Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41696324›Full record

ReviewACS omega2026

Big Data for Drug Discovery: Some Historical Landscape, Considerations, and Applications for a Medicinal Chemist.

João A L de Lima, Lucas Silva Franco, Lídia M Lima

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS omega, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

João A L de LimaInstitute of Biomedical Science, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Avenue Carlos Chagas Filho 373, CCS, Block B Room B14 Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-902, Brazil.
Lucas Silva FrancoInstitute of Biomedical Science, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Avenue Carlos Chagas Filho 373, CCS, Block B Room B14 Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-902, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0121-3011
Lídia M LimaInstitute of Biomedical Science, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Avenue Carlos Chagas Filho 373, CCS, Block B Room B14 Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-902, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8625-6351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Big Data (BD) has the potential to transform the process of drug discovery. The integration of chemical, biological, pharmacological, and clinical information facilitates the expeditious conception of high-value projects, thereby enhancing the identification of hits and the generation of superior leads or repositioned candidates while concomitantly reducing time and costs. In this review, we demonstrate that BD extends beyond the scope of ligand discovery, thereby supporting the identification of novel pharmacological targets through the integration of genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic data sets. This integration adds further depth and guides the development of individualized therapies. When combined with combinatorial chemistry, high-throughput screening, and artificial intelligence (AI), BD expedites the identification of compounds that exhibit optimal pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. The impact of BD extends to later stages of drug development, including regulatory evaluation and clinical translation. This demonstrates that BD is no longer a supplementary tool but a cornerstone for rational molecular design, predictive modeling, and data-driven drug discovery. Although the benefits generated by the use of BD and AI in MedChem are evident, the impact of the widespread use of these data and tools raises a series of philosophical questions that need to be discussed since the popularization of large language models (LLMs) has resulted in the generation of promiscuous data, which, from a scientific point of view, lacks the criteria necessary for such data to be considered meaningful. All of these factors demonstrate the need for intentional dialogue on how these tools should be applied within the hermeneutics of biomedical sciences themselves, in order to ensure a lucid discussion on the nature of the method, harmonizing this apparent tension between human and AI, which has been a source of controversy since the exponential rise of ChatGPT and various other LLMs.

Identifiers

PMID41696324
PMCPMC12903145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.