Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21849979›Full record

Trial reportNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2011

Imaging drugs with and without clinical analgesic efficacy.

Jaymin Upadhyay, Julie Anderson, Adam J Schwarz, Alexandre Coimbra, Richard Baumgartner, G Pendse, Edward George, Lauren Nutile, Diana Wallin, James Bishop and 8 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A pharmacological imaging challenge based onEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  9. The Role of fMRI in Drug Development: An Update.Advances in neurobiology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The role of fMRI in drug development.Drug discovery today · 2018
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jaymin UpadhyayImaging Consortium for Drug Development, Brain Imaging Center, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA 02478, USA.
Julie Anderson
Adam J Schwarz
Alexandre Coimbra
Richard Baumgartner
G Pendse
Edward George
Lauren Nutile
Diana Wallin
James Bishop
Saujanya Neni
Gary Maier
Smriti Iyengar
Jeffery L Evelhoch
David Bleakman
Richard Hargreaves
Lino Becerra
David Borsook
Centre for Drug Research and Development · CAHarvard University · USMcLean Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The behavioral response to pain is driven by sensory and affective components, each of which is mediated by the CNS. Subjective pain ratings are used as readouts when appraising potential analgesics; however, pain ratings alone cannot enable a characterization of CNS pain circuitry during pain processing or how this circuitry is modulated pharmacologically. Having a more objective readout of potential analgesic effects may allow improved understanding and detection of pharmacological efficacy for pain. The pharmacological/functional magnetic resonance imaging (phMRI/fMRI) methodology can be used to objectively evaluate drug action on the CNS. In this context, we aimed to evaluate two drugs that had been developed as analgesics: one that is efficacious for pain (buprenorphine (BUP)) and one that failed as an analgesic in clinical trials aprepitant (APREP). Using phMRI, we observed that activation induced solely by BUP was present in regions with μ-opioid receptors, whereas APREP-induced activation was seen in regions expressing NK(1) receptors. However, significant pharmacological modulation of functional connectivity in pain-processing pathways was only observed following BUP administration. By implementing an evoked pain fMRI paradigm, these drugs could also be differentiated by comparing the respective fMRI signals in CNS circuits mediating sensory and affective components of pain. We report a correlation of functional connectivity and evoked pain fMRI measures with pain ratings as well as peak drug concentration. This investigation demonstrates how CNS-acting drugs can be compared, and how the phMRI/fMRI methodology may be used with conventional measures to better evaluate candidate analgesics in small subject cohorts.

Indexed as

AdultAnalgesicsBrain MappingBuprenorphineCerebral CortexCohort StudiesDose-Response Relationship, DrugHot TemperatureHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeuropharmacologyPain MeasurementAnalgesicsBuprenorphine

Identifiers

PMID21849979
PMCPMC3230490
OpenAlexW1981685879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.