DeCure's autonomous Cardio AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for dilated cardiomyopathy 1DD — screening already-approved drugs against its 1-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease moduleDilated cardiomyopathy 1DD maps to a 1-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 dilated cardiomyopathy 1dd 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.
What the evidence adds up to
In a 1994 follow-up study of 235 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy enrolled from 1978 to 1992, two-year survival rose from 73.8% in the earliest period (1978–1982, 26 patients) to 87.7% in the middle period (1983–1987, 65 patients) and 90.3% in the latest period (1988–1992, 144 patients). Four-year survival improved from 53.8% to 72.3% to 82.9% (P = 0.02). The authors note that patients in later periods were younger and less severely affected, which partly explains the improvement, but the survival curves diverged progressively and the difference remained significant after stratification for disease severity, suggesting a sustained treatment effect. A progressively higher proportion of patients received ACE inhibitors and later beta blockers. In the middle group, patients treated with ACE inhibitors showed better survival than those not treated, after stratification for heart failure severity. In the latest group, beta blockers had a significant additive effect with conventional therapy: four-year survival in patients with mild heart failure treated with beta blockers (usually with digitalis and ACE inhibitors) was 90%, and in those with moderate to severe heart failure it was 87.5%.
A 1989 review states that the natural history of dilated cardiomyopathy varies: 50% of patients die within two years, while 25% survive more than ten years. The review mentions that at least 11,000 new cases are diagnosed each year in the United States and that traditional therapy includes cardiac glycosides and diuretics. No trial data from that review are provided.
A 2019 clinical case report discusses dysmetabolic cardiomyopathy as a subtype of dilated cardiomyopathy and presents one clinical case with diagnostic methods, but gives no survival or response data.
What is still missing is a prospective, randomised trial that isolates the effect of any single drug in a contemporary, well-characterised dilated cardiomyopathy cohort, particularly one that accounts for the changing baseline severity and earlier diagnosis noted in the 1994 study. Funding for such a trial, along with clear patient stratification by aetiology and disease stage, would be needed before any claim of efficacy could be made.
Evidence
Retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works and resolved on OpenAlex — ranked by citations, including the results that did not work.
Heart · 1994 · 76 citations · open access
Changing mortality in dilated cardiomyopathy
AbstractOBJECTIVE: To analyse the changes in mortality in dilated cardiomyopathy over the past 15 years and to identify the factors that might have influenced survival. DESIGN: Follow up study of 235 patients (aged 16-70) systematically enrolled on a register from 1 January 1978 to 31 December 1992. SETTING: Hospital department of cardiology. PATIENTS: Three groups corresponding to three periods of 5 years: group 1 (diagnosis between 1 January 1978 and 31 December 1982) 26 patients; group 2 (diagnosis between 1 January 1983 and 31 December 1987) 65 patients; and group 3 (diagnosis between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 1992) 144 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Death or heart transplantation. RESULTS: Two and four year survival was 73.8% and 53.8% in group 1, 87.7% and 72.3% in group 2, and 90.3% and 82.9% in group 3 (P = 0.02). During the 15 years of the study period the number of cases increased progressively and the baseline clinical characteristics changed (that is, patients were younger and less severely affected), partly explaining the improvement in survival. None the less, the three mortality curves tended to diverge progressively and the improvement in survival in the different groups was still significant after stratification for the severity of the disease, suggesting that treatment had a sustained effect. A progressively higher proportion of patients were treated with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and more recently with beta blockers. In group 2, after stratification for the severity of heart failure, patients who were treated with ACE inhibitors showed a better survival than patients who were not. Furthermore, analysis of group 3 showed that beta blockers had a significant additive effect with conventional therapy both by intention to treat and actual treatment. Four year survival in patients with mild and moderate to severe heart failure treated with beta blockers, and usually digitalis and ACE inhibitors, was respectively 90% and 87.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in the survival of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy over the past 15 years may be explained by earlier diagnosis, new treatments, and a change in the clinical characteristics of the patients at enrolment.
New England Journal of Medicine · 1989 · 10 citations
Immunosuppression for Dilated Cardiomyopathy
AbstractThe diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy is made when left ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction, with normal wall thickness, occur in the absence of coronary artery, valvular, or pericardial disease.1 The right ventricle is also often involved. The natural history of the disease varies from a course progressing to death within 2 years in 50 percent of afflicted patients2 to survival for more than 10 years in 25 percent. The incidence of dilated cardiomyopathy is increasing; at least 11,000 new cases are diagnosed each year in the United States. The traditional approach to therapy includes cardiac glycosides and diuretics. Although increased . . .
Family Medicine · 2019 · 0 citations · open access
Clinical Case of Dysmetabolic Cardiomyopathy in the Practice of a Family Doctor
AbstractThe article highlights the classification of dilated cardiomyopathy, the etiological factors responsible for the occurrence of this pathology, modern principles of diagnosis and treatment of dysmetabolic cardiomyopathy as one of the types of dilated cardiomyopathy. Clinical and main instrumental diagnostic methods are presented, a clinical case of dysmetabolic cardiomyopathy is considered.
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.
