Protease-activated receptors: mechanisms by which proteases sensitize TRPV channels to induce neurogenic inflammation and pain

Proteolytic enzymes comprise approximately 2 percent of the human genome [1]. Given their abundance, it is not surprising that proteases have diverse biological functions, ranging from the degradation of proteins in lysosomes to the control of physiological processes such as the coagulation cascade. However, a subset of serine proteases (possessing serine residues within their catalytic sites), which may be soluble in the extracellular fluid or tethered to the plasma membrane, are signaling molecules that can specifically regulate cells by cleaving protease-activated receptors (PARs), a family of four G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). These serine proteases include members of the coagulation cascade (e.g., thrombin, factor VIIa, and factor Xa), proteases from inflammatory cells (e.g., mast cell tryptase, neutrophil cathepsin G), and proteases from epithelial tissues and neurons (e.g., trypsins). They are often generated or released during injury and inflammation, and they cleave PARs on multiple cell types, including platelets, endothelial and epithelial cells, myocytes, fibroblasts, and cells of the nervous system. Activated PARs regulate many essential physiological processes, such as hemostasis, inflammation, pain, and healing. These proteases and their receptors have been implicated in human disease and are potentially important targets for therapy. Proteases and PARs participate in regulating most organ systems and are the subject of several comprehensive reviews [2, 3]. Within the central and peripheral nervous systems, proteases and PARs can control neuronal and astrocyte survival, proliferation and morphology, release of neurotransmitters, and the function and activity of ion channels, topics that have also been comprehensively reviewed [4, 5]. This chapter specifically concerns the ability of PARs to regulate TRPV channels of sensory neurons and thereby affect neurogenic inflammation and pain transmission [6, 7].

The “pain matrix” in pain-free individuals

Human functional imaging provides a correlative picture of brain activity during pain. A particular set of central nervous system structures (eg, the anterior cingulate cortex, thalamus, and insula) consistently respond to transient nociceptive stimuli causing pain. Activation of this so-called pain matrix or pain signature has been related to perceived pain intensity, both within and between individuals,1,2 and is now considered a candidate biomarker for pain in medicolegal settings and a tool for drug discovery. The pain-specific interpretation of such functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) responses, although logically flawed,3,4 remains pervasive. For example, a 2015 review states that “the most likely interpretation of activity in the pain matrix seems to be pain.”4 Demonstrating the nonspecificity of the pain matrix requires ruling out the presence of pain when highly salient sensory stimuli are presented. In this study, we administered noxious mechanical stimuli to individuals with congenital insensitivity to pain and sampled their brain activity with fMRI. Loss-of-function SCN9A mutations in these individuals abolishes sensory neuron sodium channel Nav1.7 activity, resulting in pain insensitivity through an impaired peripheral drive that leaves tactile percepts fully intact.5 This allows complete experimental disambiguation of sensory responses and painful sensations