The Role of Peripheral Glutamate and Glutamate Receptors in Muscle Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To review evidence that associates elevated muscle interstitial glutamate concentration and the activation of peripheral glutamate receptors with the development and maintenance of muscle pain in conditions such as myofascial temporomandibular disorders [TMDs].Findings: In certain noninflammatory musculoskeletal pain conditions, an association between pain, elevated glutamate concentrations and the expression of peripheral N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors [NRs] has been made. Myofascial TMDs are a noninflammatory muscle pain disorder characterized by pain and localized mechanical sensitivity in the masticatory muscle and a greater prevalence in young women than in men. Artificial elevation of glutamate concentrations in the masticatory muscles of healthy subjects evokes intense, short duration pain that is significantly greater in woman than in men and induces a more prolonged, localized mechanical sensitization that is similar in both sexes. Glutamate-evoked pain and sensitization may be attenuated by coinjection of the NR antagonist ketamine, which suggests that these effects are mediated, in part, through activation of peripheral NRs. In male and female animals, a two- to three-fold elevation of muscle interstitial glutamate concentrations appears sufficient to both excite and sensitize masticatory muscle nociceptors through activation of peripheral NRs. The magnitude of nociceptor discharge in response to peripheral NR activation is greater in females than in males, and this sex-related difference appears to be due, in part, to an estrogen-mediated enhancement of peripheral NR expression.Conclusions: These findings suggest that modest elevations of interstitial glutamate concentration could alter musculoskeletal pain sensitivity in a sex-related manner through activation of peripheral NR receptors.
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 | 0.004 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".