SHANGHAI, May 27, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- On May 20, 2026, Viva Biotech hosted a V-Experts in Conversation webinar, "Managing Complexity in Modern Drug Discovery: A Practical Approach to Integrated Screening & Chemistry." Moderated by Victoria Ouroutzoglou, Associate Director of Business Development at Viva Biotech, the roundtable featured Dr. Bing Xia, Vice President & Head of Early Discovery Platforms, and Dr. Tim Dwight, Senior Director of Medicinal Chemistry & Business Development. The discussion examined how integrated screening workflows with medicinal chemistry embeds greater scientific discipline to early drug discovery, streamlining the clearer decisions as programs advance from hit identification to lead optimization.

Hit Identification Starts with Target Context

As Dr. Bing Xia emphasized, hit identification is highly target-dependent and is not best approached as a fixed route. Strategy selection should begin with the target context, including biological validation, tractability, assay readiness, structural information, protein availability, resource constraints, and the broader IP and competitive landscape.

When high-quality structural information is available, fragment-based drug discovery or virtual screening may provide efficient entry points. When a reliable functional or cellular assay has been established, HTS remains a powerful route for assessing biological activity across large compound collections. For more challenging targets, affinity-based approaches such as DEL, ASMS, or SPR can help address early questions around druggability, particularly when protein availability or assay readiness is limited.

The discussion also highlighted V-DEL-facilitated target triage as one of Viva Biotech's practical approaches for early target and modality assessment. By integrating DEL screening outcomes, protein science expertise, protein QC and conformational-state assessment, and an AI-powered V-DEL Friendly Index, this approach can help assess ligandability, rank targets or constructs, prioritize resources, and inform whether small molecules or linear/cyclic peptides may represent suitable modality directions. This can be especially valuable for first-in-class or less-characterized targets, where early data helps reduce uncertainty and guide resource allocation.

Validated Hits Require More Than Primary Activity

Primary screening readouts are only the starting point. To advance a hit with confidence, teams need a layered validation workflow that combines purity and liability checks, dose-response confirmation, orthogonal assays, selectivity and counter-screening, cytotoxicity assessment, and biophysical binding studies. This process helps distinguish actionable hits from false positives, nonspecific binders, and assay artifacts.

Dr. Xia also discussed Viva Biotech's continuously updated "promiscuous frequent hits" dataset with masked target names. Built from accumulated screening experience, this internal resource supports more informed triage and helps reduce the risk of advancing misleading hits across screening campaigns.

DMTA Cycles Require Clear Hypotheses

After hit validation, the design–make–test–analyze cycle becomes a central operating framework for advancing compounds. From the medicinal chemistry perspective, Dr. Tim Dwight emphasized the importance of close coordination across medicinal chemistry, AIDD/CADD, biology, DMPK, and project teams. These cycles often operate on a weekly cadence, to align with primary assay workflows, allowing teams to generate new hypotheses, refine and select new designs, and prioritize focused compound sets.

Structure-based design, ligand-centric SAR analysis, molecular descriptors, FEP, MD simulations, ADMET prediction, and AI/ML-supported modeling can all contribute to compound prioritization. The objective is not to generate designs in isolation, but to test defined hypotheses and determine which directions should continue, pause, or be replaced.

Dr. Dwight also noted that the scale of chemical change often evolves with the stage of the program. In hit-to-lead, larger scaffold or functional-group changes may be needed to remove liabilities, test tractability, and build backup series. As programs move into lead optimization, smaller SAR-driven changes often become more important for improving potency, selectivity, exposure, safety, and developability.

Integration Supports Scientific Discipline

Clear go/no-go criteria are essential to prevent programs from continuing without sufficient evidence of tractability, efficacy, or developability. Assay enablement, protein construct quality, target modulation, in vivo efficacy, therapeutic index, scaffold-specific toxicity, DDI risk, cross-species PK, early CMC considerations, and nomination criteria can all influence program decisions.

In this context, integration is less about placing multiple capabilities under one roof, and more about connecting the right data, expertise, and decision points at each stage of discovery. By integrating protein science, structural biology, screening, medicinal chemistry, AIDD/CADD, biology, and DMPK, Viva Biotech supports a continuous discovery workflow, helping partners move from target understanding to validated hits and lead optimization with greater rigor, efficiency and scientific discipline.

Logo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/2934554/Viva_Logo.jpg

View original content:https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/from-hit-identification-to-lead-optimization-building-scientific-continuity-in-early-drug-discovery-302783072.html

Die von US-Präsident Donald Trump angekündigten Zölle von 25 Prozent auf Neuwagenimporte aus der Europäischen Union würden nach Einschätzung von Branchenexperten vor allem die deutsche Autoindustrie treffen. Berechnungen des Center Automotive Research (CAR) in Bochum zufolge kämen allein auf die Autoproduktion in Deutschland zusätzliche Belastungen von rund 2,5 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr zu. Hinzu kämen weitere Kosten für US-Exporte deutscher Hersteller aus Werken in anderen EU-Staaten.

Obwohl sich die Maßnahmen formal gegen die gesamte EU richten, sieht CAR-Direktor Ferdinand Dudenhöffer insbesondere Deutschland im Visier Washingtons. Die Exporte anderer ausländischer Autobauer in die USA seien „unwesentlich“, sagte er und sprach mit Blick auf die neuen Zoll-Drohungen vom möglichen Beginn eines „Wirtschaftskriegs gegen Deutschland“. Die Maßnahmen würden die Hersteller jedoch unterschiedlich hart treffen, abhängig von ihrer Produktionsstruktur und Präsenz in den Vereinigten Staaten.

Relativ besser gestellt wären demnach Konzerne wie BMW und Mercedes-Benz, die über umfangreiche Produktionskapazitäten in den USA verfügen. In ihren US-Werken fertigen sie vor allem SUV-Modelle, die den Großteil ihrer Verkäufe auf dem US-Markt ausmachen. Diese lokale Produktion wirkt nach Einschätzung Dudenhöffers wie ein „Zollschutz“, weil in den USA montierte Fahrzeuge nicht unter die geplanten Importzölle auf Neuwagen aus der EU fallen würden.

Deutlich verwundbarer wären dagegen Marken wie Audi und Porsche, die ihre Fahrzeuge bislang weitgehend aus Europa in die USA liefern. Für sie könnten die neuen Einfuhrabgaben ein Anreiz sein, Pläne zum Aufbau eigener Produktionsstätten in den Vereinigten Staaten zu beschleunigen. Vollständig auffangen können die Hersteller die zusätzlichen Kosten nach Einschätzung des CAR-Instituts jedoch nicht. Ein Teil der Belastungen dürfte über Preiserhöhungen an die US-Käufer weitergegeben werden. Dank der starken Markenbindung rechnet Dudenhöffer zwar nicht mit einem abrupten Nachfrageeinbruch, die deutschen Autobauer stünden jedoch vor der Herausforderung, ihre Preissetzung und Standortstrategie zügig an die neue handelspolitische Lage anzupassen.