Nocebo and lessebo effects

Evidence and sources of placebo effects in transcranial direct current stimulation during a single session of visuospatial working memory practice

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to non-invasively augment cognitive training. However, the benefits of tDCS may be due in part to placebo effects, which have not been well-characterized. The purpose of this study was to determine whether tDCS can have a measurable placebo effect on cognitive training and to identify potential sources of this effect. Eighty-three right-handed adults were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control (no exposure to tDCS), sham tDCS, or active tDCS. The sham and active tDCS groups were double-blinded. Each group performed 20 min of an adapted Corsi Block Tapping Task (CBTT), a visuospatial working memory task. Anodal or sham tDCS was applied during CBTT training in a right parietal-left supraorbital montage. After training, active and sham tDCS groups were surveyed on expectations about tDCS efficacy. Linear mixed effects models showed that the tDCS groups (active and sham combined) improved more on the CBTT with training than the control group, suggesting a placebo effect of tDCS. Participants' tDCS expectations were significantly related to the placebo effect, as was the belief of receiving active stimulation. This placebo effect shows that the benefits of tDCS on cognitive training can occur even in absence of active stimulation. Future tDCS studies should consider how treatment expectations may be a source of the placebo effect in tDCS research, and identify ways to potentially leverage them to maximize treatment benefit.

The Nocebo Effect: A Bias in Clinical Practice-An Ethical Approach

BACKGROUND

The nocebo effect is often disregarded in medical practice and is certainly much less known than the placebo effect, although, in reality, both can influence therapeutic decision making and the quality of life of patients. However, the nocebo effect raises a number of issues not only of a practical nature related to clinical activity but also ethical dilemmas related to the observance of the patient's autonomy, nonmaleficence, or informed consent and the information on which it is based.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The ethical dilemmas raised by the nocebo effect revolve around how informed consent can be achieved, the accuracy and volume of information that is transmitted to the patient, and how to report negative side effects of therapeutic treatment.

DATA SOURCES

In September 2023, a narrative analysis of the literature was conducted using a combination of keywords such as nocebo, placebo, ethics, therapeutic relationship from PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and so on, as well as from official documents developed at an international level (World Health Organization), for a period of 10 years (2012-2021).

RESULTS

Analyzing the articles that remarked upon the significant impact of ethics in nocebo research or in the therapeutic relationship, we can state that the existence of several relevant issues of interest have been detected regarding the ethical use of nocebo and its impact in research or in clinics and thus the need for proper knowledge and management of the impact of nocebo effects. The ethical paradox of obtaining informed consent with the 2 goals, first, the need for complete information and second, the preservation of the autonomy of the patient, respectively, that of "primum non-nocere" and of avoiding unnecessary harm by revealing probable adverse effects is a point of interest for numerous studies. The potential for a nocebo effect is present when we inform patients about the risks and benefits of treatment, there being a clear link between the moral and ethical duty to inform patients and the need to avoid situations that increase the nocebo impact on how the disease or the adverse effects of the treatment are perceived. Adapting information about the side effects of medicines should focus on ensuring a balance between transparency and caution, especially in patients with a high potential for nocebo effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The nocebo effect had for a long time been unknown or denied, although it can interfere with the results of the treatment used. As the nocebo phenomenon becomes increasingly known in medical practice, the clinical and ethical implications are identified by medical staff, and nocebo's adverse responses are no longer ignored.

Negative expectations (nocebo phenomenon) in clinical interventions: A scoping review

Unpredictable, undesirable, and confusing reactions in the face of psychological or medical interventions make the clinical presentation more complicated and may represent clinically unexplained symptoms and also disturbed the doctor-patients relationship and decrease patients' benefits of treatment. It seems that negative expectations from the treatment (nocebo phenomenon) can explain such reactions. The aim of the current study is a scoping review and investigate different aspects of the nocebo phenomenon (negative expectations) in clinical interventions. This paper follows a scoping review of the existence, importance, and multidimensions of the nocebo phenomenon in medical and psychological interventions. Data sources include literature databases (ProQuest, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus) reviewed from inception dates to 2023, and the terms negative expectations, nocebo effect, placebo effect, negative placebo, and clinical interventions were searched. The review of the available articles showed that negative expectations play an important role in the process and effectiveness of clinical interventions. Negative expectations (here named nocebo effect) can significantly interfere with rapport and treatment processes. Some underlying components of the nocebo effect include negative expectancies, conditioning, social learning, memory, cognitive distortions, meaning, motivation, somatic focus, negative reinforcements, personality, anxiety, and neurophysiological factors such as CCK, dopamine, and cortisol are proposed for development and presence of nocebo phenomenon in clinical practice. Negative expectations with its biopsychosocial aspects play an important and amazing role in disorganizing medical and psychological interventions. Using appropriate methods to reduce nocebo effects in therapeutic interventions may increase treatment compliance and adherence and increase the effectiveness of interventions.

A new experimental rat model of nocebo-related nausea involving double mechanisms of observational learning and conditioning

AIM

The nocebo effect, such as nausea and vomiting, is one of the major reasons patients discontinue therapy. The underlying mechanisms remain unknown due to a lack of reliable experimental models. The goal of this study was to develop a new animal model of nocebo-related nausea by combining observational learning and Pavlovian conditioning paradigms.

METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats with nitroglycerin-induced migraine were given 0.9% saline (a placebo) or LiCl (a nausea inducer) following headache relief, according to different paradigms.

RESULTS

Both strategies provoked nocebo nausea responses, with the conditioning paradigm having a greater induction impact. The superposition of two mechanisms led to a further increase in nausea responses. A preliminary investigation of the underlying mechanism revealed clearly raised peripheral and central cholecystokinin (CCK) levels, as well as specific changes in the 5-hydroxytryptamine and cannabinoid systems. Brain networks related to emotion, cognition, and visceral sense expressed higher c-Fos-positive neurons, including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), insula, basolateral amygdala (BLA), thalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVT), hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN), nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS), periaqueductal gray (PAG), and dorsal raphe nucleus-dorsal part (DRD). We also found that nausea expectances in the model could last for at least 12 days.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides a useful experimental model of nocebo nausea that might be used to develop potential molecular pathways and therapeutic strategies for nocebo.

The lessebo effect in randomized controlled trials of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to assess the impact of negative expectations associated with receiving a placebo (the lessebo effect) on efficacy outcomes in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis on the American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, and 70% (ACR20, 50, 70) response rates in the placebo and active (biosimilar)-controlled groups (reference-pbo and reference-bs) of rituximab showing an insufficient response to methotrexate or tumor necrosis factor. We evaluated the difference in ACR20, 50, 70 response rates between the two groups (reference-bs vs. reference-pbo).

RESULTS

Nine RCTs included a total of 2734 patients with RA. The pooled incidence of ACR20 response rate in the placebo- and active-controlled groups of the rituximab RCTs for RA was 53.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 49.9-56.3%) and 75.0% (95% CI 71.2-78.4%), respectively. The difference in the ACR20 response rate between the placebo- and active-controlled groups was -20.9% (95% CI -26.9 to 61.9%, p < 0.001). The pooled incidence of ACR50 response rate in the placebo- and active-controlled groups of the rituximab RCTs for RA was 29.0% (95% CI 26.2-32.0%) and 47.4% (95% CI 43.2-51.6%), respectively. The ACR50 response rates were significantly higher in the active-controlled groups than in the placebo-controlled groups (-18.4%; 95% CI -18.4 to -13.4%, p < 0.001). The difference in the ACR70 response rate between the placebo- and active-controlled groups was -14.9% (95% CI -22.2 to -7.6%, p < 0.001). The ACR20, 50, 70 response rates were significantly higher in the active-controlled groups than in the placebo-controlled group.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the use of a placebo can be associated with a clinically significant reduction in the magnitude of change of the ACR20, 50, 70 response rates in rituximab RCTs for RA. The lessebo effect has potential implications for the development of new treatments and appraisal of current treatment options for RA.

E-Health Psychological Intervention for COVID-19 Healthcare Workers: Protocol for its Implementation and Evaluation

(1) Background: Healthcare workers have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital interventions have been carried out that have been effective with this population; however, few have been reported in Latin America. Our aim is to describe the components and methods to evaluate the feasibility and utility of an online multi-component psychological intervention for healthcare workers in Mexico during COVID-19. (2) Methods: This study is a randomized clinical trial with two arms: (1) self-applied intervention and (2) intervention delivered online by therapists. The participants are randomly assigned to one arm, receiving the same treatment contents in both groups. The "Personal COVID" intervention consists of an internet platform containing 9 nuclear and 3 complementary modules. The objectives of the intervention are: (1) to reduce anxiety, depressive symptoms, burnout, and compassion fatigue, and (2) to increase the quality of life, sleep quality, self-care, and their skills to give bad news. The protocol has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT04890665). (3) Discussion: This protocol is designed according to the highest scientific standards following the SPIRIT guidelines. The "Personal COVID" intervention is expected to be of high efficacy in treating the emotional distress of healthcare workers and promoting their health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The response to TNF blockers depending on their comparator in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials: the lessebo effect, a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of the biological reference agents (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in pivotal superiority placebo-controlled trials (reference agent vs placebo) vs their effect in equivalence active comparator-controlled trials (reference agent vs biosimilar).

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, databases were searched for randomized, double-blind, controlled trials up to March 2020 comparing a biological reference agent vs placebo or biosimilar. The study assessed the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses of the reference agent in these groups (Reference-pbo and Reference-bs, respectively). The effect of the reference agent in both groups was estimated with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), pooled using random-effects models and then compared using a meta-regression model.

RESULTS

We included 31 trials. The main characteristics of the population (disease duration and activity, % seropositivity and methotrexate dose) of the population in both groups were similar. The meta-analysis found a better ACR20 response to the biological originator in the Reference-bs group with a global rate of 70% (95%CI, 66-74) compared with 59% (95%CI, 55-62) in the reference-pbo group (p= 0.001). A significant difference was also found for ACR 50 [44% (95%CI, 39-50) vs 35% (95%CI, 31-39) respectively, p< 0.01].

CONCLUSION

Effect of the reference biologic agent was better when compared with an active drug to a placebo. This could be linked to an increased placebo effect in active comparator-controlled studies or a nocebo effect in placebo-controlled studies. This effect can be called the Lessebo effect.