Exploring pharmacological inhibition of Gq/11 as an analgesic strategy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Misuse of opioids has greatly affected our society. One potential solution is to develop analgesics that act at targets other than opioid receptors. These can be used either as stand-alone therapeutics or to improve the safety profile of opioid drugs. Previous research showed that activation of G_q/11 proteins by G-protein coupled receptors has pro-nociceptive properties, suggesting that blockade of G_q/11 signalling could be beneficial for pain control. The aim of this study was to test this hypothesis pharmacologically by using potent and selective G_q/11 inhibitor YM-254890.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We used a series of behavioural assays to evaluate the acute responses of mice to painful thermal stimulation while administering YM-254890 alone and in combination with morphine. We then used electrophysiological recordings to evaluate the effects of YM-254890 on the excitability of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) nociceptor neurons.

KEY RESULTS

We found that systemic administration of YM-254890 produced anti-nociceptive effects and also augmented morphine analgesia in both hotplate and tail flick paradigms. However, it also caused substantial inhibition of locomotion, which may limit its therapeutic utility. To circumvent these issues, we explored the local administration of YM-254890. Intrathecal injections of YM-254890 produced lasting analgesia in a tail flick test and greatly augmented the anti-nociceptive effects of morphine without any significant effects on locomotor behaviour. Electrophysiological studies showed that YM-254890 reduced the excitability of DRG nociceptors and augmented their opioid-induced inhibition.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

These findings indicate that pharmacological inhibition of G_q/11 could be explored as an analgesic strategy.

Functional subgroups of rat and human sensory neurons: a systematic review of electrophysiological properties

Sensory neurons are responsible for the generation and transmission of nociceptive signals from the periphery to the central nervous system. They encompass a broadly heterogeneous population of highly specialized neurons. The understanding of the molecular choreography of individual subpopulations is essential to understand physiological and pathological pain states. Recently, it became evident that species differences limit transferability of research findings between human and rodents in pain research. Thus, it is necessary to systematically compare and categorize the electrophysiological data gained from human and rodent dorsal root ganglia neurons (DRGs). In this systematic review, we condense the available electrophysiological data defining subidentities in human and rat DRGs. A systematic search on PUBMED yielded 30 studies on rat and 3 studies on human sensory neurons. Defined outcome parameters included current clamp, voltage clamp, cell morphology, pharmacological readouts, and immune reactivity parameters. We compare evidence gathered for outcome markers to define subgroups, offer electrophysiological parameters for the definition of neuronal subtypes, and give a framework for the transferability of electrophysiological findings between species. A semiquantitative analysis revealed that for rat DRGs, there is an overarching consensus between studies that C-fiber linked sensory neurons display a lower action potential threshold, higher input resistance, a larger action potential overshoot, and a longer afterhyperpolarization duration compared to other sensory neurons. They are also more likely to display an infliction point in the falling phase of the action potential. This systematic review points out the need of more electrophysiological studies on human sensory neurons.

Inhibition of Fast Nerve Conduction Produced by Analgesics and Analgesic Adjuvants-Possible Involvement in Pain Alleviation

Nociceptive information is transmitted from the periphery to the cerebral cortex mainly by action potential (AP) conduction in nerve fibers and chemical transmission at synapses. Although this nociceptive transmission is largely inhibited at synapses by analgesics and their adjuvants, it is possible that the antinociceptive drugs inhibit nerve AP conduction, contributing to their antinociceptive effects. Many of the drugs are reported to inhibit the nerve conduction of AP and voltage-gated Na⁺ and K⁺ channels involved in its production. Compound action potential (CAP) is a useful measure to know whether drugs act on nerve AP conduction. Clinically-used analgesics and analgesic adjuvants (opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, ₂-adrenoceptor agonists, antiepileptics, antidepressants and local anesthetics) were found to inhibit fast-conducting CAPs recorded from the frog sciatic nerve by using the air-gap method. Similar actions were produced by antinociceptive plant-derived chemicals. Their inhibitory actions depended on the concentrations and chemical structures of the drugs. This review article will mention the inhibitory actions of the antinociceptive compounds on CAPs in frog and mammalian peripheral (particularly, sciatic) nerves and on voltage-gated Na⁺ and K⁺ channels involved in AP production. Nerve AP conduction inhibition produced by analgesics and analgesic adjuvants is suggested to contribute to at least a part of their antinociceptive effects.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2012

This paper is the thirty-fifth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2012 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).