ArticlePloS one2014
Opposite effects of neuropeptide FF on central antinociception induced by endomorphin-1 and endomorphin-2 in mice.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracerebroventricular Neuropeptide FF Diminishes the Number of Apneas and Cardiovascular Effects Produced by Opioid Receptors' Activation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- The multifunctional peptide DN-9 produced peripherally acting antinociception in inflammatory and neuropathic pain via μ- and κ-opioid receptors.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Article
- BN-9, a chimeric peptide with mixed opioid and neuropeptide FF receptor agonistic properties, produces nontolerance-forming antinociception in mice.British journal of pharmacology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuropeptide FF (NPFF) is known to be an endogenous opioid-modulating peptide. Nevertheless, very few researches focused on the interaction between NPFF and endogenous opioid peptides. In the present study, we have investigated the effects of NPFF system on the supraspinal antinociceptive effects induced by the endogenous µ-opioid receptor agonists, endomorphin-1 (EM-1) and endomorphin-2 (EM-2). In the mouse tail-flick assay, intracerebroventricular injection of EM-1 induced antinociception via µ-opioid receptor while the antinociception of intracerebroventricular injected EM-2 was mediated by both µ- and κ-opioid receptors. In addition, central administration of NPFF significantly reduced EM-1-induced central antinociception, but enhanced EM-2-induced central antinociception. The results using the selective NPFF1 and NPFF2 receptor agonists indicated that the EM-1-modulating action of NPFF was mainly mediated by NPFF2 receptor, while NPFF potentiated EM-2-induecd antinociception via both NPFF1 and NPFF2 receptors. To further investigate the roles of µ- and κ-opioid systems in the opposite effects of NPFF on central antinociception of endomprphins, the µ- and κ-opioid receptors selective agonists DAMGO and U69593, respectively, were used. Our results showed that NPFF could reduce the central antinociception of DAMGO via NPFF2 receptor and enhance the central antinociception of U69593 via both NPFF1 and NPFF2 receptors. Taken together, our data demonstrate that NPFF exerts opposite effects on central antinociception of endomorphins and provide the first evidence that NPFF potentiate antinociception of EM-2, which might result from the interaction between NPFF and κ-opioid systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.