Well, USN in 1971 asserted submarine design called APHNAS eventually rejected by then-CNO ADM Zumwalt's will. Despite APHNAS had officially been the precursor to Seawolf, many of its features disappeared enroute, but... modern Russian SSNs of Yasen-class (Project 885/885M, NATO Graney) are resembling APHNAS to such a degree that I'd like to say APHNAS seems to be the parental design: roughly the same power, submerged displacement, speed and main battery (20-cell VLS). Most important fact is that APHNAS had been viewed as a mean to deal with Soviet Surface Action Groups built around CGs to kill surface ships by STAM cruise missiles, just like Soviet designs were up to Charlie and eventually Oscar-class. When VADM Henry Mustin said in his oral history that USN NAVAIR people who dominated CNO realm before and after Zumwalt stated "we surely and easy can cope with this SAGs by means of A-6s", he simultaneously expressed opinion that there weren't anything behind these statement but typical fighter jocks' bravado, but USN bubbleheads took this danger way more seriousely, especially given the Rickover's will to put two powerful reactors, D1W and D1G, though designed for surface ships, into subs' hulls. All in all, APHNAS was something in a way of Soviet doctrine, for which the similarity to Yasen-class is kinda proof.