Abstract Drug repurposing has garnered growing attention as an alternative to traditional drug development, which is expensive and marked by low success rates. However, identifying appropriate disease candidates for new indications remains a key challenge. While both academic papers and patent documents provide valuable information, their comparative strengths in supporting drug repurposing have not been systematically evaluated. We aimed to compare the information characteristics of academic papers and patent documents to propose their appropriate use in different stages of disease candidate selection for drug repurposing. Using dementia as a case study, we constructed disease networks from academic papers and patent documents. Three dimensions of data quality—relevance, completeness, and accuracy—were evaluated. Accuracy was validated against Phase IV clinical trial data, with statistical testing performed using a sign test and binomial test. Our analysis revealed that patent documents exhibited higher relevance and accuracy, making them effective for identifying specific target diseases in the early stages of drug repurposing. In contrast, academic papers demonstrated greater completeness, offering broader and more diverse information that supports the selection of a wider range of potential disease candidates during the planning phase of drug repurposing. By comparing the distinctive information characteristics of academic papers and patent documents, our study demonstrates how their complementary use can guide evidence-based decision-making in drug repurposing. Leveraging academic papers for broad exploration and patent documents for targeted refinement can help researchers and pharmaceutical companies develop more efficient and effective R&D strategies.
Shin et al. (Fri,) studied this question.