Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40382515›Full record

ReviewCommunications medicine2025

Regulating the AI-enabled ecosystem for human therapeutics.

Rominder Singh, Mark Paxton, Jared Auclair

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Artificial intelligence directed computational protein design: lessons from COVID-19 for pandemic-ready vaccines and antibody therapeutics.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Applications of artificial intelligence in drug discovery.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
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

3 authors.

Rominder SinghProfessor of Practice, Regulatory Sciences & AI, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. rom.singh@northeastern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-8298-8176
Mark PaxtonFounder, White Oak AI Law, Versailles, KY, France.
Jared AuclairDean and Professor, College of Professional Studies, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) tools and techniques can revolutionize the discovery, development, manufacturing, and delivery of new medicines by reducing the time and cost involved. The biopharmaceutical industry is a highly regulated sector where robust regulatory oversight is essential to ensure human therapeutics' quality, efficacy, and safety. This Perspective examines the challenges of regulating AI-driven technologies in drug discovery and development. As AI is anticipated to play an unprecedented role in transforming drug development, the critical question is not whether to regulate these advancements but how to do so effectively. Here, we evaluate current global drug regulatory practices, discuss gaps and unknowns, and provide recommendations on addressing these issues to facilitate effective regulations of AI-driven innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry.

Identifiers

PMID40382515
PMCPMC12085592

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.