Biology subjects

Honigman, L.

Publications and source records attributed to Honigman, L..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2025

The Contribution of Circulating Endocannabinoid Tone to Individual Differences in Human Pain Sensitivity: A Quantitative Sensory Testing Study

The endocannabinoid (eCB) system--comprising cannabinoid receptors, eCBs (anandamide-- AEA, 2-arachidonoylglycerol--2-AG) and related N-acylethanolamines (NAEs; N-palmitoylethanolamide--PEA, and N-oleoylethanolamide--OEA), and metabolizing enzymes (e.g., fatty acid amide hydrolase; FAAH)--modulates nociceptive circuits in rodents. In humans, the FAAH C385A polymorphism is associated with reduced pain sensitivity, suggesting eCB tone influences individual pain differences, but this has yet to be tested. Here, we determined whether the eCB system is associated with somatosensory and pain sensitivity measured with quantitative sensory testing (QST) in 91 healthy participants (39 males, 52 females). We tested three hypotheses: (1) FAAH C385A polymorphism, cannabis use, and sex affect serum eCB/NAE concentrations; (2) FAAH C385A carriers show altered pain sensitivity versus non-carriers; and (3) baseline serum eCB/NAE concentrations are associated with QST measures. eCB/NAE concentrations were not statistically different based on sex (p > .05), based on FAAH genotype (p > .05), and based on cannabis use (p > .05). To address collinearity of AEA, OEA and PEA, we performed a principal components analysis, which identified a single component of FAAH substrates. Linear regressions found that FAAH genotype did not affect QST measures and that baseline 2-AG and FAAH substrate concentrations were not associated with QST measures, except pressure pain thresholds (PPT; p = 0.003), which were associated with AEA and OEA. Baseline eCB/NAE levels and FAAH genotype are not associated with the outcome measures of standard QST tests that rely on point estimates in healthy adult humans; nonetheless, circulating FAAH substrate levels were associated with PPT.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2024

It's the Sound not the Pulse: Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation Reduces Central Sensitization through Auditory Modulatory Effects

Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) is a non-pharmacological, non-invasive analgesic modality with limited side effects. However, there is a paucity of controlled studies demonstrating its efficacy compared to existing pain management tools. Here, in an initial sample of 100 healthy participants (age 18-40), we compared the analgesic efficacy of two rPMS stimulation protocols--continuous theta burst stimulation (ctbPMS) and intermittent TBS (itbPMS)--against transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), a peripheral stimulation technique that is commonly used for pain management. We also included a sham rPMS protocol where participants heard the sound of rPMS stimulation while the coil was placed over their arm, but received no peripheral stimulation. We hypothesized that itbPMS and ctbPMS--but not sham--would reduce pain intensity, pain unpleasantness, and secondary hyperalgesia evoked by a phasic heat pain (PHP) paradigm on the volar forearm with similar efficacy to TENS. Neither rPMS nor TENS reduced reported pain intensity or unpleasantness (p>0.25). However, ctbPMS and itbPMS significantly reduced the area of secondary hyperalgesia, whereas TENS did not (F3,96= 4.828, p= 0.004). Unexpectedly, sham rPMS, which involved auditory but no peripheral nerve stimulation, also significantly reduced secondary hyperalgesia compared to TENS. We performed a second study (n=32) to investigate auditory contributions to rPMS analgesia. Masking the rPMS stimulation sound with pink noise eliminated its analgesic effect on secondary hyperalgesia (p=0.5). This is the first study to show that the analgesic properties of rPMS in acute experimental pain may be largely attributed to its auditory component rather than peripheral nerve stimulation.

neuroscience↗