ArticleCommunications chemistry2025
A bottom-up approach to find lead compounds in expansive chemical spaces.
Article in Communications chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chemical Distance-Based Acceleration of Large Library Docking with ChemSTEP.ACS central science · 2026Article
- Strategies for Identifying Molecules of Interest in Large Chemical Spaces.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- Modeling the Sensitivity of Large-Scale Virtual Screening to Scoring Function Accuracy, Artifacts, and Library Composition.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- ReLink-PyB: an adapted REINVENT-based framework for non-DSM PfDHODH inhibitor discovery.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Phenotypic AI-based design of cell-specific small molecule cytotoxics.Communications chemistry · 2026Article
- Integrative Computational Chemistry Approaches in Modern Drug Discovery: Advances in Docking, Pharmacophore Modeling, Molecular Dynamics, and Virtual Screening.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Representative Random Sampling of Chemical Space.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug discovery starts with the identification of a "hit" compound that, following a long and expensive optimization process, evolves into a drug candidate. Bigger screening collections increase the odds of finding more and better hits. For this reason, large pharmaceutical companies have invested heavily in high-throughput screening (HTS) collections that can contain several million compounds. However, this figure pales in comparison with the emergent on-demand chemical collections, which have recently reached the trillion scale. These chemical collections are potentially transformative for drug discovery, as they could deliver many diverse and high-quality hits, even reaching lead-like starting points. But first, it will be necessary to develop computational tools capable of efficiently navigating such massive virtual collections. To address this challenge, we have conceived an innovative strategy that explores the chemical universe from the bottom up, performing a systematic search on the fragment space (exploration phase), to then mine the most promising areas of on-demand collections (exploitation phase). Using a hierarchy of increasingly sophisticated computational methods to remove false positives, we maximize the success probability and minimize the overall computational cost. A basic implementation of the concept has enabled us to validate the strategy prospectively, allowing the identification of new BRD4 (BD1) binders with potencies comparable to stablished drug candidates.
Identifiers
What 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.