecture.