ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025
Data-driven strategies for drug repurposing: insights, recommendations, and case studies.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- DLRNA-BERTa: a transformer approach for predicting molecule-RNA binding affinities.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- TRIM25 promotes glioblastoma progression by stabilizing HIF-1α expression in normoxia through K11/K29 polyubiquitination.Cell death & disease · 2026Article
- Enabling multi-target drug discovery through latent evolutionary optimization and synthesis-aware prioritization (EVOSYNTH).Communications chemistry · 2026Article
- Design and evaluation of semantically-valid negative samples integration techniques for scalable semi-automated drug repurposing prediction pipelines in rare disease research.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Single-Cell Transcriptomics Reveals Biomarkers for NK Cell Dysfunction in Endometriosis-Associated Immune Dysregulation.Mediators of inflammation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug discovery is a complex, time-intensive, and costly process, often requiring more than a decade and substantial financial investment to bring a single therapeutic to market. Drug repurposing, the systematic identification of new indications for existing approved drugs, offers a cost-effective and expedited alternative to traditional pipelines, with the potential to address unmet clinical needs. In this study, we present a comparative analysis of drug-target interaction data from three extensively curated resources: ChEMBL, BindingDB, and GtoPdb, evaluating their release histories, curation methodologies, and coverage of approved and investigational compounds and targets. To facilitate therapeutic interpretation, we manually classified ChEMBL targets into 12 high-level biological families and mapped 817 clinically approved drug indications into 28 broader therapeutic groups. This structured framework enabled a systematic profiling of physicochemical properties among approved drugs across therapeutic categories. Our analyses revealed associations between physicochemical characteristics and therapeutic groups, providing practical guidance for indication-specific compound prioritization and refining the repurposing studies. We also examined cross-indication drug approvals to identify areas with high repurposing potential. Finally, we implemented a pathway-based computational pipeline to predict repositioning opportunities for FDA-approved drugs across 10 major cancer types, demonstrating its adaptability to other disease contexts. Overall, this work consolidates drug-target data and computational repurposing into a data-driven framework that advances drug discovery and translational applications.
Indexed as
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.