DeCure's autonomous Cardio AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for atrioventricular block — screening already-approved drugs against its 27-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease moduleAtrioventricular block maps to a 27-gene Open Targets module — the target space DeCure's AI scientist screens approved drugs against.
DeCure.ai methodSignature reversal (LINCS) plus network proximity (STRING) rank already-approved drugs likely to perturb this module — the same engine that produces DeCure.ai's repurposing hypotheses.
Repurposing thesisScreening approved medicines against this disease module, then publishing the evidence for the strongest candidate. Known pharmacology and human exposure data make the first question sharper — they do not establish safety or efficacy in a new indication.
Research record
01
ResearchComing soon
Candidate research + dossier — target rationale, drug-repurposing thesis and evidence pack.proof: Published dossier + on-chain hash
02
ValidationComing soon
In-vitro biological validation at a contract research org (CRO).proof: CRO contract + in-vitro report
03
Peer review & paperComing soon
Peer-reviewed paper published open-access (preprint + journal).proof: DOI + open-access link + on-chain hash
Current lead
No approved-drug candidate for atrioventricular block is corroborated in the literature DeepSearch retrieved. Some conditions are managed with non-pharmacological care — a device, surgery or physical therapy — rather than a medicine; that may be the case here, or the literature we found may simply be too sparse yet to support a drug-repurposing angle.
Molecular view
LIM domain binding 3 (LDB3) — LDB3 is one of the genes genetically linked to this disease in Open Targets — shown as context, not as a drug target we're pursuing: no approved-drug candidate for this disease is yet corroborated in the literature we found.
Loading structure…
helix sheet gludrag to rotate · scroll to zoom
RCSB Protein Data Bank · entry 4YDP · 1.4 Å · ligand GLUTAMIC ACID (GLU). Experimental structure, not a prediction.
What the evidence adds up to
In a retrospective Danish study of 575 patients who received a temporary pacemaker for atrioventricular block between 2000 and 2011, 55 met criteria for having no other cause of block and having had their AV-node blocking drugs stopped. Of those 55, 47 still had an indication for a permanent pacemaker at initial admission despite drug discontinuation. Among the 8 discharged without a permanent pacemaker, 2 later had recurrence of AV block requiring a permanent pacemaker and 1 experienced syncope. In total, 49 of 55 patients (89%) ultimately required a permanent pacemaker. Among patients on beta-blocker monotherapy, 26 of 27 (96%) had an indication for a permanent pacemaker. Temporary pacemaker implantation was complicated by infection or displacement in 11% of cases.
A 2014 review of paediatric atrioventricular block notes that acquired and often reversible causes of block exist in children, and that recent advances in diagnostics and pacing therapies have improved outcomes. The review states that management should focus on resuscitative measures, diagnostic testing, identifying reversible causes, monitoring for progression, cardiac consultation, and evaluating the need for definitive pacemaker placement. It does not report any specific drug or intervention as reversing the block.
A 1975 report describes four cases of block within the His bundle diagnosed by His bundle recording. Three cases were complete atrioventricular block from a split His bundle, and one was first-degree His bundle block. The paper stresses the usefulness of His bundle recording in atrioventricular block but does not report any drug treatment or reversal.
What is still missing is prospective data on which specific drugs, if any, can be safely withdrawn to avoid permanent pacing in selected patients, and whether any patient subgroup (by age, block level, or drug class) might benefit from a trial of drug cessation rather than immediate pacemaker implantation. No trial has yet stratified patients by His bundle recording or by reversible cause to test drug discontinuation as a strategy.
Evidence
Retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works and resolved on OpenAlex — ranked by citations, including the results that did not work.
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology · 2013 · 26 citations
The Impact of Drug Discontinuation in Patients Treated with Temporary Pacemaker Due to Atrioventricular Block
AbstractINTRODUCTION: Patients treated with a temporary pacemaker (TPM) due to atrioventricular (AV) block are often monitored after discontinuation of AV node blocking drugs to evaluate the indication for permanent pacing. However, the impact of drug discontinuation is sparsely documented. We investigated to what extent drug discontinuation abolished the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: All hospital records of patients who received a TPM at Aalborg Hospital, Denmark, between January 2000 and March 2011 (n = 575) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with AV block who were treated with a TPM and concomitant cessation of drug therapy were included if there was no other underlying mechanism causing the AV block. AV blocking drugs included antiarrhythmic agents classes II-IV and digoxin. Fifty-five patients fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Forty-seven patients had an indication for a PPM at the initial hospital admission, despite drug discontinuation. Of the remaining 8 patients who were discharged without a PPM, 3 subsequently experienced events: 2 had recurrence of AV block requiring a PPM, and 1 experienced syncope. Thus, in total, 49 (89%) patients had a final indication for a permanent pacemaker (PPM). Of patients receiving beta-blocker monotherapy, 26 (96%) had an indication for a PPM. TPM implantation was complicated by infection or displacement in 11% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of patients treated with a TPM due to AV block and who receive beta-blockers alone or in combination with digoxin have a final indication for a PPM despite cessation of drug treatment. TPM are frequently associated with complications.
Current Opinion in Pediatrics · 2014 · 12 citations
Evaluation and management of atrioventricular block in children
AbstractPURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pediatric brady-dysrhythmias and conduction disorders are uncommon, but timely recognition and evaluation are critical. This review will highlight the key diagnostic and management steps for first, second, and third-degree atrioventricular heart block in pediatric patients. RECENT FINDINGS: There is a breadth of acquired and often reversible causes of atrioventricular block in childhood. Recent advances in diagnostics and pacing therapies have led to improved outcomes. SUMMARY: A thorough evaluation is required to determine when atrioventricular block requires treatment. In symptomatic or unstable patients, the management should focus on resuscitative measures, diagnostic testing, potential reversible causes, monitoring for progression, cardiac consultation and evaluating the need for definitive pacemaker placement.
AbstractSince the first repont of BH block by Narula and Samet in 1970, the attention has been drawn to this special type of atrioventricular block, and now it is generally accepted that this is not a very uncommon abnormality.The present paper contains a report of 4 cases of BH block diagnosed by His bundle recording. Three cases were diagnosed as complete atrioventricular block resulting from split BH (H, H'), whereas the remaining 1 was diagnosed as first degree BH block (abnormal duration of BH with split BH). The usefulness of His bundle recording in atrioventricular block was stressed.
Disease module: DeepOracle (Open Targets). Structures: RDKit from PubChem SMILES. Literature: retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works (targeted per-candidate search), resolved on OpenAlex.
DeCure is a research and publication project, not medical advice and not a treatment. "DeCure for X" describes a research goal, not a claim that a cure exists. Backing a cure is a contribution to fund the research — it is not an investment, and confers no yield, royalty, equity or IP ownership. Papers are published open-access by the DeCure.ai DAO.
