Do "central sensitization" questionnaires reflect measures of nociceptive sensitization or psychological constructs? A systematic review and meta-analyses.

ABSTRACT: Central sensitization (CS) is defined as an increased nociceptive responsiveness due to sensitization of neurons in the central nervous system, usually the result of prolonged nociceptive input or a disease state associated with noxious inputs (eg, polyarthritis). The concept of CS has recently been adopted in clinical assessments of chronic pain, but its diagnosis in humans may now include a wide range of hypervigilant responses. The purpose of this review is to ascertain whether self-report questionnaires linked with CS are associated with enhanced nociceptive responses or whether they measure sensitivity in a broader sense (ie, emotional responses). According to our published, PROSPERO-registered review protocol (CRD42021208731), a predefined search of studies that involve the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) or Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ), correlated with either nociceptive sensory tests or emotional hypervigilance was conducted on MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Correlations between the CSI or PSQ with our primary outcomes were extracted and meta-analysed. A review of 66 studies totalling 13,284 participants found that the CSI (but not the PSQ) strongly correlated with psychological constructs: depression, anxiety, stress, pain catastrophising, sleep, and kinesiophobia. The CSI and PSQ showed weak or no correlations with experimental measures of nociceptive sensitivity: pain thresholds, temporal summation, or conditioned pain modulation. The PSQ did, however, correlate strongly with phasic heat and tonic cold pain tests. The studies reviewed did not provide sufficient evidence that self-report measures reflect a canonical understanding of CS. The CSI more closely reflects psychological hypervigilance than increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons.

Investigating the relationship between pain indicators and observers' judgements of pain.

BACKGROUND: Due to the inherent subjectivity of pain, it is difficult to make accurate judgements of pain in others. Research has found discrepancies between the ways in which perceived "objective" (e.g., medical evidence of injury) and "subjective" information (e.g., self-report) influence judgements of pain. This study aims to explore which potential cues (depictions of sensory input, brain activation, self-reported pain and facial expressions) participants are most influenced by when evaluating pain in others. METHODS: First, 60 participants (23 women, 36 ± 10 years old) judged who was in more pain between two different pain indicators representing two different patients. These trials revealed which congruent indicator (i.e., two high pain indicators) would most influence participant decisions. Second, participants prescribed quantities of analgesia for one patient's pain based on two different pain indicators. These trials revealed which incongruent indicators (i.e., one high and one low indicator) would most influence participant decisions. RESULTS: As predicted, facial expressions were perceived as subjective and were the least likely, among all pain indicators, to influence observer's judgements of pain. Participants relied upon indicators they perceived as objective. Self-report pain ratings had the greatest influence on participants judgements about how much analgesic cream to prescribe and was perceived as objective by half of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: We found that in situations where incongruent information was presented about an individual's pain, participants relied on pain indicators that they perceived to be objective. The current study provides important insights about biases that people hold when making judgements of pain in others. SIGNIFICANCE: Interpretation and assessment of pain remains one of the largest barriers to pain management and involves complex, idiosyncratic processing. This study provides insights into what information participants view as critical in making attributions of pain when presented with multiple, seemingly incongruent sources of information.

Conditioned pain modulation is associated with heightened connectivity between the periaqueductal grey and cortical regions.

Introduction: Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is a psychophysical assessment used to estimate the efficiency of an individual's endogenous modulatory mechanisms. Conditioned pain modulation has been used as a predictive assessment for the development of chronic pain and responses to pain interventions. Although much is known about the spinal cord mechanisms associated with descending pain modulation, less is known about the contribution of supraspinal and especially cortical regions. Objectives: We aimed to explore how whole-brain connectivity of a core modulatory region, the periaqueductal grey (PAG), is associated with conditioned pain modulation, and endogenous pain modulation more broadly. Methods: We measured CPM and resting-state connectivity of 35 healthy volunteers, absent of chronic pain diagnoses. As a region of interest, we targeted the PAG, which is directly involved in endogenous modulation of input to the spinal cord and is a key node within the descending pain modulation network. Results: We found that CPM was associated with heightened connectivity between the PAG and key regions associated with pain processing and inhibition, such as the primary and secondary somatosensory cortices, as well as the motor, premotor, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices. These findings are consistent with connectivity findings in other resting-state and event-related fMRI studies. Conclusion: These findings indicate that individuals who are efficient modulators have greater functional connectivity between the PAG and regions involved in processing pain. The heightened connectivity of these regions may contribute to the beneficial outcomes in clinical pain management, as quantified by CPM. These results may function as brain-based biomarkers for vulnerability or resilience to pain.

Pain severity and pain interference during major depressive episodes treated with escitalopram and aripiprazole adjunctive therapy: a CAN-BIND-1 report.

Escitalopram may have pain-alleviating effects for patients with comorbid pain and depression. This study aimed to quantify improvements in pain for patients on escitalopram and adjunctive aripiprazole. A secondary analysis of the CAN-BIND-1 trial was conducted which only included participants with a current depressive episode and pain. Participants received escitalopram (10-20mg) for eight weeks and treatment response was defined as a reduction in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) of at least 50% from baseline. Non-responders at week 8 received adjunctive aripiprazole (2-10mg) for another eight weeks. The Brief Pain Inventory's pain severity (PSC) and pain interference (PIC) composite scores were measured at baseline, week 8, and week 16. Linear regression was used to determine how PSC and PIC differed between treatment responders and non-responders. Eighty-two participants with pain and depression received escitalopram. PSC and PIC decreased significantly regardless of treatment response at week 8, although responders had significantly lower PSC and PIC than non-responders. For the group receiving aripiprazole after week 8, neither PSC nor PIC improved further. Further research is needed to identify interventions that might treat both pain and depression symptoms.

Neural and behavioral correlates of human pain avoidance in participants with and without episodic migraine.

ABSTRACT: The innate motivation to avoid pain can be disrupted when individuals experience uncontrollable stress, such as pain. This can lead to maladaptive behaviors, including passivity, and negative affect. Despite its importance, motivational aspects of pain avoidance are understudied in humans and their neural mechanisms vastly unknown. Rodent models suggest an important role of the periaqueductal gray, but it is unknown whether it subserves a similar role in humans. Furthermore, it is unclear whether pain avoidance is associated with individual differences in pain coping. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, networks underlying pain avoidance behavior were examined in 32 participants with and without episodic migraine. Pain avoidance behavior was assessed using an adaptation of the incentive delay task. In each trial of the task, participants tried to avoid a painful stimulus and receive a nonpainful one instead while the difficulty to succeed varied across trials (3 difficulty levels: safe, easy, and difficult). After unsuccessful pain avoidance on the preceding trial, participants showed reduced pain avoidance behavior, especially in the difficult condition. This reduction in behavior was associated with higher helplessness scores only in participants with migraine. Higher helplessness in participants with migraine was further correlated with a stronger decrease in activation of cortical areas associated with motor behavior, attention, and memory after unsuccessful pain avoidance. Of these areas, specifically posterior parietal cortex activation predicted individual's pain avoidance behavior on the next trial. The results link individual pain coping capacity to patterns of neural activation associated with altered pain avoidance in patients with migraine.

Endogenous opioids contribute to the feeling of pain relief in humans.

Endogenous opioids mediate the pleasurable responses to positively reinforcing stimuli such as palatable food. Yet, the reduction or omission of a negative experience can also be rewarding (negative reinforcement). As such, pain relief leads to negative reinforcement and evokes a pleasant feeling in humans. Although it has been shown that the feeling of pleasure associated with positive reinforcement is at least partly mediated through endogenous opioids, it is currently unknown whether similar neurochemical mechanisms are involved in the pleasant feeling evoked by pain relief. In this study, 27 healthy participants completed 2 identical experimental sessions, 1 with placebo and 1 with naltrexone, an endogenous opioid antagonist. Pain relief was induced by superficial cooling after heat stimulation of capsaicin-sensitized skin. Participants rated the relief and pleasantness in response to the cooling. Endogenous opioid blockade by naltrexone decreased relief and pleasantness ratings compared with placebo (P = 0.0027). This study provides evidence that endogenous opioids play a role in mediating the pleasant feeling of pain relief in humans. Clinically, the rewarding nature of pain relief and its underlying mechanisms require consideration because of their potential reinforcing effects on behaviors that might be beneficial short-term but maladaptive long-term.

Do "central sensitization" questionnaires reflect measures of nociceptive sensitization or psychological constructs? Protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Central sensitization (CS) was first defined in animal studies to be increased nociceptive responsiveness due to sensitization of neurons in the central nervous system, usually the result of prolonged nociceptive input or a disease state. Recently, the concept of CS has been adopted in clinical assessments of chronic pain, but its diagnosis in humans has expanded to include the enhancement of a wide range of nociceptive, sensory, and emotional responses. Many poorly understood pain disorders are referred to as "central sensitivity syndrome," a term associated with a broad range of hypervigilant sensory and emotional responses. Diagnosis often involves a review of medical records and an assessment of behaviour, emotional disposition, and overall sensitivity of a patient. Obviously, these assessments are unable to directly capture the responsiveness of nociceptive neurons. The purpose of this review is to ascertain whether self-report questionnaires associated with central sensitization and the diagnosis of central sensitivity syndrome are associated with enhanced nociceptive responses or whether they more validly measure sensitivity in a broader sense (ie, including emotional responses). METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, a detailed search of studies that involve the Central Sensitization Inventory or Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire correlated with either nociceptive sensory tests (quantitative sensory testing) or emotional hypervigilance (anxiety, depression, stress, etc) will be conducted on MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. PERSPECTIVE: The review is expected to synthesize correlations between sensitivity questionnaires and nociceptive or emotional sensitivity to determine whether these questionnaires reflect a broadened understanding of the term "central sensitization."

Intrinsic attention to pain is associated with a pronociceptive phenotype.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence suggests that attention to pain is a product of both incoming sensory signals and cognitive evaluation of a stimulus. Intrinsic attention to pain (IAP) is a measure that captures an individual's natural tendency to attend to a painful stimulus and may be important in understanding why pain disrupts cognitive functioning in some individuals more than others. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we explored the extent to which IAP was associated with the modulation of incoming sensory signals characteristic of a pronociceptive phenotype: temporal summation (TS) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM). METHOD: 44 healthy participants (23 female; Mage=23.57, S.D.=5.50) were assessed on IAP, TS and CPM. RESULTS: We found that IAP was positively correlated with TS and CPM. A regression model showed that TS and CPM explained 39% of the variance in IAP scores. Both mechanisms seem to contribute independently to the propensity to attend to pain. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight that modulatory mechanisms at the spinal/supraspinal level exert a strong influence on an individual's ability to disengage from pain.

Reward processing as a common diathesis for chronic pain and depression.

Pain disorders and psychiatric illness are strongly comorbid, particularly in the context of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). While these disorders account for a significant amount of global disability, the mechanisms of their overlap remain unclear. Understanding these mechanisms is of vital importance to developing prevention strategies and interventions that target both disorders. Of note, brain reward processing may be relevant to explaining how the comorbidity arises, given pain disorders and MDD can result in maladaptive reward responsivity that limits reward learning, appetitive approach behaviours and consummatory response. In this review, we discuss this research and explore the possibility of reward processing deficits as a common diathesis to explain the manifestation of pain disorders and MDD. Specifically, we hypothesize that contextual physical or psychological events (e.g. surgery, divorce) in the presence of a reward impairment diathesis worsens symptoms and results in a negative feedback loop that increases the chronicity and probability of developing the other disorder. We also highlight the implications for treatment and provide a framework for future research.

Neuropathic pain after thoracotomy: Tracking signs and symptoms before and at monthly intervals following surgery.

BACKGROUND: As the development of neuropathic symptoms contributes to pain severity and chronification after surgery, their early prediction is important to allow targeted treatment. OBJECTIVES: We longitudinally investigated trajectories of signs and symptoms in patients undergoing thoracotomy and assessed whether and at which time they were related to the development of neuropathic pain symptoms 6 months after surgery. METHODS: Presurgical and 6 monthly postsurgical assessments included questionnaires for mental and physical well-being (e.g., depression/anxiety, pain catastrophizing, sleep quality, neuropathic pain symptoms), and quantitative sensory testing (QST). RESULTS: QST trajectories indicated nerve impairment of the surgery site with predominant loss of function. Signs of recovery towards the end of the assessment period were observed for some tests. Unsupervised cluster analysis with NPSI scores 6 months after surgery as clustering variable identified one group with no/low levels of neuropathic symptoms and one with moderate levels. The two groups differed w.r.t. several signs and symptoms already at early time points. Notably, neuropathic pain anywhere in the body differed already preoperatively and sleep impairment differentiated the two groups at all time points. Regression analysis revealed three factors that seemed particularly suited to predicted 6 months NPSI scores, namely preoperative neuropathic pain symptoms, with contributions from sleep impairment 1 month after surgery and the presence of dynamic mechanical allodynia 3 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical routine should focus on the individual's physiological state, including pre-existing neuropathic pain and sleep quality to identify patients early who might be at risk to develop chronic post-surgical neuropathic pain. SIGNIFICANCE: Development of neuropathies contributes to pain severity and pain chronification after surgery. Here we demonstrate trajectories of quantitative sensory tests (assessed at monthly intervals for 6 months after surgery) that reveal accurate time courses of gain/loss of nerve function following thoracotomy. Independent of the degree of neuropathic signs after surgery, the main predictors for post-surgical neuropathic pain are self-reported neuropathic pain before surgery and sleep quality shortly after surgery.

Induced oscillatory signaling in the beta frequency of top-down pain modulation.

BACKGROUND: Induced synchronized brain activity, particularly in the beta-frequency range, has rarely been investigated in human electrophysiological studies of attentional modulation of the perception of nociceptive stimuli. METHODS: We measured time-resolved brain responses to nociceptive stimuli in healthy subjects (final data set: n = 17) using magnetoencephalography (MEG). In addition to investigating evoked responses as previous studies, we tested whether synchronized beta activity induced by nociceptive stimuli differs between 2 attentional conditions. Subjects were presented simultaneously with 2 stimulus modalities (pain-producing intraepidermal electrical stimuli and visual stimuli) in 2 different experimental conditions, ie, "attention to pain" and "attention to color." Pain ratings between conditions were compared using a 2-sided paired-sample t test; MEG data were analyzed with Brainstorm. RESULTS: Pain ratings were significantly higher in the "attention to pain" compared with the "attention to color" condition. Peak amplitudes of the evoked responses were significantly larger in the "attention to pain" condition bilaterally in the insula and secondary somatosensory cortex, and in the primary somatosensory cortex (SI) contralateral to stimulation. Induced responses to painful stimuli were significantly stronger in contralateral SI in the beta-frequency range in the "attention to pain" condition. CONCLUSIONS: This study replicates previous reports w.r.t. the attentional modulation of evoked responses and suggests a functional role of induced oscillatory activity in the beta frequency in top-down modulation of nociceptive stimuli.

Functional connectivity of the amygdala is linked to individual differences in emotional pain facilitation.

The amygdala is central to emotional processing of sensory stimuli, including pain. Because recent findings suggest that individual differences in emotional processes play a part in the development of chronic pain, a better understanding of the individual patterns of functional connectivity that makes individuals susceptible to emotionally modulated facilitation of pain is needed. We therefore investigated the neural correlates of individual differences in emotional pain facilitation using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) with an amygdala seed. Thirty-seven participants took part in 3 separate sessions, during which pain sensitivity was tested (session 1), participants underwent rs-fMRI (session 2), and emotional pain modulation was assessed (session 3). The amygdala served as seed for the rs-fMRI analysis, and whole-brain voxel-wise connectivity was tested. Pain modulatory scores were entered as regressor for the group analysis. Stronger connectivity of the amygdala to S1/M1, S2/operculum, and posterior parietal cortex at rest characterized individuals who showed greater pain facilitation by negative emotions. When comparing the amygdala networks associated with pain unpleasantness and with pain-intensity modulation, most of the identified areas were equally related to either pain rating type; only amygdala connectivity to S1/M1 was found to predict pain-intensity modulation specifically. We demonstrate that trait-like patterns of functional connectivity between amygdala and cortical regions involved in sensory and motor responses are associated with the individual amplitude of pain facilitation by negative emotional states. Our results are an early step toward improved understanding of the mechanisms that give rise to individual differences in emotional pain modulation.

Male-Specific Conditioned Pain Hypersensitivity in Mice and Humans.

Pain memories are hypothesized to be critically involved in the transition of pain from an acute to a chronic state. To help elucidate the underlying neurobiological mechanisms of pain memory, we developed novel paradigms to study context-dependent pain hypersensitivity in mouse and human subjects, respectively. We find that both mice and people become hypersensitive to acute, thermal nociception when tested in an environment previously associated with an aversive tonic pain experience. This sensitization persisted for at least 24 hr and was only present in males of both species. In mice, context-dependent pain hypersensitivity was abolished by castrating male mice, pharmacological blockade of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, or intracerebral or intrathecal injections of zeta inhibitory peptide (ZIP) known to block atypical protein kinase C (including the protein kinase Mζ isoform). In humans, men, but not women, self-reported higher levels of stress when tested in a room previously associated with tonic pain. These models provide a new, completely translatable means for studying the relationship between memory, pain, and stress.

Multicenter assessment of quantitative sensory testing (QST) for the detection of neuropathic-like pain responses using the topical capsaicin model.

BACKGROUND: The use of quantitative sensory testing (QST) in multicenter studies has been quite limited, due in part to lack of standardized procedures among centers. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the application of the capsaicin pain model as a surrogate experimental human model of neuropathic pain in different centers and verify the variation in reports of QST measures across centers. METHODS: A multicenter study conducted by the Quebec Pain Research Network in six laboratories allowed the evaluation of nine QST parameters in 60 healthy subjects treated with topical capsaicin to model unilateral pain and allodynia. The same measurements (without capsaicin) were taken in 20 patients with chronic neuropathic pain recruited from an independent pain clinic. RESULTS: Results revealed that six parameters detected a significant difference between the capsaicin-treated and the control skin areas: (1) cold detection threshold (CDT) and (2) cold pain threshold (CPT) are lower on the capsaicin-treated side, indicating a decreased in cold sensitivity; (3) heat pain threshold (HPT) was lower on the capsaicin-treated side in healthy subjects, suggesting an increased heat pain sensitivity; (4) dynamic mechanical allodynia (DMA); (5) mechanical pain after two stimulations (MPS2); and (6) mechanical pain summation after ten stimulations (MPS10), are increased on the capsaicin-treated side, suggesting an increased in mechanical pain (P < 0.002). CDT, CPT and HPT showed comparable effects across all six centers, with CPT and HPT demonstrating the best sensitivity. Data from the patients showed significant difference between affected and unaffected body side but only with CDT. CONCLUSION: These results provide further support for the application of QST in multicenter studies examining normal and pathological pain responses.

Contexte: L'utilisation de tests sensoriels quantitatifs (QST) dans les études multicentriques est limitée, en partie à cause de l'absence de procédures normalisées au sein des centres.But: évaluer l'application du modèle de la douleur traitée par capsaïcine en tant que modèle expérimental humain de substitution pour la douleur neuropathique dans différents centres et vérifier les variations dans les mesures des tests sensoriels quantitatifs entre les centres.Méthodes: Une étude multicentrique menée par le Réseau québécois de recherche sur la douleur dans six laboratoires a permis d'évaluer neuf paramètres de tests sensoriels quantitatifs chez 60 sujets en bonne santé traités par capsaïcine topique afin de modéliser la douleur unilatérale et l'allodynie. Les mêmes mesures (sans capsaïcine) ont été prises chez 20 patients atteints de douleur neuropathique chronique recrutés dans une clinique de la douleur indépendante.Résultats: Les résultats ont révélé une différence significative entre la zone de peau traitée à la capsaïcine et la zone contrôle pour six paramètres : 1) le seuil de détection du froid (CTF) et 2) le seuil de perception de la douleur causée par le froid (CPT) étaient plus bas sur le côté traité par capsaïcine chez les sujets en bonne santé, ce qui indique une diminution de la sensibilité au froid, 3) Le seuil de perception de la douleur causée par la chaleur (HPT) était plus bas sur le côté traité par capsaïcine chez les sujets en bonne santé, ce qui suggère une augmentation de la sensibilité à la douleur causée par la chaleur; 4) l'allodynie mécanique dynamique (DMA), 5) la douleur mécanique après deux stimulations (MPS2) et 6) la somme de la douleur mécanique après 10 stimulations (MPS10) ont augmenté sur le côté traité à la capsaïne, ce qui suggère une augmentation de la douleur mécanique (p < 0,002). Le CDT, le CPT et le HPT ont démontré des effets comparables dans les six centres, le CPT et le HPT démontrant la meilleure sensibilité. Les données des patients ont révélé une différence significative entre le côté affecté et le non côté non affecté, mais seulement dans le cas du CDT.Conclusion: Ces résultats soutiennent l'application de tests sensoriels quantitatifs dans les études multicentriques portant sur les réponses normales et pathologiques à la douleur.

Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception.

Minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure are conflicting motivations when pain and reward co-occur. Decisions to prioritize reward consumption or pain avoidance are assumed to lead to pain inhibition or facilitation, respectively. Such decisions are a function of the subjective utility of the stimuli involved, i.e. the relative value assigned to the stimuli to compare the potential outcomes of a decision. To test perceptual pain modulation by varying degrees of motivational conflicts and the role of subjective utility, we implemented a task in which healthy volunteers had to decide between accepting a reward at the cost of receiving a nociceptive electrocutaneous stimulus or rejecting both. Subjective utility of the stimuli was assessed by a matching task between the stimuli. Accepting reward coupled to a nociceptive stimulus resulted in decreased perceived intensity, while rejecting the reward to avoid pain resulted in increased perceived intensity, but in both cases only if a high motivational conflict was present. Subjective utility of the stimuli involved moderated these bidirectional perceptual effects: the more a person valued money over pain, the more perceived intensity increased or decreased. These findings demonstrate pain modulation when pain and reward are simultaneously present and highlight the importance of subjective utility for such modulation.

How Accurate Appraisal of Behavioral Costs and Benefits Guides Adaptive Pain Coping.

Coping with pain is a complex phenomenon encompassing a variety of behavioral responses and a large network of underlying neural circuits. Whether pain coping is adaptive or maladaptive depends on the type of pain (e.g., escapable or inescapable), personal factors (e.g., individual experiences with coping strategies in the past), and situational circumstances. Keeping these factors in mind, costs and benefits of different strategies have to be appraised and will guide behavioral decisions in the face of pain. In this review we present pain coping as an unconscious decision-making process during which accurately evaluated costs and benefits lead to adaptive pain coping behavior. We emphasize the importance of passive coping as an adaptive strategy when dealing with ongoing pain and thus go beyond the common view of passivity as a default state of helplessness. In combination with passive pain coping, we highlight the role of the reward system in reestablishing affective homeostasis and discuss existing evidence on a behavioral and neural level. We further present neural circuits involved in the decision-making process of pain coping when circumstances are ambiguous and, therefore, costs and benefits are difficult to anticipate. Finally, we address the wider implications of this topic by discussing its relevance for chronic pain patients.

Orbitofrontal cortex mediates pain inhibition by monetary reward.

Pleasurable stimuli, including reward, inhibit pain, but the level of the neuraxis at which they do so and the cerebral processes involved are unknown. Here, we characterized a brain circuitry mediating pain inhibition by reward. Twenty-four healthy participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging while playing a wheel of fortune game with simultaneous thermal pain stimuli and monetary wins or losses. As expected, winning decreased pain perception compared to losing. Inter-individual differences in pain modulation by monetary wins relative to losses correlated with activation in the medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC). When pain and reward occured simultaneously, mOFCs functional connectivity changed: the signal time course in the mOFC condition-dependent correlated negatively with the signal time courses in the rostral anterior insula, anterior-dorsal cingulate cortex and primary somatosensory cortex, which might signify moment-to-moment down-regulation of these regions by the mOFC. Monetary wins and losses did not change the magnitude of pain-related activation, including in regions that code perceived pain intensity when nociceptive input varies and/or receive direct nociceptive input. Pain inhibition by reward appears to involve brain regions not typically involved in nociceptive intensity coding but likely mediate changes in the significance and/or value of pain.