ArticlePain2025
The conotoxin Contulakin-G reverses hypersensitivity observed in rodent models of cancer-induced bone pain without inducing tolerance or motor disturbance.
Article in Pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From neuropeptides to toxins: illuminating the origins of venom complexity in cone snails.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Toxins in disguise: Neuropeptide mimicry across animal venoms.General and comparative endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractAs the incidence and survival rates of patients with cancer continues to grow, an increasing number of people are living with comorbidities, which often manifests as cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP). The majority of patients with CIBP report poor pain control from currently available analgesics. A conotoxin, Contulakin-G (CGX), has been demonstrated to be an antinociceptive agent in postsurgical and neuropathic pain states via a neurotensin receptor 2 (NTSR2)-mediated pathway. However, the efficacy and side effect profile of CGX have never been assessed in CIBP. Here, we evaluated CGX's antinociceptive potential in a rodent model of CIBP. We hypothesized that CGX engages the NTSR2 pathway, providing pain relief with minimal tolerance and motor side effects. Our results demonstrated that CGX intrathecal injection in mice with CIBP attenuated both spontaneous pain behaviors and evoked mechanical hypersensitivity, regardless of their sex. Furthermore, the antinociceptive effect of CGX was dependent upon expression of NTSR2 and the R-type voltage-gated calcium channel (Cav2.3); gene editing of these targets abolished CGX antinociception without affecting morphine antinociception. Examination of the side effect profile of CGX demonstrated that, unlike morphine, chronic intrathecal infusion maintained antinociception with reduced tolerance in rats with CIBP. Moreover, at antinociceptive doses, CGX had no impact on motor behavior in rodents with CIBP. Finally, RNAScope and immunoblotting analysis revealed expression of NTSR2 in both dorsal and ventral horns, while Cav2.3 was minimally expressed in the ventral horn, possibly explaining the sensory selectivity of CGX. Together, these findings support advancing CGX as a potential therapeutic for cancer pain.
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.