DeCure's autonomous Rare AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for sick sinus syndrome — screening already-approved drugs against its 8-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease moduleSick sinus syndrome maps to a 8-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 sick sinus syndrome 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.
Evidence
Retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works and resolved on OpenAlex — ranked by citations, including the results that did not work.
Archives of Family Medicine · 1993 · 51 citations
Cefaclor vs amoxicillin in the treatment of acute, recurrent, and chronic sinusitis
AbstractBACKGROUND: The treatment of acute, recurrent, and chronic sinusitis remains controversial because of the presence of a wide variety of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria in the sinuses. DESIGN: This double-blind, randomized trial compared cefaclor with amoxicillin in the treatment of acute, recurrent, and chronic maxillary sinusitis using clinical evaluation, roentgenography, and microbiologic evaluation of antral aspirates. SETTING: Outpatient office of five otorhinolaryngologists in Salt Lake City, Utah. PATIENTS: One hundred eight adult patients with acute, recurrent, or chronic maxillary sinusitis. INTERVENTION: Oral treatment with cefaclor (500 mg) twice daily or amoxicillin (500 mg) three times daily for 10 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Clinical response to treatment with cefaclor vs amoxicillin. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients with acute sinusitis, 25 with recurrent sinusitis, and 15 with chronic sinusitis were evaluable. Although multiple organisms were common in each group, patients with acute sinusitis were more likely to have Haemophilus influenzae or Streptococcus pneumoniae, and patients with recurrent or chronic sinusitis were more likely to have anaerobes in sinus aspirate. Whether treated with cefaclor or amoxicillin, clinical improvement occurred in 86% of patients with acute sinusitis and 56% of patients with recurrent sinusitis. Patients with chronic sinusitis were too few to allow statistical analysis of the differences in outcome between them and patients with recurrent or acute sinusitis. Resistance of the cultured organisms to the study drug used was unrelated to treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of clinical improvement was high in patients with acute sinusitis but was less favorable in those with recurrent and chronic disease regardless of the study drug used. The susceptibility of organisms isolated to the study drugs was unrelated to outcome.
Sinus node recovery time assessment by the overdrive suppression test employing an intravenous injection of disopyramide phosphate
AbstractAlthough sinus node recovery time (SNRT) assessment by the overdrive suppression test (ODST) is important in detecting sick sinus syndrome (SSS), its sensitivity is still inadequate. We have evaluated the effect of intravenous injection (i.v.) of disopyramide phosphate (DP) in ODST. The subjects were 30 SSS patients (64.9 +/- 10.0 <SD> years old). If SNRT was <2,000 ms or the corrected SNRT (CSNRT) was < 1,000 ms, ODST was repeated after DP i.v. (2 mg. kg(-1), < or = 100 mg in total). Eleven normal subjects (59.3 +/- 9.0 years old) were also studied. Although SNRT was <2,000 ms or the CSNRT was < 1,000 ms in 13 of the 30 SSS patients (43%), SNRT was prolonged from 1,510 +/- 300ms to 3,400 +/- 1,160 ms (P<0.01), and CSNRT from 510 +/- 190 to 2,470 +/- 1,470 ms (P<0.01) after DP i.v. in these patients. Thus, SNRT was > or = 2,000 ms and the CSNRT was > or = 1,000 ms in 27 of 30 SSS patients (90%) after DP i.v. Using a combination of overdrive suppression and intravenous injection of disopyramide phosphate, the corrected sinus node recovery time was diagnostic (>525 ms) in 29 of the 30 patients (97%). In contrast, SNRT and CSNRT were shortened in the normal subjects during ODST after DP i.v. (P<0.01). The plasma concentration of DP estimated in nine patients was 4.1 +/- 1.0 microg.ml(-1). No serious side effect occurred. ODST employing DP i.v. is safe and seems to be highly effective in diagnosing SSS.
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.
