DeCure's autonomous Rare AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for spermatogenic failure 58 — 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 moduleSpermatogenic failure 58 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 spermatogenic failure 58 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
A 2007 study of 69 testicular biopsy samples from azoospermic men found that at least 188 transcripts were significantly increased on two microarray platforms, with levels rising as spermatogenic damage worsened and reaching a maximum in Sertoli-cell-only samples. The over-represented functional categories included steroid metabolism, innate defence and immune response, focal adhesion, antigen processing and presentation, and the mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathway. The expression signature distinguished normal from defective spermatogenesis in three disparate data sets, with more than 90% of biopsy samples clustering correctly. The authors noted that many of the inflammation-related genes in the signature are also increased in autoimmune diseases.
A 2011 review states that medical treatment of men with primary spermatogenic failure remains largely ineffective, in contrast to treatment for secondary testicular failure. Treatment has been attempted with hormones and nutritional supplements including antioxidants, but no treatment has consistently demonstrated efficacy, and it has not been possible to reliably identify patients likely to benefit. The review notes that empiric medical therapy has been largely replaced by assisted reproductive techniques.
A 1988 study of 8879 consecutive vasectomies performed with uniform technique over 24 years reported 97 failures of all types among 5331 men who returned for at least two postoperative semen tests. There were 32 early overt failures (0.60%), 61 technical failures involving persistence of small numbers of spermatozoa (1.14%), and 4 late overt failures (0.08%) discovered as a result of pregnancy at least four years after two azoospermic test results. Four failures were due to missed vasa deferentia; the remainder were attributed to recanalisation.
A 2013 conference abstract describes a method for array comparative genomic hybridisation on single human sperm, noting that the study was mainly performed to optimise the protocol rather than to determine percentages of chromosomal alterations in normal or pathological conditions. The authors suggest future application might give information on sperm chromosome aberrations in infertile men, carriers of karyotype anomalies, men with advanced age, subjects treated with chemotherapy, and partners of couples with repeated miscarriage or repeated failure during assisted reproduction. What is still missing is a consistent, effective medical therapy for primary spermatogenic failure, reliable patient stratification, and prospective trials that test the inflammatory-like expression signature as a target or biomarker rather than only as a diagnostic classifier.
Evidence
Retrieved by DeepSearch across 234,678,978 indexed works and resolved on OpenAlex — ranked by citations, including the results that did not work.
Human Reproduction · 2007 · 86 citations
Cross-platform gene expression signature of human spermatogenic failure reveals inflammatory-like response
AbstractBACKGROUND: The molecular basis of human testicular dysfunction is largely unknown. Global gene expression profiling of testicular biopsies might reveal an expression signature of spermatogenic failure in azoospermic men. METHODS: Sixty-nine individual testicular biopsy samples were analysed on two microarray platforms; selected genes were validated by quantitative real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: A minimum of 188 transcripts were significantly increased on both platforms. Their levels increased with the severity of spermatogenic damage and reached maximum levels in samples with Sertoli-cell-only appearance, pointing to genes expressed in somatic testicular cells. Over-represented functional annotation terms were steroid metabolism, innate defence and immune response, focal adhesion, antigen processing and presentation and mitogen-activated protein kinase K signalling pathway. For a considerable proportion of genes included in the expression signature, individual transcript levels were in keeping with the individual mast cell numbers of the biopsies. When tested on three disparate microarray data sets, the gene expression signature was able to clearly distinguish normal from defective spermatogenesis. More than 90% of biopsy samples clustered correctly into the corresponding category, emphasizing the robustness of our data. CONCLUSIONS: A gene expression signature of human spermatogenic failure was revealed which comprised well-studied examples of inflammation-related genes also increased in other pathologies, including autoimmune diseases.
Asian Journal of Andrology · 2011 · 57 citations · open access
Medical therapy for spermatogenic failure
AbstractMedical treatment of men with primary spermatogenic failure remains largely ineffective in contrast to those with secondary testicular failure. Treatment has been attempted with a multitude of agents ranging from hormones to nutritional supplements (antioxidants). While some studies have demonstrated benefit to some treatments, no treatments have consistently demonstrated efficacy nor has it been possible to reliably identify patients likely to benefit. Idiopathic spermatogenic failure likely results from multiple discrete defects in sperm production that are as yet unidentified. A better understanding of these defects will yield more effective treatment options and appropriate triage of patients to specific therapeutic regimens. This review focuses on the rationale and current evidence for hormonal and antioxidant therapy in medical treatment of male infertility, spermatogenic failure in particular. Although empiric medical therapy for spermatogenic failure has been largely replaced by assisted reproductive techniques, both treatment modalities could play a role, perhaps as combination therapy.
AbstractVasectomy techniques and failure rates vary among surgeons, and the criteria for failure are not often clearly defined. To help establish a yardstick for comparative purposes, a series of 8879 consecutive vasectomies performed with uniform technique over 24 years was reviewed. A subgroup of 5331 men who had returned for at least two postoperative semen tests—the<i>study</i>group—was used for follow-up analysis. Failures were defined as<i>early</i>or<i>late</i>and also were categorized as overt or<i>technical</i>according to the numbers, motility, or persistence of the remaining spermatozoa. There were 97 failures of all types, including 32 (0.60%) early and overt failures and 61 (1.14%) technical failures that involved the persistence of small numbers of spermatozoa, possibly of no significance. Four (0.08%) late overt failures were also seen; each of these was discovered as a result of a pregnancy, and each occurred at least four years after two azoospermic test results. Of the 97 failures, four were recognized as due to missed vasa deferentia, and the remainder were attributed to recanalization. Whether improved and reproducible failure rates can be consistently obtained by other techniques is not yet clear. (<i>JAMA</i>1988;259:3142-3144)
ICSI using testicular spermatozoa after failure of ICSI with ejaculated spermatozoa could be a good choice: A propensity score‐matched cohort study
AbstractBACKGROUND: Ejaculated spermatozoa are considered to possess a higher fertilisation potential than testicular spermatozoa. In selected cases, the use of testicular spermatozoa from non-azoospermic infertile men resulted in a higher implantation and pregnancy rate than the use of ejaculated spermatozoa. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare the live birth rate and cumulative live birth rate between couples with failed intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedure using ejaculated spermatozoa who subsequently had an intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle with testicular spermatozoa and those who subsequently had an intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle with ejaculated spermatozoa. The secondary objective was to determine the indications for the use of testicular spermatozoa after intracytoplasmic sperm injection failure with ejaculated spermatozoa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of matched couples using propensity score matching analysis was performed. After an intracytoplasmic sperm injection failure (cycle_1), intracytoplasmic sperm injection with either ejaculated spermatozoa (ejaculated sperm group), or testicular spermatozoa (testicular sperm group), was performed (cycle_2). The matching was on intracytoplasmic sperm injection performed in cycle_1 according to spermatozoa used (testicular or ejaculated) in cycle_2. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the influence of sperm origin on cumulative live birth rate. Univariate analysis on parameters of cycle_1 was used to identify the prognostic factors to propose an intracytoplasmic sperm injection with testicular spermatozoa in case of cycle_1 failure. The study outcomes were live birth rate and cumulative live birth rate. RESULTS: Among the 6034 couples available, 63 were selected to constitute the testicular sperm group and 63 were selected by propensity score matching to constitute the ejaculated sperm group. After matching, the DNA fragmentation index was higher in the testicular sperm group (13.43% ± 9.65% vs. 8.93% ± 4.47%, p = 0.013); no significant difference was observed for the fertilisation rate, the number of obtained embryos, blastulation rate and frozen embryo rate. In cycle_2, the live birth rate was higher in the testicular group (22.2% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.001), as was the cumulative live birth rate (25.4% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.065). The prognostic factors identified for the proposal of intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedure with testicular spermatozoa after intracytoplasmic sperm injection failure with ejaculated spermatozoa were: teratozoospermia, cryptozoospermia and high DNA fragmentation index. DISCUSSION: According to the present study and current knowledge, the use of testicular spermatozoa after failed intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedure in non-azoospermic men could be proposed instead of sperm donation in case of high sperm DNA fragmentation index, cryptozoospermia and teratozoospermia. A good oocyte response to ovarian stimulation during the previous assisted reproductive technology attempt will increase the chance of success. Although the main limitation of the current study is its retrospective nature, the use of the propensity score matching to perform causal inference study increases its reliability. CONCLUSION: The present study supports that the use of testicular spermatozoa outside the classical indication of azoospermia is a good option when the indication is well established. However, before proposing a testicular biopsy, an improvement in sperm characteristics should be considered by treating the causes of sperm alteration.
Human Reproduction · 2013 · 0 citations · open access
Session 69: Clinical endocrinology
AbstractLimitations, reason for caution: This study was mainly performed to optimize an aCGH protocol on human single sperm, not to have percentage of alterations in normal and pathological conditions. Wider implications of the findings: Future application of this method might give important information on the biology and pathophysiology of spermatogenesis and sperm chromosome aberrations in normal subjects and in patients at higher risk of producing unbalanced sperm, such as infertile men, carriers of karyotype anomalies, men with advanced age, subjects treated with chemotherapy, and partners of couples with repeated miscarriage and repeated failure during assisted reproduction techniques. Study funding/competing interest(s): University of Padova/no competing interests
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.
