TNFα Mechanically Sensitizes Masseter Muscle Afferent Fibers of Male Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral evidence in rats indicates that injection of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) into skeletal muscle results in a prolonged mechanical sensitization without gross inflammation. To investigate whether a peripheral mechanism could underlie this effect, in the present study, TNFalpha (1 or 0.1 microg) was injected into the rat masseter muscle to assess its effect on the excitability and mechanical threshold (MT) of muscle nociceptors as well as on inflammation. Expression of TNFR1 (P55 receptors) and TNFR2 (P75 receptors) by the masseter muscle and trigeminal ganglion neurons that innervate that muscle was determined by Western blot and immunohistochemistry, respectively. The Evans blue dye technique was used at the end of the TNFalpha experiments to assess for plasma protein extravasation. In subsequent experiments to confirm the involvement of receptor activation in TNFalpha-induced effects, P55 or P75 receptor antibody was co-injected with TNFalpha. Intramuscular injection of 1 microg TNFalpha did not excite nociceptors but did significantly decrease MT compared with vehicle control. There was no evidence of gross inflammation 3 h after injection of TNFalpha. Co-injection of TNFalpha with P55 or P75 receptor antibodies attenuated TNFalpha-induced mechanical sensitization. P55 and P75 receptors were expressed by 29 and 62% of masseter nociceptors, respectively. These findings indicate that TNFalpha induces mechanical sensitization of masseter nociceptors that is mediated through activation of peripheral P55 and P75 receptors. These results support the hypothesis that a peripheral receptor mechanism could contribute to TNFalpha-induced noninflammatory mechanical sensitization of skeletal muscle previously reported in behaving rats.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".