Microglia-independent peripheral neuropathic pain in male and female mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The dominant view in the field of pain is that peripheral neuropathic pain is driven by microglia in the somatosensory processing region of the spinal dorsal horn. Here, to the contrary, we discovered a form of neuropathic pain that is independent of microglia. Mice in which the nucleus pulposus (NP) of the intervertebral disc was apposed to the sciatic nerve developed a constellation of neuropathic pain behaviours: hypersensitivity to mechanical, cold, and heat stimuli. However, NP application caused no activation of spinal microglia nor was pain hypersensitivity reversed by microglial inhibition. Rather, NP-induced pain hypersensitivity was dependent on cells within the NP which recruited macrophages to the adjacent nerve. Eliminating macrophages systemically or locally prevented NP-induced pain hypersensitivity. Pain hypersensitivity was also prevented by genetically disrupting the neurotrophin brain-derived neurotrophic factor selectively in macrophages. Moreover, the behavioural phenotypes as well as the molecular mechanisms of NP-induced pain hypersensitivity were not different between males and females. Our findings reveal a previously unappreciated mechanism for by which a discrete peripheral nerve lesion may produce pain hypersensitivity, which may help to explain the limited success of microglial inhibitors on neuropathic pain in human clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".