Lumbar Intrathecal Administration of the Quaternary Lidocaine Derivative, QX-314, Produces Irritation and Death in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We recently found that peripheral administration of the quaternary lidocaine derivative, QX-314, produces long-lasting sensory and motor blockade in animals. The goal of this study was to test whether intrathecal QX-314 has similar properties. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-controlled, blinded study with female CD-1 mice. Animals in the treatment group received lumbar intrathecal QX-314 (0.5-10 mM; volume, 2 microl; each concentration, n = 6). Normal saline and lidocaine (70 mM) served as negative and positive controls (each group, n = 12), respectively. Animals were tested for up to 3 h for lumbosacral neural blockade and observed for adverse effects. RESULTS: No animal injected with saline and 11 of 12 (92%) animals injected with lidocaine displayed reversible lumbosacral motor blockade (P < 0.001). QX-314 (5 mM) produced motor blockade in four of the six (67%) and sensory blockade in five of the six animals (83%; P < 0.05 vs. saline). However, six of the six mice (100%) at 5 mM QX-314 and five of the six (83%) at 10 mM exhibited marked irritation; one of the six animals at 5 mM (17%) and two of the six at 10 mM (33%) died. We observed no neural blockade without adverse effects in any animal injected with QX-314. All animals injected with saline and 11 of the 12 (92%) animals injected with lidocaine demonstrated normal behavior. CONCLUSION: Lumbar intrathecal QX-314 concentration-dependently produced irritation and death in mice, at lower concentrations than those associated with robust motor blockade. Although QX-314 did produce long-lasting neural blockade, these findings indicate that QX-314 is unlikely to be a suitable candidate for spinal anesthesia in humans.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".