Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38773351›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2024

The state of the art in secondary pharmacology and its impact on the safety of new medicines.

Richard J Brennan, Stephen Jenkinson, Andrew Brown, Annie Delaunois, Bérengère Dumotier, Malar Pannirselvam, Mohan Rao, Lyn Rosenbrier Ribeiro, Friedemann Schmidt, Alicia Sibony and 10 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Building structure activity relationships to avoid toxicity due to unwanted central nervous system ion channel activity.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. AI snake oil? A risk/benefit analysis for toxicology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026
    Article
  15. Targeting Melanin Production: The Safety of Tyrosinase Inhibition.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Richard J Brennan *Sanofi, Cambridge, MA, USA. richbrennan@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0449-2730
Stephen Jenkinson *Pfizer, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Andrew BrownGSK, Stevenage, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5616-3664
Annie DelaunoisUCB Biopharma, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6345-7989
Bérengère DumotierNovartis Biomedical Research, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3360-1510
Malar PannirselvamVertex Pharmaceuticals, Boston, MA, USA.
Mohan RaoJanssen Research & Development, San Diego, CA, USA.
Lyn Rosenbrier RibeiroUCB Biopharma, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium.
Friedemann SchmidtSanofi, Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0265-0974
Alicia SibonyUCB Biopharma, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium.
Yoav TimsitNovartis Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Vicencia Toledo SalesTakeda Pharmaceuticals, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Duncan ArmstrongNovartis Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Armando LagruttaMerck, North Wales, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0136-6210
Scott W MittlestadtAbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Russell NavenTakeda Pharmaceuticals, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Ravikumar PeriTakeda Pharmaceuticals, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Sonia RobertsRoche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center, Basel, Switzerland.
James M VergisFaegre Drinker Biddle and Reath, LLP, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-1362-2368
Jean-Pierre Valentin *UCB Biopharma, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3599-9155

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Secondary pharmacology screening of investigational small-molecule drugs for potentially adverse off-target activities has become standard practice in pharmaceutical research and development, and regulatory agencies are increasingly requesting data on activity against targets with recognized adverse effect relationships. However, the screening strategies and target panels used by pharmaceutical companies may vary substantially. To help identify commonalities and differences, as well as to highlight opportunities for further optimization of secondary pharmacology assessment, we conducted a broad-ranging survey across 18 companies under the auspices of the DruSafe leadership group of the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development. Based on our analysis of this survey and discussions and additional research within the group, we present here an overview of the current state of the art in secondary pharmacology screening. We discuss best practices, including additional safety-associated targets not covered by most current screening panels, and present approaches for interpreting and reporting off-target activities. We also provide an assessment of the safety impact of secondary pharmacology screening, and a perspective on opportunities and challenges in this rapidly developing field.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsAnimalsDrug DevelopmentDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalDrug IndustryDrugs, InvestigationalHumansDrugs, Investigational

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.