Small G-Protein Rheb Gates Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Signaling to Regulate Morphine Tolerance in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Analgesic tolerance due to long-term use of morphine remains a challenge for pain management. Morphine acts on μ-opioid receptors and downstream of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling pathway to activate the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. Rheb is an important regulator of growth and cell-cycle progression in the central nervous system owing to its critical role in the activation of mTOR. The hypothesis was that signaling via the GTP-binding protein Rheb in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord is involved in morphine-induced tolerance. METHODS: Male and female wild-type C57BL/6J mice or transgenic mice (6 to 8 weeks old) were injected intrathecally with saline or morphine twice daily at 12-h intervals for 5 consecutive days to establish a tolerance model. Analgesia was assessed 60 min later using the tail-flick assay. After 5 days, the spine was harvested for Western blot or immunofluorescence analysis. RESULTS: Chronic morphine administration resulted in the upregulation of spinal Rheb by 4.27 ± 0.195-fold (P = 0.0036, n = 6), in turn activating mTOR by targeting rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). Genetic overexpression of Rheb impaired morphine analgesia, resulting in a tail-flick latency of 4.65 ± 1.10 s (P < 0.0001, n = 7) in Rheb knock-in mice compared to 10 s in control mice (10 ± 0 s). Additionally, Rheb overexpression in spinal excitatory neurons led to mTORC1 signaling overactivation. Genetic knockout of Rheb or inhibition of mTORC1 signaling by rapamycin potentiated morphine-induced tolerance (maximum possible effect, 52.60 ± 9.56% in the morphine + rapamycin group vs. 16.60 ± 8.54% in the morphine group; P < 0.0001). Moreover, activation of endogenous adenosine 5'-monophosphate-activated protein kinase inhibited Rheb upregulation and retarded the development of morphine-dependent tolerance (maximum possible effect, 39.51 ± 7.40% in morphine + metformin group vs. 15.58 ± 5.79% in morphine group; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests spinal Rheb as a key molecular factor for regulating mammalian target of rapamycin signaling.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".