ArticleScientific reports2019
Improving the odds of drug development success through human genomics: modelling study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
107 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 265 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification of genetically-supported new drug targets for osteomyelitis based on druggable genomes.Human genomics · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on Mental Illness: Evidence from a Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Lipid lowering and Alzheimer disease risk: A mendelian randomization study.Annals of neurology · 2020Pooled it
- Complement Component C4B Prioritization Through Drug‒Target Mendelian Randomization and Proteomic Analysis Reveals a Novel Therapeutic Target for Calcific Aortic Valve Stenosis.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
- An integrative mendelian randomisation and drug mechanism framework for target prioritisation and therapeutic repurposing in major depression.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- The immunoproteome and multimorbidity: A Mendelian randomization study.Science advances · 2026Article
- Using human genetics to understand the effect of modulating targets of antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Moving Mendelian Randomization From Traditional Risk Factors to Molecular Targets for Drug Development and Clinical Trials in Nephrology.Kidney international reports · 2026Review
- Liver-on-a-Chip (LoC) Models: Case Studies of Academic Platforms and Commercial Products.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Informing development of brain cancer therapies within "preclinical trials" using ex vivo patient tumors.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2026Review
- Immunotherapy drug target identification using machine learning and patient-derived tumour explant validation.Nature machine intelligence · 2026Article
- Identification of potential therapeutic targets for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: an integrated multiomics analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Identification of potential bladder cancer drug targets through Mendelian randomization and molecular docking.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Exploring upstream and downstream causality of inflammatory cytokines in intervertebral disc degeneration: a bidirectional, two-sample Mendelian randomization study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Vascularized Tumor-on-a-Chip Model as a Platform for Studying Tumor-Microenvironment-Drug Interaction.Macromolecular bioscience · 2025Review
- Harnessing hibernation: Unlocking nature's secrets for advances in healthy aging, critical care, and space exploration.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Clinical impact of pharmacogenetic risk variants in a large chinese cohort.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Paradigm Lost.Cancers · 2025Article
- Seronegative Sicca Syndrome: Diagnostic Considerations and Management Strategies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Search for common genetic variants to allow reliable Mendelian randomization investigations into ketone metabolism.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Lack of efficacy in the intended disease indication is the major cause of clinical phase drug development failure. Explanations could include the poor external validity of pre-clinical (cell, tissue, and animal) models of human disease and the high false discovery rate (FDR) in preclinical science. FDR is related to the proportion of true relationships available for discovery (γ), and the type 1 (false-positive) and type 2 (false negative) error rates of the experiments designed to uncover them. We estimated the FDR in preclinical science, its effect on drug development success rates, and improvements expected from use of human genomics rather than preclinical studies as the primary source of evidence for drug target identification. Calculations were based on a sample space defined by all human diseases - the 'disease-ome' - represented as columns; and all protein coding genes - 'the protein-coding genome'- represented as rows, producing a matrix of unique gene- (or protein-) disease pairings. We parameterised the space based on 10,000 diseases, 20,000 protein-coding genes, 100 causal genes per disease and 4000 genes encoding druggable targets, examining the effect of varying the parameters and a range of underlying assumptions, on the inferences drawn. We estimated γ, defined mathematical relationships between preclinical FDR and drug development success rates, and estimated improvements in success rates based on human genomics (rather than orthodox preclinical studies). Around one in every 200 protein-disease pairings was estimated to be causal (γ = 0.005) giving an FDR in preclinical research of 92.6%, which likely makes a major contribution to the reported drug development failure rate of 96%. Observed success rate was only slightly greater than expected for a random pick from the sample space. Values for γ back-calculated from reported preclinical and clinical drug development success rates were also close to the a priori estimates. Substituting genome wide (or druggable genome wide) association studies for preclinical studies as the major information source for drug target identification was estimated to reverse the probability of late stage failure because of the more stringent type 1 error rate employed and the ability to interrogate every potential druggable target in the same experiment. Genetic studies conducted at much larger scale, with greater resolution of disease end-points, e.g. by connecting genomics and electronic health record data within healthcare systems has the potential to produce radical improvement in drug development success rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.