Repeated Testing With the Hypertonic Saline Assay in Mice for Screening of Analgesic Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In vivo animal assays are a cornerstone of preclinical pain research. An optimal stimulus for determining the activity of potential analgesics would produce responses of a consistent magnitude on repeated testing. Intraplantar (i.pl.) injection of hypertonic saline (HS) in mice produces robust nociceptive responses to different analgesics, without evidence of tissue damage. Here, we investigated whether the nociceptive response is changed by repeating the injection at different times and sites in a mouse and whether it is attenuated by morphine. METHODS: We conducted randomized and blinded experiments to assess responses to repeated i.pl. 10% HS in female CD-1 mice. An injection of HS was followed by a second injection into the same hind paw at 4 hours, 24 hours, or 7 days. A separate group of mice each received i.pl. injections at 5, 10, and 15 days. In 2 independent experiments, 30 minutes after initial HS injections in the ipsilateral hind paw, mice received HS injection into the contralateral hind paw or ipsilateral forepaw. The ability of morphine to block the nociceptive responses was examined by injecting morphine at 5-day intervals. RESULTS: Repeated injection of HS did not alter the responses at 4 hours (84 vs 75 seconds; mean difference [95% CI], -9 [-40 to 23]; P = .6), 24 hours (122 vs 113 seconds; -6 [-24 to 12]; P = .5), or 7 days (112 vs 113 seconds; -0.3 [-12 to 11]; P = .95) or at multiple injections (day 0, 122 seconds vs day 5, 121 seconds; -0.3 [-28 to 27], P > .99; day 10, 118 seconds; 2.5 [-36 to 41], P = .99; day 15, 119 seconds; 2 [-36 to 38], P = .99). A previous hind paw injection did not change the responses of the contralateral hind paw (right, 93 seconds versus left, 96 seconds; -3 [-20 to 13], P = .7) or of the ipsilateral forepaw (forepaw after HS, 146 seconds versus forepaw after 0.9% saline, 149 seconds; -3 [-28 to 22], P = .8). Morphine dose-dependently attenuated HS responses (control, 94 seconds vs 4 mg/kg, 66 seconds; 29 [-7 to 64], P = .12; vs 10 mg/kg, 27 seconds; 67 [44-90], P < .0001; 4 vs 10 mg/kg, 67 [44-90], P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The repetition of i.pl. HS produces consistent reproducible responses without tissue damage. This results in efficient, rapid detection of analgesic activity, reducing the number of animals required.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".