The terpenes alpha-bisabolol and camphene modulate pruritus via an action on Cav3.2 T-type calcium channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alpha-bisabolol and camphene have demonstrated analgesic effects in inflammatory pain models by blocking Cav3.2 calcium channels. As the pain pathway overlaps with mechanisms for itch, and because Cav3.2 channels have been associated with itch in our previous work, we aimed to investigate the potential anti-itch effects of these two terpenes. Although both terpenes failed to show anti-pruritogenic properties when dissolved in aqueous PBS, when diluted in Hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin their bioactivity significantly increased. Both compounds significantly reduced scratching in the histaminergic itch model, whether administered subcutaneously or intraperitoneally. Camphene reduced itching in the non-histaminergic model regardless of the route of administration, whereas alpha-bisabolol did not alleviate chloroquine-induced itching. When tested in Cav3.2-/- mice, neither camphene nor alpha-bisabolol significantly reduced histamine-induced scratching behavior. This suggests that the anti-pruritic actions of these terpenes may involve Cav3.2 block to mitigate itch.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".