Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39030362›Full record

ReviewNature chemical biology2024

Machine learning in preclinical drug discovery.

Denise B Catacutan, Jeremie Alexander, Autumn Arnold, Jonathan M Stokes

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature chemical biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

85 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Artificial intelligence-assisted lead optimization in drug discovery: bridging computational advances and translational challenges.Medicinal chemistry research : an international journal for rapid communications on design and mechanisms of action of biologically active agents · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Denise B Catacutan *Department of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jeremie Alexander *Department of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Autumn ArnoldDepartment of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jonathan M StokesDepartment of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. stokesjm@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-8378-2380

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug-discovery and drug-development endeavors are laborious, costly and time consuming. These programs can take upward of 12 years and cost US $2.5 billion, with a failure rate of more than 90%. Machine learning (ML) presents an opportunity to improve the drug-discovery process. Indeed, with the growing abundance of public and private large-scale biological and chemical datasets, ML techniques are becoming well positioned as useful tools that can augment the traditional drug-development process. In this Perspective, we discuss the integration of algorithmic methods throughout the preclinical phases of drug discovery. Specifically, we highlight an array of ML-based efforts, across diverse disease areas, to accelerate initial hit discovery, mechanism-of-action (MOA) elucidation and chemical property optimization. With advances in the application of ML across diverse therapeutic areas, we posit that fully ML-integrated drug-discovery pipelines will define the future of drug-development programs.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryMachine LearningAlgorithmsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumans

Identifiers

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.