Mechanisms of Morphine Enhancement of Spontaneous Seizure Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-dose opioid therapy can precipitate seizures; however, the mechanism of such a dangerous adverse effect remains poorly understood. The aim of our study was to determine whether the neuroexcitatory activity of high-dose morphine is mediated by selective stimulation of opioid receptors. METHODS: Mice hippocampi were resected intact and bathed in low magnesium artificial cerebrospinal fluid to induce spontaneous seizure-like events recorded from CA1 neurons. RESULTS: Application of morphine had a biphasic effect on the recorded spontaneous seizure-like events. In a low concentration (10 microM), morphine depressed electrographic seizure activity. Higher morphine concentrations (30 and 100 microM) enhanced seizure activity in an apparent dose-dependent manner. Naloxone, a nonselective opiate antagonist blocked the proconvulsant action of morphine. Selective mu and kappa opiate receptor agonists and antagonists enhanced and suppressed the spontaneous seizure activity, respectively. On the contrary, delta opioid receptor ligands did not have an effect. CONCLUSIONS: The proseizure effect of morphine is mediated through selective stimulation of mu and kappa opiate receptors but not the activation of the delta receptor system. The observed dose-dependent mechanism of morphine neuroexcitation underscores careful adjustment and individualized opioid dosing in the clinical setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".