1
|
Quesada C, Kostenko A, Ho I, Leone C, Nochi Z, Stouffs A, Wittayer M, Caspani O, Brix Finnerup N, Mouraux A, Pickering G, Tracey I, Truini A, Treede RD, Garcia-Larrea L. Human surrogate models of central sensitization: A critical review and practical guide. Eur J Pain 2021; 25:1389-1428. [PMID: 33759294 PMCID: PMC8360051 DOI: 10.1002/ejp.1768] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2020] [Revised: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 03/21/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Background As in other fields of medicine, development of new medications for management of neuropathic pain has been difficult since preclinical rodent models do not necessarily translate to the clinics. Aside from ongoing pain with burning or shock‐like qualities, neuropathic pain is often characterized by pain hypersensitivity (hyperalgesia and allodynia), most often towards mechanical stimuli, reflecting sensitization of neural transmission. Data treatment We therefore performed a systematic literature review (PubMed‐Medline, Cochrane, WoS, ClinicalTrials) and semi‐quantitative meta‐analysis of human pain models that aim to induce central sensitization, and generate hyperalgesia surrounding a real or simulated injury. Results From an initial set of 1569 reports, we identified and analysed 269 studies using more than a dozen human models of sensitization. Five of these models (intradermal or topical capsaicin, low‐ or high‐frequency electrical stimulation, thermode‐induced heat‐injury) were found to reliably induce secondary hyperalgesia to pinprick and have been implemented in multiple laboratories. The ability of these models to induce dynamic mechanical allodynia was however substantially lower. The proportion of subjects who developed hypersensitivity was rarely provided, giving rise to significant reporting bias. In four of these models pharmacological profiles allowed to verify similarity to some clinical conditions, and therefore may inform basic research for new drug development. Conclusions While there is no single “optimal” model of central sensitization, the range of validated and easy‐to‐use procedures in humans should be able to inform preclinical researchers on helpful potential biomarkers, thereby narrowing the translation gap between basic and clinical data. Significance Being able to mimic aspects of pathological pain directly in humans has a huge potential to understand pathophysiology and provide animal research with translatable biomarkers for drug development. One group of human surrogate models has proven to have excellent predictive validity: they respond to clinically active medications and do not respond to clinically inactive medications, including some that worked in animals but failed in the clinics. They should therefore inform basic research for new drug development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles Quesada
- NeuroPain lab, Lyon Centre for Neuroscience Inserm U1028, Lyon, France.,Pain Center Neurological Hospital (CETD), Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
| | - Anna Kostenko
- Department of Neurophysiology, Mannheim center for Translational Neurosciences, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Idy Ho
- Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Caterina Leone
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Zahra Nochi
- Danish Pain Research Center, Dept of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Alexandre Stouffs
- Institute of Neuroscience (IoNS), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Matthias Wittayer
- Department of Neurophysiology, Mannheim center for Translational Neurosciences, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ombretta Caspani
- Department of Neurophysiology, Mannheim center for Translational Neurosciences, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nanna Brix Finnerup
- Danish Pain Research Center, Dept of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - André Mouraux
- Institute of Neuroscience (IoNS), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
| | | | - Irene Tracey
- Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Andrea Truini
- Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Rolf-Detlef Treede
- Department of Neurophysiology, Mannheim center for Translational Neurosciences, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Luis Garcia-Larrea
- NeuroPain lab, Lyon Centre for Neuroscience Inserm U1028, Lyon, France.,Pain Center Neurological Hospital (CETD), Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van Amerongen G, de Boer MW, Groeneveld GJ, Hay JL. A literature review on the pharmacological sensitivity of human evoked hyperalgesia pain models. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2016; 82:903-22. [PMID: 27203797 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2016] [Revised: 05/13/2016] [Accepted: 05/18/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIMS Human evoked pain models can be used to determine the efficacy of new and existing analgesics and to aid in the identification of new targets. Aspects of neuropathic pain can be simulated by inducing hyperalgesia resulting from provoked sensitization. The present literature review aimed to provide insight into the sensitivity of different hyperalgesia and allodynia models of pharmacological treatment. METHODS A literature search was performed to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that included human hyperalgesia pain models and investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of different classes of drugs. RESULTS Three hyperalgesia models [ultraviolet B (UVB) irradiation, capsaicin and thermode burn] have been used extensively. Assessment of hyperalgesia/allodynia and pharmacological effect are measured using challenge tests, which generally comprise thermal (heat/cold) or mechanical stimulation (pin-prick, stroking or impact). The UVB model was sensitive to the antihyperalgesic effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. The capsaicin model was partially sensitive to opioids. The burn model did not detect any antihyperalgesic effects when NSAIDs or local anaesthetics were administered but responded to the effects of N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists by moderately reducing mechanical hyperalgesia. CONCLUSIONS Based on pharmacological sensitivity, the UVB model adequately reflects inflammatory pain and was sensitive to NSAIDs and opioids. Findings from the capsaicin and burn models raised questions about the translatability of these models to the treatment of neuropathic pain. There is a need for a reproducible and predictive model of neuropathic pain, either in healthy subjects or in patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Justin L Hay
- Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ringsted TK, Enghuus C, Petersen MA, Werner MU. Demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones: Punctate stimulation pressure matters. J Neurosci Methods 2015; 256:74-81. [PMID: 26310180 DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2015] [Revised: 08/16/2015] [Accepted: 08/18/2015] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Secondary hyperalgesia is increased sensitivity in normal tissue near an injury, and it is a measure of central sensitization reflecting injury-related effects on the CNS. Secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), usually assessed by polyamide monofilaments, are important outcomes in studies of analgesic drug effects in humans. However, since the methods applied in demarcating the secondary hyperalgesia zone seem inconsistent across studies, we examined the effect of a standardized approach upon the measurement of SHA following a first degree burn injury (BI). NEW METHOD The study was a two-observer, test-retest study with the two sessions separated by 6wk. An observer-blinded design adjusted to examine day-to-day and observer-to-observer variability in SHA was used. In 23 healthy volunteers (12 females/11 males) a BI was induced by a contact thermode (47.0°C, 420s, 2.5×5.0cm(2)). The SHA, demarcated by polyamide monofilaments (bending force: 0.2, 69 and 2569mN) and a "weighted-pin" stimulator (512mN), were assessed 45 to 75min after each BI. RESULTS A random effect, linear mixed model demonstrated a logarithmic correlation between elicited skin pressures (mN/mm(2)) and the SHAs (P<0.0001). No day-to-day or observer-to-observer differences in SHAs were observed. Intraclass correlation coefficients, in the range of 0.51 to 0.84, indicated a moderate to almost perfect reliability between observers. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS No standardized approach in SHA-assessment has hitherto been presented. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study to demonstrate that demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones depends on the developed pressure of the punctate stimulator used.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas K Ringsted
- Neuroscience Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Multidisciplinary Pain Center 7612, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
| | - Casper Enghuus
- Neuroscience Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Multidisciplinary Pain Center 7612, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Morten A Petersen
- Research Unit, Department of Palliative Care, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mads U Werner
- Neuroscience Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Multidisciplinary Pain Center 7612, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bache S, Stendell L, Olsen N, Olsen K. Problems in obtaining sufficient anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil: three cases, a test infusion, and a review. Br J Anaesth 2013; 110:741-6. [DOI: 10.1093/bja/aes474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
|
5
|
Schori H, Yoles E, Wheeler LA, Raveh T, Kimchi A, Schwartz M. Immune-related mechanisms participating in resistance and susceptibility to glutamate toxicity. Eur J Neurosci 2002; 16:557-64. [PMID: 12270031 DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02134.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
Glutamate is an essential neurotransmitter in the CNS. However, at abnormally high concentrations it becomes cytotoxic. Recent studies in our laboratory showed that glutamate evokes T cell-mediated protective mechanisms. The aim of the present study was to examine the nature of the glutamate receptors and signalling pathways that participate in immune protection against glutamate toxicity. We show, using the mouse visual system, that glutamate-induced toxicity is strain dependent, not only with respect to the amount of neuronal loss it causes, but also in the pathways it activates. In strains that are genetically endowed with the ability to manifest a T cell-dependent neuroprotective response to glutamate insult, neuronal losses due to glutamate toxicity were relatively small, and treatment with NMDA-receptor antagonist worsened the outcome of exposure to glutamate. In contrast, in mice devoid of T cell-dependent endogenous protection, NMDA receptor antagonist reduced the glutamate-induced neuronal loss. In all strains, blockage of the AMPA/KA receptor was beneficial. Pharmacological (with alpha2-adrenoceptor agonist) or molecular intervention (using either mice overexpressing Bcl-2, or DAP-kinase knockout mice) protected retinal ganglion cells from glutamate toxicity but not from the toxicity of NMDA. The results suggest that glutamate-induced neuronal toxicity involves multiple glutamate receptors, the types and relative contributions of which, vary among strains. We suggest that a multifactorial protection, based on an immune mechanism independent of the specific pathway through which glutamate exerts its toxicity, is likely to be a safer, more comprehensive, and hence more effective strategy for neuroprotection. It might suggest that, because of individual differences, the pharmacological use of NMDA-antagonist for neuroprotective purposes might have an adverse effect, even if the affinity is low.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hadas Schori
- Department of Neurobiology, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|