Activating α4β2 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Alleviates Fentanyl-induced Respiratory Depression in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Opioid analgesics are widely used for treatment of acute, postoperative, and chronic pain. However, activation of opioid receptors can result in severe respiratory depression. There is an unmet clinical need to develop a pharmacologic therapy to counter opioid-induced respiratory depression without interfering with analgesia. Further, additional advances to confront accidental lethal overdose with the use of fentanyl and other opioids are needed. Here, the authors test the hypothesis that activation of nicotinic receptors expressed within respiratory rhythm-generating networks would counter opioid-induced respiratory depression without compromising analgesia. METHODS: Respiratory neural discharge was measured using in vitro brainstem-spinal cord and medullary slice rat preparations. In vivo, plethysmographic recording, nociception testing, and righting reflexes were used to examine respiratory ventilation, analgesia, and sedation, respectively. RESULTS: The administration of nicotine, selective α4β2 nicotinic receptor agonist A85380, but not α7 nicotinic receptor agonist PNU282987, reversed opioid-induced respiratory depression in neonatal pups in vitro and in vivo. In adult rats in vivo, administration of A85380 (0.03 mg/kg), but not PNU282987, provides a rapid and robust reversal of fentanyl-induced decrease in respiratory rate (93.4 ± 33.7% of control 3 min after A85380 vs. 31 ± 20.5% of control after vehicle, n = 8 each, P < 0.001), without marked side effects. The coadministration of A85380 (0.06 mg/kg) with fentanyl or remifentanil markedly reduced respiratory depression and apneas, and enhanced the fentanyl-induced analgesia, as evidenced by increased paw withdrawal latency in Hargreaves plantar test (14.4 ± 2.8 s vs. vehicle: 11.3 ± 2.4 s, n = 8 each, P = 0.013) and decreased formalin-induced nocifensive duration (2.5 ± 2.4 min vs. vehicle: 5.4 ± 2.7 min, n = 8 each, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: The novel strategy of targeting α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors has the potential for advancing pain control and reducing opioid-induced respiratory depression and overdose.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".