Mu-opioid receptors in nociceptive afferents produce a sustained suppression of hyperalgesia in chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The latent sensitization model of chronic pain reveals that recovery from some types of long-term hyperalgesia is an altered state in which nociceptive sensitization persists but is suppressed by the ongoing activity of analgesic receptors such as μ-opioid receptors (MORs). To determine whether these MORs are the ones present in nociceptive afferents, we bred mice expressing Cre-recombinase under the Nav1.8 channel promoter (Nav1.8cre) with MOR-floxed mice (flMOR). These Nav1.8cre/flMOR mice had reduced MOR expression in primary afferents, as revealed by quantitative PCR, in situ hybridization, and immunofluorescence colocalization with the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide. We then studied the recovery from chronic pain of these mice and their flMOR littermates. When Nav1.8cre/flMOR mice were injected in the paw with complete Freund adjuvant they developed mechanical hyperalgesia that persisted for more than 2 months, whereas the responses of flMOR mice returned to baseline after 3 weeks. We then used the inverse agonist naltrexone to assess ongoing MOR activity. Naltrexone produced a robust reinstatement of hyperalgesia in control flMOR mice, but produced no effect in the Nav1.8/flMOR males and a weak reinstatement of hyperalgesia in Nav1.8/flMOR females. Naltrexone also reinstated swelling of the hind paw in flMOR mice and female Nav1.8cre/flMOR mice, but not male Nav1.8cre/flMOR mice. The MOR agonist DAMGO inhibited substance P release in flMOR mice but not Nav1.8cre/flMOR mice, demonstrating a loss of MOR function at the central terminals of primary afferents. We conclude that MORs in nociceptive afferents mediate an ongoing suppression of hyperalgesia to produce remission from chronic 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".