ArticleMolecular diversity2025
"Several birds with one stone": exploring the potential of AI methods for multi-target drug design.
Article in Molecular diversity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive evaluation of artificial intelligence-empowered approaches for protein-aptamer complex prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Fine-tuning LLM hyperparameters to align semantic and physiological contexts of aging-related pathways.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- Optimization of potential targets for antidepressant Chinese medicines: AI and multi-omics methods.Chinese medicine · 2026Review
- Machine Learning for Multi-Target Drug Discovery: Challenges and Opportunities in Systems Pharmacology.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Multi-Target Drug Design in Alzheimer's Disease Treatment: Emerging Technologies, Advantages, Challenges, and Limitations.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2025Review
- Editorial: Multi-target drug discovery and design for complex health disorders.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Drug discovery is a time-consuming and expensive process. Artificial intelligence (AI) methodologies have been adopted to cut costs and speed up the drug development process, serving as promising in silico approaches to efficiently design novel drug candidates targeting various health conditions. Most existing AI-driven drug discovery studies follow a single-target approach which focuses on identifying compounds that bind a target (i.e., one-drug-one-target approach). Polypharmacology is a relatively new concept that takes a systematic approach to search for a compound (or a combination of compounds) that can bind two or more carefully selected protein biomarkers simultaneously to synergistically treat the disease. Recent studies have demonstrated that multi-target drugs offer superior therapeutic potentials compared to single-target drugs. However, it is intuitively thought that searching for multi-target drugs is more challenging than finding single-target drugs. At present, it is unclear how AI approaches perform in designing multi-target drugs. In this paper, we comprehensively investigated the performance of multi-objective AI approaches for multi-target drug design. Our findings are quite counter-intuitive demonstrating that, in fact, AI approaches for multi-target drug design are able to efficiently generate more high-quality novel compounds than the single-target approaches while satisfying a number of constraints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39580772What 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.