Anne-Li Lind1, Payam Emami Khoonsari2, Marcus Sjödin3, Lenka Katila1, Magnus Wetterhall3, Torsten Gordh1, Kim Kultima2. 1. Department of Surgical Sciences, Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 2. Department of Medical Sciences, Cancer Pharmacology and Computational Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 3. Department of Chemistry-BMC, Analytical Chemistry, Uppsala University, Uppsala//GE Healthcare, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Electrical neuromodulation by spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established method for treatment of neuropathic pain. However, the mechanism behind the pain relieving effect in patients remains largely unknown. In this study, we target the human cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) proteome, a little investigated aspect of SCS mechanism of action. METHODS: Two different proteomic mass spectrometry protocols were used to analyze the CSF of 14 SCS responsive neuropathic pain patients. Each patient acted as his or her own control and protein content was compared when the stimulator was turned off for 48 hours, and after the stimulator had been used as normal for three weeks. RESULTS: Eighty-six proteins were statistically significantly altered in the CSF of neuropathic pain patients using SCS, when comparing the stimulator off condition to the stimulator on condition. The top 12 of the altered proteins are involved in neuroprotection (clusterin, gelsolin, mimecan, angiotensinogen, secretogranin-1, amyloid beta A4 protein), synaptic plasticity/learning/memory (gelsolin, apolipoprotein C1, apolipoprotein E, contactin-1, neural cell adhesion molecule L1-like protein), nociceptive signaling (neurosecretory protein VGF), and immune regulation (dickkopf-related protein 3). CONCLUSION: Previously unknown effects of SCS on levels of proteins involved in neuroprotection, nociceptive signaling, immune regulation, and synaptic plasticity are demonstrated. These findings, in the CSF of neuropathic pain patients, expand the picture of SCS effects on the neurochemical environment of the human spinal cord. An improved understanding of SCS mechanism may lead to new tracks of investigation and improved treatment strategies for neuropathic pain.
OBJECTIVES: Electrical neuromodulation by spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established method for treatment of neuropathic pain. However, the mechanism behind the pain relieving effect in patients remains largely unknown. In this study, we target the human cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) proteome, a little investigated aspect of SCS mechanism of action. METHODS: Two different proteomic mass spectrometry protocols were used to analyze the CSF of 14 SCS responsive neuropathic pain patients. Each patient acted as his or her own control and protein content was compared when the stimulator was turned off for 48 hours, and after the stimulator had been used as normal for three weeks. RESULTS: Eighty-six proteins were statistically significantly altered in the CSF of neuropathic pain patients using SCS, when comparing the stimulator off condition to the stimulator on condition. The top 12 of the altered proteins are involved in neuroprotection (clusterin, gelsolin, mimecan, angiotensinogen, secretogranin-1, amyloid beta A4 protein), synaptic plasticity/learning/memory (gelsolin, apolipoprotein C1, apolipoprotein E, contactin-1, neural cell adhesion molecule L1-like protein), nociceptive signaling (neurosecretory protein VGF), and immune regulation (dickkopf-related protein 3). CONCLUSION: Previously unknown effects of SCS on levels of proteins involved in neuroprotection, nociceptive signaling, immune regulation, and synaptic plasticity are demonstrated. These findings, in the CSF of neuropathic pain patients, expand the picture of SCS effects on the neurochemical environment of the human spinal cord. An improved understanding of SCS mechanism may lead to new tracks of investigation and improved treatment strategies for neuropathic pain.
Authors: Tony K Y Lim; Kathleen M Anderson; Pawan Hari; Marcos Di Falco; Troy E Reihsen; George L Wilcox; Kumar G Belani; Sylvie LaBoissiere; Manuel R Pinto; David S Beebe; Lois J Kehl; Laura S Stone Journal: J Pain Date: 2017-06-24 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Jacob Caylor; Rajiv Reddy; Sopyda Yin; Christina Cui; Mingxiong Huang; Charles Huang; Rao Ramesh; Dewleen G Baker; Alan Simmons; Dmitri Souza; Samer Narouze; Ricardo Vallejo; Imanuel Lerman Journal: Bioelectron Med Date: 2019-06-28
Authors: Laura Molteni; Laura Rizzi; Elena Bresciani; Ramona Meanti; Jean-Alain Fehrentz; Pascal Verdié; Robert J Omeljaniuk; Giuseppe Biagini; Vittorio Locatelli; Antonio Torsello Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Johanna Estelius; Johan Lengqvist; Elena Ossipova; Helena Idborg; Erwan Le Maître; Magnus L A Andersson; Lou Brundin; Mohsen Khademi; Elisabet Svenungsson; Per-Johan Jakobsson; Jon Lampa Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 5.156