ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Development and validation of an artificial intelligence proof-of-concept tool for risk-based quality assessment of generic medicines: a South African case study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Regulatory authorities in African countries face persistent challenges in ensuring the timely authorization of quality generic medicines due to limited technical capacity and extensive review timelines. The South African medicines regulator (SAHPRA) piloted a risk-based assessment (RBA) framework to expedite the Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) evaluation of generic medicines. Building on this initiative, an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tool, termed LEXI, was developed and validated to automate SAHPRA's RBA triage for generic medicines and was externally validated at two African NRAs. Methods: LEXI was designed based on SAHPRA's established RBA quality matrix, using 210 of its product dossiers, and was validated under the Good Automated Manufacturing Practice (GAMP5) framework. The system employed Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) architecture with Meta's Llama 3.1 large language model, supported by regulatory data integrations from the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines (EDQM) and the World Health Organization Prequalification Programme. Validation comprised three qualification phases-installation (IQ), operational (OQ), and performance (PQ)-and was conducted across two African national regulatory authorities (NRAs): SAHPRA and the Botswana Medicines Regulatory Authority (BoMRA). Results: During external validation across 60 dossiers, LEXI demonstrated 91.7% overall predictive accuracy (55/60; 95% CI: 81.6-97.2%), with sensitivity of 96.9% (31/32; 95% CI: 83.8-99.9%) and specificity of 85.7% (24/28; 95% CI: 67.3-96.0%), with a median 91% time reduction; performance varied by criterion and dossier structure. Criterion-level accuracy exceeded 95% for most critical quality attributes (CQAs). Adaptations allowed for effective operation across different dossier structures and local regulatory environments, confirming its interoperability and robustness. Discussion: The validation of LEXI highlights the feasibility of secure, traceable AI integration into regulatory workflows. The tool augments human expertise by automating risk classification and dossier triage, enabling consistent, evidence-based decision support. These findings align with global regulatory trends at mature authorities, emphasizing AI's role in improving regulatory agility while maintaining scientific rigor. Conclusion: LEXI represents a validated proof-of-concept for AI-assisted, risk-based regulatory assessment in resource-constrained settings. Its demonstrated efficiency and accuracy support its potential to enhance regulatory workflows and reduce review backlogs of generic medicines, pending further validation across a broader range of product types, including complex formulations, and diverse regulatory environments.
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.