ReviewInflammopharmacology2026
Neuropathic pain in traumatic brain injury: consequences, mechanisms, and therapeutic avenues.
Review in Inflammopharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global health crisis affecting approximately 27 million individuals annually. Nearly half of TBI survivors develop chronic neuropathic pain, with post-traumatic headache representing the most prevalent pain syndrome. Despite substantial advances in understanding TBI pathophysiology, no unified mechanistic framework links acute neuroinflammation to the chronification of post-TBI pain, and no FDA-approved treatment currently targets TBI-specific neuropathic pain. This review synthesizes the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying neuroinflammation and pain following TBI, with emphasis on the roles of microglia, astrocytes, regulatory T cells, and mast cells in sustaining central sensitization. Proinflammatory cytokines, most notably interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), and interleukin-6 (IL-6), drive nociceptor sensitization through prostaglandin-dependent and receptor-mediated signaling cascades, with IL-1β having the strongest and most direct evidence for nociceptor sensitization. Dysregulation of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and substance P exacerbates post-traumatic headache through trigeminovascular sensitization. The review further integrates evidence on epigenetic modifications, ferroptosis, complement system activation, and descending pain modulatory circuit disruption as contributors to pain chronicity. The three key conclusions of this review are: (1) neuroinflammation and central sensitization, driven by glial activation and cytokine signaling, are the primary sustaining forces of chronic post-TBI pain; (2) epigenetic reprogramming and dysregulation of descending pain modulatory pathways drive long-term pain persistence; and (3) therapeutics including CGRP antagonists, adenosine A3 receptor (A3AR) agonists, GABAergic modulators, and emerging natural compounds such as palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and myrcene show mechanistic promise. Translating these findings into clinical practice requires addressing TBI heterogeneity, validating pain-specific biomarkers, and designing adequately powered trials for this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42406251What 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.