https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2852-9649
Figures
Abstract
In mammals, pain is regulated by the combination of an ascending stimulating and descending inhibitory pain pathway. It remains an intriguing question whether such pain pathways are of ancient origin and conserved in invertebrates. Here we report a new Drosophila pain model and use it to elucidate the pain pathways present in flies. The model employs transgenic flies expressing the human capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in sensory nociceptor neurons, which innervate the whole fly body, including the mouth. Upon capsaicin sipping, the flies abruptly displayed pain-related behaviors such as running away, scurrying around, rubbing vigorously, and pulling at their mouth parts, suggesting that capsaicin stimulated nociceptors in the mouth via activating TRPV1. When reared on capsaicin-containing food, the animals died of starvation, demonstrating the degree of pain experienced. This death rate was reduced by treatment both with NSAIDs and gabapentin, analgesics that inhibit the sensitized ascending pain pathway, and with antidepressants, GABAergic agonists, and morphine, analgesics that strengthen the descending inhibitory pathway. Our results suggest Drosophila to possess intricate pain sensitization and modulation mechanisms similar to mammals, and we propose that this simple, non-invasive feeding assay has utility for high-throughput evaluation and screening of analgesic compounds.
Citation: Jang W, Oh M, Cho E-H, Baek M, Kim C (2023) Drosophila pain sensitization and modulation unveiled by a novel pain model and analgesic drugs. PLoS ONE 18(2): e0281874. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874
Editor: Sekyu Choi, POSTECH - Pohang University of Science and Technology, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Received: October 22, 2022; Accepted: February 1, 2023; Published: February 16, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Jang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its supporting information files.
Funding: National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea (www.nrf.re.kr) to CK (2021R1A2C1010334) and WJ (2020R1I1A1A01074292).
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Upon exposure to painful stimuli, both vertebrates and invertebrates commonly exhibit coordinated escape or avoidance behaviors. Noxious substances trigger pain sensors/channels located on specialized sensory neurons (nociceptors) in the peripheral nervous system, which in turn activate ascending nociceptive neural circuits that relay signals from those neurons through spinal sites to pain centers in the brain, where they are interpreted as unpleasant pain [1–4]. Studies mostly in mammals have also identified descending anti-nociceptive pathways that modulate the ascending pain signals at the spinal sites, prior to the signal reaching higher neural centers [5–8].
Tissue damage and nerve injuries can sensitize the ascending neural circuits and inhibit the descending neural circuits, which leads to reduction of pain thresholds (allodynia) and exaggeration of pain response (hyperalgesia) [9–14]. Such sensitization has also been reported in Drosophila; for example, a UV-irradiated larval model demonstrated that Drosophila nociceptors can be sensitized upon tissue damage, leading to heightened noxious response to both innocuous and noxious stimuli [15]. Recently, a leg amputation model also showed that Drosophila develops long-term neuropathic pain states due to abolition of GABAergic modulatory neural circuits from the central nervous system, which is similar to the descending modulatory pain circuits in mammals [16]. However, the molecular and neural mechanisms regarding ascending pain sensitization and especially descending inhibitory neural circuits are still poorly understood in invertebrates.
A variety of analgesic drugs are known to act in distinct ways to reduce sensitized neural pain circuits. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and 1-(aminomethyl)cyclohexaneacetic acid (gabapentin) act by reducing afferent nociceptor sensitization and synaptic transmission, respectively [17–20]. Other analgesics such as anti-depressant drugs, GABAergic agonists, and morphine act by enhancing anti-nociceptive signaling and so reducing pain transmission at the central sites of nociceptive pathways [12, 21–24]. Just as the pain circuits in Drosophila are yet poorly understood, so is pain medication in Drosophila also poorly advanced, in part due to a lack of proper pain models. Here we elicit nociception in Drosophila with repeated stimulation of nociceptors and test the responsiveness of this model to pain medications administered in humans, thereby gaining insight into Drosophila pain pathways.
Materials and methods
Chemicals and preparation of drug-containing foods
Chemicals were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Co., except for gabapentin and SB366791, which were purchased from Tocris Bioscience. An obstruent drug (active ingredient berberine) and a digestive drug (active ingredient pancreatin) were purchased from a local pharmacy in Korea. Fly food contained 90.6 g dextrose, 68 g dry yeast, 42.8 g corn meal, 6.5 g agar, 0.1% Tegasept, and 4.5 ml propionic acid per liter, which were all dissolved by boiling. The resulting food was then mixed with capsaicin and the various other drugs as appropriate and aliquoted into vials.
Genetics and fly strains
Drosophila stocks were raised on standard fly food medium described above at 25°C under a 12-h light/dark cycle. All experiments involving drugs were performed with 5-day old adult males, which were tested in groups of 20 per vial. The md-Gal4 flies were obtained from the Jan Laboratory at the University of California, San Francisco. To produce transgenic flies carrying the UAS-TRPV1 construct, the coding region of TRPV1 [25] was amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using turbo Pfu (Stratagene) and cloned into the EcoR1-XbaI sites of the pUAST transformation vector. Red-eyed flies were recovered by microinjection of the UAS-TRPV1 vector. The presence of UAS-TRPV1 in those flies was confirmed by PCR using primers corresponding to the TRPV1 sequence. Primers used for construction of the UAS-TRPV1 vector were: 5’-GGC GAA TTC ATG AAG AAA TGG AGC-3’ (forward), 5’-GGC CTC GAG TCA CTT CTC CCC GGA-3’ (reverse). Primers used to confirm the UAS-TRPV1 transgene were: 5’-ATAGCTCCTA CAACAGCCT-3’ (forward), 5’-CACCTGGAACACCAACGT-3’ (reverse). All of the selected transgenic lines carried the vector on the third chromosome. Flies bearing a second-chromosomal insertion were obtained from a transgenic line with a third-chromosomal insertion by chromosomal jumping using the delta 2–3 P-element. The fly line with second-chromosomal insertions of both md-Gal4 and UAS-TRPV1 was then generated through recombination between md-Gal4 on the second chromosome of single-insertion flies and UAS-TRPV1 on the second chromosome of single-insertion flies. Finally, a strain of transgenic flies that carried w; md-Gal4, UAS-TRPV1/CyO; UAS-TRPV1/UAS-TRPV1 was obtained and used for most of the drug experiments.
Drug feeding experiments
Drugs were dissolved in DMSO and added to fly food to yield a final concentration of 1% DMSO (SB366791, amitriptyline, trazodone, benzodiazepine, carbamazepine, aspirin, acetaminophen, and tolfenamic acid), 2.5% DMSO (gabapentin), 5% DMSO (ibuprofen). Diclofenac was dissolved in 100% ethanol and added to fly food to yield a final concentration of 10% ethanol. Fly food containing 1, 2.5, 5% DMSO, or 10% ethanol was used as a control for the corresponding drug-containing food solutions. Five-day-old male transgenic flies, 20 flies in each vial, were used for the analgesic drug tests. Flies were first fed drug-containing food for 24 h, then transferred to a food source containing 5 mM capsaicin and varying amounts of the drug. For the morphine tolerance test, flies were fed 660 μM morphine-containing food for 0, 1, 3, or 6 days prior to transferring them to a food source containing 5 mM capsaicin and 660 μM morphine. In all assays, the flies were examined each day for viability.
Data analyses
All data except Fig 1C were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the SPSS statistical software. One-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons was used when warranted. Paired Student’s t-test was used for Fig 1C.
(A, B) Hungry (18 hours starved on water-soaked filters) md-TRPV1(3) flies were offered either normal food (A) or capsaicin-containing food (B). Those provided normal food continuously sipped for longer than three minutes before idling, whereas flies given 5 mM capsaicin-containing food exhibited repeated brief sipping (~ one second) and longer recess intervals. (C) The sipping period of hungry md-TRPV1(3) flies on capsaicin food is dependent on capsaicin concentration. Values are the average of eating intervals measured for 2 minutes beginning immediately after flies were transferred to food containing varying amounts of capsaicin (0 to 5 mM). Bars represent mean ± SD. n = 10 for each capsaicin concentration. All flies were 5-day-old males. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
Results
Pain model with repeat nociceptor stimulation
In mammals, the heat and capsaicin receptor TRPV1 mediates heat- and capsaicin-induced pain and also inflammatory and chronic pain [26–32]. In Drosophila, heat elicits thermal nociception, but capsaicin does not elicit nociception [33, 34]. To stimulate nociceptors and thereby elicit nociception in Drosophila upon capsaicin sipping, we expressed the human capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in nociceptors via the Gal4/UAS binary expression system [35]. We generated transgenic flies bearing one copy of md-Gal4, in which Gal4 is expressed in nociceptive multidendritic (md) neurons [36–38], along with one, two, or three copies of the UAS-TRPV1 construct. All experiments (except for Figs 2D and 3B) were performed with transgenic flies bearing one copy of md-Gal4 and three copies of UAS-TRPV1 (henceforth referred to as md-TRPV1(3), in which (3) indicates copy number) due to such flies exhibiting the strongest nociceptive response against capsaicin.
(A) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies grown at 29°C on food containing capsaicin at indicated concentrations. Control (Canton-S or md-Gal4) flies were grown at 29°C on food containing 5 mM capsaicin. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 (20 flies per vial) for each capsaicin concentration; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for 1 mM vs 10 mM. (B) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies grown on 5 mM capsaicin-containing food at the temperatures indicated. Control (Canton-S or md-Gal4) flies were grown at 29°C on food containing 5 mM capsaicin. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each temperature; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for 29°C vs 25°C. (C) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) on food containing capsaicin (5 mM) and SB366791 at the concentrations indicated. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no SB366791 vs 1 mM SB266791. (D) Viability of md-TRPV1 flies grown on capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food at 29°C. The number denotes the number of UAS-TRPV1 copies. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for two vs three copies of UAS-TRPV1. Control (Canton-S or md-Gal4) flies were grown at 29°C on food containing 5 mM capsaicin. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1. All flies were 5- day-old males.
(A) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies reared on food that contained capsaicin (5 mM) and gabapentin at the concentrations indicated. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no gabapentin vs 2.5 mM gabapentin. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1. (B) Viability of md-TRPV1(2) flies bearing one copy of md-Gal4 and two copies of UAS-TRPV1 with or without UAS-stj RNAi grown on food with capsaicin (5 mM) at 29°C. Other flies (UAS-TRPV1 and md-Gal4) were used as controls. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for md-TRPV1(2) vs md-TRPV1(2), UAS-stj-RNAi, in which (2) indicates two copies of UAS-TRPV1. All flies were 5-day-old males.
To examine whether capsaicin elicited nociception in md-TRPV1(3) larvae, we touched abdominal segment five of the larvae with a brush soaked with capsaicin (20 mM). Wild-type larvae did not respond to the capsaicin brush; in contrast, brush-touched md-TRPV1(3) larvae exhibited robust rolling (S1 Video), a readout of larval nociception, suggesting that capsaicin elicited nociception in the transgenic larvae but not wild-type larvae. Additionally, this nociception was dependent on capsaicin concentration (S1A and S1B Fig), indicating that the elicited nociception occurred through activation of the capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in nociceptors of the skin.
The next question was whether capsaicin elicits nociception in adult flies. Wild-type and md-TRPV1(3) flies were starved for 18 hours on a water-soaked glass filter and then offered food containing capsaicin (5 mM). Hungry control flies (md-Gal4 or UAS-TRPV1(3)) continued eating the capsaicin-containing food without exhibiting nocifensive behaviors (S2 Fig). In contrast, hungry md-TRPV1(3) flies, which continued eating the normal food lacking capsaicin (Fig 1A), sipped the capsaicin-containing food only briefly (~ one second), then ran away, scurried around, and vigorously rubbed and pulled on their mouthparts with their front legs (S2 Video), which looked like an expression of pain. The transgenic flies then returned to their food and sipped again for a brief period (~ one second), followed again by running away; they repeated these unusual behaviors several times (Fig 1B and S3 Fig). Moreover, the sipping periods decreased as capsaicin concentration increased (Fig 1C). Taken together, these behaviors suggest that capsaicin repeatedly stimulated nociceptors abundant in the mouth (S1C Fig) and elicited nociception in the md-TRPV1(3) flies, but not in control (md-Gal4 or UAS-TRPV1(3)) flies.
Due to this nociception, md-TRPV1(3) flies were rarely detectable on capsaicin-containing food sites (S4 Fig), which suggests that md-TRPV1(3) flies ultimately starved to death. When provided 5 mM capsaicin-containing food at 29°C, md-TRPV1(3) flies exhibited short viability with empty abdomens and weight loss (S5 Fig). The observed viability was similar to that of md-TRPV1(3) flies fed only water (S5A Fig), supporting the effect as being due to starvation. However, upon shifting from capsaicin food to normal food, 90% of md-TRPV1(3) flies remained viable (S6 Fig). Taken together, these findings suggest that md-TRPV1(3) flies avoid eating capsaicin-containing food and ultimately die of starvation.
To examine whether the viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies is dependent on capsaicin concentration, we varied the amount of capsaicin used in their food. Decrease of capsaicin from 10 mM to 1 mM led to two-fold increased viability, with the half-viability period extending from 16 hr. to 38 hr (Fig 2A). Additionally, we examined the effect of rearing temperature on viability of capsaicin-fed md-TRPV1(3) flies. Decreasing the rearing temperature from 29°C to 25°C led to two-fold increased viability, with respective half-viability periods of 28 hr and 52 hr (Fig 2B). Further decrease of rearing temperature to 18°C caused the viability to increase profoundly (Fig 2B). Finally, we tested whether inhibition of TRPV1 affects the viability of these transgenic flies. SB366791 is a TRPV1 inhibitor demonstrated to work well when administered orally in rat models of pain [39]; accordingly, we tested the addition of different concentrations of inhibitor to food also containing 5 mM capsaicin. Addition of 0.2 mM SB366791 was not effective, but 1 mM increased viability by two-fold, from a half-viability of 24 hr to 48 hr (Fig 2C); meanwhile, 5 mM was toxic to the flies (S7 Fig). We further explored alternatively reducing TRPV1 activities in md neurons by reducing the copy number of UAS-TRPV1. Reducing copy number from three to two increased viability four-fold; reducing further to one copy increased viability eleven-fold (Fig 2D). These confirm the notion that capsaicin-associated viability in transgenic md-TRPV1 flies is dependent on the magnitude of TRPV1 activation and thus the degree of nociceptor activation and total nociception.
Efficacy of analgesics presumed to inhibit the ascending pain pathway
Gabapentin, an analgesic for chronic neuropathic pain, acts on the α2δ-subunit of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) in mammals [40–44]. Gabapentin was recently shown to be effective at reducing leg amputation neuropathic pain in Drosophila by targeting straightjacket (stj), which encodes the α2δ subunit of Drosophila VGCCs [45]. Accordingly, we tested the effect of gabapentin and its target, stj, in our nociception model. Adding 1 mM gabapentin to capsaicin food was not effective, but 2.5 mM gabapentin, which did not affect viability of control flies (md-Gal4) on normal food lacking capsaicin (S8 Fig), increased viability 3-fold, extending the half-viability period of one day to 2.7 days (Fig 3A). This suggests that gabapentin is effective in reducing the elicited nociception in our model. A higher concentration (5 mM) of gabapentin was toxic to the flies (S7 Fig). Stj is expressed in nociceptors, wherein it has been demonstrated to be required for both thermal and neuropathic nociception [45, 46]. Knock-down of stj in md neurons via expression of stj RNAi doubled the viability of md-TRPV1(2) flies (that is, flies with two copies of UAS-TRPV1) from a half-viability of 8 days to 17 days (Fig 3B). Taken together, these findings suggest that activity of stj is required for nociception as represented by the viability of md-TRPV1 flies fed capsaicin-containing food.
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) act as analgesics for inflammatory pain through inhibiting synthesis of prostaglandin, an enhancer of nociceptor sensitization [47–51]. Adding NSAIDs to capsaicin food increased the viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies, suggesting that NSAIDs are effective in reducing the elicited pain in this model. Of those tested, diclofenac and ibuprofen were the most effective, respectively, increasing viability 5- and 6-fold (Fig 4) without affecting the viability of control flies on normal food lacking capsaicin (S8 Fig). Higher concentrations of NSAIDs were toxic (S7 Fig).
Drugs were added to food at the concentrations indicated in the figure. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no diclofenac vs 20 mM diclofenac and for no ibuprofen vs 25 mM ibuprofen. All flies were 5-day-old males. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
Efficacy of analgesics presumed to enhance the modulatory pain pathway
Neuropathic pain medication relives pain through strengthening descending inhibitory circuits [12, 52–54]. We tested diverse neuropathic pain medications in our pain model. Adding antidepressants to capsaicin food increased the viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies. Antidepressants increased viability, by 3-fold for amitriptyline and 6-fold for trazodone (Fig 5A and 5B); neither affected the viability of control flies on normal food lacking capsaicin (S8 Fig). The gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists benzodiazepine increased viability by 3-fold (Fig 5C), without affecting viabilities of control (md-Gal4) flies (S8 Fig). Morphine also increased viability by 3-fold (Fig 6A). Notably, prolonged or repeated use of morphine decreases its efficacy [22, 55, 56]. To examine if prolonged use of morphine decreases its efficacy in our pain assay, a morphine pretreatment was applied. When flies were pre-fed morphine (660 μM)-containing food for just one day, no effect of morphine (660 μM) on viability was observed; in contrast, flies that were pre-fed morphine (660 μM)-containing food every day for six days showed significantly reduced analgesic effects, suggesting that morphine pretreatment decreased its efficacy (Fig 6B). In contrast to analgesic drugs, fly viability was not affected by non-analgesic drugs, including isoproterenol (used to treat asthma), hydrochorothiazide (an antihypertensive diuretic), and D-mannitol (an osmotic diuretic) (S9 Fig).
Drugs were added to food at the concentrations indicated. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no drug vs 1 mM amitriptyline, 0.2 mM trazodone, 5 mM benzodiazepine. All flies were 5-day-old males. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
(A) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies grown on food with morphine added at the concentrations indicated. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no morphine vs 660 μM morphine. (B) Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies that were pre-fed with morphine (660 μM)-containing food for one, three, or six days and then transferred to a food that contained 5 mM capsaicin and 660 μM morphine. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve; one-way ANOVA with the Tukey-Kramer method for multiple comparisons, *** P < 0.001 for no pre-feeding vs six days pre-fed. All flies were 5-day-old males. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
Discussion
Here we elicited nociception in Drosophila via repeated stimulation of nociceptors and tested the efficacy of diverse analgesic medications that are routinely administered in inflammatory and neuropathic human pain. We show that the elicited pain is reduced by NSAIDs and gabapentin, which are presumed to reduce nociceptor sensitization and synaptic transmission, respectively, and also by GABAergic agonists, antidepressants, and morphine, which are presumed to enhance the modulatory descending pain pathway. Therefore, our findings suggest that the molecular mechanisms and neural networks of nociception sensitization and modulation are highly conserved across both vertebrates and invertebrates and that pain pathways in Drosophila are as complex as those of the mammalian pain system.
Pain model of repeat nociceptor stimulation
The pain model presented here employs transgenic flies that express the human capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in nociceptors. This invites the question as to whether capsaicin stimulated the nociceptors and elicited nociception in the animals. Our results suggested that capsaicin did indeed stimulate the nociceptors and thereby elicit nociception via TRPV1 activation in both transgenic larvae and flies. Firstly, capsaicin touch on the skin of md-TRPV1(3) larvae evoked rolling, which is a readout of larval nociception. Secondly, capsaicin touch on the tongue of md-TRPV1(3) flies generated abrupt escape from the food source and pain-expressing behaviors like rubbing and pulling at their mouth parts. Critically, larval and adult nocifensive responses alike were associated with capsaicin concentration and UAS-TRPV1 copy number, both of which are related to the magnitude of TRPV1 activation: the greater the capsaicin and UAS-TRPV1 copy number, the stronger the nociceptive response exhibited by md-TRPV1 larvae and flies. These findings support that capsaicin activated the nociceptors and thereby elicited nociception via stimulation of TRPV1 in these transgenic larvae and flies.
Hungry (starved) md-TRPV1(3) flies sipped on capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food for one second and then abruptly escaped from the food site; this behavior was not seen in control flies (md-Gal4 or UAS-TRPV1(3)). Being still hungry, they returned to sip briefly (one second) and escape again. These sipping actions would stimulate nociceptors repeatedly, which produces nociceptor sensitization, leading to hyperalgesia and allodynia [10, 57–60]. Of note, the flies were rarely detectable on the food site, suggesting that the short viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies on capsaicin food is due to lack of food intake. Remarkably, fly viability was dependent on parameters of TRPV1 activation, namely the capsaicin concentration in the food and UAS-TRPV1 copy number, suggesting that the observed viability represents the magnitude of nociceptor stimulation via TRPV1 activation and, therefore, the pain experience of the flies upon capsaicin sipping. This notion is further supported by the increase of viability observed when a TRPV1 inhibitor was added to the capsaicin food. Consequently, this feeding assay could be used to identify analgesics, which are added to the capsaicin food, based on increased viability.
Efficacy of analgesics presumed to reduce the ascending pain pathway
With this feeding assay, we found that gabapentin, an analgesic administered for neuropathic pain [40, 43, 61, 62], also reduced the elicited pain in the flies. Gabapentin works through inhibiting the α2δ-subunit of VGCCs, which is essential to synaptic transmission [40, 63–65]. Consistent with this function, we also found that RNAi-mediated knockdown of stj, the Drosophila homolog of the mammalian α2δ-subunit of VGCCs, in md neurons also reduced the elicited pain. These results are in accord with a recent finding in both Drosophila and mice that stj is required in nociceptors, wherein it mediates thermal nociception and neuropathic pain [44–46, 63]. It is noteworthy that gabapentin was recently shown to be effective in reducing neuropathic pain in a Drosophila leg-amputation pain model, and moreover to produce this effect through inhibiting stj [45]. Taken together, it is clear that reducing nociceptor transmission either with a drug (gabapentin) or by knockdown of its target gene (stj) reduced the elicited pain.
In addition, we found that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics administered in inflammatory pain, reduced the elicited pain in this pain model. NSAIDs are effective in reducing nociceptor sensitization and firing via their inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX) [66]. In inflammatory pain, COX produces prostaglandins (PGs) that sensitize nociceptors, leading to hypersensitivity to both innocuous and noxious stimuli [66, 67]. Our findings suggest that the elicited pain in md-TRPV1(3) flies involves PG-mediated nociceptor sensitization. Consistent with this hypothesis, cyclooxygenase-like activity has been reported in fly and in insect tissue extracts [68–71], and NSAIDs documented to block PG synthetic activity in insect tissue extracts [72, 73]. Our findings along with other observations suggest that Drosophila might possess pain sensitization mechanisms based on COX and prostaglandins, similar to those in mammals.
Efficacy of analgesics presumed to enhance the modulatory pain pathway
Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists are effective in reducing pain, particularly neuropathic pain, through enhancing descending inhibitory GABAergic neural circuits [21, 74–76]. We found that GABA receptor agonists, which enhance the action of GABAergic neural circuits, reduced the elicited pain in this assay. Notably, a Drosophila leg amputation model recently showed GABAergic inhibitory neural circuits to subsequently be removed from the fly central nervous system, which results in a chronic pain state [16]. Taken together, our findings and those of others support the notion that GABAergic modulatory nociceptive neural circuits constitute descending inhibitory nociceptive neural circuits in Drosophila.
Antidepressants likewise alleviate pain by enhancing the descending inhibitory pathway through serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT) circuits at the central sites of nociceptive pathways [5, 12, 74, 77–80]. Here we show that antidepressants relive the elicited pain in md-TRPV1(3) flies, suggesting that Drosophila might have anti-nociceptive descending neural circuits similar to those in mammals that act to modulate pain. This conjecture is further strengthened by the observed relief of nociception by morphine, which is presumed to act through morphinergic neuronal circuits that constitute an integral part of the anti-nociceptive neural pathway [23, 24, 81]. Therefore, flies might possess anti-nociceptive signaling pathways involving both serotonergic and morphinergic neural circuits, similar to the system in mammals.
Drosophila molecular targets of analgesic drugs
A multitude of currently-used analgesic drugs are effective in reducing pain in our pain model; however, the molecular targets of these analgesics in Drosophila are poorly understood. Cyclooxygenases (COXs), the established molecular targets of NSAIDs, are not well documented in flies. Recently, rigorous bioinformatics approaches involving iterative sequence searches with tertiary structural modeling have identified three putative fly COXs (CG4009, CG6969, Pxt) [82]. It is an intriguing question as to whether these putative COXs mediate inflammatory pain sensitization in Drosophila. Also, intriguing is the question of whether the Drosophila GABA receptor and serotonin transporter (dSERT), the respective targets of GABA agonists and antidepressants, respectively, are involved in Drosophila pain. Additionally, morphine receptors have not been identified in Drosophila, but a few reports suggest their presence. Morphine has been shown to mediate pain reduction (in our study). Endo-morphine-like molecules are known to be released in the neurons of some invertebrates [83, 84] and the Drosophila head membrane binds morphine with high affinity [85]. Still, it is unknown what morphine-like-receptor might exist and mediate pain in Drosophila.
Conclusions
The pain assay described here is based on elicited pain with repeated stimulation of nociceptors by capsaicin sipping in transgenic flies that express the human heat and capsaicin receptor (TRPV1) in nociceptors. The magnitude of the elicited pain is represented as the viability of flies on capsaicin-containing food. The system is ‘sensitized,’ as a slight perturbation of the noxious stimulus profoundly affects the pain experienced by the transgenic flies and thus their viability; for example, an additional copy of UAS-TRPV1 yielded a seven-day difference. As demonstrated by the drug efficacy assays performed in this work, our system can be used to measure the effects of analgesic drugs as long as the agent has a slight influence on the nociception experienced by the transgenic flies. Moreover, this simple feeding assay allowed us to show that both analgesics that reduce afferent sensitized pain and those that strengthen descending modulatory circuits are effective in reducing Drosophila pain, suggesting that Drosophila nociception features intricate pain sensation, sensitization, and modulatory neural circuits comparable to those in mammals. We propose that this feeding assay, which is sensitive and non-invasive, can be utilized for rapid evaluation and screening of candidate compounds (or lead compounds) to identify those having analgesic effects in vivo.
Supporting information
S1 Video. Capsaicin induces rolling in md-TRPV1(3) larvae.
A brush soaked with 20 mM capsaicin solution was touched to the skin of md-TRPV1(3) larvae and the response recorded with a video camera. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s001
(AVI)
S2 Video. Behavior of md-TRPV1(3) flies after sipping on capsaicin-containing food.
After being starved for 18 hours, a md-TRPV1(3) fly was transferred to 5 mM capsaicin-containing food and the response recorded with a video camera. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s002
(AVI)
S1 Fig. Nociceptive rolling response of md-TRPV1(3) larvae upon exposure to capsaicin solution and Gal4 expression in the mouthpart of md-Gal4 fly.
(A, B) Aversive rolling response of md-TRPV1(3) larvae. A capsaicin-soaked brush contacts the abdominal segment five; rolling within 10 seconds was counted as response. n = 30 for each capsaicin concentration. Error bars indicate ±SEM of more than three independent experiments. w1118 larvae were used as a control. Paired t-test, *** P < 0.001 for no capsaicin vs 20 mM capsaicin. (C) A confocal image of the mouthpart of a md-Gal>UAS-mCD8GFP fly stained with anti-GFP antibodies to indicate presence of md neurons. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s003
(PPTX)
S2 Fig. Control flies are not aversive to capsaicin ingestion.
Hungry (18 hours starved on water-soaked filters) control (md-Gal4 and UAS-TRPV1(3)) flies were offered capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food. The flies continuously sipped for longer than five minutes. Representative behaviors are shown. Five flies exhibited similar behaviors. Five-day-old males were used.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s004
(PPTX)
S3 Fig. md-TRPV1(3) flies are aversive to capsaicin ingestion.
Hungry (18 hours starved on water-soaked filters) md-TRPV1(3) flies were offered capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food, on which they exhibited repeated brief sipping (~ one second) and longer recess intervals. The sipping behaviors of three flies over 10 min are shown. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and three copies of UAS-TRPV1. Five-day-old males were used.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s005
(PPTX)
S4 Fig. md-TRPV1(3) flies are aversive to capsaicin-containing food.
Hungry (18 hours starved on water-soaked filters) md-TRPV1(3) flies were offered either capsaicin-containing food (5 mM; left vials) or normal food lacking capsaicin (right vials). Flies given capsaicin-containing food were rarely detectable on the food site, while those provided normal food were frequently detectable on the food site. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and three copies of UAS-TRPV1. Five-day-old males were used.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s006
(PPTX)
S5 Fig. Aversive behavior of md-TRPV1(3) flies grown on capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food.
(A) Viabilities of md-TRPV1(3) reared on capsaicin-containing food or water-soaked filters at 29°C. md-Gal4 flies were used as control. n = 40 for each experiment. (B) Empty abdomen of a md-TRPV1(3) fly that was provided capsaicin (5 mM) food and full abdomen of one provided normal food for 36 hours at 25°C. n = 10. (C) Weight loss of md-TRPV1(3) flies on capsaicin (5 mM) food. Weight was measured after transfer to normal food or capsaicin (5 mM) food for 21 hours and 28 hours, respectively, at 25°C. n = 40 for each point. Five-day-old males were used. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s007
(PPTX)
S6 Fig. Requirement of continuous rearing on capsaicin-containing food for the death of md-TRPV1(3) flies.
The viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies reared on capsaicin-containing food (circles) vs that of md-TRPV1(3) flies reared for two days on capsaicin-containing food and then transferred to normal food lacking capsaicin (squares). The day of transfer is indicated by a red arrow. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 (20 flies per vial) for each curve. Five-day-old males were used. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and three copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s008
(PPTX)
S7 Fig. Dependency of md-TRPV1(3) fly viability on drugs in a concentration-dependent manner.
The viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies reared on capsaicin (5 mM)-containing food supplemented with varying amounts of drugs marked in the curve is dependent on the concentration of the supplemented drugs. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and three copies of UAS-TRPV1. Five-day-old males were used.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s009
(PPTX)
S8 Fig. Effect of analgesic drugs on the viability of the control flies.
The viability of control (md-Gal4) flies fed normal food supplemented with analgesic drugs (at the concentration most effective in pain reduction) reared at 29°C is shown. Five-day-old males were used. n = 60 (20 flies per vial). The dots and vertical lines denote the means and standard deviations, respectively.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s010
(PPTX)
S9 Fig. Effect of non-analgesic drugs on md-TRPV1(3) fly viability.
Drugs were added to food at the concentration indicated. Viability of md-TRPV1(3) flies on capsaicin (5 mM) containing food supplemented with non-analgesic drugs at 29°C. Dots and vertical lines denote means and standard deviations, respectively. n = 60 for each curve. Five-day-old males were used. md-TRPV1(3) denotes one copy of md-Gal4 and 3 copies of UAS-TRPV1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281874.s011
(PPTX)
References
- 1. Craig AD. Pain mechanisms: labeled lines versus convergence in central processing. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2003;26:1–30. Epub 20030306. pmid:12651967.
- 2. Ingvar M. Pain and functional imaging. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1999;354(1387):1347–58. pmid:10466155; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1692633.
- 3. Price DD. Psychological and neural mechanisms of the affective dimension of pain. Science. 2000;288(5472):1769–72. pmid:10846154.
- 4. Caterina MJ, Julius D. The vanilloid receptor: a molecular gateway to the pain pathway. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2001;24:487–517. pmid:11283319.
- 5. Millan MJ. Descending control of pain. Prog Neurobiol. 2002;66(6):355–474. pmid:12034378.
- 6. Mayer DJ, Price DD. Central nervous system mechanisms of analgesia. Pain. 1976;2(4):379–404. pmid:195254.
- 7. Ossipov MH, Dussor GO, Porreca F. Central modulation of pain. J Clin Invest. 2010;120(11):3779–87. Epub 20101101. pmid:21041960; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2964993.
- 8. Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965;150(3699):971–9. pmid:5320816.
- 9. Petitjean H, Pawlowski SA, Fraine SL, Sharif B, Hamad D, Fatima T, et al. Dorsal Horn Parvalbumin Neurons Are Gate-Keepers of Touch-Evoked Pain after Nerve Injury. Cell Rep. 2015;13(6):1246–57. Epub 20151029. pmid:26527000; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6038918.
- 10. Ikeda H, Stark J, Fischer H, Wagner M, Drdla R, Jager T, et al. Synaptic amplifier of inflammatory pain in the spinal dorsal horn. Science. 2006;312(5780):1659–62. pmid:16778058.
- 11. Matsuda M, Huh Y, Ji RR. Roles of inflammation, neurogenic inflammation, and neuroinflammation in pain. J Anesth. 2019;33(1):131–9. Epub 20181117. pmid:30448975; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6813778.
- 12. Fauss GNK, Hudson KE, Grau JW. Role of Descending Serotonergic Fibers in the Development of Pathophysiology after Spinal Cord Injury (SCI): Contribution to Chronic Pain, Spasticity, and Autonomic Dysreflexia. Biology (Basel). 2022;11(2). Epub 20220201. pmid:35205100; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8869318.
- 13. Manion J, Waller MA, Clark T, Massingham JN, Neely GG. Developing Modern Pain Therapies. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:1370. Epub 20191220. pmid:31920521; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6933609.
- 14. Mendell LM. The Path to Discovery of Windup and Central Sensitization. Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2022;3:833104. Epub 20220215. pmid:35295805; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8915729.
- 15. Babcock DT, Landry C, Galko MJ. Cytokine signaling mediates UV-induced nociceptive sensitization in Drosophila larvae. Curr Biol. 2009;19(10):799–806. Epub 20090416. pmid:19375319; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4017352.
- 16. Khuong TM, Wang QP, Manion J, Oyston LJ, Lau MT, Towler H, et al. Nerve injury drives a heightened state of vigilance and neuropathic sensitization in Drosophila. Sci Adv. 2019;5(7):eaaw4099. Epub 20190710. pmid:31309148; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6620091.
- 17. Vane JR, Botting RM. Anti-inflammatory drugs and their mechanism of action. Inflamm Res. 1998;47 Suppl 2:S78–87. pmid:9831328.
- 18. Zeilhofer HU, Brune K. Analgesic strategies beyond the inhibition of cyclooxygenases. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2006;27(9):467–74. pmid:16876882.
- 19. Cheng JK, Chiou LC. Mechanisms of the Antinociceptive Action of Gabapentin. J Pharmacol Sci. 2006. pmid:16474201.
- 20. Petersen KL, Brennum J, Dahl JB. Experimental evaluation of the analgesic effect of ibuprofen on primary and secondary hyperalgesia. Pain. 1997;70(2–3):167–74. pmid:9150290.
- 21. Rogawski MA, Loscher W. The neurobiology of antiepileptic drugs. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5(7):553–64. pmid:15208697.
- 22. Waldhoer M, Bartlett SE, Whistler JL. Opioid receptors. Annu Rev Biochem. 2004;73:953–90. pmid:15189164.
- 23. Basbaum AI, Fields HL. Endogenous pain control systems: brainstem spinal pathways and endorphin circuitry. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1984;7:309–38. pmid:6143527.
- 24. Zubieta JK, Smith YR, Bueller JA, Xu Y, Kilbourn MR, Jewett DM, et al. Regional mu opioid receptor regulation of sensory and affective dimensions of pain. Science. 2001;293(5528):311–5. pmid:11452128.
- 25. Kim J, Chung YD, Park DY, Choi S, Shin DW, Soh H, et al. A TRPV family ion channel required for hearing in Drosophila. Nature. 2003;424(6944):81–4. Epub 20030618. pmid:12819662.
- 26. Kim YS, Chu Y, Han L, Li M, Li Z, LaVinka PC, et al. Central terminal sensitization of TRPV1 by descending serotonergic facilitation modulates chronic pain. Neuron. 2014;81(4):873–87. Epub 20140123. pmid:24462040; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3943838.
- 27. Zhang N, Inan S, Cowan A, Sun R, Wang JM, Rogers TJ, et al. A proinflammatory chemokine, CCL3, sensitizes the heat- and capsaicin-gated ion channel TRPV1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(12):4536–41. Epub 20050311. pmid:15764707; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC555471.
- 28. Caterina MJ, Leffler A, Malmberg AB, Martin WJ, Trafton J, Petersen-Zeitz KR, et al. Impaired nociception and pain sensation in mice lacking the capsaicin receptor. Science. 2000;288(5464):306–13. pmid:10764638.
- 29. Caterina MJ, Schumacher MA, Tominaga M, Rosen TA, Levine JD, Julius D. The capsaicin receptor: a heat-activated ion channel in the pain pathway. Nature. 1997;389(6653):816–24. pmid:9349813.
- 30. Davis JB, Gray J, Gunthorpe MJ, Hatcher JP, Davey PT, Overend P, et al. Vanilloid receptor-1 is essential for inflammatory thermal hyperalgesia. Nature. 2000;405(6783):183–7. pmid:10821274.
- 31. Dux M, Rosta J, Messlinger K. TRP Channels in the Focus of Trigeminal Nociceptor Sensitization Contributing to Primary Headaches. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(1). Epub 20200104. pmid:31948011; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6981722.
- 32. Wu Z, Yang Q, Crook RJ, O’Neil RG, Walters ET. TRPV1 channels make major contributions to behavioral hypersensitivity and spontaneous activity in nociceptors after spinal cord injury. Pain. 2013;154(10):2130–41. Epub 20130627. pmid:23811042.
- 33. Al-Anzi B, Tracey WD, Jr., Benzer S. Response of Drosophila to wasabi is mediated by painless, the fly homolog of mammalian TRPA1/ANKTM1. Curr Biol. 2006;16(10):1034–40. Epub 20060427. pmid:16647259.
- 34. Marella S, Fischler W, Kong P, Asgarian S, Rueckert E, Scott K. Imaging taste responses in the fly brain reveals a functional map of taste category and behavior. Neuron. 2006;49(2):285–95. pmid:16423701.
- 35. Brand AH, Perrimon N. Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development. 1993;118(2):401–15. pmid:8223268.
- 36. Tracey WD, Jr., Wilson RI, Laurent G, Benzer S. painless, a Drosophila gene essential for nociception. Cell. 2003;113(2):261–73. pmid:12705873.
- 37. Hwang RY, Zhong L, Xu Y, Johnson T, Zhang F, Deisseroth K, et al. Nociceptive neurons protect Drosophila larvae from parasitoid wasps. Curr Biol. 2007;17(24):2105–16. Epub 20071129. pmid:18060782; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2225350.
- 38. Gao FB, Brenman JE, Jan LY, Jan YN. Genes regulating dendritic outgrowth, branching, and routing in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 1999;13(19):2549–61. pmid:10521399; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC317067.
- 39. Varga A, Nemeth J, Szabo A, McDougall JJ, Zhang C, Elekes K, et al. Effects of the novel TRPV1 receptor antagonist SB366791 in vitro and in vivo in the rat. Neurosci Lett. 2005;385(2):137–42. pmid:15950380.
- 40. Cui W, Wu H, Yu X, Song T, Xu X, Xu F. The Calcium Channel alpha2delta1 Subunit: Interactional Targets in Primary Sensory Neurons and Role in Neuropathic Pain. Front Cell Neurosci. 2021;15:699731. Epub 20210930. pmid:34658790; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8514986.
- 41. Davies A, Hendrich J, Van Minh AT, Wratten J, Douglas L, Dolphin AC. Functional biology of the alpha(2)delta subunits of voltage-gated calcium channels. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2007;28(5):220–8. Epub 20070402. pmid:17403543.
- 42. Gee NS, Brown JP, Dissanayake VU, Offord J, Thurlow R, Woodruff GN. The novel anticonvulsant drug, gabapentin (Neurontin), binds to the alpha2delta subunit of a calcium channel. J Biol Chem. 1996;271(10):5768–76. pmid:8621444.
- 43. Dworkin RH, O’Connor AB, Backonja M, Farrar JT, Finnerup NB, Jensen TS, et al. Pharmacologic management of neuropathic pain: evidence-based recommendations. Pain. 2007;132(3):237–51. Epub 20071024. pmid:17920770.
- 44. Park J, Luo ZD. Calcium channel functions in pain processing. Channels (Austin). 2010;4(6):510–7. Epub 20101101. pmid:21150297; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3052250.
- 45. Khuong TM, Hamoudi Z, Manion J, Loo L, Muralidharan A, Neely GG. Peripheral straightjacket (alpha2delta Ca(2+) channel subunit) expression is required for neuropathic sensitization in Drosophila. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2019;374(1785):20190287. Epub 20190923. pmid:31544607; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6790392.
- 46. Neely GG, Hess A, Costigan M, Keene AC, Goulas S, Langeslag M, et al. A genome-wide Drosophila screen for heat nociception identifies alpha2delta3 as an evolutionarily conserved pain gene. Cell. 2010;143(4):628–38. pmid:21074052; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3040441.
- 47. Yaksh TL, Dirig DM, Conway CM, Svensson C, Luo ZD, Isakson PC. The acute antihyperalgesic action of nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs and release of spinal prostaglandin E2 is mediated by the inhibition of constitutive spinal cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) but not COX-1. J Neurosci. 2001;21(16):5847–53. pmid:11487607; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6763183.
- 48. Schug SA, Goddard C. Recent advances in the pharmacological management of acute and chronic pain. Ann Palliat Med. 2014;3(4):263–75. pmid:25841906.
- 49. Sinatra R. Role of COX-2 inhibitors in the evolution of acute pain management. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2002;24(1 Suppl):S18–27. pmid:12204484.
- 50. Stiller CO, Hjemdahl P. Lessons from 20 years with COX-2 inhibitors: importance of dose-response considerations and fair play in comparative trials. J Intern Med. 2022. Epub 20220518. pmid:35585779.
- 51. Yaksh TL, Dirig DM, Malmberg AB. Mechanism of action of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Cancer Invest. 1998;16(7):509–27. pmid:9774958.
- 52. Fields H. State-dependent opioid control of pain. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5(7):565–75. pmid:15208698.
- 53. Moisset X, Page MG, Pereira B, Choiniere M. Pharmacological treatments of neuropathic pain: real-life comparisons using propensity score matching. Pain. 2022;163(5):964–74. pmid:34985849.
- 54. Gurba KN, Chaudhry R, Haroutounian S. Central Neuropathic Pain Syndromes: Current and Emerging Pharmacological Strategies. CNS Drugs. 2022;36(5):483–516. Epub 20220505. pmid:35513603.
- 55. Corbett AD, Henderson G, McKnight AT, Paterson SJ. 75 years of opioid research: the exciting but vain quest for the Holy Grail. Br J Pharmacol. 2006;147 Suppl 1:S153–62. pmid:16402099.
- 56. Bailey CP, Connor M. Opioids: cellular mechanisms of tolerance and physical dependence. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2005;5(1):60–8. pmid:15661627.
- 57. Kilo S, Forster C, Geisslinger G, Brune K, Handwerker HO. Inflammatory models of cutaneous hyperalgesia are sensitive to effects of ibuprofen in man. Pain. 1995;62(2):187–93. pmid:8545144.
- 58. Lotsch J, Geisslinger G, Heinemann S, Lerch F, Oertel BG, Ultsch A. Quantitative sensory testing response patterns to capsaicin- and ultraviolet-B-induced local skin hypersensitization in healthy subjects: a machine-learned analysis. Pain. 2018;159(1):11–24. pmid:28700537; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5737455.
- 59. Petersen KL, Rowbotham MC. A new human experimental pain model: the heat/capsaicin sensitization model. Neuroreport. 1999;10(7):1511–6. pmid:10380972.
- 60. Hugosdottir R, Kasting M, Morch CD, Andersen OK, Arendt-Nielsen L. Priming of central and peripheral mechanisms with heat and cutaneous capsaicin facilitates secondary hyperalgesia to high-frequency electrical stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2022;127(3):651–9. Epub 20220112. pmid:35020531.
- 61. Zajaczkowska R, Rojewska E, Ciechanowska A, Pawlik K, Ciapala K, Kocot-Kepska M, et al. Mirogabalin Decreases Pain-like Behaviours and Improves Opioid and Ketamine Antinociception in a Mouse Model of Neuropathic Pain. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2022;15(1). Epub 20220113. pmid:35056145; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8780738.
- 62. Hayashida KI, Eisenach JC. Descending Noradrenergic Inhibition: An Important Mechanism of Gabapentin Analgesia in Neuropathic Pain. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1099:93–100. pmid:30306517.
- 63. Zamponi GW, Striessnig J, Koschak A, Dolphin AC. The Physiology, Pathology, and Pharmacology of Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels and Their Future Therapeutic Potential. Pharmacol Rev. 2015;67(4):821–70. pmid:26362469; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4630564.
- 64. Kurshan PT, Oztan A, Schwarz TL. Presynaptic alpha2delta-3 is required for synaptic morphogenesis independent of its Ca2+-channel functions. Nat Neurosci. 2009;12(11):1415–23. Epub 20091011. pmid:19820706; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2996863.
- 65. Ly CV, Yao CK, Verstreken P, Ohyama T, Bellen HJ. straightjacket is required for the synaptic stabilization of cacophony, a voltage-gated calcium channel alpha1 subunit. J Cell Biol. 2008;181(1):157–70. pmid:18391075; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2287295.
- 66. Burian M, Geisslinger G. COX-dependent mechanisms involved in the antinociceptive action of NSAIDs at central and peripheral sites. Pharmacol Ther. 2005;107(2):139–54. Epub 20050419. pmid:15993252.
- 67. Woolf CJ. Pain: moving from symptom control toward mechanism-specific pharmacologic management. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(6):441–51. pmid:15023710.
- 68. Tootle TL, Spradling AC. Drosophila Pxt: a cyclooxygenase-like facilitator of follicle maturation. Development. 2008;135(5):839–47. Epub 20080123. pmid:18216169; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2818214.
- 69. Varvas K, Kurg R, Hansen K, Jarving R, Jarving I, Valmsen K, et al. Direct evidence of the cyclooxygenase pathway of prostaglandin synthesis in arthropods: genetic and biochemical characterization of two crustacean cyclooxygenases. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 2009;39(12):851–60. Epub 20091024. pmid:19854273.
- 70. Pages M, Rosello J, Casas J, Gelpi E, Gualde N, Rigaud M. Cyclooxygenase and lipoxygenase-like activity in Drosophila melanogaster. Prostaglandins. 1986;32(5):729–40. pmid:3103173.
- 71. Tootle TL. Genetic insights into the in vivo functions of prostaglandin signaling. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2013;45(8):1629–32. Epub 20130516. pmid:23685076.
- 72. Buyukguzel K, Tunaz H, Putnam SM, Stanley D. Prostaglandin biosynthesis by midgut tissue isolated from the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 2002;32(4):435–43. pmid:11886778.
- 73. Stanley-Samuelson DW, Ogg CL. Prostaglandin biosynthesis by fat body from the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 1994;24(5):481–91. pmid:8205144.
- 74. Sindrup SH, Otto M, Finnerup NB, Jensen TS. Antidepressants in the treatment of neuropathic pain. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2005;96(6):399–409. pmid:15910402.
- 75. Hwang JH, Yaksh TL. The effect of spinal GABA receptor agonists on tactile allodynia in a surgically-induced neuropathic pain model in the rat. Pain. 1997;70(1):15–22. pmid:9106805.
- 76. McQuay HJ, Tramer M, Nye BA, Carroll D, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA. A systematic review of antidepressants in neuropathic pain. Pain. 1996;68(2–3):217–27. pmid:9121808.
- 77. Dickenson AH, Matthews EA, Suzuki R. Neurobiology of neuropathic pain: mode of action of anticonvulsants. Eur J Pain. 2002;6 Suppl A:51–60. pmid:11888242.
- 78. Sindrup SH, Jensen TS. Efficacy of pharmacological treatments of neuropathic pain: an update and effect related to mechanism of drug action. Pain. 1999;83(3):389–400. pmid:10568846.
- 79. McCleane G. Pharmacological management of neuropathic pain. CNS Drugs. 2003;17(14):1031–43. pmid:14594443.
- 80. Pertovaara A. Noradrenergic pain modulation. Prog Neurobiol. 2006;80(2):53–83. Epub 20061009. pmid:17030082.
- 81. Tavares DRB, Okazaki JEF, Santana MVA, Pinto A, Tutiya KK, Gazoni FM, et al. Motor cortex transcranial direct current stimulation effects on knee osteoarthritis pain in elderly subjects with dysfunctional descending pain inhibitory system: A randomized controlled trial. Brain Stimul. 2021;14(3):477–87. Epub 20210305. pmid:33684598.
- 82. Scarpati M, Qi Y, Govind S, Singh S. A combined computational strategy of sequence and structural analysis predicts the existence of a functional eicosanoid pathway in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS One. 2019;14(2):e0211897. Epub 20190212. pmid:30753230; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6372189.
- 83. Stefano GB, Goumon Y, Casares F, Cadet P, Fricchione GL, Rialas C, et al. Endogenous morphine. Trends Neurosci. 2000;23(9):436–42. pmid:10941194.
- 84. Stefano GB, Digenis A, Spector S, Leung MK, Bilfinger TV, Makman MH, et al. Opiate-like substances in an invertebrate, an opiate receptor on invertebrate and human immunocytes, and a role in immunosuppression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993;90(23):11099–103. pmid:8248214.
- 85. Santoro C, Hall LM, Zukin RS. Characterization of two classes of opioid binding sites in Drosophila melanogaster head membranes. J Neurochem. 1990;54(1):164–70. pmid:2152792.