Blockade of dopamine D1 receptors in male rats disrupts morphine reward in pain naïve but not in chronic pain states
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rewarding effect of opiates is mediated through dissociable neural systems in drug naïve and drug-dependent states. Neuroadaptations associated with chronic drug use are similar to those produced by chronic pain, suggesting that opiate reward could also involve distinct mechanisms in chronic pain and pain-naïve states. We tested this hypothesis by examining the effect of dopamine (DA) antagonism on morphine reward in a rat model of neuropathic pain.Neuropathic pain was induced in male Sprague-Dawley rats through chronic constriction (CCI) of the sciatic nerve; reward was assessed in the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm in separate groups at early (4-8 days post-surgery) and late (11-15 days post-surgery) phases of neuropathic pain. Minimal effective doses of morphine that produced a CPP in early and late phases of neuropathic pain were 6 mg/kg and 2 mg/kg respectively. The DA D1 receptor antagonist, SCH23390, blocked a morphine CPP in sham, but not CCI, rats at a higher dose (0.5 mg/kg), but had no effect at a lower dose (0.1 mg/kg). The DA D2 receptor antagonist, eticlopride (0.1 and 0.5 mg/kg), had no effect on a morphine CPP in sham or CCI rats, either in early or late phases of neuropathic pain. In the CPP paradigm, morphine reward involves DA D1 mechanisms in pain-naïve but not chronic pain states. This could reflect increased sensitivity to drug effects in pain versus no pain conditions and/or differential mediation of opiate reward in these two states.
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 | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".