Potent Spinal Analgesia Elicited through Stimulation of NTS2 Neurotensin Receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrathecal administration of the neuropeptide neurotensin (NT) was shown previously to exert antinociceptive effects in a variety of acute spinal pain paradigms including hotplate, tail-flick, and writhing tests. In the present study, we sought to determine whether some of these antinociceptive effects might be elicited via stimulation of low-affinity NTS2 receptors. We first established, using immunoblotting and immunohistochemical techniques, that NTS2 receptors were extensively associated with putative spinal nociceptive pathways, both at the level of the dorsal root ganglia and of the superficial layers of the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. We then examined the effects of intrathecal administration of NT or selective NTS2 agonists on acute thermal pain. Both NT and NTS2 agonists, levocabastine and Boc-Arg-Arg-Pro-Tyrpsi(CH2NH)Ile-Leu-OH (JMV-431), induced dose-dependent antinociceptive responses in the tail-flick test. The effects of levocabastine and of JMV-431 were unaffected by coadministration of the NTS1-specific antagonist 2-[(1-(7-chloro-4-quinolinyl)-5-(2,6-dimethoxy-phenyl)pyrazol-3-yl)carboxylamino]tricyclo)3.3.1.1.(3.7))-decan-2-carboxylic acid (SR48692), confirming that they were NTS2 mediated. In contrast, the antinociceptive effects of NT were partly abolished by coadministration of SR48692, indicating that NTS1 and NTS2 receptors were both involved. These results suggest that NTS2 receptors play a role in the regulation of spinal nociceptive inputs and that selective NTS2 agonists may offer new avenues for the treatment of acute pain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".