Increased plasma glutamate, glycine, and arginine levels in complex regional pain syndrome type 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various inflammatory mediators have been identified as potential contributors to complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS1), but these mediators do not entirely explain certain manifestations of the syndrome, such as pain. The objective of this study was to investigate the role of amino acids in the pathogenesis of CRPS1. METHODS: We used HPLC to determine plasma concentrations of 16 amino acids, especially those related to the NMDA receptor (e.g., glutamate and glycine) and nitric oxide (NO) synthesis (e.g., arginine and citrulline) in patients with CRPS1 (n=64) and age- and sex-matched healthy controls (n=51). Patients rated pain intensity (visual analog scale) and the subjective experience of pain intensity (McGill Pain Questionnaire). Psychological dysfunction was assessed using the SCL-90. RESULTS: Relative to controls, in CRPS1 patients, plasma levels of glutamate, arginine, taurine, and glycine were increased, and plasma levels of glutamine and the ratio of citrulline to arginine were decreased. Remarkably, in CRPS1 patients there was a highly significant inverse correlation between glutamine and glutamate, although the sum of molar concentrations of glutamate and glutamine remains unchanged. Subjective measures of pain and indicators of psychoneuroticism and emotional instability did not correlate with amino acid levels. CONCLUSION: This study shows for the first time a pronounced increase in amino acid levels in this chronic pain syndrome. The marked differences in glutamate, glutamine, glycine, taurine and arginine levels between patients and controls suggest the involvement of both the NDMA receptor and the endothelium-dependent arginine-NO system in CRPS1.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".