ReviewFrontiers in genetics2026
Epigenetic, chromatin-associated, and epitranscriptomic regulation in chronic pain: mechanisms and translational prospects.
Review in Frontiers in genetics, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic pain is sustained by durable yet dynamic changes in gene regulation across sensory neurons, spinal circuits, glial and immune cells, and higher brain regions. This review critically evaluates three related but conceptually distinct regulatory layers: chromatin-associated epigenetic mechanisms, including DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation, histone modifications, and chromatin accessibility; non-coding RNAs that directly interface with chromatin-regulatory machinery; and RNA N6-methyladenosine (m6A), an epitranscriptomic mechanism that acts primarily at the RNA level. Across pain models, the most reproducible mechanistic theme is not a uniform increase or decrease in one epigenetic mark, but locus-, cell-, and stage-specific reprogramming that can silence anti-nociceptive genes while activating pro-nociceptive or inflammatory programs. Evidence is strongest where locus-specific perturbation connects a regulatory change to transcription, cellular excitability, synaptic function, and pain behavior; bulk-tissue associations remain mainly hypothesis-generating. Human blood and tissue studies have identified candidate methylation signatures, but none is sufficiently validated for routine diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment selection. Likewise, broad DNMT, HDAC, or histone-modifying interventions show analgesic activity mainly in animals, whereas the negative phase two trial of the HDAC6 inhibitor ricolinostat illustrates the translational gap. We therefore argue that future progress will depend on cell-resolved longitudinal multi-omics, causal epigenome editing, human tissue validation, and biomarker studies designed around prespecified clinical utility rather than statistical association alone.
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.