4.5 Article

Involvement of the long-chain fatty acid receptor GPR40 as a novel pain regulatory system

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1432, 期 -, 页码 74-83

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.11.012

关键词

Docosahexaenoic acid; GPR40; Antinociception; beta-endorphin

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology for Young Scientists [22791459]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22791459] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

G-protein receptor (GPR) 40 is known to be activated by docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). However, reports studying the role and functions (including pain regulation) of GPR40 in the brain are lacking. We investigated the involvement of GPR40 in the brain on DHA-induced antinociceptive effects. Expression of GPR40 protein was observed in the olfactory bulb, striatum, hippocampus, midbrain, hypothalamus, medulla oblongata, cerebellum and cerebral cortex in the brain as well as the spinal cord, whereas GPR120 protein expression in these areas was not observed. Intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.), but not intrathecal (i.t.) injection of DHA (25 and 50 mu g/mouse) and GW9508 (a GPR40- and GPR120-selective agonist; 0.1 and 1.0 mu g/mouse) significantly reduced formalin-induced pain behavior. These effects were inhibited by pretreatment with the mu opioid receptor antagonist beta-funaltrexamine (beta-FNA), naltrindole (delta opioid receptor antagonist) and anti-beta-endorphin antiserum. The K opioid receptor antagonist norbinaltorphimine (nor-BNI) did not affect the antinociception of DHA or GW9508. Furthermore, the immunoreactivity of beta-endorphin in the hypothalamus increased at 10 and 20 min after icy, injection of DHA and GW9508. These findings suggest that DHA-induced antinociception via beta-endorphin release may be mediated (at least in part) through GPR40 signaling in the supraspinal area, and may provide valuable information on a novel therapeutic approach for pain control. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据