Pharma's AI Inflection Point: What Does It Mean for Early Phase Clinical Development?

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Amalia M. Issa
{"title":"Pharma's AI Inflection Point: What Does It Mean for Early Phase Clinical Development?","authors":"Amalia M. Issa","doi":"10.1002/cpdd.1596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>If you attended or will soon attend any clinical pharmacology or drug development conference this year, you would have noticed that artificial intelligence (AI) is a major focus everywhere. Headlines, plenaries, and panels all speak to AI's rapid ascendance. Yet, this trend is much more than media hype or marketing spin—it marks a true inflection point for the pharmaceutical industry.</p><p>A report<span><sup>1</sup></span> published this summer offers a timely snapshot into the current state of AI in the pharmaceutical industry. Based on interviews and survey data from senior C-suite executives at more than 40 organizations, including most of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies, the report highlights that AI has reached a critical tipping point. AI is no longer an experimental curiosity but a core strategic priority across drug R&amp;D, clinical development, and commercialization. Leaders from Big Pharma, major tech companies, and innovative startups concur that we are entering a pivotal phase for AI. The next 12 to 24 months will likely determine whether AI becomes a foundational technology or remains an incremental tool in pharmaceutical R&amp;D. As a result, strategies and investments are shifting away from cautious experimentation and pilot projects toward enterprise-wide adoption.</p><p>As clinical pharmacologists and drug development experts, we must ask: What does this strategic shift mean for early phase studies, where rigor and innovation are non-negotiable?</p><p>Enterprise-level AI initiatives are being championed at the C-suite, with leadership aligning budgets, governance structures, and strategic priorities<span><sup>1</sup></span> to achieve measurable gains in speed, efficiency, and scientific innovation. For early-phase clinical studies, these priorities could not be more aligned. Phase I/II trials stand to benefit immensely from AI in several domains.</p><p>Emerging scientific literature demonstrates that generative AI,<span><sup>2</sup></span> multi-omics modeling,<span><sup>3</sup></span> and federated learning<span><sup>4</sup></span> can uncover novel drug targets, optimize biomarker-driven trial designs, and identify subtle signals of efficacy and safety that may otherwise go undetected, especially in smaller, early-phase cohorts. This evolution of AI in clinical trials opens real opportunities for clinical pharmacologists to contribute to innovative, data-driven approaches to drug development.</p><p>The report highlights an ongoing transition: whereas pharma previously sought to build AI tools internally for reasons of data ownership and trust, there is a notable rise in hybrid and partnership models.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Pharma is increasingly open to leveraging foundational models from big tech and specialized startups, provided that solutions are transparent, validated, and regulatory-ready. Similar sentiments are echoed by Brumfeld et al.,<span><sup>14</sup></span> who found that consortium approaches and public-private partnerships can accelerate access to high-quality multimodal data and encourage external validation, which are crucial for regulatory credibility in early studies.</p><p>However, this collaboration brings new challenges: data governance, protection of intellectual property, and regulatory harmonization are rapidly evolving frontiers. It is incumbent upon our field to set clear standards around model validation, documentation, and AI explainability, in keeping with recent FDA guidance<span><sup>15</sup></span> and global regulatory trends.</p><p>However, with these powerful new tools come corresponding responsibilities. Challenges such as AI hallucinations, algorithmic bias, reproducibility issues, overfitting, dataset shifts, and “black box” models remain urgent and well-documented.<span><sup>16-18</sup></span> The way forward is clear: rigorous external validation, open science, and cross-disciplinary education are essential. We cannot afford to passively accept AI-driven results; our role is to interpret, challenge, and refine them.</p><p>As we look ahead, the “AI moment” in pharma will be defined by how thoughtfully we integrate these technologies into early development and shift from a mindset of “AI as a faster calculator” toward AI as a catalyst for hypothesis-driven and patient-centric early development. Collaborative efforts with AI specialists, regulatory authorities, and consortia are needed to write the next chapter of rigor, transparency, and innovation, so that this inflection point does not become a missed opportunity.</p><p>The author declares no conflicts of interest.</p><p>The author received no funding for the article.</p>","PeriodicalId":10495,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development","volume":"14 9","pages":"646-648"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://accp1.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpdd.1596","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://accp1.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpdd.1596","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

If you attended or will soon attend any clinical pharmacology or drug development conference this year, you would have noticed that artificial intelligence (AI) is a major focus everywhere. Headlines, plenaries, and panels all speak to AI's rapid ascendance. Yet, this trend is much more than media hype or marketing spin—it marks a true inflection point for the pharmaceutical industry.

A report1 published this summer offers a timely snapshot into the current state of AI in the pharmaceutical industry. Based on interviews and survey data from senior C-suite executives at more than 40 organizations, including most of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies, the report highlights that AI has reached a critical tipping point. AI is no longer an experimental curiosity but a core strategic priority across drug R&D, clinical development, and commercialization. Leaders from Big Pharma, major tech companies, and innovative startups concur that we are entering a pivotal phase for AI. The next 12 to 24 months will likely determine whether AI becomes a foundational technology or remains an incremental tool in pharmaceutical R&D. As a result, strategies and investments are shifting away from cautious experimentation and pilot projects toward enterprise-wide adoption.

As clinical pharmacologists and drug development experts, we must ask: What does this strategic shift mean for early phase studies, where rigor and innovation are non-negotiable?

Enterprise-level AI initiatives are being championed at the C-suite, with leadership aligning budgets, governance structures, and strategic priorities1 to achieve measurable gains in speed, efficiency, and scientific innovation. For early-phase clinical studies, these priorities could not be more aligned. Phase I/II trials stand to benefit immensely from AI in several domains.

Emerging scientific literature demonstrates that generative AI,2 multi-omics modeling,3 and federated learning4 can uncover novel drug targets, optimize biomarker-driven trial designs, and identify subtle signals of efficacy and safety that may otherwise go undetected, especially in smaller, early-phase cohorts. This evolution of AI in clinical trials opens real opportunities for clinical pharmacologists to contribute to innovative, data-driven approaches to drug development.

The report highlights an ongoing transition: whereas pharma previously sought to build AI tools internally for reasons of data ownership and trust, there is a notable rise in hybrid and partnership models.1 Pharma is increasingly open to leveraging foundational models from big tech and specialized startups, provided that solutions are transparent, validated, and regulatory-ready. Similar sentiments are echoed by Brumfeld et al.,14 who found that consortium approaches and public-private partnerships can accelerate access to high-quality multimodal data and encourage external validation, which are crucial for regulatory credibility in early studies.

However, this collaboration brings new challenges: data governance, protection of intellectual property, and regulatory harmonization are rapidly evolving frontiers. It is incumbent upon our field to set clear standards around model validation, documentation, and AI explainability, in keeping with recent FDA guidance15 and global regulatory trends.

However, with these powerful new tools come corresponding responsibilities. Challenges such as AI hallucinations, algorithmic bias, reproducibility issues, overfitting, dataset shifts, and “black box” models remain urgent and well-documented.16-18 The way forward is clear: rigorous external validation, open science, and cross-disciplinary education are essential. We cannot afford to passively accept AI-driven results; our role is to interpret, challenge, and refine them.

As we look ahead, the “AI moment” in pharma will be defined by how thoughtfully we integrate these technologies into early development and shift from a mindset of “AI as a faster calculator” toward AI as a catalyst for hypothesis-driven and patient-centric early development. Collaborative efforts with AI specialists, regulatory authorities, and consortia are needed to write the next chapter of rigor, transparency, and innovation, so that this inflection point does not become a missed opportunity.

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

The author received no funding for the article.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

制药行业的人工智能拐点:对早期临床开发意味着什么?
如果你参加过或即将参加今年的任何临床药理学或药物开发会议,你就会注意到人工智能(AI)在任何地方都是一个主要焦点。头条新闻、全体会议和小组讨论都在谈论人工智能的迅速崛起。然而,这一趋势不仅仅是媒体炒作或营销炒作——它标志着制药行业真正的拐点。今年夏天发布的一份报告及时反映了人工智能在制药行业的现状。该报告基于对40多个组织(包括前20大制药公司中的大多数)的高级管理人员的访谈和调查数据,强调人工智能已经达到了一个关键的临界点。人工智能不再是实验性的好奇心,而是贯穿药物研发、临床开发和商业化的核心战略重点。大型制药公司、大型科技公司和创新型创业公司的领导人一致认为,我们正在进入人工智能的关键阶段。未来12到24个月可能会决定人工智能是成为一项基础技术,还是仍然是制药研发的增量工具。因此,战略和投资正在从谨慎的实验和试点项目转向企业范围内的采用。作为临床药理学家和药物开发专家,我们必须问:这种战略转变对早期研究意味着什么?在早期研究中,严谨性和创新性是不可协商的。企业层面的人工智能计划得到了高管层的支持,领导层调整了预算、治理结构和战略优先级,以实现速度、效率和科学创新方面的可衡量收益。对于早期临床研究来说,这些优先事项是非常一致的。I/II期试验将在几个领域从人工智能中受益匪浅。新兴的科学文献表明,生成式人工智能2、多组学建模3和联合学习4可以发现新的药物靶点,优化生物标志物驱动的试验设计,并识别可能未被发现的疗效和安全性的微妙信号,特别是在较小的早期队列中。人工智能在临床试验中的发展为临床药理学家提供了真正的机会,为创新的、数据驱动的药物开发方法做出贡献。该报告强调了一种正在进行的转变:尽管制药公司此前出于数据所有权和信任的原因寻求在内部构建人工智能工具,但混合模式和合作模式的数量显著增加制药公司越来越愿意利用大型科技公司和专业初创公司的基础模型,前提是解决方案是透明的、经过验证的,并为监管做好准备。Brumfeld等人也表达了类似的观点,14他们发现联合方法和公私伙伴关系可以加速获得高质量的多模式数据,并鼓励外部验证,这对于早期研究中的监管可信度至关重要。然而,这种合作带来了新的挑战:数据治理、知识产权保护和监管协调正在迅速发展。我们的领域有责任围绕模型验证、文档和人工智能的可解释性制定明确的标准,以与最近的FDA指南和全球监管趋势保持一致。然而,这些强大的新工具带来了相应的责任。诸如人工智能幻觉、算法偏差、可重复性问题、过拟合、数据集转移和“黑箱”模型等挑战仍然紧迫且有充分记录。前进的道路是明确的:严格的外部验证、开放的科学和跨学科的教育是必不可少的。我们不能被动地接受人工智能驱动的结果;我们的角色是诠释、挑战和完善它们。展望未来,制药行业的“人工智能时刻”将取决于我们如何将这些技术整合到早期开发中,并从“人工智能作为更快的计算器”的思维方式转变为人工智能作为假设驱动和以患者为中心的早期开发的催化剂。需要与人工智能专家、监管机构和联盟合作,书写严谨、透明和创新的下一个篇章,这样这个拐点才不会成为错失的机会。作者声明无利益冲突。作者没有收到这篇文章的资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
154
期刊介绍: Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development is an international, peer-reviewed, online publication focused on publishing high-quality clinical pharmacology studies in drug development which are primarily (but not exclusively) performed in early development phases in healthy subjects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信