Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42890802›Full record

ReviewiMetaOmics2026

Progress of metabolomics-centric multi-omics research in medicine.

Ziyi Wang, Shiwen Deng, Xiaoxu Wang, Xiao Chang, Na Guo, Peng Chen, Hongjun Yang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iMetaOmics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ziyi WangExperimental Research Center China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0578-1363
Shiwen DengExperimental Research Center China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing China.
Xiaoxu WangAstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP Gaithersburg Maryland USA.
Xiao ChangDepartment of Urology, The Third Medical Center Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital Beijing China.
Na GuoExperimental Research Center China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing China.
Peng ChenExperimental Research Center China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5629-9000
Hongjun YangExperimental Research Center China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metabolomics reveals molecular changes at the metabolic level during biological processes. Recent advancements, particularly through integration with other omics and artificial intelligence (AI), are advancing metabolic data analysis and multi-omics interpretation. This review introduces a "metabolomics-centric" paradigm as a conceptual framework for multi-omics integration, positioning metabolic readouts as the functional anchor for interpreting genotype-phenotype relationships. It also chronicles the evolution and medical applications of integration technologies. Our discussion first traces the field's evolution from bulk to single-cell and spatial methodologies, next surveys integration strategies to uncover mechanistic insights, and finally examines how AI-driven multimodal data integration and AI-optimized metabolomics workflows tackle persistent biological and computational challenges. Looking forward, this review identifies the AI virtual cell as a pivotal future direction for metabolomics-based multi-omics integration, calling for increased attention to its development to simulate dynamic molecular phenotypic networks within a multi-omics context.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencemedical researchmetabolomicsmulti‐omics integrationvirtual cell

Identifiers

PMID42890802
PMCPMC13674409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.