DeCure's autonomous Rare AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for bruxism — screening already-approved drugs against its 3-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease moduleBruxism maps to a 3-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 bruxism 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
methyl-CpG binding protein 2 (MECP2) — MECP2 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 unxdrag to rotate · scroll to zoom
RCSB Protein Data Bank · entry 6OGK · 1.65 Å · ligand UNKNOWN ATOM OR ION (UNX). Experimental structure, not a prediction.
What the evidence adds up to
A 2013 systematic review of 301 adults found that sleep bruxism alone did not increase the risk for any type of headache. The combination of sleep bruxism and painful temporomandibular disorder (TMD) greatly increased the risk for chronic migraine (odds ratio 87.1), episodic migraine (6.7), and episodic tension-type headache (3.8). Painful TMD without sleep bruxism also raised the risk for chronic migraine (30.1) and episodic migraine (3.7). The association between sleep bruxism and chronic migraine was significant (odds ratio 3.8), but no association was found with episodic migraine or tension-type headache when TMD was absent.
A 2022 randomised single-blind trial compared two botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injection protocols in 20 patients with bruxism and bilateral orofacial muscle pain. One group received injections only in the masseter muscles (3 points per muscle, 10 U per point), the other in both masseter and temporal muscles (3 points per masseter, 2 per temporal, 10 U per point). Both groups reported reduced pain at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days compared to baseline. Posterior bite force was reduced only at 15, 90, and 120 days. Treatment satisfaction was high at all time points. No differences were found between the two protocols at any evaluation.
A 2023 Bayesian network analysis and single-arm analysis of controlled clinical trials from 2005 to 2022 reported that botulinum toxin A injection significantly relieved bruxism pain for up to six months. The analysis found that BTX-A produced greater pain relief than oral splinting (mean difference −1.5 on the visual analogue scale) and than saline injection (mean difference −3.3). The authors noted inconsistent evidence in the literature and called for further long-term follow-up randomised controlled trials comparing BTX-A with other treatments or drugs.
A 2018 literature review described the most commonly used treatments for bruxism as splints, physiotherapy, psychotherapy, biofeedback, and pharmacological treatment. The review emphasised the variety of methods and the lack of clear treatment guidelines. It argued that a multidirectional approach, including behaviour modification through relaxation exercises or biofeedback, may be needed to eliminate bruxism rather than merely alleviate symptoms. What remains missing are large, long-term randomised trials that directly compare BTX-A with other active treatments, studies that stratify patients by the presence or absence of TMD, and funding for trials that test behavioural interventions against pharmacological ones.
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 Orofacial Pain · 2013 · 727 citations · open access
Epidemiology of Bruxism in Adults: A Systematic Review of the Literature
AbstractAIMS: To investigate the association among temporomandibular disorders (TMD), sleep bruxism, and primary headaches, assessing the risk of occurrence of primary headaches in patients with or without painful TMD and sleep bruxism. METHODS: The sample consisted of 301 individuals (253 women and 48 men) with ages varying from 18 to 76 years old (average age of 37.5 years). The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders were used to classify TMD. Sleep bruxism was diagnosed by clinical criteria proposed by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and primary headaches were diagnosed according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II. Data were analyzed by chi-square and odds ratio tests with a 95% confidence interval, and the significance level adopted was .05. RESULTS: An association was found among painful TMD, migraine, and tension-type headache (P < .01). The magnitude of association was higher for chronic migraine (odds ratio = 95.9; 95% confidence intervals = 12.51-734.64), followed by episodic migraine (7.0; 3.45-14.22) and episodic tension-type headache (3.7; 1.59-8.75). With regard to sleep bruxism, the association was significant only for chronic migraine (3.8; 1.83-7.84). When the sample was stratified by the presence of sleep bruxism and painful TMD, only the presence of sleep bruxism did not increase the risk for any type of headache. The presence of painful TMD without sleep bruxism significantly increased the risk in particular for chronic migraine (30.1; 3.58-252.81), followed by episodic migraine (3.7; 1.46-9.16). The association between painful TMD and sleep bruxism significantly increased the risk for chronic migraine (87.1; 10.79-702.18), followed by episodic migraine (6.7; 2.79-15.98) and episodic tension-type headache (3.8; 1.38-10.69). CONCLUSION: The association of sleep bruxism and painful TMD greatly increased the risk for episodic migraine, episodic tension-type headache, and especially for chronic migraine.
The Saudi Dental Journal · 2022 · 20 citations · open access
Effect of botulinum toxin A on pain, bite force, and satisfaction of patients with bruxism: A randomized single-blind clinical trial comparing two protocols
AbstractPurpose: The current study aims to evaluate bite force, perception of orofacial pain, and treatment satisfaction of patients with bruxism using two protocols of botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injections. Material and Methods: Two groups of patients seeking bruxism treatment and presenting bilateral orofacial pain of muscle origin were randomly created according to BTX-A injection sites: masseter muscle only, bilaterally (3 points in each muscle, 10 U per point), and masseter and temporal muscles (3 points in each masseter muscle and 2 points in each temporal muscle, 10 U per point). The patients were evaluated preoperatively and longitudinally at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days by the use of visual analog scales for pain and treatment satisfaction and a gnathodynamometer for bite force recording. Results: The final sample included 10 participants in each group. Both groups presented mitigation of pain at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days in comparison with baseline; however, reduction in the posterior bite force was noted only at 15, 90, and 120 days. Quite high treatment satisfaction was reported from both groups at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days. No differences were observed between the groups in all evaluations and study periods. Conclusion: In general, considering pain relief, reduction in bite force, and treatment satisfaction, both protocols of BTX-A seem to be somewhat equally effective in the short-term management (up to 120 days) of bruxism.
Journal of Dental Sciences · 2023 · 11 citations · open access
Can botulinum toxin injection alleviate the pain of bruxism? A Bayesian network analysis and a single-arm analysis
AbstractBackground/purpose: There is inconsistent evidence regarding whether the botulinum toxin A (BTA) injection can relieve pain caused by bruxism. This study aimed to estimate the efficiency of BTA injection in relieving pain caused by bruxism at different follow-up periods. Materials and methods: Five electronic databases were searched from 2005 to 2022 using search terms related to botulinum toxin and bruxism. Only controlled clinical trials were included. Two investigators reviewed each article and discussed any disagreements until a consensus was reached. Pain outcomes as evaluated by the visual analogue scale (VAS) were subjected to single-arm and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Pooling data were measured by a random-effects model. Results: < 0.01). According to the Bayesian analysis, BTA also resulted in significantly greater pain relief than oral splinting (mean difference (MD), -1.5; 95% credible interval (CrI) = -2.7 to -0.19) or saline injection (MD, -3.3; 95% CrI = -6.2 to -0.32). Conclusion: BTA significantly relieves the pain of bruxism for 6 months after injection, and its therapeutic efficacy was higher than that of oral splinting. Nevertheless, further long-term follow-up randomized controlled trials comparing BTA with other management or drugs are warranted.
Journal of Stomatology · 2018 · 10 citations · open access
The most commonly used methods of treatment for bruxism – a literature review
AbstractBruxism is referred to as grinding and clenching of the teeth. It is a disorder affecting an increasing number of patients. This disease causes severe ailments that negatively influencing the daily functioning and manifesting, among the others, as toothaches, masticatory muscle pain, headaches, and tooth hypersensitivity. The aim of the work is to analyse the contemporary treatment methods and methods of alleviating the effects of the disease. In addition, it evaluates the usefulness of these methods in daily dental practice. The article shows the contemporary view of treatment, including the multidisciplinary approach. The authors present treatment methods of bruxism, such as: splints, physiotherapy, psychotherapy, biofeedback, and pharmacological treatment. The variety of methods currently used and the lack of clear guidelines for treatment of bruxism should be emphasised. The article also draws attention to the need to modify the daily behaviour of the patient through relaxation exercises or biofeedback, in order to eliminate bruxism and not just alleviate its symptoms. A multidirectional approach and treatment of bruxism can produce satisfactory and lasting results.
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.
