ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2026
Why do AI projects fail in drug development and pharma? Insights from multi-year Pistoia Alliance studies.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is playing an increasingly central role in drug discovery and the pharmaceutical industry more broadly. However, despite some high-profile success stories, many technically successful pilots do not translate into sustained business value. In this study, we analyze the determinants of successful AI adoption in the life sciences through three complementary approaches: (i) brainstorming workshops with senior industry professionals, (ii) a global executive survey, and (iii) a statistical analysis of a collection of AI/ML use cases collected by the Pistoia Alliance. Across all methods, a consistent pattern emerges: high strategic importance and demand for AI contrast with low organizational maturity, resulting in limited success rates for production deployments. Statistical analysis reveals that business success is associated with dimensions of organizational capability maturity, most notably project maturity, while technical factors such as data sources or model types show no significant association on their own. The findings reinforce that AI projects follow the same success drivers as other complex engineering initiatives and that organizational readiness, change management, and alignment between stakeholders are critical. Furthermore, trustworthiness encompassing reproducibility, explainability, and governance, is identified as a limiting factor for adoption, particularly in high-risk domains. We synthesize these observations into a set of recommended practices that emphasize fitness-for-purpose method selection, integration of AI into human workflows, and development of shared standards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42563013What 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.