Alpha‐1 Adrenoceptor Hyperresponsiveness in Three Neuropathic Pain States: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1, Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain and Central Pain States Following Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pathophysiology of the pain associated with complex regional pain syndrome, spinal cord injury and diabetic peripheral neuropathy is not known. The pain of complex regional pain syndrome has often been attributed to abnormal sympathetic nervous system activity based on the presence of vasomotor instability and a frequently reported positive response, albeit a temporary response, to sympathetic blockade. In contrast, the pain below the level of spinal cord injury and diabetic peripheral neuropathy are generally seen as deafferentation phenomena. Each of these pain states has been associated with abnormal sympathetic nervous system function and increased peripheral alpha-1 adrenoceptor activity. This increased responsiveness may be a consequence of alpha-1 adrenoceptor postsynaptic hypersensitivity, or alpha-2 adrenoceptor presynaptic dysfunction with diminished noradrenaline reuptake, increased concentrations of noradrenaline in the synaptic cleft and increased stimulation of otherwise normal alpha-1 adrenoceptors. Plausible mechanisms based on animal research by which alpha-1 adrenoceptor hyperresponsiveness can lead to chronic neuropathic-like pain have been reported. This raises the intriguing possibility that sympathetic nervous system dysfunction may be an important factor in the generation of pain in many neuropathic pain states. Although results to date have been mixed, there may be a greater role for new drugs which target peripheral alpha-2 adrenoceptors (agonists) or alpha-1 adrenoceptors (antagonists).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".