Rajendran, S. et al. Cross-learning from varied biomedical data types and patient groups: obstacles and prospects for breakthroughs. Patterns 5, 100913 (2024).
Arora, A., Wagner, S. K., Carpenter, R., Jena, R. & Keane, P. A. The pressing need to fast-track synthetic data privacy standards for medical studies. Lancet Digit. Health 7, 157–160 (2025).
Alberto, I. R. I. et al. How commercial health datasets shape medical research and health-care algorithms. Lancet Digit. Health 5, 288–294 (2023).
Ghofrani, A. & Taherdoost, H. Leveraging biomedical data analytics to improve patient care. Drug Discov. Today 30, 104280 (2025).
Alderman, J. E. et al. Combating algorithmic bias and fostering openness in health datasets: the STANDING Together consensus guidelines. Lancet Digit. Health 7, 64–88 (2025).
Han, H. Reproducibility hurdles for AI in biomedical data science. BMC Med. Genomics 18, 8 (2025).
Luo, J. & Solit, D. B. Harnessing real-world data to drive biomarker discovery and precision oncology forward. Cancer Cell 43, 606–610 (2025).
Sriram, V. et al. Overcoming biomedical data hurdles and seizing opportunities to shape a comprehensive data lifecycle for better sharing, interoperability, analysis, and stakeholder collaboration. Sci. Rep. 15, 6291 (2025).
Sharma, A., Lysenko, A., Jia, S., Boroevich, K. A. & Tsunoda, T. Progress in AI and machine learning for predictive healthcare. J. Hum. Genet. 29, 487–497 (2024).
Ballard, J., Wang, Z., Li, W., Shen, L. & Long, Q. Deep learning methods for integrating and analyzing multi-omics data. BioData Min. 17, 38 (2024).
Breugel, B., Liu, T., Oglic, D. & Schaar, M. Generating synthetic biomedical data through generative artificial intelligence. Nat. Rev. Bioeng. 2, 991–1004 (2024).
Sandve, G. & Greiff, V. Unrestricted access to ground truth makes simulated data just as essential as experimental data for developing and benchmarking bioinformatics methods. Bioinformatics 38, 4994–4996 (2022).
Semmelrock, H. et al. Reproducibility in machine-learning research: a review of obstacles and enabling factors. AI Mag. 46, 70002 (2025).
Mendes, J. M., Barbar, A. & Refaie, M. Synthetic data generation: a privacy-conscious strategy to speed up rare disease research. Front. Digit. Health 7, 1563991 (2025).
Wang, X. et al. Clonal expansion determines how effectively mitochondrial lineage tracing works in single cells. Genome Biol. 26, 70 (2025).
Yu, Y. et al. Adjusting batch effects in large-scale multiomics studies with a reference-material-based ratio approach. Genome Biol. 24, 201 (2023).
He, X. -h, Li, J. -r, Shen, S. -y & Xu, H. E. Comparing AlphaFold3 predictions to experimental structures: evaluating accuracy in ligand-bound G protein-coupled receptors. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 46, 1111–1122 (2025).
Vall’ee, A. Imagining the future of personalized medicine: the role and practical realities of digital twins.
J. Med. Internet Res. 26, 50204 (2024).
Li, X. et al. Digital twins as global public health and disease models for preventive and personalized medicine. Genome Med. 17, 11 (2025).
Jirsa, V. et al. Personalized virtual brain models in epilepsy. Lancet Neurol. 22, 443–454 (2023).
Niarakis, A. et al. Immune digital twins for complex human diseases: uses, limitations, and challenges. npj Syst. Biol. Appl. 10, 141 (2024).
Hernandez, M. et al. A comprehensive evaluation framework for synthetic tabular health data: analyzing the accuracy, usefulness, and privacy of generative models with and without privacy protections. Front. Digit. Health 7, 1576290 (2025).
Tian, Q., Zhang, P., Zhai, Y., Wang, Y. & Zou, Q. Using and comparing machine learning and database-based methods for classifying high-throughput sequencing data. Genome Biol. Evol. 16, 102 (2024).
Mhanna, V. et al. Analyzing adaptive immune receptor repertoires. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 4, 6 (2024).
Suhre, K. et al. Nanoparticle enrichment mass-spectrometry proteomics identifies protein-altering variants for precise pQTL mapping. Nat. Commun. 15, 989 (2024).
O’Donnell, T. J. et al. Reading the repertoire: advances in adaptive immune receptor analysis using machine learning. Cell Syst. 15, 1168–1189 (2024).
Akbar, R. et al. Progress and challenges in designing fit-for-purpose monoclonal antibodies using machine learning. mAbs 14, 2008790 (2022).
D’amico, S. et al. Using AI-generated synthetic data to speed up research and precision medicine in hematology. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform. 7, 2300021 (2023).
Schneider, C., Buchanan, A., Tadde, B. & Deane, C. M. DLAB: deep learning approaches for structure-based virtual screening of antibodies. Bioinformatics 38, 377–383 (2022).
Robert, P. A. et al. Generating unrestricted synthetic antibody–antigen structures to improve machine learning methods for predicting antibody specificity. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 845–865 (2022).
Robert, P. A., Arulraj, T. & Meyer-Hermann, M. Ymir: a 3D structural binding affinity model for simulating multi-epitope vaccines. iScience 24, 102979 (2021).
Monzó, C. et al. MOSim: a simulator for bulk and single-cell multilayer regulatory networks. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 110 (2025).
Liu, J. et al. Achieving out-of-distribution generalization: a survey. Preprint at (2023).
Han, X., Zheng, H. & Zhou, M. CARD: classification and regression diffusion models. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 35, 18100–18115 (2022).
Zhou, Z. et al. Tackling data imbalance in sim2real: the Imbalsim2real approach and its use in finger joint stiffness self-sensing for soft robot-assisted rehabilitation. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 12, 1334643 (2024).
Chernigovskaya, M. et al. Simulating adaptive immune receptors and repertoires with complex immune information to guide
Curtiss, M. et al. Development and benchmarking of AIRR machine learning. Nucleic Acids Res. 53, gkaf025 (2025).
Schuler, A., Jung, K., Tibshirani, R., Hastie, T. & Shah, N. Synth-validation: choosing the optimal causal inference approach for a specific dataset. Preprint at (2017).
Franklin, J. M., Schneeweiss, S., Polinski, J. M. & Rassen, J. A. Plasmode simulation for assessing pharmacoepidemiologic methods within complex healthcare databases. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 72, 219–226 (2014).
Quintana, D. S. A primer on synthetic datasets for the biobehavioural sciences to encourage reproducibility and hypothesis generation. eLife 9, 53275 (2020).
Selvarajoo, K. & Maurer-Stroh, S. Advancing multi-omics synthetic data integration. Brief. Bioinform. 25, 213 (2024).
Giuffrè, M. & Shung, D. L. Leveraging synthetic data in healthcare: innovation, application, and privacy considerations. npj Digit. Med. 6, 186 (2023).
Heine, J., Fowler, E. E., Berglund, A., Schell, M. J. & Eschrich, S. Methods for producing and assessing realistic multivariate synthetic data. Sci. Rep. 13, 12266 (2023).
Kühnel, L. et al. Creating synthetic data for a longitudinal cohort study—evaluation, method extension, and replication of published data analysis findings. Sci. Rep. 14, 14412 (2024).
Pezoulas, V. C. et al. Approaches for generating synthetic data in healthcare: a review of open-source tools and techniques. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 23, 2892–2910 (2024).
Rai, K., Wang, Y., O’Connell, R. W., Patel, A. B. & Bashor, C. J. Employing machine learning to improve and speed up synthetic biology. Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng. 31, 100553 (2024).
Hahn, W. et al. Producing dependable synthetic clinical trial data: the importance of hyperparameter tuning and domain-specific constraints. Inf. Sci. 733, 122927 (2026).
Qian, Z. et al. Using synthetic data to preserve privacy in clinical risk prediction. Sci. Rep. 14, 25676 (2024).
Nisevic, M., Milojevic, D. & Spajic, D. The use of synthetic data in medicine: legal and ethical issues in patient profiling. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 28, 190–198 (2025).
Schulz, A. et al. Modeling conditional distributions of neural and behavioral data using masked variational autoencoders. Cell Rep. (2025).
Kim, Y. & Cheon, M. in Transcriptome Data Analysis (ed. Azad, R. K.) 259–274 (Springer, 2024); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-3886-6_15
Watson, J. L. et al. Designing protein structure and function from scratch with RFdiffusion. Nature 620, 1089–1100 (2023).
Dalla-Torre, H. et al. Nucleotide transformer: constructing and evaluating robust foundation models for human genomics. Nat. Methods 22, 287–297 (2025).
Zhang, S. et al. Uses of transformer-based language models in bioinformatics: a comprehensive survey. Bioinform. Adv. 3, 001 (2023).
Vu, M. H. et al. A linguistically inspired guide for developing biologically reliable protein language models. Nat. Mach. Intell. 5, 485–496 (2023).
Garbulowski, M. et al. GeneSPIDER2: simulating and benchmarking large-scale gene regulatory networks using perturbed single-cell data. NAR Genomics Bioinform. 6, 121 (2024).
Cunningham, H., Ewart, A., Riggs, L., Huben, R. & Sharkey, L. Sparse autoencoders identify highly interpretable features within language models. ICLR (2024).
Gujral, O., Bafna, M., Alm, E. & Berger, B. Sparse autoencoders reveal biologically meaningful features in protein language model representations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 122, 2506316122 (2025).
Zhang, Y., Tiňo, P., Leonardis, A. & Tang, K. A review of neural network interpretability methods. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. Intell. 5, 726–742 (2021).
Lewis, S. et al. Scalable generation of protein equilibrium ensembles using generative deep learning. Science 389, eadv9817 (2025).
Wasdin, P. T. et al. Designing antigen-specific paired-chain antibodies with large language models. Cell 188, 7206–7221.e16 (2025).
Mason, D. M. et al. Improving therapeutic antibodies by predicting antigen specificity from antibody sequences using deep learning. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 600–612 (2021).
Scuoppo, R. et al. Building a virtual cohort of TAVI patients for in silico trials using statistical shape analysis and machine learning. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 63, 467–482 (2025).
Wang, H., Arulraj, T., Ippolito, A. & Popel, A. S. Moving from virtual patients to digital twins in immuno-oncology: insights from mechanistic quantitative systems pharmacology modeling. npj Digit. Med. 7, 189 (2024).
Vilhekar, R. S. & Rawekar, A. Applications of artificial intelligence in genetics. Cureus 16, e52035 (2024).
Yelmen, B. et al. Generating artificial human genomes with generative neural networks. PLoS Genet. 17, 1009303 (2021).
Chen, J., Mowlaei, M. E. & Shi, X. Augmenting population-scale genomic data using conditional generative adversarial networks. In Proc. 11th ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and Health Informatics (Association for Computing Machinery, 2020).
Rehfeldt, T. G. et al. ProteomicsML: a community-driven online platform for curated datasets and machine learning tutorials in proteomics. J. Proteome Res. 22, 632–636 (2023).
Akbar, R. et al. In silico demonstration of machine learning–based antibody design at unconstrained scale. mAbs 14, 2031482 (2022).
Gallo, E. The impact of big data: deep sequencing–powered computational approaches are reshaping synthetic antibody design. J. Biomed. Sci. 31, 29 (2024).
Konstantinovsky, T., Peres, A., Polak, P. & Yaari, G. A fair comparison of immunoglobulin sequence alignment tools. Brief. Bioinform. 25, 556 (2024).
Santangelo, G., Nicora, G., Bellazzi, R. & Dagliati, A. Evaluating synthetic data quality: SynthRO, a dashboard for assessing and benchmarking synthetic tabular data. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 25, 89 (2025).
De Nicoló, V. et al. Synthetic data generation in cancer genomics: a review of global research trends over the past decade. Discov. Artif. Intell. 5, 148 (2025).
Peng, K. et al. Worth and difficulty in immunogenomic diversity. Nat. Methods 18, 588–591 (2021).
Google Scholar
Tavakkol, S. et al. Less is better: adjusting coverage levels for synthetically-generated training datasets. Preprint at (2025).
Avellí, M. P., Medina, R. H., Webel, H. & Rasmussen, S. Exploring variational autoencoders for merging biomedical datasets. Preprint at bioRxiv (2025).
Zhang, J., Che, Y., Liu, R., Wang, Z. & Liu, W. Leveraging deep learning for multi-omics research: improving cancer detection and treatment strategies. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 440 (2025).
Google Scholar
Omeranovic, A., Van Long, F. N., Boubaker, A., Turgeon, A. & Nabi, H. Gaps in genomic research representation: insights from researcher interviews. BMC Med. Genomics 18, 72 (2025).
Google Scholar
Böttcher, L., Wald, S. & Chou, T. A mathematical framework for distinguishing private from public immune receptor sequences. Bull. Math. Biol. 85, 102 (2023).
Google Scholar
Baião, A. R. et al. A comprehensive overview of multi-omics integration techniques: spanning classical statistics to modern deep generative models. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 355 (2025).
Google Scholar
Palsson, G. et al. Comprehensive mapping of human recombination landscapes. Nature 639, 700–707 (2025).
Google Scholar
Santiago, E., Köpke, C. & Caballero, A. Incorporating population structure and data quality into demographic analyses using linkage disequilibrium approaches. Nat. Commun. 16, 6054 (2025).
Google Scholar
Schloissnig, S. et al. Mapping structural genomic variation across 1,019 individuals using long-read sequencing technologies. Nature 644, 442–452 (2025).
Google Scholar
Cui, X. et al. Moving past fixed structures: capturing protein motion and conformational dynamics after AlphaFold. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 340 (2025).
Google Scholar
Shrestha, P., Kandel, J., Tayara, H. & Chong, K. T. Predicting post-translational modifications through prompt-based tuning of a GPT-2 architecture. Nat. Commun. 15, 6699 (2024).
Google Scholar
Draizen, E. J., Veretnik, S., Mura, C. & Bourne, P. E. Generative deep models reveal remote protein relationships through continuous fold space exploration. Nat. Commun. 15, 8094 (2024).
Google Scholar
Listov, D., Goverde, C. A., Correia, B. E. & Fleishman, S. J. Prospects and hurdles in engineering and optimizing protein functionality. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 25, 639–653 (2024).
Google Scholar
Latorre, D., Monticelli, S., Wypych, T. P., Aschenbrenner, D. & Notarbartolo, S. T cell specificity and cross-reactivity: relevance to both healthy and diseased states. Front. Immunol. 15, 1385415 (2024).
Google Scholar
Gray, G. I. et al. Rethinking T cell receptor recognition: the underlying rules are more suggestive than strict. Immunol. Rev. 329, 13439 (2025).
Google Scholar
Boraschi, D., Schaar, M., Costa, A. & Milne, R. Regulating synthetic data in medical research: an urgent priority. Lancet Digit. Health 7, 233–234 (2025).
Google Scholar
Jiang, J., Domingues, L. & Mendes, J. M. Synthetic data in medical imaging under the EHDS framework: charting a way forward for ethical governance, regulation, and standardization. Front. Digit. Health 7, 1620270 (2025).
Google Scholar
Heusel, M., Ramsauer, H., Unterthiner, T., Nessler, B. & Hochreiter, S. Training GANs with a two time-scale update rule leads to convergence at a local Nash equilibrium. In Proc. 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 6629–6640 (Curran Associates, 2017).
Kynkäänniemi, T., Karras, T., Laine, S., Lehtinen, J. & Aila, T. An enhanced precision and recall metric for evaluating generative models. In Proc. 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 3927–3936 (Curran Associates, 2019).
Sarkar, A. et al. Engineering DNA sequences with adjustable regulatory functions using discrete diffusion. Preprint at bioRxiv (2026).
Juan, L. et al. Assessing individual genome similarity using a topic model approach. Bioinformatics 36, 4757–4764 (2020).
Tunyasuvunakool, K. et al. Accurate prediction of protein structures across the human proteome. Nature 596, 590–596 (2021).
Alamdari, S. et al. Protein generation via evolutionary diffusion: leveraging sequence information alone. Preprint at bioRxiv (2024).
Preuer, K., Renz, P., Unterthiner, T., Hochreiter, S. & Klambauer, G. Fréchet ChemNet distance: a benchmarking metric for generative molecular models in drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 58, 1736–1741 (2018).
Seo, K. & Choi, J. K. A thorough analysis of TCR and BCR repertoires: methods, challenges, and applications. Genomics Inform. 23, 6 (2025).
Mika, J. et al. A systematic evaluation of diversity metrics for TCR repertoire analysis. BMC Biol. 23, 133 (2025).
Corcoran, M. M. & Hedestam, G. B. K. Variation in germline genes of adaptive immune receptors. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 87, 102429 (2024).
Zamzmi, G. et al. A scoring framework for assessing synthetic medical data. Commun. Eng. 4, 130 (2025).
Huang, J. et al. Foundation models and intelligent decision-making: advancements, open issues, and future directions. Innovation (2025).
Hu, Y., Xu, C., Lin, B., Yang, W. & Tang, Y. Y. Multimodal large language models in medicine: a comprehensive review. Intell. Oncol. 1, 308–325 (2025).
Arora, R. K. et al. HealthBench: benchmarking large language models for better human health outcomes. Preprint at (2025).
Gaebe, K. & Woerd, B. Testing large language models as diagnostic aids for medical students and clinicians with advanced prompting methods. PLoS ONE 20, 0325803 (2025).
Phillips, L. et al. SynthPert: boosting LLM biological reasoning through synthetic traces for predicting cellular perturbations. Preprint at (2025).
Bolgova, O., Ganguly, P., Ikram, M. F. & Mavrych, V. Using large language models to grade medical short answer questions: a comparison with expert human graders. Med. Educ. Online 30, 2550751 (2025).
Höfer, S. et al. Sim2real in robotics and automation: use cases and challenges. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 18, 398–400 (2021).
Truong, J., Chernova, S. & Batra, D. Two-way domain adaptation for sim2real transfer in embodied navigation systems. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 6, 2634–2641 (2021).
Baek, S., Song, K. & Lee, I. Single-cell foundation models: integrating artificial intelligence into cellular biology. Exp. Mol. Med. 27, 2169–2181 (2025).
Sethna, Z., Elhanati, Y., Callan, C. G., Walczak, A. M. & Mora, T. OLGA: rapid calculation of generation probabilities for B-cell and T-cell receptor amino acid sequences and motifs. Bioinformatics 35, 2974–2981 (2019).
Ahlmann-Eltze, C., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Deep learning approaches for predicting gene perturbation effects have not yet surpassed simple linear baseline methods. Nat. Methods 22, 1657–1661 (2025).
Fischer, S. C., Bassel, G. W. & Kollmannsberger, P. Tissues as networks of cells: toward generative rules governing complex organ development. J. R. Soc. Interface 20, 20230115 (2023).
Karim, A. S. et al. Deconstructing synthetic biology across multiple scales: a conceptual framework for training synthetic biologists. Nat. Commun. 15, 5425 (2024).
Pang, K. et al. PULSAR: a foundational model for multi-scale and multicellular biology. Preprint at bioRxiv (2025).
Lv, T., Zhang, Y., Liu, J., Kang, Q. & Liu, L. Multi-omics integration for both single-cell and spatially resolved data using a dual-path graph attention auto-encoder. Brief. Bioinform. 25, 450 (2024).
Wu, Y. & Xie, L. AI-powered multi-omics integration for multi-scale predictive modeling of genotype–environment–phenotype relationships. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 27, 265–277 (2025).
Schuster, V., Dann, E., Krogh, A. & Teichmann, S. A. multiDGD: a flexible deep generative model for multi-omics data. Nat. Commun. 15, 10031 (2024).
Xin, L. et al. Artificial intelligence for central dogma-centric multi-omics: challenges and breakthroughs. Preprint (2024).
Li, Y., Wang, Y., Liang, T., Li, Y. & Du, W. A multi-omics integration framework employing multi-label guided learning and multi-scale fusion. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 493 (2025).
Arulraj, T., Wang, H. et al. Harnessing multi-omics data to strengthen quantitative systems pharmacology in immuno-oncology. Brief. Bioinform. 25, 131 (2024).
Liu, J. et al. Challenges in AI-driven biomedical multimodal data fusion and analysis. Genomics Proteomics Bioinform. 23, 011 (2025).
Marchesi, R. et al. Coherent cross-modal generation of synthetic biomedical data to advance multimodal precision medicine. PLoS Comput. Biol. (2026).
Warner, E. et al. Multimodal machine learning in image-based and clinical biomedicine: a survey and future outlook. Int. J. Comput. Vision 132, 3753–3769 (2024).
Sheng, B., Keane, P. A., Tham, Y.-C. & Wong, T. Y. Synthetic data enhances medical foundation models. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 9, 443–444 (2025).
Pedrocchi, F., Barkmann, F., Joudaki, A. & Boeva, V. Sparse autoencoders uncover interpretable features in single-cell foundation models. Preprint at bioRxiv (2025).
Le, N. M. et al. Assessing the utility of sparse autoencoders for interpreting a pathology foundation model. Preprint (2025).
Tagasovska, N. et al. Antibody DomainBed: out-of-distribution generalization in therapeutic protein design. Preprint (2024).
Vegesana, K. & Thomas, P. G. Deciphering the code of adaptive immunity: the role of computational tools. Cell Syst. 15, 1156–1167 (2024).
Cohen-Davidi, E. & Veksler-Lublinsky, I. Evaluating negative instances: how generating negative data influences the classification of interactions between microRNAs and messenger RNAs. PLoS Comput. Biol. 20, 1012385 (2024).
Klarner, L., Rudner, T, G. J., Morris, G. M., Deane, C. M. & Teh, Y. W. Guiding diffusion with context for designing molecules and proteins outside the training distribution. In Proc. 41st International Conference on Machine Learning 24770–24807 (JMLR, 2024).
Ursu, E. et al. How training data composition shapes machine learning generalization and the discovery of biological principles. Nat. Mach. Intell. 7, 1206–1219 (2025).
Vanherle, B., Michiels, N. & Reeth, F. V. Evolutionary learning approaches for crafting sim-to-real data enhancement strategies. Preprint at (2024).
Li, W., Ballard, J., Zhao, Y. & Long, Q. Integrating biological knowledge into learning methods for multi-omics data analysis. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 23, 1945–1950 (2024).
Shi, Y., Xu, W. & Hu, P. Learning beyond the training distribution in bioinformatics: recent advances and open challenges. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 294 (2025).
Liu, Y. et al. An intelligent bioinformatics assistant powered by data for large-scale omics studies and scientific discovery. Brief. Bioinform. 26, 312 (2025).
Tobin, J. et al. Leveraging domain randomization to adapt deep neural networks from simulated environments to real-world settings. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) 23–30 (IEEE Press, 2017).
Saratkar, S. Y. et al. Digital twin technology for advancing personalized medicine. Front. Digit. Health (2025).
De Domenico, M. et al. Prospects and hurdles for digital twins in precision medicine through the lens of complex systems. npj Digit. Med. 8, 37 (2025).
Puniya, B. L. AI-powered advances in mechanistic computational modeling and digital twin technology for biomedical use cases. J. Mol. Biol. 437, 169181 (2025).
Thornburg, Z. R. et al. Computationally reconstructing a minimal living cell in four dimensions. Cell (2026).
Hansen, J., Jain, A. R., Nenov, P., Robinson, P. N. & Iyengar, R. Bridging transcriptomics and digital twins to model organ-level function. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. (2024).
Niarakis, A. et al. Constructing immune digital twins: a collaborative, multidisciplinary, international initiative. Immunoinformatics (2025).
Surian, N. U. et al. A digital twin approach using generalized metabolic fluxes to detect and forecast chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes. npj Digit. Med. 7, 140 (2024).
Kapteyn, M. G. et al. TumorTwin: a Python-based toolkit for building patient-specific digital twins in cancer research. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. (2026).
Frey, N. C. et al. Combining laboratory experimentation with deep learning for therapeutic antibody optimization. Preprint at bioRxiv (2025).
Khan, A. A. et al. A strategic roadmap toward predictive human immunology. Preprint at (2025).
Morlot, J.-B. et al. TwinCell: a large-scale causal cellular model enabling robust and interpretable identification of therapeutic targets. Preprint at bioRxiv (2026).
Bruynseels, K., Sio, F. & Hoven, J. Exploring the ethical dimensions of digital twins as an emerging paradigm in healthcare engineering. Front. Genet. 9, 31 (2018).
Björnsson, B. et al. Leveraging digital twins to tailor medical treatments to individual patients. Genome Med. 12, 1–4 (2020).
I notice that the content you’ve provided consists entirely of a reference list (bibliography) from an academic article. These are citations — author names, titles, journal names, years, and page numbers — which are factual bibliographic data that cannot be meaningfully paraphrased without losing their accuracy and utility.
Paraphrasing citation entries would be inappropriate because:
1. **Author names** are proper nouns and cannot be changed.
2. **Article titles** are fixed identifiers — altering them would make the references incorrect.
3. **Journal names, volumes, pages, and DOIs** are precise factual data that must remain unchanged for the references to function.
Since there is no prose or narrative text to rewrite, there is nothing here to paraphrase. The HTML structure and content should be kept exactly as-is.
If you have the **body text** of the article (the paragraphs discussing these references), I’d be happy to paraphrase that for you while keeping the reference list intact. Please share the article text and I’ll get started!
