DeCure's autonomous Dermatology AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for phototoxic dermatitis — screening already-approved drugs against its 34-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease modulePhototoxic dermatitis maps to a 34-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 phototoxic dermatitis 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
membrane metalloendopeptidase (MME) — MME 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 ft8drag to rotate · scroll to zoom
RCSB Protein Data Bank · entry 6SUK · 1.75 Å · ligand Omapatrilat (FT8). Experimental structure, not a prediction.
What the evidence adds up to
Photopatch testing across several centres and decades consistently identifies a minority of suspected cases as true photoallergic contact dermatitis. In an Italian multicentre study of 1082 patients, 234 (21.6%) were positive to at least one substance, with 204 reactions classified as typically photoallergic, 68 as allergic, and 18 as phototoxic. A 15-year Athens review of 207 patients found photocontact reactions in 28 (13.52%), with promethazine the most common offender (25%), followed by chlorpromazine and oxybenzone (12.5% each). In New Zealand, only 6 of 58 patients tested with a photoallergen series (10%) had a positive photopatch reaction, four to promethazine and two to benzophenone-3; the most common postpatch diagnosis was endogenous dermatitis (54%), not photoallergy.
The offending agents are consistent across populations. Promethazine sensitisation in the New Zealand series occurred via oral exposure, supporting a mechanism of systematised photoallergy. Chlorpromazine produces both systemic phototoxic and photoallergic reactions and, exceptionally, allergic contact dermatitis, as documented in a tertiary series from 1980 to 2019. Photo-irritant contact dermatitis, by contrast, is diagnosed clinically and is usually caused by furocoumarins in plants such as limes and celery, while photoallergic contact dermatitis is attributed primarily to sunscreens, fragrances, and antibacterial agents. A 1973 monograph on soap photodermatitis describes how halogenated salicylanilides in soaps caused widespread adverse cutaneous reactions through a cell-mediated delayed hypersensitivity mechanism, with light converting the chemical into an active photohapten.
Diagnostic practice remains uneven. Photopatch testing is not commonly performed even by dermatologists who patch test and give phototherapy, and availability is limited to a few tertiary referral clinics, as the New Zealand review notes. The Italian study observed that evaluation of possible photoallergic contact dermatitis in at-risk populations is often not undertaken and agreed methodology is uncommon. In children, phototherapy modalities such as narrowband-UVB, broadband-UVB, PUVA, and excimer laser are considered valuable for photoresponsive dermatoses, but this guidance concerns treatment of dermatoses generally, not photoallergic contact dermatitis specifically.
What is missing is a standardised, widely used photopatch testing protocol and prospective data linking test results to clinical outcomes. The retrospective series are small, span decades, and use differing allergen series, making prevalence estimates fragile. No trial data exist for any intervention in photoallergic contact dermatitis; the literature is confined to diagnosis and allergen identification. Patient stratification by exposure source, such as topical versus systemic drugs, and by UV wavelength would clarify mechanisms, but no such cohort has been assembled.
Evidence
Retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works and resolved on OpenAlex — ranked by citations, including the results that did not work.
Contact Dermatitis · 2008 · 65 citations
Photopatch tests: an Italian multicentre study from 2004 to 2006
AbstractBACKGROUND: Evaluation of possible photoallergic contact dermatitis in at-risk populations is often not undertaken, and an agreed methodology for investigation is uncommonly used. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a retrospective multicentre study to determine the prevalence of photoallergic contact dermatitis in Italy. METHODS: A total of 1082 patients with histories and clinical features suggestive of photoallergic contact dermatitis were evaluated. All the patients had undergone photopatch testing with allergens proposed for Italy as well as other substances suggested by each patient's personal history. RESULTS: 234 patients (21.6%) were positive to at least one test substance of the standard photopatch testing series or to added substances. 234 patients (21.6%) were positive to at least one substance with a total of 290 reactions. 204 of the reactions were typically photoallergic; 68 reactions were allergic and within this group 10 were photoaugmented reactions; 18 reactions were considered to be phototoxic. CONCLUSION: The predominant group of photoallergens was drugs, followed by organic UV filters and antimicrobial agents.
Seminars in Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2010 · 32 citations
Phototherapy in Pediatric Patients: Choosing the Appropriate Treatment Option
AbstractPhototherapeutic modalities, including narrowband-UVB, broadband-UVB, PUVA photochemotherapy, and excimer laser therapy are valuable tools that can be used for photoresponsive dermatoses in children. As a systematically safer alternative compared with internal agents, including the prebiologic and biological therapies, phototherapy should be considered a possible treatment option for children with diseases including psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, pityriasis lichenoides chronica, and vitiligo.
International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology · 2008 · 26 citations · open access
Photo Allergic Contact Dermatitis: The 15-Year Experience of a Tertiary Reference Center in a Sunny Mediterranean City
AbstractPhotoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) represents an important entity of photodermatoses while photopatch testing is the main diagnostic tool. The main goal of this study is to evaluate retrospectively the prevalence of photoallergic reactions and the offending agents in Athens during a 15-year period. The medical records of all patients with possible PACD between 1992 and 2006 were examined. All patients included in the analysis had undergone patch testing and photo-testing. Contact reactions were detected in 86 out of 207 participants (41.54%), while photocontact reactions were identified in 28/207 (13.52%) patients. The most common offending photoallergen was promethazine (25%), while chlorpromazine and oxybenzone were both detected in 12.5% of cases. PACD represents a unique proportion of photodermatoses in a sunny Mediterranean city such as Athens.
Photoallergic Contact Dermatitis: No Fun in the Sun
AbstractPhotoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) is a form of allergic contact dermatitis that occurs due to the interaction between a topically applied chemical and exposure to UV radiation. It can be difficult to identify and requires photopatch testing (PPT) for definitive diagnosis. In this article, we provide an overview of PACD, including clinical features, the most common photoallergens, and why cases may go undiagnosed.
Photopatch Testing in New Zealand: A 12-Year Retrospective Review
AbstractBACKGROUND: Little is known about the common photoallergens in New Zealand, where ultraviolet exposure is particularly high. Availability of photopatch testing is limited because of it being performed in very few tertiary referral and contact dermatitis clinics. OBJECTIVE: To review the photopatch testing experience in New Zealand. METHOD: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent photopatch testing at a tertiary referral center in Auckland from 2008 to 2019 was performed. RESULTS: Seventy patients had photopatch testing over the 12-year period. Of the 58 patients tested using the photoallergen series, 6 (10%) patients had a positive photopatch test reaction, of which 4 were to promethazine and 2 were to benzophenone-3. The most common postpatch diagnosis was endogenous dermatitis (54%), followed by allergic contact dermatitis (21%), photoallergic contact dermatitis (9%), and chronic actinic dermatitis (4%). CONCLUSIONS: Both patch and photopatch testing are important investigations in patients with suspected photoallergic contact dermatitis. Promethazine and benzophenone-3 were the most frequent and only photoallergens in our population. Promethazine sensitization was via oral exposure, supporting a mechanism of systematized photoallergy to promethazine.
Australasian Journal of Dermatology · 2020 · 3 citations
Allergic and photoallergic contact dermatitis to chlorpromazine
AbstractChlorpromazine is known to produce both systemic phototoxic and photoallergic reactions. However, it may also cause photoallergic contact dermatitis and, albeit exceptionally, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). We present a series of photoallergic contact dermatitis and ACD to chlorpromazine diagnosed at a tertiary centre cutaneous allergy unit between 1980 and 2019.
Estudios mindonienses: Anuario de estudios histórico-teológicos de la diócesis de Mondoñedo-Ferrol · 1997 · 1 citations
Un problema resuelto: la fundación del Monasterio de Santa María de Monfero, los privilegios de Alfonso VII y su filiación al Císter
AbstractPhotocontact dermatitis is not a common condition, but neither is it rare. Both photo-irritant contact dermatitis (PICD) and photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) are seen by most dermatologists in general practice. PICD is diagnosed on clinical grounds and is usually caused by furocoumarins in plants like limes and celery. PACD is caused primarily by sunscreens but can also be the result of fragrances and antibacterial agents. PACD can only be diagnosed by photo-patch testing that most dermatologists, even those who patch test and give phototherapy in their office, do not perform. The procedure as outlined in this manuscript is relatively simple and can easily be accomplished in the dermatologist's office.
AbstractThis compact 181-page textbook is a comprehensive monograph concerning a most fascinating and recently defined medical problem, photodermatitis. Its chapters, written in a concise and lucid manner, contain material of relevance for dermatologists, photobiologists, immunologists, as well as members of industry concerned with household products and consumer protection. The authors have wisely presented, in the early chapters, a simple review of the biochemistry and biophysics necessary to understand how thousands of individuals developed adverse cutaneous reactions following the use of soaps containing selected antibacterial agents known as halogenated salicylanilides. They discuss studies of diverse investigators, demonstrating that the underlying mechanism of action in this particular photodermatitis is an immunologic one of the cell-mediated, delayed hypersensitivity type. In this reaction, light photochemically alters the halogenated salicylanilide into an active photohapten. The authors are well qualified to present this scientific material, for their own macrophage inhibition studies contributed greatly to a better
Disease module: DeepOracle (Open Targets). Structures: RDKit from PubChem SMILES. Literature: retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works using Disease Ontology synonyms, 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.
