Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42949536›Full record

ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2026

Advances in computational biology approaches for digital modeling of tumor microenvironment.

Wenlong Ming, Huimin Lu, Tianhao Zeng, Kun Luo, Jun Xu, Hongde Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 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

6 authors.

Wenlong MingJiangsu Key Laboratory of Intelligent Medical Image Computing, School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, 219 Ning Liu Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210044, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5553-905X
Huimin LuJiangsu Key Laboratory of Intelligent Medical Image Computing, School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, 219 Ning Liu Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210044, China.
Tianhao ZengJiangsu Key Laboratory of Intelligent Medical Image Computing, School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, 219 Ning Liu Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210044, China.
Kun LuoDepartment of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, No. 137 Liyushan South Road, Xinshi District, Urumqi, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region 830054, China.
Jun XuJiangsu Key Laboratory of Intelligent Medical Image Computing, School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, 219 Ning Liu Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210044, China.
Hongde LiuState Key Laboratory of Digital Medical Engineering, School of Biological Science & Medical Engineering, Southeast University, No. 2 Sipailou, Xuanwu District, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province 210096, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8768-764X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor progression arises from tightly coupled cellular, vascular, metabolic, immune, and biomechanical processes within the tumor microenvironment (TME), forming a heterogeneous multiscale system that cannot be fully characterized through experimental observation alone. Computational modeling provides a quantitative framework for integrating these mechanisms, but the diversity of available methods complicates model selection, parameterization, validation, and clinical translation. This review presents a problem-driven synthesis of computational approaches for TME modeling. Continuous, discrete, and discrete-continuous hybrid paradigms are compared in terms of biological resolution, data requirements, interpretability, and computational cost, and are linked to five mechanistic domains: tumor-cell dynamics, vascular transport, extracellular matrix and mechanics, metabolism and hypoxia, and immune interactions. Model credibility is examined through parameter identifiability, uncertainty quantification, numerical validity, biological fidelity, and clinical relevance, with emphasis on interpreting performance according to intended use and validation context. Machine learning is analyzed by function within mechanistic-ML integration: surrogate models accelerate forward simulation, inverse methods estimate latent parameters and states, patient-specific workflows combine multimodal clinical data with mechanistic models, and physics-informed neural networks embed governing equations into learning. We further discuss longitudinal personalization, physics-aware multiscale integration, clinically deployable digital twins, external generalization, and synthetic-data-to-clinical transfer. A translation-readiness pathway is proposed from mechanistic hypothesis generation to adaptive digital-twin decision support. Credible TME modeling should prioritize the minimum sufficient model, explicit intended use, transparent uncertainty, and evidence matched to the biological or clinical question.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyModels, BiologicalNeoplasmsTumor MicroenvironmentComputer SimulationHumansMachine LearningSoft Computingdigital twinsdiscrete–continuous hybrid modelingmechanistic–machine learning integrationmultiscale modelingpatient-specific modelingtumor microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID42949536
PMCPMC13714792

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.