Spinal Cord Toll-Like Receptor 4 Mediates Inflammatory and Neuropathic Hypersensitivity in Male But Not Female Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The innate immune system is increasingly appreciated to play an important role in the mediation of chronic pain, and one molecule implicated in this process is the Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). Here, using pharmacological and genetic manipulations, we found that activating TLR4 in the spinal cord, with the agonist lipopolysaccharide (LPS), causes robust mechanical allodynia but only in male mice. Spinal LPS had no pain-producing effect in female mice. TLR4 also has a sex-specific role in inflammatory (complete Freund's adjuvant) and neuropathic (spared nerve injury) pain: pain behaviors were TLR4 dependent in males but TLR4 independent in females. The sex differences appear to be specific to the spinal cord, as LPS administered to the brain or the hindpaw produces equivalent allodynia in both sexes, and specific to pain, as intrathecal LPS produces equivalent hypothermia in both sexes. The involvement of TLR4 in pain behaviors in male mice is dependent on testosterone, as shown by gonadectomy and hormone replacement. We found no sex differences in spinal Tlr4 gene expression at baseline or after LPS, suggesting the existence of parallel spinal pain-processing circuitry in female mice not involving TLR4.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".