From Silicon to Carbon: Experimental Validation of Generative AI-Derived CNS Drug Candidates — A Systematic Review (2021–2026)
8 affiliations
- 1Slovak University of Technology
- 2ISRA University
- 3Azerbaijan Medical University
- 4University of Namibia
- 5Kolkata, India
- 6Government College Women University
- 7Northview High School
- 8Kathmandu Model Secondary School
Abstract
Background Generative artificial intelligence has gained traction as an approach for designing novel CNS-relevant drug candidates, yet the extent to which computationally generated molecules undergo experimental validation remains poorly characterised. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines using a prospectively registered protocol (OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JE2DY). PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, arXiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to March 2026. Eligible studies applied generative AI approaches to CNS-relevant targets and reported experimental wet laboratory validation. Titles and abstracts were screened independently by three reviewers; full-text screening, extraction, and quality appraisal were performed independently in duplicate. Findings were synthesised narratively; no meta-analysis was performed. Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria from 374 identified records. All performed in vitro validation; two additionally provided in vivo evidence. Despite CNS-focused objectives, one of six experimentally validated blood–brain barrier permeability. Three studies confirmed their primary computational predictions experimentally, whereas three showed partial confirmation. Validation rates, calculated as confirmed active compounds divided by compounds tested, ranged from 26 to 100 percent; these rates reflect differing selection stringency and are not directly comparable. Publicly accessible code was unavailable in four of six studies. Conclusions Among studies reaching experimental validation, blood–brain barrier confirmation, in vivo evidence, and code availability remain the exception. Because eligibility required reported validation, these findings describe successful translations and cannot estimate failure rates; they nonetheless indicate that validation depth, rather than molecular generation, is the current constraint in this field.
Related
- COSMO-RS screening and experimental solid-liquid equilibrium validation of eutectic solvent candidates for CO2 capture
- Generative and Foundation-Model Artificial Intelligence in Food Safety Analysis, Authenticity Identification, and Quality Control: A Systematic Review of Validation and Decision Readiness.
- In Silico Design and Structural Validation ofEpitope-Based Vaccine Candidates Against Feline Calicivirus using Immunoinformatics
- Systematic DFT Screening of Anti-Perovskite Nitrides for Chemical-Looping Ammonia Synthesis: Ca-Based Compounds as Promising Candidates
- Entropic Control of Ethylene and Acetylene Uptake in Silicon-Functionalized Ionic Liquids? An Experimental and Molecular Dynamics Study
BibTeX
@misc{awwad2026from,
title = {{From Silicon to Carbon: Experimental Validation of Generative AI-Derived CNS Drug Candidates — A Systematic Review (2021–2026)}},
author = {Jad Awwad and Gul e Sehar and Fiona Benny and Obert Mutumba and Sukanya Mondal and Esha Shahbaz and Rishit Jangam and Shusant Upreti},
howpublished = {ChemRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.26434/chemrxiv.15008982/v1},
url = {https://chemrxiv.org/doi/full/10.26434/chemrxiv.15008982/v1},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - From Silicon to Carbon: Experimental Validation of Generative AI-Derived CNS Drug Candidates — A Systematic Review (2021–2026)
AU - Jad Awwad
AU - Gul e Sehar
AU - Fiona Benny
AU - Obert Mutumba
AU - Sukanya Mondal
AU - Esha Shahbaz
AU - Rishit Jangam
AU - Shusant Upreti
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/17
PB - ChemRxiv
DO - 10.26434/chemrxiv.15008982/v1
UR - https://chemrxiv.org/doi/full/10.26434/chemrxiv.15008982/v1
AB - Background Generative artificial intelligence has gained traction as an approach for designing novel CNS-relevant drug candidates, yet the extent to which computationally generated molecules undergo experimental validation remains poorly characterised. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines using a prospectively registered protocol (OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JE2DY). PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, arXiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to March 2026. Eligible studies applied generative AI approaches to CNS-relevant targets and reported experimental wet laboratory validation. Titles and abstracts were screened independently by three reviewers; full-text screening, extraction, and quality appraisal were performed independently in duplicate. Findings were synthesised narratively; no meta-analysis was performed. Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria from 374 identified records. All performed in vitro validation; two additionally provided in vivo evidence. Despite CNS-focused objectives, one of six experimentally validated blood–brain barrier permeability. Three studies confirmed their primary computational predictions experimentally, whereas three showed partial confirmation. Validation rates, calculated as confirmed active compounds divided by compounds tested, ranged from 26 to 100 percent; these rates reflect differing selection stringency and are not directly comparable. Publicly accessible code was unavailable in four of six studies. Conclusions Among studies reaching experimental validation, blood–brain barrier confirmation, in vivo evidence, and code availability remain the exception. Because eligibility required reported validation, these findings describe successful translations and cannot estimate failure rates; they nonetheless indicate that validation depth, rather than molecular generation, is the current constraint in this field.
ER -