ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2026
How Can QM Methods Be Used to Guide Synthesis Planning in Drug Discovery?
Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantum mechanical (QM) methods are traditionally used in drug discovery to support molecular design and property prediction; however, they are becoming increasingly important for evaluating synthetic feasibility during the Design-Make-Test-Analyze (DMTA) cycle. As modern tools such as virtual screening and machine-learning workflows rapidly propose many potential candidate molecules, their progression ultimately depends on whether they can be prepared efficiently in the laboratory. QM approaches provide a mechanistically grounded framework for evaluating thermodynamic and kinetic feasibility, predicting selectivity, and identifying competing reaction pathways before experimental effort is invested. This chapter reviews how QM methods can guide synthesis planning by complementing chemist expertise, literature precedent, and computer-assisted synthesis planning (CASP) tools. The application of density functional theory (DFT) to evaluate reaction energetics, transition states, and stereochemical outcomes is discussed, as well as the role of QM-derived reactivity descriptors to enable the quantitative ranking of retrosynthetic disconnections. An automated reaction-path exploration method is also highlighted for analyzing complex pericyclic and stereochemically rich transformations. These approaches demonstrate how QM-driven synthesis planning can support the identification of synthetically accessible drug candidates and advance progress in making the compounds, which is often the rate-limiting step in drug discovery. Some shortcomings of QM methods are also acknowledged, particularly the difficulty of fully modeling complex chemical reactions, which consequently restricts the breadth of their practical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42604911What 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.