Trends in clinical success rates
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Over 80% of anticancer drug candidates fail during clinical screening due to weak efficacy or adverse events.
“However, the success rate of anticancer drugs in clinical trials is very low, with over 80% of drug candidates failing during clinical screening due to weak efficacy or adverse events4–7.”
From Tumor-on-a-chip: from bioinspired design to biomedical application (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Estimation of clinical trial success rates and related parameters
Wong, C. H., Siah, K. W., & Lo, A. W. (2019) · Biostatistics · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxx069 · Cited by 1,585 · see citing works
The Current State of Peptide Drug Discovery: Back to the Future?
Henninot, A., Collins, J. C., & Nuss, J. M. (2017) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b00318 · Cited by 1,120 · see citing works
Rethinking drug design in the artificial intelligence era
Schneider, P., Walters, W. P., Plowright, A. T., Sieroka, N., Listgarten, J., Goodnow, R. A., Fisher, J., Jansen, J. M., Duca, J. S., Rush, T. S., et al. (2020) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/s41573-019-0050-3 · Cited by 894 · see citing works
“The [1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine moiety appeared only six times in the initial dataset of 880 structures.”
BackgroundMolecular Docking: Challenges, Advances and its Use in Drug Discovery Perspective
Saikia, S., & Bordoloi, M. (2018) · Current Drug Targets · doi:10.2174/1389450119666181022153016 · Cited by 575 · see citing works
Shultz, M. (2018) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b00686 · Cited by 375 · see citing works
3D bioprinting for reconstituting the cancer microenvironment
Datta, P., Dey, M., Ataie, Z., Unutmaz, D., & Ozbolat, I. T. (2020) · npj Precision Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41698-020-0121-2 · Cited by 314 · see citing works
A Comprehensive Map of FDA-Approved Pharmaceutical Products
Zhong, H., Chan, G., Yuanjia, H., Hu, H., & Ouyang, D. (2018) · Pharmaceutics · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics10040263 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
“However, the success rate of NMEs in clinical trials is merely about 10% [2,3].”
BackgroundCancer therapy with antibodies
Paul, S., Konig, M. F., Pardoll, D. M., Bettegowda, C., Papadopoulos, N., Wright, K. M., Gabelli, S. B., Ho, M., van Elsas, A., & Zhou, S. (2024) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/s41568-024-00690-x · Cited by 271 · see citing works
“Data is lacking for the success rate of antibody-based therapeutics in oncology specifically, but ~18% of therapeutic antibodies (for all indications including oncology) that enter phase I trials proceed to drug launch 146 .”
Tumor-on-a-chip: from bioinspired design to biomedical application
Liu, X., Fang, J., Huang, S., Wu, X., Xie, X., Wang, J., Liu, F., Zhang, M., Peng, Z., & Hu, N. (2021) · Microsystems & Nanoengineering · doi:10.1038/s41378-021-00277-8 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Takebe, T., Imai, R., & Ono, S. (2018) · Clinical and Translational Science · doi:10.1111/cts.12577 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
“With many unmet medical needs still remaining, a number of reports have emphasized both the importance and challenges of academic- industrial collaboration.26,27 Smietana et al.28 (2016) demonstrated that partnering has recently had a positive influence on the success of clinical trials regardless of whether it involv…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialStorm, C. S., Kia, D. A., Almramhi, M. M., Bandrés‐Ciga, S., Finan, C., Noyce, A. J., Kaiyrzhanov, R. B., Middlehurst, B., Tan, M. M. X., Houlden, H., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26280-1 · Cited by 212 · see citing works
“Out of 23 pQTL studies identified, four studies (1) reported significant pQTLs in individuals of European descent for any of the druggable proteins proposed by our eQTL analysis, (2) provided all the SNP information required for MR and (3) reported SNPs that were available in our PD outcome data37–40.”
BackgroundMethodMachine learning in preclinical drug discovery
Catacutan, D. B., Alexander, J., Arnold, A., & Stokes, J. M. (2024) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/s41589-024-01679-1 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
“However, this traditional approach is associated with a roughly 90% failure rate for candidate compounds traversing from phase 1 clinical trials to market approval, with a much higher rate when accounting for the preclinical stages of discovery 4 .”
Microfluidics for Drug Development: From Synthesis to Evaluation
Liu, Y., Sun, L., Zhang, H., Shang, L., & Zhao, Y. (2021) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01289 · Cited by 209 · see citing works
Morel, T., & Cano, S. (2017) · Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · doi:10.1186/s13023-017-0718-x · Cited by 194 · see citing works
“Third, while encouraging overall clinical trial success rates for rare disease treatments are being reported [10, 11], recurrent late-stage drug development programme failures (e.”
BackgroundLou, B., & Wu, L. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/16565 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
“About 90% of potential drugs fail to attain FDA approval (Smietana et al. 2016).”
Chen, X., Guan, N., Sun, Y., Li, J., & Qu, J. (2018) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bby098 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
A review of lipidation in the development of advanced protein and peptide therapeutics
Menacho‐Melgar, R., Decker, J. S., Hennigan, J. N., & Lynch, M. (2018) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2018.12.032 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Zoetemelk, M., Rausch, M., Colin, D., Dormond, O., & Nowak-Sliwinska, P. M. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-42836-0 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
AI-powered drug discovery captures pharma interest
Smalley, E. (2017) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0717-604 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Drug discovery effectiveness from the standpoint of therapeutic mechanisms and indications
Shih, H.-P., Zhang, X., & Aronov, A. M. (2017) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd.2017.194 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
2D Layered Double Hydroxide Nanoparticles: Recent Progress toward Preclinical/Clinical Nanomedicine
Cao, Z., Li, B., Sun, L., Li, L., Xu, Z. P., & Gu, Z. (2019) · Small Methods · doi:10.1002/smtd.201900343 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Machtakova, M., Thérien‐Aubin, H., & Landfester, K. (2021) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d1cs00686j · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Applications of tumor chip technology
Hachey, S. J., & Hughes, C. C. W. (2018) · Lab on a Chip · doi:10.1039/c8lc00330k · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Zhang, D., Hop, C. E. C. A., Patilea-Vrana, G., Gampa, G., Seneviratne, H. K., Unadkat, J. D., Kenny, J. R., Nagapudi, K., Di, L., Zhou, L., et al. (2019) · Drug Metabolism and Disposition · doi:10.1124/dmd.119.086744 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Cabri, W., Cantelmi, P., Corbisiero, D., Fantoni, T., Ferrazzano, L., Martelli, G., Mattellone, A., & Tolomelli, A. (2021) · Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2021.697586 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Wang, M. W. H., Goodman, J. M., & Allen, T. E. H. (2020) · Chemical Research in Toxicology · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00316 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Applications of Machine Learning Methods in Drug Toxicity Prediction
Zhang, L., Zhang, H., Ai, H., Hu, H., Li, S., Zhao, J. H., & Liu, H. (2018) · Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.2174/1568026618666180727152557 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Cancer Modeling‐on‐a‐Chip with Future Artificial Intelligence Integration
Fetah, K., DiPardo, B. J., Kongadzem, E.-M. L., Tomlinson, J. S., Elzagheid, A. I., Elmusrati, M. S., Khademhosseini, A., & Ashammakhi, N. A. (2019) · Small · doi:10.1002/smll.201901985 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Peptide Conjugates with Small Molecules Designed to Enhance Efficacy and Safety
He, R., Finan, B., Mayer, J. P., & DiMarchi, R. D. (2019) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules24101855 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
“Small molecule drug candidates have historically recorded a higher attrition rate in clinical development, which partially results from suboptimal physicochemical properties [16,17,49].”
BackgroundYamaguchi, S., Kaneko, M., & Narukawa, M. (2021) · Clinical and Translational Science · doi:10.1111/cts.12980 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Targeted protein knockdown using small molecule degraders
Raina, K., & Crews, C. M. (2017) · Current Opinion in Chemical Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2017.05.016 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
“Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 2017, 39:46–53 has generated optimism, especially given their higher success rate in getting from Phase I to launch [1], the lack of cellular penetration with typical biomacromolecules is a severely limiting feature of these drugs.”
BackgroundA high-throughput imaging and nuclear segmentation analysis protocol for cleared 3D culture models
Boutin, M. E., Voss, T. C., Titus, S. A., Cruz-Gutierrez, K., Michael, S., & Ferrer, M. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-29169-0 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Critical Assessment of Targeted Protein Degradation as a Research Tool and Pharmacological Modality
Kostić, M., & Jones, L. H. (2020) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2020.02.006 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Choi, Y.-M., Lee, H., Ann, M., Song, M., Rheey, J., & Jang, J. (2023) · Biofabrication · doi:10.1088/1758-5090/acd95f · Cited by 94 · see citing works
“According to studies conducted between 2000 and 2015, only 3.4% of cancer-targeting medications have passed clinical trials and were approved for use [76, 77].”
InfluentialRakib-Uz-Zaman, S. M., Apu, E. H., Muntasir, M. N., et al. (2022) · Challenges · doi:10.3390/challe13010018 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Nijsen, M., Wu, F., Bansal, L., Bradshaw‐Pierce, E. L., Chan, J. R., Liederer, B. M., Mettetal, J. T., Schroeder, P. E., Schuck, E. L., Tsai, A., et al. (2018) · CPT Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology · doi:10.1002/psp4.12282 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
“Nevertheless, of all the factors that impact the overall cost of drug development, the most important one is still the poor success rate in the phase II proof-of-concept study.(4) The Critical Path Initiative led by the US Food and Drug Administration(5) proposed the utilization of model-based approaches to improve dr…”
BackgroundEnhancing the Promise of Drug Repositioning through Genetics
Pritchard, J.-L., O’Mara, T. A., & Glubb, D. M. (2017) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2017.00896 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
“The development of a new drug takes on average 13–15 years and costs between US$2–3 billion (Nosengo, 2016) with only a ∼10% chance that a new therapy will be successfully approved by government regulatory agencies (Smietana et al., 2016).”
BackgroundAccelerators for Classical Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Biomolecules
Jones, D., Allen, J., Yang, Y., Bennett, W. F., Gokhale, M. B., Moshiri, N., & Rosing, T. (2022) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.1c01214 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
“2,3 Compounding this issue is the fact that the “ drug-like ” chemical space is itself not well understood as a whole, with estimates of the upper bound on this space varying between 10 18 − 10 100 depending on the assumptions made.”
BackgroundMind and machine in drug design
Schneider, G. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0030-7 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Factors Affecting Success of New Drug Clinical Trials
Kim, E., Yang, J.-H., Park, S., & Shin, K. (2023) · Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science · doi:10.1007/s43441-023-00509-1 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
“In addition, Smietana analyzed recent trends in the success rate of clinical trials and found that the success rate of clinical trials with partnerships was high [19].”
BackgroundInfluentialOrphan Drugs and Their Impact on Pharmaceutical Development
Attwood, M. M., Rask‐Andersen, M., & Schiöth, H. B. (2018) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2018.03.003 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Quantifying Target Occupancy of Small Molecules Within Living Cells
Robers, M. B., Ohana, R. F., Huber, K., Kilpatrick, L. E., Vasta, J. D., Berger, B., Chaudhry, C., Hill, S. J., Müller, S., Knapp, S., et al. (2020) · Annual Review of Biochemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-011420-092302 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Droplet-Based Microfluidics: Applications in Pharmaceuticals
Trinh, T. N. D., Do, H. D. K., Nam, N. N., Dan, T. T., Trinh, K. T. L., & Lee, N. Y. (2023) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph16070937 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Translational aspect in peptide drug discovery and development: An emerging therapeutic candidate
Anand, U., Bandyopadhyay, A., Jha, N. K., de la Lastra, J. M. P., & Dey, A. (2022) · BioFactors · doi:10.1002/biof.1913 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Glutathione-responsive copper-disulfiram nanoparticles for enhanced tumor chemotherapy
Chen, M., Huang, Z., Xia, M., Ding, Y., Shan, T., Guan, Z., Dai, X., Xu, X., Huang, Y., Huang, M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.11.041 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Intrinsic physicochemical profile of marketed antibody-based biotherapeutics
Ahmed, L., Gupta, P., Martin, K., Scheer, J. M., Nixon, A. E., & Kumar, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2020577118 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
“Both trends can help improve the productivity of biologic discovery and development projects by enabling a greater number of biotherapeutic candidates to reach clinical development (1).”
InfluentialAsif, A., Kim, K. H., Jabbar, F., Kim, S., & Choi, K. H. (2020) · Microfluidics and Nanofluidics · doi:10.1007/s10404-020-02347-1 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Key indicators of phase transition for clinical trials through machine learning
Feijoo, F., Palopoli, M., Bernstein, J., Siddiqui, S., & Albright, T. E. (2020) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2019.12.014 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Wee, J., & Xia, K. (2021) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01415 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
NCATS Inxight Drugs: a comprehensive and curated portal for translational research
Siramshetty, V. B., Grishagin, I. V., Nguyễn, Ð.-T., Peryea, T., Skovpen, Y., Stroganov, O. V., Katzel, D. A., Sheils, T. K., Jadhav, A., Mathé, E. A., et al. (2021) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkab918 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
“A slow upwards trend in new drug approval rates has been observed since 2012, largely due to increased rates of biologics approvals, while the field of synthetic small molecules has begun to show modest signs of improvement (7).”
BackgroundFibroblast origin shapes tissue homeostasis, epidermal differentiation, and drug uptake
Hausmann, C., Zoschke, C., Wolff, C., Darvin, M. E., Sochorová, M., Kováčik, A., Wanjiku, B., Schumacher, F., Tigges, J., Kleuser, B., et al. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-39770-6 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Improving Heart Failure Therapeutics Development in the United States
O’Connor, C. M., Psotka, M. A., Fiuzat, M., Lindenfeld, J. M., Abraham, W. T., Bristow, M. R., Caños, D., Harrington, R. A., Hillebrenner, M., Jessup, M. L., et al. (2018) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.048 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
“Due in part to these changes and differences in trial design, the oncology pipeline currently boasts the largest number of preclinical therapeutics in development of any field (17).”
BackgroundKu, Y., Chan, V. S., Christesen, A. C., Grieme, T., Mulhern, M. M., Pu, Y., & Wendt, M. D. (2019) · The Journal of Organic Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.joc.8b02750 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Cavero, I., Guillon, J., & Holzgrefe, H. H. (2019) · Expert Opinion on Drug Safety · doi:10.1080/14740338.2019.1634689 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
“selected for therapeutic development, as adjudicated by nonclinical investigations, ultimately garner regulatory marketing approval [1,2].”
BackgroundUno, H., Imai, T., Harada, K., et al. (2020) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/acscatal.9b05377 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Target Validation Using PROTACs: Applying the Four Pillars Framework
Nowak, R. P., & Jones, L. H. (2020) · SLAS DISCOVERY · doi:10.1177/2472555220979584 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Fernald, K., Förster, P. C., Claassen, E., & van de Burgwal, L. (2024) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2024.104160 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Model-based drug development: application of modeling and simulation in drug development
Kim, T., Shin, S., & Shin, B. S. (2017) · Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation · doi:10.1007/s40005-017-0371-3 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“It has been reported that around 90% of all potential drugs that enter Phase I clinical trials fail in later phases, and less than 10% ultimately reach the market (Smietana et al. 2016).”
BackgroundPerspectives towards antiviral drug discovery against Ebola virus
Mirza, M. U., Vanmeert, M., Ali, A., Iman, K., Froeyen, M., & Idrees, M. (2018) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.25357 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“An experimental drug in Phase I clinical trials has approximately 10% chance to reach the market.(242) Inadequate efficacy of drugs accounts for two‐thirds of recent Phase III clinical”
BackgroundInfluentialRecent Advances in Peptide-Based Approaches for Cancer Treatment
Conibear, A. C., Schmid, A., Kamalov, M., Becker, C. F. W., & Bello, C. (2017) · Current Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.2174/0929867325666171123204851 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Kelm, J. M., Lal‐Nag, M., Sittampalam, G. S., & Ferrer, M. (2018) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2018.07.007 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Storelli, F., Yin, M., Kumar, A. R., Ladumor, M. K., Evers, R., Chothe, P. P., Enogieru, O. J., Liang, X., Lai, Y., & Unadkat, J. D. (2022) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2022.108271 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Pharmacological enrichment of polygenic risk for precision medicine in complex disorders
Reay, W. R., Atkins, J. R., Carr, V. J., Green, M. J., & Cairns, M. J. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-57795-0 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Schuhmacher, A., Hinder, M., Brief, E., Gassmann, O., & Hartl, D. (2025) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2025.104291 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Accelerating material design with the generative toolkit for scientific discovery
Manica, M., Born, J., Cadow, J., Christofidellis, D., Dave, A., Clarke, D., Teukam, Y. G. N., Giannone, G., Hoffman, S. C., Buchan, M. J., et al. (2023) · npj Computational Materials · doi:10.1038/s41524-023-01028-1 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
“However, in some of the most important fields, such as material or drug discovery, the productivity has been decreasing dramatically (Smietana et al., 2016) and by today it can take almost a decade to discover a new material and cost upwards of $10–$100 million.”
BackgroundRushed Innovation: Evidence from Drug Licensing
Hermosilla, M. (2020) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2019.3530 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
“Success rates in our sample were compared with those of DiMasi et al. (2003, 2010, 2016), Abrantes-Metz et al. (2004), Kola and Landis (2004), Arrowsmith (2011), Pammolli et al. (2011), Hay et al. (2014), Waring et al. (2015), Smietana et al. (2016), and Wong et al. (2019).”
Kapr, J., Petersilie, L., Distler, T., Lauria, I., Bendt, F., Sauter, C. M., Boccaccini, A. R., Rose, C. R., & Fritsche, E. (2021) · Advanced Healthcare Materials · doi:10.1002/adhm.202100131 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Engineering brain-on-a-chip platforms
Servais, B., Mahmoudi, N., Gautam, V., Tong, W., Ibbotson, M. R., Nisbet, D. R., & Collins, D. J. (2024) · Nature Reviews Bioengineering · doi:10.1038/s44222-024-00184-3 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Generative AI for navigating synthesizable chemical space
Gao, W., Luo, S., & Coley, C. W. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2415665122 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Comparative study of therapeutic antibody candidates derived from mini‐pool and clonal cell lines
Fan, L., Rizzi, G., Bierilo, K. K., Tian, J., Yee, J. C., Russell, R. J., & Das, T. K. (2017) · Biotechnology Progress · doi:10.1002/btpr.2477 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
“Several contributing factors are driving a huge expansion of biologics pipeline, which include advances in biotechnology, focused investment in high potential targets, and higher success rates for biologics than small molecules.(4,5) However, the long journey from initial discovery phase of target identification to re…”
BackgroundKalaria, D. R., Parker, K., Reynolds, G., & Laru, J. (2020) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2019.12.012 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Application of three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting in anti-cancer therapy
Wu, B., Wu, Z. Q., Hou, Y.-Y., Fang, Z.-X., Deng, Y., Wu, H.-T., & Liu, J. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20475 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“However, traditional tumor models, such as 2D cell cultures and animal models have a shortcoming in predicting human clinical outcomes, and the success rate of anticancer drugs entering clinical trials and obtaining marketing approval is less than 10% [5,6].”
BackgroundOrganoids Provide an Important Window on Inflammation in Cancer
Baker, K. (2018) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers10050151 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“The overall success rate of drugs entering clinical trials from 2000 through 2015 was approximately 10% [114,115].”
BackgroundAlternative strategies in cardiac preclinical research and new clinical trial formats
Kreutzer, F. P., Meinecke, A., Schmidt, K., Fiedler, J., & Thum, T. (2022) · Cardiovascular Research · doi:10.1093/cvr/cvab075 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Lagarde, N., Rey, J., Gyulkhandanyan, A., Tufféry, P., Miteva, M. A., & Villoutreix, B. O. (2018) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.25966 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“However, despite the use of various modern high-throughput technologies, the drug discovery process requires many years of research and development and the failure rate in clinical trials remains very high, close to 90% [5], essentially because of the www.”
BackgroundOrgan-on-a-Chip and Microfluidic Platforms for Oncology in the UK
Nolan, J., Pearce, O. M. T., Screen, H. R. C., Knight, M. M., & Verbruggen, S. W. (2023) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers15030635 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“Even with promising pre-clinical data, bringing a single drug to FDA market-approval can take more than 10 years and USD 2.5 billion, with about two-thirds of this cost occurring in the clinical trial phases [49].”
BackgroundInfluentialA graph neural network approach for molecule carcinogenicity prediction
Fradkin, P., Young, A., Atanackovic, L., Frey, B. J., Lee, L. J., & Wang, B. (2022) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btac266 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
High-Throughput Gene Expression Profiles to Define Drug Similarity and Predict Compound Activity
Wolf, H. D., Cougnaud, L., Hoorde, K. V., Bondt, A. D., Wegner, J. K., Ceulemans, H., & Göhlmann, H. W. H. (2018) · Assay and Drug Development Technologies · doi:10.1089/adt.2018.845 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Zhou, Y., Arribas, G. H., Turku, A., Jürgenson, T., Mkrtchian, S., Krebs, K., Wáng, Y., Svobodová, B., Milani, L. A., Schulte, G., et al. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abi6856 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Haplosaurus computes protein haplotypes for use in precision drug design
Spooner, W., McLaren, W., Slidel, T., Finch, D., Butler, R. J., Campbell, J., Eghobamien, L., Rider, D., Kiefer, C., Robinson, M., et al. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06542-1 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Hachey, S. J., Sobrino, A., Lee, J. G., Jafari, M. D., Klempner, S. J., Puttock, E. J., Edwards, R. A., Lowengrub, J. S., Waterman, M. L., Zell, J. A., et al. (2022) · Translational research · doi:10.1016/j.trsl.2022.11.011 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
“1 The low rates of effective preclinical compounds reaching the clinic can be largely attributed to weaknesses in current model systems, which turn out to be poor predictors of drug response in patients.”
BackgroundFabbri, C., Montgomery, S., Lewis, C. M., & Serretti, A. (2020) · International Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1097/yic.0000000000000305 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
“Conventional drug development is a very long and expensive process (13–15 years and US$2–3 billion) with only 10% chance of being approved by regulatory agencies (Nosengo, 2016; Smietana et al., 2016).”
BackgroundPharmacogenetics and Depression: A Critical Perspective
Corponi, F., Fabbri, C., & Serretti, A. (2019) · Psychiatry Investigation · doi:10.30773/pi.2019.06.16 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
New Mechanism for Release of Endosomal Contents: Osmotic Lysis via Nigericin-Mediated K+/H+ Exchange
Rangasamy, L., Chelvam, V., Kanduluru, A. K., Srinivasarao, M., Bandara, N. A., You, F., Orellana, E. A., Kasinski, A. L., & Low, P. S. (2018) · Bioconjugate Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.7b00714 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
The Kv1.3 K+ channel in the immune system and its “precision pharmacology” using peptide toxins
Varga, Z., Tajti, G., & Panyi, G. (2021) · Biologia Futura · doi:10.1007/s42977-021-00071-7 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Drug Screening, Oral Bioavailability and Regulatory Aspects: A Need for Human Organoids
Zietek, T., Boomgaarden, W., & Rath, E. (2021) · Pharmaceutics · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics13081280 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Tsubata, Y., Hayashi, M., Tanino, R., et al. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-13025-8 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Kumar, S., Roffi, K., Tomar, D. S., Cirelli, D. J., Luksha, N., Meyer, D., Mitchell, J., Allen, M. J., & Li, L. (2018) · Protein Engineering Design and Selection · doi:10.1093/protein/gzy020 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“However, merely 18% of potential biologic drug candidates discovered in research laboratories are able to overcome all challenges involved in their drug product development and successfully reach the clinic (Smietana et al., 2016).”
BackgroundSchistosomiasis Drug Discovery in the Era of Automation and Artificial Intelligence
Moreira‐Filho, J. T., Silva, A. C., Dantas, R. F., Gomes, B. F., Neto, L. R. S., Brandão-Neto, J., Owens, R. J., Furnham, N., Neves, B. J., Silva, F. P., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.642383 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
“Despite all advances achieved in the fi eld of automation of screens, FBDD, and also in the understanding of disease biology in the post-genomic era, delivering new drugs to the market remains a highly complex, expensive and time-consuming process (288, 289).”
BackgroundDisparities in availability of new cancer drugs worldwide: 1990-2022
Li, M., Ka, D., & Chen, Q. (2024) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015700 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Emerging technologies for prediction of drug candidate efficacy in the preclinical pipeline.
Menshykau, D. (2017) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2017.04.019 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Biofabrication of Modular Spheroids as Tumor‐Scale Microenvironments for Drug Screening
Mekhileri, N. V., Major, G. S., Lim, K. S., Mutreja, I., Chitcholtan, K., Phillips, E., Hooper, G. J., & Woodfield, T. B. F. (2022) · Advanced Healthcare Materials · doi:10.1002/adhm.202201581 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Hosoya, M., & Czysz, K. (2016) · Cells · doi:10.3390/cells5040046 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“entering Phase 1 fail as a result of the translational gap between the preclinical and clinical settings [20].”
BackgroundAn outlook on using serial femtosecond crystallography in drug discovery
Mishin, A., Gusach, A., Luginina, A. P., Marin, E., Borshchevskiy, V. I., & Cherezov, V. (2019) · Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery · doi:10.1080/17460441.2019.1626822 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“tion rates, with about 90% of drug candidates reaching Phase I clinical trials being destined to fail [4].”
BackgroundNMR Metabolomics Protocols for Drug Discovery
Bhinderwala, F., & Powers, R. (2019) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-9690-2_16 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Taylor, D. L., Gough, A., Schurdak, M. E., Vernetti, L. A., Chennubhotla, C. S., Lefever, D. E., Pei, F., Faeder, J. R., Lezon, T. R., Stern, A. M., et al. (2019) · Handbook of experimental pharmacology · doi:10.1007/164_2019_239 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“…ECM, the incorporation of liver-speci fi c endothelial cells, and alteration of fl ow rates, by which the oxygen tension in the device could be controlled to simulate oxygen zones in the liver, enabling the demonstration of zone-speci fi c biology (Lee-Montiel et al. 2017; Soto-Gutierrez et al. 2017).”
BackgroundHiggins, G. A., Brown, M., John, J. S., MacMillan, C., Silenieks, L. B., & Thevarkunnel, S. (2020) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108064 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Monobodies as tool biologics for accelerating target validation and druggable site discovery
Akkapeddi, P., Teng, K. W., & Koide, S. (2021) · RSC Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1039/d1md00188d · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Multitask CapsNet: An Imbalanced Data Deep Learning Method for Predicting Toxicants
Wang, Y., Wang, B., Jiang, J., Guo, J., Lai, J., Lian, X., & Wu, J. (2021) · ACS Omega · doi:10.1021/acsomega.1c03842 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Bioprinting and its Use in Tumor-On-A-Chip Technology for Cancer Drug Screening: A Review
Fang, L., Liu, Y., Qiu, J., & Wan, W. (2022) · International Journal of Bioprinting · doi:10.18063/ijb.v8i4.603 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“Food and Drug Administration marketing approval is between 5% and 10%, which is significantly lower than that of drugs for other diseases[6-8].”
Background
- Authors
- Smietana, K., Siatkowski, M., & Møller, M.
- Affiliations
- McKinsey & Company (United States) (US)
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Drug Discovery
- Published
- 2016-05-20
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 379-380
- ISSN
- 1474-1776 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-1784
- OpenAlex
- W2396649694
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 4
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- clinical success rate, late-stage clinical trials, biologics, industry partnerships, drug development trends, portfolio size
- MeSH terms
- Biological Products, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Research Design
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
