Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36364451›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2022

To Affinity and Beyond: A Personal Reflection on the Design and Discovery of Drugs.

Darren R Flower

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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

1 author.

Darren R FlowerIndependent Interdisciplinary Consultant, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Faced with new and as yet unmet medical need, the stark underperformance of the pharmaceutical discovery process is well described if not perfectly understood. Driven primarily by profit rather than societal need, the search for new pharmaceutical products-small molecule drugs, biologicals, and vaccines-is neither properly funded nor sufficiently systematic. Many innovative approaches remain significantly underused and severely underappreciated, while dominant methodologies are replete with problems and limitations. Design is a component of drug discovery that is much discussed but seldom realised. In and of itself, technical innovation alone is unlikely to fulfil all the possibilities of drug discovery if the necessary underlying infrastructure remains unaltered. A fundamental revision in attitudes, with greater reliance on design powered by computational approaches, as well as a move away from the commercial imperative, is thus essential to capitalise fully on the potential of pharmaceutical intervention in healthcare.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsVaccinesDrug DesignDrug DiscoveryDrug IndustryPharmaceutical PreparationsBiological ProductsPharmaceutical PreparationsVaccinescomputational chemistrydrug discoveryepistemiologymolecular designpharmaceutical industry

Identifiers

PMID36364451
PMCPMC9656231

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.