Chronic pelvic pain (CPP), despite its high prevalence, is still relatively poorly understood mechanistically. This study, as part of the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) project, has used a full quantitative sensory testing (QST) paradigm to profile n = 85 women with and without CPP (endometriosis or bladder pain specifically). We used the foot as a control site and abdomen as the test site. Across 5 diagnostically determined subgroups, we found features which are common across different aetiologies, eg, gain of function in pressure pain threshold (PPT) when assessing responses from the lower abdomen or pelvis (referred pain site). However, disease-specific phenotypes were also identified, eg, greater mechanical allodynia in endometriosis, despite there being large heterogeneities within diagnostic groups. The most common QST sensory phenotype was mechanical hyperalgesia (>50% across all the groups). A "healthy' sensory phenotype was seen in <7% of CPP participants. Specific QST measures correlated with sensory symptoms assessed by the painDETECT questionnaire (pressure-evoked pain [painDETECT] and PPT [QST] [ r = 0.47, P < 0.001]; mechanical hyperalgesia (painDETECT) and mechanical pain sensitivity [MPS from QST] [ r = 0.38, P = 0.009]). The data suggest that participants with CPP are sensitive to both deep tissue and cutaneous inputs, suggesting that central mechanisms may be important in this cohort. We also see phenotypes such as thermal hyperalgesia, which may be the result of peripheral mechanisms, such as irritable nociceptors. This highlights the importance of stratifying patients into clinically meaningful phenotypes, which may have implications for the development of better therapeutic strategies for CPP.

Endometriosis (ENDO) and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) are chronic pain conditions for which better treatments are urgently needed. Development of new therapies with proven clinical benefit has been slow. We have conducted a review of existing preclinical in vivo models for ENDO and IC/BPS in rodents, discussed to what extent they replicate the phenotype and pain experience of patients, as well as their relevance for translational research. In 1009 publications detailing ENDO models, 41% used autologous, 26% syngeneic, 18% xenograft, and 11% allogeneic tissue in transplantation models. Intraperitoneal injection of endometrial tissue was the subcategory with the highest construct validity score for translational research. From 1055 IC/BPS publications, most interventions were bladder centric (85%), followed by complex mechanisms (8%) and stress-induced models (7%). Within these categories, the most frequently used models were instillation of irritants (92%), autoimmune (43%), and water avoidance stress (39%), respectively. Notably, although pelvic pain is a hallmark of both conditions and a key endpoint for development of novel therapies, only a small proportion of the studies (models of ENDO: 0.5%-12% and models of IC/BPS: 20%-44%) examined endpoints associated with pain. Moreover, only 2% and 3% of publications using models of ENDO and IC/BPS investigated nonevoked pain endpoints. This analysis highlights the wide variety of models used, limiting reproducibility and translation of results. We recommend refining models so that they better reflect clinical reality, sharing protocols, and using standardized endpoints to improve reproducibility. We are addressing this in our project Innovative Medicines Initiative-PainCare/Translational Research in Pelvic Pain.