A novel cortical biomarker signature predicts individual pain sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Importance Biomarkers would greatly assist decision making in the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of chronic pain. Objective The present study aimed to undertake analytical validation of a sensorimotor cortical biomarker signature for pain consisting of two measures: sensorimotor peak alpha frequency (PAF) and corticomotor excitability (CME). Design In this cohort study (recruitment period: November 2020-October 2022), participants experienced a model of prolonged temporomandibular pain with outcomes collected over 30 days. Electroencephalography (EEG) to assess PAF and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to assess CME were recorded on Days 0, 2 and 5. Pain was assessed twice daily from Days 1-30. Setting Data collection occurred at a single centre: Neuroscience Research Australia. Participants We enrolled 159 healthy participants (through notices placed online and at universities across Australia), aged 18-44 with no history of chronic pain, neurological or psychiatric condition. 150 participants completed the protocol. Exposure Participants received an injection of nerve growth factor (NGF) to the right masseter muscle on Days 0 and 2 to induce prolonged temporomandibular pain lasting up to 4 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures We determined the predictive accuracy of the PAF/CME biomarker signature using a nested control-test scheme: machine learning models were run on a training set (n = 100), where PAF and CME were predictors and pain sensitivity was the outcome. The winning classifier was assessed on a test set (n = 50) comparing the predicted pain labels against the true labels. Results The final sample consisted of 66 females and 84 males with a mean age of 25.1 ± 6.2. The winning classifier was logistic regression, with an outstanding area under the curve (AUC=1.00). The locked model assessed on the test set had excellent performance (AUC=0.88[0.78-0.99]). Results were reproduced across a range of methodological parameters. Moreover, inclusion of sex and pain catastrophizing as covariates did not improve model performance, suggesting the model including biomarkers only was more robust. PAF and CME biomarkers showed good-excellent test-retest reliability. Conclusions and Relevance This study provides evidence for a sensorimotor cortical biomarker signature for pain sensitivity. The combination of accuracy, reproducibility, and reliability, suggests the PAF/CME biomarker signature has substantial potential for clinical translation, including predicting the transition from acute to chronic pain. Key Points Question Can individuals be accurately classified as high or low pain sensitive based on two features of cortical activity: sensorimotor peak alpha frequency (PAF) and corticomotor excitability (CME)? Findings In a cohort study of 150 healthy participants, the performance of a logistic regression model was outstanding in a training set (n=100) and excellent in a test set (n=50), with the combination of slower PAF and CME depression predicting higher pain. Results were reproduced across a range of methodological parameters. Meaning A novel cortical biomarker can accurately distinguish high and low pain sensitive individuals, and may predict the transition from acute to chronic pain
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".