| Title |
Electrical peripheral nerve stimulation relieves bone cancer pain by inducing Arc protein expression in the spinal cord dorsal horn
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pain Research, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jpr.s149470 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ke-fu Sun, Wan-wen Feng, Yue-peng Liu, Yan-bin Dong, Li Gao, Hui-lin Yang |
| Abstract |
The analgesic effect on chronic pain of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been proven, but its underlying mechanism remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the analgesic effect of PNS on bone cancer pain in a rat model and to explore the underlying mechanism. PNS on sciatic nerves with bipolar electrode was performed in both naïve and bone cancer pain model rats. Then, the protein levels of activity-regulated cytoskeleton-associated protein (Arc), α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid-type glutamate receptor 1 (GluA1), and phosphate N-methyl-d-aspartic acid-type glutamate receptor subunit 2B (pGluNR2B) in spinal cord were evaluated by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting. Thermal paw withdraw latency and mechanical paw withdraw threshold were used to estimate the analgesic effect of PNS on bone cancer pain. Intrathecal administration of Arc shRNA was used to inhibit Arc expression in the spinal cord. PNS at 60 and 120 Hz for 20 min overtly induced Arc expression in the spinal cord, increased thermal pain thresholds in naïve rats, and relieved bone cancer pain; meanwhile, 10 Hz PNS did not achieve those results. In addition, PNS at 60 and 120 Hz also reduced the expression of GluA1, but not pGluNR2B, in the spinal cord. Finally, the anti-nociceptive effect and GluA1 downregulation induced by PNS were inhibited by intrathecal administration of Arc shRNA. PNS (60 Hz, 0.3 mA) can relieve bone-cancer-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia by upregulating Arc protein expression and then by decreasing GluA1 transcription in the spinal cord dorsal horn. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 6 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,879,822
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,123
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,008
of 345,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#36
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.