DeCure's autonomous Rare AI scientist is researching a drug-repurposing hypothesis for temporal arteritis — screening already-approved drugs against its 20-gene Open Targets disease module to publish open-access research. Research is fast; the path to publication is funded in milestone stages.
Disease moduleTemporal arteritis maps to a 20-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 temporal arteritis 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
dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) — DHFR 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 ndpdrag to rotate · scroll to zoom
RCSB Protein Data Bank · entry 4M6J · 1.201 Å · ligand NADPH DIHYDRO-NICOTINAMIDE-ADENINE-DINUCLEOTIDE PHOSPHATE (NDP). Experimental structure, not a prediction.
What the evidence adds up to
A 2017 study from Turkey, a low-incidence region, reviewed 42 consecutive temporal artery biopsies performed between 2011 and 2016. Only eight of those 42 biopsies (19%) confirmed temporal arteritis. The study found no statistically significant difference between biopsy-positive and biopsy-negative groups in sex, age, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, or biopsy length. The authors concluded they could not find a correlation between biopsy results and clinical evaluation, and that laboratory examination results may not be helpful for accurate diagnosis.
A 1999 literature review covering more than 300 articles from 1966 to 1998 produced a clinical guide based on clinical suspicion, laboratory testing, and temporal artery biopsy. A 1981 article warned that temporal arteritis is often incorrectly diagnosed in elderly patients who have a high ESR and temporal pain, leading to needless biopsy and serious side effects from high-dose prednisone. That article stated a negative biopsy does not rule out the disease, and therapy should not be deferred until biopsy results are reported. The recommended treatment was 40 to 60 mg of prednisone daily for at least four to six weeks, then a gradual taper.
A 1992 article noted that visual loss is the most common complication when temporal arteritis is misdiagnosed or undertreated, but that treatment recommendations vary among medical disciplines. No controlled trial data comparing treatment regimens or visual outcomes were provided in any of the abstracts. No drug other than prednisone was mentioned.
What is still missing is a prospective, randomised trial that tests alternative treatments or shorter corticosteroid courses with defined visual and relapse endpoints. The diagnostic uncertainty — biopsy-negative cases, poor correlation with lab values, and reliance on clinical suspicion alone — means that patient stratification remains imprecise, and the long-term toxicity of current therapy has not been systematically measured against any comparator.
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 the American Geriatrics Society · 1999 · 36 citations
Temporal Arteritis: A Clinical Approach
AbstractOBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical guide to the evaluation of temporal arteritis. DESIGN: A Medline English-language search of the literature from 1966 to 1998, including more than 300 articles about temporal arteritis, was performed to develop a guide to the evaluation of temporal arteritis. RESULTS: A user-friendly guide to the evaluation of temporal arteritis was developed based on the following criteria: (1) clinical suspicion, (2) laboratory testing, and (3) temporal artery biopsy. CONCLUSION: A clinical guide to the evaluation of temporal arteritis may assist clinicians in the care of patients with this condition.
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira · 2017 · 11 citations · open access
Clinical correlation of biopsy results in patients with temporal arteritis
AbstractOBJECTIVE: Temporal arteritis is systemic vasculitis of medium and large sized vessels. The lowest incidence rates were reported in Turkey, Japan and Israel. We aimed to investigate the results of patients with biopsy-proven temporal arteritis and those classified according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria from a low-incidence region for temporal arteritis. The results of our study are noteworthy, since there is limited data on pathologic diagnosis of temporal arteritis in Turkey. METHOD: We studied the medical records, laboratory findings such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein levels, biopsy results, and postoperative complications of all the patients operated for temporal artery biopsy at our clinic. We used the computerized laboratory registry that keeps all records of 42 consecutive temporal artery biopsy results from January 2011 to December 2016. RESULTS: The mean age was 66±12.5 years. The most common manifestations on admission were temporal headache, optic neuritis and jaw claudication, respectively. Temporal artery biopsy results confirmed tempoal arteritis in eight out of 42 (19%) patients. There was no statistically significant difference between biopsy-positive and biopsy-negative groups in terms of sex, age, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein and biopsy length. CONCLUSION: We were not able to find a correlation between the analysis of biopsy results and clinical evaluation of patients with temporal arteritis. We suggest that diagnosis of temporal arteritis depends on clinical suspicion. Laboratory examination results may not be helpful in accurate diagnosis of tempoal arteritis.
AbstractVisual loss is the most common complication of temporal arteritis when the disease is misdiagnosed or undertreated, yet treatment recommendations vary among different medical disciplines. In this article, Dr Wind presents a case report and information from the medical literature illustrating different treatment regimens and visual outcomes in patients with temporal arteritis.
AbstractTemporal arteritis is not a common disease, but it is often incorrectly diagnosed in elderly patients with a high ESR and pain in the temporal area. Such an incorrect diagnosis can subject the patient to needless biopsy and the serious side effects of therapy with large doses of prednisone. When temporal arteritis is suspected yet presentation is atypical, careful consideration should be given to ENT and neurologic examination, and even psychiatric evaluation. Temporal artery biopsy should be done on the tender side, with multiple serial sections. A negative biopsy does not rule out temporal arteritis. Therapy should not be deferred until biopsy results are reported. It consists of 40 to 60 mg of prednisone daily for at least four to six weeks with a gradual decrease thereafter.
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.
