ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2018
Drug discovery effectiveness from the standpoint of therapeutic mechanisms and indications.
Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 47 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
47 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trackable Intratumor Microdosing and Spatial Profiling Provide Early Insights into Activity of Investigational Agents in the Intact Tumor Microenvironment.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2023Trial
- Therapeutic Horizon in Multiple Myeloma: Analysis of the Emerging Landscape of Clinical Trials.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Small-Molecule Targeting of the Iron-Responsive Element in the APP mRNA 5'-UTR to Control Amyloid Translation in Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Dynamic clinical trial success rates for drugs in the 21st century.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Review
- Validation of a functional human AD model with four AD therapeutics utilizing patterned ipsc-derived cortical neurons integrated with microelectrode arrays.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- In Silico Investigation against Inhibitors of Alpha-Amylase Using Structure-based Screening, Molecular Docking, and Molecular Simulations Studies.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2024Article
- Validation of a functional human AD model with four AD therapeutics utilizing patterned iPSC-derived cortical neurons integrated with microelectrode arrays.Research square · 2024Article
- Recent advances in anti-inflammatory active components and action mechanisms of natural medicines.Inflammopharmacology · 2023Review
- The Future of Drug Delivery.Chemistry of materials : a publication of the American Chemical Society · 2023Article
- Predictive validity in drug discovery: what it is, why it matters and how to improve it.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2022Review
- A semi-mechanistic dose-finding design in oncology using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling.Pharmaceutical statistics · 2022Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Current Status and Future Perspectives: A State-of-the-Art Review.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Review
- Article
- Nanosafety: An Evolving Concept to Bring the Safest Possible Nanomaterials to Society and Environment.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A State-of-the-Art Roadmap for Biomarker-Driven Drug Development in the Era of Personalized Therapies.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Regulatory spine RS3 residue of protein kinases: a lipophilic bystander or a decisive element in the small-molecule kinase inhibitor binding?Biochemical Society transactions · 2022Article
- Human Genomics and Drug Development.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2022Review
- Decisive role of water and protein dynamics in residence time of p38α MAP kinase inhibitors.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Prediction of Drug Targets for Specific Diseases Leveraging Gene Perturbation Data: A Machine Learning Approach.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The productivity of the pharmaceutical industry has been widely discussed in recent years, particularly with regard to concerns that substantial expenditures on research and development have failed to translate into approved drugs. Various analyses of this productivity challenge have focused on aspects such as attrition rates at particular clinical phases or the physicochemical properties of drug candidates, but relatively little attention has been paid to how the industry has performed from the standpoint of the choice of therapeutic mechanisms and their intended indications. This article examines what the pharmaceutical industry has achieved in this respect by analysing comprehensive industry-wide data on the mechanism-indication pairs that have been investigated during the past 20 years. Our findings indicate several points and trends that we hope will be useful in understanding and improving the productivity of the industry, including areas in which the industry has had substantial success or failure and the relative extent of novelty in completed and ongoing projects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29075002What 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.