The Dose-Response Relationship between Opioid Agonist Therapy and Alterations in Pain Pathways in Patients with Opioid Use Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The administration of opioids can be followed by enduring neuroplastic changes in the peripheral and central nervous systems. This remodeling can lead to opioid-induced hyperalgesia, causing an increased sensitivity to painful stimuli. The description of opioid-induced changes in the somatosensory system has seldom been described in the setting of opioid agonist therapy in the treatment of opioid use disorders, and the few existing reports provide no guidance with respect to the effect of varied doses or substances. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess alterations of pain pathways among patients receiving opioid agonist therapy and to elucidate the dose-response relationship. METHODS: This study was planned as cross-sectional in an outpatient clinic in Graz, Austria. Patients receiving opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorders (including methadone, levomethadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release morphine) were asked to fill out a questionnaire, including the central sensitization inventory. A battery of somatosensory system assessments was then performed. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients participated (85 men/35 women). The mean oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME) was 694 ± 249 mg/day. Our study found significant alterations in pain perception, conditioned pain modulation, and wind-up. We demonstrated a moderate dose-response relationship between high-dose opioids and markers of central sensitization. CONCLUSION: The present trial demonstrates the clear effects of opioid agonist therapy on the somatosensory system. Both central sensitization and descending pain modulation are negatively affected by high doses of opioids and our data elucidate a moderate dose-response relationship for these phenomena.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".