Category Archives: Cheminformatics

Predicting ADME Properties with Machine Learning: 82% of the Performance From Two Descriptors

A Nature survey of ~1500 scientists reported that more than 70% had failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, and 50% had failed to replicate their own (Baker, 2016). This study wasn’t specific to machine learning, but the crisis has its own flavour in computational drug discovery.

One aspect of this is that available datasets have known quality issues, and results built on them can be fragile. MoleculeNet and the Therapeutic Data Commons (TDC) opened drug discovery to a wider ML community, but they’re no longer sufficient for driving further advances (Wognum et al., 2024).

Amongst a number of issues, 71% of molecules in one MoleculeNet dataset (BACE) contained at least one undefined stereocenter (a point where the same atoms can sit in two different 3D arrangements), making it unclear what chemical entity is actually being modelled (Li et al., 2026).

The stakes are high. In 2017, a research group found their cancer-target inhibitor inactive from one vendor and highly active from another. Eventually they traced this to vendors selling different mixtures of the compound’s two 3D forms where only one was active on the target and mechanism they were investigating (Baker, 2017).

Most approved pharmaceuticals are relatively small chemical molecules, typically weighing under 900 g/mol, with most of the rest being biologics. Whilst in Oxford on the UNIQ+ summer internship programme, I focused on ADME, an aspect of early stage drug discovery, where assays are measured in vitro as a stand-in to predict how a compound will behave in vivo (in the human body) before clinical trials. Absorption (does it enter the body), Distribution (where does it go), Metabolism (how quickly it’s transformed) and Excretion (how quickly it’s eliminated) are processes critical to whether a candidate succeeds. 

Continue reading

Beyond the Vaccine: AI’s Expanding Role in LNP mediated Drug Delivery

Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) have evolved from a specialised drug-delivery technology into a cornerstone of modern medicine. Their success became evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling the delivery of the mRNA used in the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. However, their applications extend far beyond vaccination, as LNPs can also deliver siRNA, plasmid DNA and gene-editing machinery, creating opportunities to treat genetic diseases, cancer and many other conditions.

Yet a fundamental challenge remains: how do we design an LNP that delivers the right payload, to the right cells, in the right place?

Continue reading

Fragment-to-Lead Successes in 2024 – 10th Anniversary Edition

In what I have to admit is now becoming an annual tradition ([2023] [2019]), I’d like to highlight the 2024 edition of the fragment-to-lead success stories, published in J. Med. Chem. at the end of 2025 [Paper].

Continue reading

New DPhil/PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Science Joint with GSK!

Many OPIGlets found their way into a DPhil in Protein Informatics through our Systems Approaches to Biomedical Sciences Industrial Doctoral Landscape Award, which was open to applicants 2009-2024. This innovative course, based at the MPLS Doctoral Training Centre (DTC), offered six months of intensive taught modules prior to starting PhD-level research, allowing students to upskill across a diverse range of subjects (coding, mathematics, structural biology, etc.) and to go on to do research in areas significantly distinct from their formal Undergraduate training. All projects also benefited from direct co-supervision from researchers working in the Pharmaceutical industry, ensuring DPhil projects in areas with drug discovery translation potential. Regrettably, having twice successfully applied for renewal of funding, we were unsuccessful in our bid to refund SABS in 2024.

Happily though, we can now formally announce that our bid for a direct successor to SABS, the Transformative Technologies in Pharmaceutical Sciences IDLA, has been backed by the BBSRC, and we will shortly be opening for applications for entry this October [2026]. As someone who benefited from the interdisciplinary training and industry-adjacency of SABS, I’m thrilled to be a co-director of this new Programme and to help deliver this course to a new generation of talented students.

Continue reading

Chemical Languages in Machine Learning

For more than a century, chemists have been trying to squeeze the beautifully messy, quantum-smeared reality of molecules into tidy digital boxes, “formats” such as line notations, connection tables, coordinate files, or even the vaguely hieroglyphic Wiswesser Line Notation. These formats weren’t designed for machine learning; some weren’t even designed for computers. And yet, they’ve become the wedged into the backbones of modern drug discovery, materials design and computational chemistry.

The emergent use of large language models and natural language processing in chemistry posits the immediate question: What does it mean for a molecule to have a “language,” and how should machines speak it?

if molecules are akin to words and sentences, what alphabet and grammatical rules should they follow?

What follows is a tour through the evolving world of chemical languages, why we use them, why our old representations keep breaking our shiny new models, and what might replace them.

Continue reading

Some thoughts on molecular similarity

Molecular similarity is a tricky concept, mostly because there are many ways to define and measure similarity. For example, two molecules could be considered similar because they have the same biological effect, or because they have identical molecular weight, or because they contain the same functional groups, etc., etc. A natural follow-on question from this is “what is the correct way to measure molecular similarity?” and the answer, unfortunately, is that it depends.

As an example of these complexities, Greg Landrum has a great blog post on how Tanimoto similarity changes depending on how you vectorise a molecule, and the need for authors to clarify the vectorisation method used. Variation in Tanimoto similarities is also something Ísak has written about on blopig.

Continue reading

Design your very own drug: An introduction to structure-based small molecule drug design

Are you curious about how scientists design small molecules to treat disease using computational tools, but the words RDKit, docking, and QED mean nothing to you? Look no further than these tutorials for learning the fundamentals of computational small molecule drug design through interactive tutorials that introduce the key tools, concepts, and workflows. From generating compounds to evaluating their drug-likeness and binding potential, by the end you’ll be ready to explore how computational methods can result in the discovery of your very own (virtual) drug candidates to cure Zika!

Find the materials here: https://github.com/oxpig/dtc-struc-bio-smolecules/tree/main.

Continue reading

Fragment-to-Lead Successes in 2023

Back in 2021, I highlighted the annual fragment-to-lead (F2L) success stories from 2019 [Blog post] [Paper]. This is one of my favourite annual publications, and I’m delighted to see that it’s still going strong. In this post, I’ll discuss the 2023 edition that was published in at the start of 2025 [Paper].

Continue reading

Extracting 3D Pharmacophore Points with RDKit

Pharmacophores are simplified representations of the key interactions ligands make with proteins, such as hydrogen bonds, charge interactions, and aromatic contacts. Think of them as the essential “bumps and grooves” on a key that allow it to fit its lock (the protein). These maps can be derived from ligands or protein–ligand complexes and are powerful tools for virtual screening and generative models. Here, we’ll see how to extract 3D pharmacophore points from a ligand using RDKit.
(Code adapted from Dr. Ruben Sanchez.)

Why pharmacophore “points”?

RDKit represents each pharmacophore feature (donor, acceptor, aromatic, etc.) as a point in 3D space, located at the feature center. These points capture the essential interaction motifs of a ligand without requiring the full atomic detail.

Continue reading

GPT-5 achieves state-of-the-art chemical intelligence

I have run ChemIQ (our chemical reasoning benchmark) on GPT-5. The model achieves state-of-the-art performance with substantial improvements in the ability to interpret SMILES strings. Read my analysis and initial findings below. Scroll to the end for some cool demos.

Figure 1: Success rates for each model on the ChemIQ reasoning benchmark. Horizontal brackets between adjacent bars indicate the result of a two-tailed McNemar’s test comparing paired outcomes for the same questions. Significance levels are shown as: n.s. (not significant, p ≥ 0.05), * (p < 0.05), ** (p < 0.01), and *** (p < 0.001).

Continue reading