http://www.back-in-business-physiotherapy.com/images/files/DescendingControl.pdf

Descending control of pain.

The formalin test: an evaluation of the method.

The formalin test for nociception, which is predominantly used with rats and mice, involves moderate, continuous pain generated by injured tissue. In this way it differs from most traditional tests of nociception which rely upon brief stimuli of threshold intensity. In this article we describe the main features of the formalin test, including the characteristics of the stimulus and how changes in nociceptive behaviour may be measured and interpreted. The response to formalin shows an early and a late phase. The early phase seems to be caused predominantly by C-fibre activation due to the peripheral stimulus, while the late phase appears to be dependent on the combination of an inflammatory reaction in the peripheral tissue and functional changes in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. These functional changes seem to be initiated by the C-fibre barrage during the early phase. In mice, the behavioural response in the late phase depends on the ambient temperature. We argue that the peripheral tissue temperature as well as other factors influencing the peripheral inflammation may affect the response, possibly confounding the results obtained with the test. Furthermore, we discuss the methods of recording the response and the value of observing more than one aspect of behaviour. Scoring of several behavioural variables provides a means of assessing motor or sensorimotor function as possible causes for changes in behaviour. In conclusion, the formalin test is a valuable addition to the battery of methods available to study nociception.

Peripheral tissue damage or nerve injury often leads to pathological pain processes, such as spontaneous pain, hyperalgesia and allodynia, that persist for years or decades after all possible tissue healing has occurred. Although peripheral neural mechanisms, such as nociceptor sensitization and neuroma formation, contribute to these pathological pain processes, recent evidence indicates that changes in central neural function may also play a significant role. In this review, we examine the clinical and experimental evidence which points to a contribution of central neural plasticity to the development of pathological pain. We also assess the physiological, biochemical, cellular and molecular mechanisms that underlie plasticity induced in the central nervous system (CNS) in response to noxious peripheral stimulation. Finally, we examine theories which have been proposed to explain how injury or noxious stimulation lead to alterations in CNS function which influence subsequent pain experience.

/pdf/contribution-of-central-neuroplasticity-to-pathological-pain-m3ucvtce0k.pdf

Contribution of central neuroplasticity to pathological pain: review of clinical and experimental evidence

The study of pain in awake animals raises ethical, philosophical, and technical problems. We review the ethical standards for studying pain in animals and emphasize that there are scientific as well as moral reasons for keeping to them. Philosophically, there is the problem that pain cannot be monitored directly in animals but can only be estimated by examining their responses to nociceptive stimuli; however, such responses do not necessarily mean that there is a concomitant sensation. The types of nociceptive stimuli (electrical, thermal, mechanical, or chemical) that have been used in different pain models are reviewed with the conclusion that none is ideal, although chemical stimuli probably most closely mimic acute clinical pain. The monitored reactions are almost always motor responses ranging from spinal reflexes to complex behaviors. Most have the weakness that they may be associated with, or modulated by, other physiological functions. The main tests are critically reviewed in terms of their sensitivity, specificity, and predictiveness. Weaknesses are highlighted, including 1) that in most tests responses are monitored around a nociceptive threshold, whereas clinical pain is almost always more severe; 2) differences in the fashion whereby responses are evoked from healthy and inflamed tissues; and 3) problems in assessing threshold responses to stimuli, which continue to increase in intensity. It is concluded that although the neural basis of the most used tests is poorly understood, their use will be more profitable if pain is considered within, rather than apart from, the body's homeostatic mechanisms.

Animal Models of Nociception

pA2 and receptor differentiation: A statistical analysis of competitive antagonism

Statistical analysis of drug-drug and site-site interactions with isobolograms.

Administration of 5% formalin into the rat or guinea pig hind paw evokes two spontaneous responses: flinching/shaking and licking/biting of the injected paw. The temporal and behavioral characteristics of these objective endpoints are described. Additionally, several practical suggestions aimed at standardizing this test for the evaluation of analgesics are presented. The early/acute and late/tonic (0–10 and 20–35 min post-formalin, respectively) phases of flinching were used to quantitate antinociception in the rat. PD 117302, the kappa selective agonist, was three times more potent than morphine against tonic flinching after SC administration. Formalin may therefore be a noxious stimulus of choice in the evaluation of kappa agonists. Morphine was only twice as potent against tonic flinching as against acute flinching or the tail-dip reflex to water (50° C). In contrast, PD 117302 was 27 times less potent on early phase and was inactive in the tail-dip test. Thus, while morphine is essentially equipotent across tests, PD 117302 shows a spectrum of activity with impressive potency and efficacy being obtained against tonic pain. Kappa receptors may therefore be prominently involved in tonic pain states. Aspirin given orally was not consistently antinociceptive in either phase of the formalin test. Spinal transection completely abolished late phase responding but only partly attenuated flinching in the early phase. This suggests that the relative involvement of spinal (as opposed to supraspinal) processing of noxious inputs may, at least in part, be a function of stimulus intensity and underlie the differences in antinociceptive potency observed in this work.

Standardization of the rat paw formalin test for the evaluation of analgesics

A comparison was made of the spontaneous nociceptive behaviors elicited by s.c. injection into the rat hind paw of the following 8 irritants: acetic acid, carrageenan, formalin, kaolin, platelet-activating factor, mustard oil (given topically), serotonin, and yeast. Two distinct quantifiable behaviors indicative of pain were identified: flinching/shaking of the paw and hindquarters and licking/biting of the injected paw. These behaviors were prolonged and intense after formalin and acetic acid. Formalin-induced flinching was biphasic across time, a finding potentially useful for the study of both acute and tonic pain. Of the remaining test agents, only yeast caused significant spontaneous behavioral activity, which was of low intensity but long duration. Different time-courses for nociceptive behavior and development of edema were demonstrated for formalin, acetic acid and yeast. It is therefore unlikely that these endpoints are causally related. Overall, the present data strongly support the use of formalin as a noxious stimulus in tonic pain research.

The rat paw formalin test: comparison of noxious agents.

Buprenorphine (BUP) is an oripavine analgesic that is beneficial in the maintenance treatment of opiate-dependent individuals. Although BUP has been studied extensively, relatively little is known about norbuprenorphine (norBUP), a major dealkylated metabolite of BUP. We now describe the binding of norBUP to opioid and nociceptin/orphanin FQ (ORL1) receptors, and its effects on [35S]guanosine-5′-O-(γ-thio)triphosphate ([35S]GTPγS) binding mediated by opioid or ORL1 receptors and in the mouse acetic acid writhing test. Chinese hamster ovary cells stably transfected with each receptor were used for receptor binding and [35S]GTPγS binding. NorBUP exhibited high affinities for μ-, δ-, and κ-opioid receptors withKi values in the nanomolar or subnanomolar range, comparable to those of BUP. NorBUP and BUP had low affinities for the ORL1 receptor with Ki values in the micromolar range. In the [35S]GTPγS binding assay, norBUP displayed characteristics distinct from BUP. At the δ-receptor, norBUP was a potent full agonist, yet BUP had no agonist activity and antagonized actions of norBUP and DPDPE. At μ- and κ-receptors, both norBUP and BUP were potent partial agonists, with norBUP having moderate efficacy and BUP having low efficacy. At the ORL1 receptor, norBUP was a full agonist with low potency, while BUP was a potent partial agonist. In the writhing test, BUP and norBUP both suppressed writhing in an efficacious and dose-dependent manner, giving A50 values of 0.067 and 0.21 mg/kg, s.c., respectively. These results highlight the similarities and differences between BUP and norBUP, each of which may influence the unique pharmacological profile of BUP.

Alan Cowan

Papers

pA2 and receptor differentiation: A statistical analysis of competitive antagonism

Statistical analysis of drug-drug and site-site interactions with isobolograms.

Standardization of the rat paw formalin test for the evaluation of analgesics

The rat paw formalin test: comparison of noxious agents.

Comparison of Pharmacological Activities of Buprenorphine and Norbuprenorphine: Norbuprenorphine Is a Potent Opioid Agonist