Cited by 18Computational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Materials ScienceArtificial Intelligence Applications

Democratising real-world drug discovery through agentic AI

Open access
He, Jiazhen, Lai, Helen, Saigiridharan, Lakshidaa, Ghiandoni, Gian Marco, Jenei, Kinga, Gokalp, Umur, Nuković, Ajša, Engkvist, Ola +2 more·2026·Drug Discovery Today

Abstract

• Agentic systems are an emerging technology for automation, but evidence of their real-world use in drug discovery is limited. • We present AstraZeneca’s agentic systems LangDMTA and ChatInvent, outlining implementation challenges and lessons learned. ChatInvent, a conversational interface for agentic drug discovery, is illustrated with a typical use case. • Key technical considerations are discussed, including architecture choice, automated testing for continuous integration, and benchmarking. • Practical recommendations are provided for building agentic systems in drug discovery. • We speculate on the potential of agentic systems for improving efficiency in pharmaceutical R&D. Agentic systems that are based on large language models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools in the chemistry domain over the past few years. Early examples included work on CoScientist, Chemcrow, and LLM-RDF, which showcased the potential of agentic systems to assist in chemical research, in the orchestration of cheminformatics tools, and in synthetic reaction development. Despite this, the current literature lacks examples of the real-world adoption of such systems in drug discovery. We present such an example by describing our work on an agentic system called ChatInvent, which has been integrated into the discovery pipeline at AstraZeneca to aid in molecular design and synthesis planning. We discuss how the system evolved from a proof-of-concept single agent into an extensible, robust, and scalable multi-agent architecture with a graphical user interface. We emphasize the lessons learnt and the challenges that persist as we continue to work on this project, and share our perspectives on the future of agentic systems in our domain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drudis.2026.104605

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
He, J., Lai, H., Saigiridharan, L., Ghiandoni, G. M., Jenei, K., Gokalp, U., Nuković, A., Engkvist, O., Janet, J. P., & Genheden, S.
Affiliations
  • AstraZeneca (Sweden) (SE)
  • AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Ghiandoni, Gian Marco
Venue
Drug Discovery Today
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2026-03
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
104605
ISSN
1359-6446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7124507199
Cited by
17
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 17
FWCI
61.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Drug Discovery Today (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
AstraZeneca
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
agentic AI, large language models, drug discovery, multi-agent architecture, molecular design, synthesis planning, conversational interfaces, continuous integration testing, benchmarking
MeSH terms
Cheminformatics, Large Language Models, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Drug Design, Drug Discovery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review