| Literature DB >> 35203710 |
Miguel A Tejada1, Ana I Santos-Llamas1, Lesley Escriva1, Juan J Tarin1,2, Antonio Cano1,3, Maria J Fernández-Ramírez3,4, Paulina Nunez-Badinez5, Bianca De Leo5, Philippa T K Saunders6, Victor Vidal7, Florent Barthas8, Katy Vincent9, Patrick J Sweeney10, Rowland R Sillito10, James Douglas Armstrong10,11, Jens Nagel12, Raúl Gomez1,13.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop and refine a heterologous mouse model of endometriosis-associated pain in which non-evoked responses, more relevant to the patient experience, were evaluated. Immunodeficient female mice (N = 24) were each implanted with four endometriotic human lesions (N = 12) or control tissue fat (N = 12) on the abdominal wall using tissue glue. Evoked pain responses were measured biweekly using von Frey filaments. Non-evoked responses were recorded weekly for 8 weeks using a home cage analysis (HCA). Endpoints were distance traveled, social proximity, time spent in the center vs. outer areas of the cage, drinking, and climbing. Significant differences between groups for von Frey response, climbing, and drinking were detected on days 14, 21, and 35 post implanting surgery, respectively, and sustained for the duration of the experiment. In conclusion, a heterologous mouse model of endometriosis-associated evoked a non-evoked pain was developed to improve the relevance of preclinical models to patient experience as a platform for drug testing.Entities:
Keywords: endometriosis; evoked and non-evoked response; heterologous model; pain
Year: 2022 PMID: 35203710 PMCID: PMC8962432 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10020501
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomedicines ISSN: 2227-9059
Figure 1Experimental design: image shows schematic representation of timeline. Recipients that were 6–8-week-old immunocompromised animals were implanted with a 17β-E2 pellet in the neck and, if required, a microtracker chip in the groin. 4 days later, mice underwent surgery to place human tissue (endometriotic lesions or fat) in the peritoneal cavity. Behavioral non-evoked and evoked pain responses were monitored every week starting on day 7 after surgery.
Figure 2Schematic image of nesting test. (A) Example of a cage divided into 6 equivalent areas in which a piece of cotton is placed in each area. After 3 h, the total number of cleared spaces was counted (B). Illustrative examples of different nest quality scores: 1 = cotton not broken, 2 = cotton partially broken, 3 = cotton totally broken (C).
Figure 3Evaluation of abdominal and hind paw mechanical pain thresholds in a heterologous model of endometriosis. Graphs show abdominal (A) and hind paw (B) mechanical threshold in animals implanted with human endometriotic lesion (red line) or fat tissue (blue line) at several time points after implanting surgery. Data in each time point are expressed as mean ± SEM values of each group (N = 6 per group). A one-way repeated ANOVA followed by Student Newman–Keuls post-hoc test was performed to analyze comparisons between groups. ** p < 0.01 = statistically significant differences between lesion and control groups at each time point.
Figure 4Nest building time course in animals with endometriosis or its control. (A) Nest building was evaluated by counting the number of cleared areas or (B) with a quality score (1 = intact bedding, 2 = bedding partially broken, 3 = bedding totally broken). Lesion and control groups are represented by red and blue lines. Data in each time point express mean ± SEM values of each group (N = 6 per group). A one-way repeated ANOVA followed by Student Newman–Keuls post-hoc test was performed to analyze comparisons between groups. Statistically significant differences between groups were not detected.
Figure 5Comparison of temporal pattern of home cage activity between animals implanted with endometriosis lesions or fat. Parameters analyzed were distance traveled (A), time isolated (B), time spent in centers zone (C), thigmotactic (D), and the time spent climbing (E) and drinking (F). The lesion and control groups are represented by the red and blue lines, respectively. Each point and vertical line represent the mean ± SEM of the values obtained of 6 animals. A one-way repeated ANOVA followed by Student Newman–Keuls post-hoc test was performed to analyze comparisons between groups during the time course. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 = Statistically significant differences between lesion and control groups at each time point.
Figure 6Image in (A) shows representative histological section of an endometriotic lesion recovered from human patients before being implanted in mice. Image in (B) shows representative observation of the macroscopic appearance of lesions (white arrows) recovered from mice at sacrifice at the end of the study period. Image in (C) shows representative histological section of an endometriotic lesion recovered from mice at the end of the study period. Note the parallels in the overall tissue architecture between the fresh and implanted tissues in regards to dense stromal tissue and few/absent glands. Note also detail of presence of immune cell infiltrate (i.e., giant cells, black arrows) in implanted tissue. Scale bar is represented in histological images.
Figure 7Staining of nerve fibers in human endometrial lesion before and after implantation in mice. Nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue) and fibers with anti-Beta III tubulin (red). Scale bar = 25 µm.