MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effects of Intrathecal Gabapentin on Spinal Morphine Tolerance in the Rat Tail-Flick and Paw Pressure Tests

2004· article· en· W2052574100 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Hansen, Ian Gilron, Murray Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityKingston General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphineED50Drug toleranceGabapentinMedicineOpioidAnalgesicPharmacologyTail flick testNociceptionAnesthesiaCross-toleranceInternal medicineReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Analgesic tolerance to opioids has been described in both experimental and clinical conditions and may limit the clinical utility of these drugs. We have previously shown that systemic gabapentin (GBP), a non-opioid drug, prevents and reverses tolerance to systemic morphine in the rat. In this study, we investigated the effect of intrathecal GBP on spinal morphine tolerance. Studied rats were given 7 days of intrathecal injections with saline (10 μL), GBP (300 μg), morphine (15 μg), or a GBP-morphine combination, and analgesic testing using tail-flick and paw-pressure tests was conducted before and 30 min after the drug injection. On Day 8, an antinociceptive dose-response curve was constructed and the 50% effective dose (ED50) values for morphine (given alone) were calculated for each study group. Coinjection of GBP with morphine blocked the development of tolerance, as shown by the preservation of morphine analgesia over 7 days as well as by a concomitant decrease in ED50 values on Day 8, as compared with the morphine-alone group. Although additive analgesia over Days 1–7 cannot be ruled out, ED50 reductions in the GBP-morphine combination group indeed suggest some suppression of tolerance. These data support previous evidence that GBP prevents opioid tolerance and, more specifically, indicate that intrathecal GBP prevents the development of spinal opioid tolerance. Future studies are required to examine the respective roles of supraspinal and peripheral sites of GBP-morphine interaction and to investigate the mechanisms underlying the action of GBP on opioid tolerance. IMPLICATIONS: Analgesic opioid tolerance may limit the efficacy of opioids, such as morphine, and has underlying mechanisms that are also important in the development of neuropathic pain. This study supports previous evidence that gabapentin prevents opioid tolerance and more specifically indicates that intrathecal gabapentin prevents the development of spinal opioid tolerance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207