Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40099205›Full record

ReviewJournal of pharmaceutical analysis2025

Elucidating the role of artificial intelligence in drug development from the perspective of drug-target interactions.

Boyang Wang, Tingyu Zhang, Qingyuan Liu, Chayanis Sutcharitchan, Ziyi Zhou, Dingfan Zhang, Shao Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pharmaceutical analysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Dual-target carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in cancer therapy: progress, challenges, and opportunities.Medicinal chemistry research : an international journal for rapid communications on design and mechanisms of action of biologically active agents · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. New Horizons in Metabolic Health: Unveiling the Future of Drug Discovery and Development.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2026
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

7 authors.

Boyang WangInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Tingyu ZhangInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Qingyuan LiuInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Chayanis SutcharitchanInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Ziyi ZhouInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Dingfan ZhangInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.
Shao LiInstitute for TCM-X, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, Bioinformatics Division, BNRist, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug development remains a critical issue in the field of biomedicine. With the rapid advancement of information technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and the advent of the big data era, AI-assisted drug development has become a new trend, particularly in predicting drug-target associations. To address the challenge of drug-target prediction, AI-driven models have emerged as powerful tools, offering innovative solutions by effectively extracting features from complex biological data, accurately modeling molecular interactions, and precisely predicting potential drug-target outcomes. Traditional machine learning (ML), network-based, and advanced deep learning architectures such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), graph convolutional networks (GCNs), and transformers play a pivotal role. This review systematically compiles and evaluates AI algorithms for drug- and drug combination-target predictions, highlighting their theoretical frameworks, strengths, and limitations. CNNs effectively identify spatial patterns and molecular features critical for drug-target interactions. GCNs provide deep insights into molecular interactions via relational data, whereas transformers increase prediction accuracy by capturing complex dependencies within biological sequences. Network-based models offer a systematic perspective by integrating diverse data sources, and traditional ML efficiently handles large datasets to improve overall predictive accuracy. Collectively, these AI-driven methods are transforming drug-target predictions and advancing the development of personalized therapy. This review summarizes the application of AI in drug development, particularly in drug-target prediction, and offers recommendations on models and algorithms for researchers engaged in biomedical research. It also provides typical cases to better illustrate how AI can further accelerate development in the fields of biomedicine and drug discovery.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDeep learningDrug combinationDrug-target interactionsMachine learningNetwork pharmacology

Identifiers

PMID40099205
PMCPMC11910364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.