Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32850117›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2020

Recent advances in phenotypic drug discovery.

David C Swinney, Jonathan A Lee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Hyperkalemia in Severe Burn Injuries: Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Advances.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2026
    Review
  7. Ligand-Based Compound Activity Prediction via Few-Shot Learning.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024
    Article
  8. Stability-based approaches in chemoproteomics.Expert reviews in molecular medicine · 2024
    Review
  9. AI enhances drug discovery and development.National science review · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

David C SwinneyDCSwinney consulting, Belmont, California, USA.
Jonathan A LeePDD4Patients LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a great need for innovative new medicines to treat unmet medical needs. The discovery and development of innovative new medicines is extremely difficult, costly, and inefficient. In the last decade, phenotypic drug discovery (PDD) was reintroduced as a strategy to provide first-in-class medicines. PDD uses empirical, target-agnostic lead generation to identify pharmacologically active molecules and novel therapeutics which work through unprecedented drug mechanisms. The economic and scientific value of PDD is exemplified through game-changing medicines for hepatitis C virus, spinal muscular atrophy, and cystic fibrosis. In this short review, recent advances are noted for the implementation and de-risking of PDD (for compound library selection, biomarker development, mechanism identification, and safety studies) and the potential for artificial intelligence. A significant barrier in the decision to implement PDD is balancing the potential impact of a novel mechanism of drug action with an under-defined scientific path forward, with the desire to provide infrastructure and metrics to optimize return on investment, which a known mechanism provides. A means to address this knowledge gap in the future is to empower precompetitive research utilizing the empirical concepts of PDD to identify new mechanisms and pharmacologically active compounds.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryMolecular Targeted TherapyArtificial IntelligencePhenotypeempiricalfirst in classPDDPhenotypic drug discoveryTargetTDD

Identifiers

PMID32850117
PMCPMC7431967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.