ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
A Practical Roadmap for Clinical Translation of Metabolic Biomarkers: A Review.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets in Alzheimer's disease.Inflammopharmacology · 2026Review
- Amino acid homeostasis in the kidney: Physiological roles and pathological dysregulation.Physiological reports · 2026Review
- Beyond Feature Selection: Interpretable Machine Learning for Mechanistic Insights in Metabolomics.Biology · 2026Review
- Peripheral blood biomarkers in PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy: distinguishing predictive from prognostic biomarkers.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- The gut microbiota-aromatic amino acid axis in cardiovascular disease: pathophysiological roles, translational biomarkers, and therapeutic targeting.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Regulatory T cells in pregnancy disorders: a multi-dimensional framework for biomarkers and therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Proteomic signals are not equal clinical phenotypes: redefining evidence standards in arbovirus-SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactivity.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Metabolomics and lipidomics enable comprehensive profiling of metabolic states across diverse diseases and have generated a vast number of candidate biomarkers. Despite this progress, only a small fraction of metabolite-based biomarkers have achieved durable clinical translation. While this gap is often attributed to biological complexity or limited cohort size, increasing evidence suggests that failure more commonly reflects systematic misalignment between analytical measurement, biological interpretation, and clinical decision-making requirements. In this review, we argue that metabolites are not intrinsically unreliable biomarkers but are frequently overinterpreted as disease-specific indicators despite being highly context-dependent reporters of physiological state. We synthesize recurrent failure modes across the translational pipeline-including pre-analytical instability, ionization bias and semi-quantitative measurement, structural and annotation ambiguity, statistical overfitting, loss of disease specificity under systemic stress, and cohort-dependent performance collapse. Building on these insights, we propose a structured roadmap for the clinical translation of metabolite and lipid biomarkers. Rather than emphasizing further discovery, this framework prioritizes decision-oriented eligibility criteria encompassing pre-analytical robustness, analytical validity, molecular definition, biological interpretability, validation under real-world heterogeneity, and alignment with clinical utility and regulatory expectations. By reframing metabolic biomarkers as context-sensitive measurements embedded within clinical decision systems, this review provides practical guidance for investigators, clinicians, and regulators seeking to translate metabolomics and lipidomics into reliable tools for clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.