Src promotes delta opioid receptor (DOR) desensitization by interfering with receptor recycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An important limitation in the clinical use of opiates is progressive loss of analgesic efficacy over time. Development of analgesic tolerance is tightly linked to receptor desensitization. In the case of delta opioid receptors (DOR), desensitization is especially swift because receptors are rapidly internalized and are poorly recycled to the membrane. In the present study, we investigated whether Src activity contributed to this sorting pattern and to functional desensitization of DORs. A first series of experiments demonstrated that agonist binding activates Src and destabilizes a constitutive complex formed by the spontaneous association of DORs with the kinase. Src contribution to DOR desensitization was then established by showing that pre-treatment with Src inhibitor PP2 (20 microM; 1 hr) or transfection of a dominant negative Src mutant preserved DOR signalling following sustained exposure to an agonist. This protection was afforded without interfering with endocytosis, but suboptimal internalization interfered with PP2 ability to preserve DOR signalling, suggesting a post-endocytic site of action for the kinase. This assumption was confirmed by demonstrating that Src inhibition by PP2 or its silencing by siRNA increased membrane recovery of internalized DORs and was further corroborated by showing that inhibition of recycling by monensin or dominant negative Rab11 (Rab11S25N) abolished the ability of Src blockers to prevent desensitization. Finally, Src inhibitors accelerated recovery of DOR-Galphal3 coupling after desensitization. Taken together, these results indicate that Src dynamically regulates DOR recycling and by doing so contributes to desensitization of these 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".