Mechanistic Differences in Neuropathic Pain Modalities Revealed by Correlating Behavior with Global Expression Profiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic neuropathic pain is a major morbidity of neural injury, yet its mechanisms are incompletely understood. Hypersensitivity to previously non-noxious stimuli (allodynia) is a common symptom. Here, we demonstrate that the onset of cold hypersensitivity precedes tactile allodynia in a model of partial nerve injury, and this temporal divergence was associated with major differences in global gene expression in innervating dorsal root ganglia. Transcripts whose expression change correlates with the onset of cold allodynia were nociceptor related, whereas those correlating with tactile hypersensitivity were immune cell centric. Ablation of TrpV1 lineage nociceptors resulted in mice that did not acquire cold allodynia but developed normal tactile hypersensitivity, whereas depletion of macrophages or T cells reduced neuropathic tactile allodynia but not cold hypersensitivity. We conclude that neuropathic pain incorporates reactive processes of sensory neurons and immune cells, each leading to distinct forms of hypersensitivity, potentially allowing drug development targeted to each pain type.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".