Expectation-induced placebo effect on acute sadness in women with major depression: An experimental investigation

Generalization and enhancement of the effects of an active placebo nasal spray on sadness

INTRODUCTION

The placebo effect, i.e., the psychobiological response arising from administering an inert treatment, influences various domains, such as pain perception and emotional regulation. Positive framing might enhance this effect. This study tested whether the effect of an active placebo (mimicking drug side effects to enhance treatment credibility) on is generalized between two different contexts of sadness induction and if positive framing of side effects enhances this effect.

METHODS

Ninety-six healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Placebo+positive framing (PPF), Placebo+standard information (PSI), or no treatment control (NTC). Participants underwent a sadness induction protocol during an in-person lab session and a 20-min online follow-up at home six hours later. Primary outcome was self-reported sadness, secondary outcome was self-reported side effects.

RESULTS

Both the PPF and PSI groups showed a significant decrease in sadness compared to the NTC group after placebo administration during the lab session (p < 0.001) and at follow-up (p < 0.05). At follow-up, only the PPF group did not experience a significant increase in sadness. Positive framing did not improve side effect tolerability.

LIMITATIONS

Self-reported measures introduce subjective bias. The sample restriction to healthy volunteers limits generalizability. The six-hour period may not capture clinically relevant long-term effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The active placebo nasal spray effectively reduced sadness, with effects persisting for six hours and across different contexts. Positive framing did not enhance side effect tolerability but may have helped maintain effectiveness at follow-up. Further research is needed in clinical populations and to explore long-term effects.

The influence of expectations on shame, rumination and cognitive flexibility: an experimental investigation on affect-regulatory characteristics of deceptive placebos

Background

Several studies identified affect-regulatory qualities of deceptive placebos within negative and positive affect. However, which specific characteristics of an affect-regulatory framing impacts the placebo effect has not yet been subject to empirical investigations. In particular, it is unclear whether placebo- induced expectations of direct emotion inhibition or emotion regulation after emotion induction elicit stronger effects in affect regulation.

Purpose

The aim of the study was to identify whether specifically framed expectations on the occurrence (antecedent-focused) vs. regulation capability (response-modulating) of affect, induced with an active placebo nasal-spray, have effects on affect-regulatory processes. Because personality traits have been suspected to influence placebo responses and affect regulation, an additional goal of the study was to examine modulating influences of shame proneness, level of depression, experiential avoidance, and emotional control.

Methods

Healthy volunteers (n = 121) were randomized to either a deceptive placebo condition (antecedent-focused vs. response-modulating instruction) or a no-treatment control group before shame was experimentally induced via autobiographical recall. Groups were compared on outcomes of state shame, rumination, and cognitive flexibility.

Results

Both antecedent-focused and response-modulating placebo framings influenced changes in state shame (b = 3.08, 95% CI = [0.80-5.92], p = 0.044), rumination (b = 4.80, 95% CI = [1.50-8.09], p ≤ 0.001) and cognitive flexibility outcomes (b = -3.63, 95% CI = [-6.75 - -0.51], p = 0.011) after shame-induction interventions. Only the antecedent-focused placebo response was modulated by personality traits. Experiential avoidance modulated shame experience (F(2,115) = 3.470, p = 0.031) whereas emotional control influenced the reports of state rumination (F(2,115) = 4.588, p = 0.012). No modulatory influences of levels of depression and shame proneness could be observed (ps > 0.05).

Conclusion

The results suggest that shame, rumination and cognitive flexibility can be positively influenced by placebo treatment in healthy subjects. Personality traits of emotional control and experiential avoidance influenced the placebo response of the antecedent-focused treatment rationale on outcomes individually.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05372744.

[Placebo effect in the treatment with antidepressants : Implications for the scientific evaluation and clinical use of pharmaceutical treatments of depression]

BACKGROUND

Blinded placebo treatment arms in clinical trials often achieve up to 80% of the clinical improvements of the verum groups. Apparently, the majority of the effects found in the antidepressant groups in clinical trials are due to factors that are not specific to antidepressant treatment. This article reviews the factors that contribute to the high effectiveness of placebo interventions for antidepressants.

METHODS

A narrative literature review is presented with particular emphasis on placebo effects in antidepressant clinical trials.

RESULTS

There is a particularly strong placebo effect in depression compared to other mental disorders. The magnitude of this effect can be modulated by helpful versus nonhelpful instructions, by patient participation in the decision-making process but also by personal attention, especially if the clinician is perceived as competent and warmhearted. The occurrence of subtle side effects can also reinforce placebo effects. Placebo effects are not only reflected in subjective patient-reported outcome variables but are also evident in neurochemical changes in the body.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians essentially contribute to the effectiveness of antidepressant treatment through their own behavior. At the same time, the relatively small overall difference between verum and placebo treatments for depression leads to the necessity of a critical evaluation of the cost-benefit ratio, adapted to the individual case. Study designs for the evaluation of antidepressants are required that better reflect the complex interactions between the genuine drug effects and placebo effects.

Boosting open-label placebo effects in acute induced pain in healthy adults (BOLPAP-study): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Pain is a highly prevalent symptom in the hospital setting, but treatment options remain limited. Harnessing the placebo effect in an ethical manner could provide a new possibility to reduce pain in clinical practice. So called open-label placebos (OLP) have been shown to elicit significant effects in reducing acute pain. But, before implementation, more knowledge concerning the properties of OLPs is needed. This study aims to assess the duration of analgesic effects from OLP and to determine the possibility of boosting such effects.

Methods and analysis

This is the protocol of an ongoing (first patient enrolled in March 2023) single-site randomized trial investigating OLPs in two parts (i.e., substudies). In both parts, pain will be induced in healthy adults using an intradermal electrical stimulation model. Participants in Part 1 will have two study visits: An interventional visit with one OLP injection accompanied by an evidence-based treatment rationale and a control visit with no treatment. For Part 2, participants will be randomized into three groups: (1) A fixed-time "Booster" group including one single repetition of the OLP injection at a fixed time point, (2) an on-demand "Booster" group including one single repetition of the OLP injection on-demand, and (3) a control group who will receive just one OLP injection. Differences in pain ratings over time (using the Numeric Rating Scale) will be analyzed with several two-sample t-tests. The time point for a fixed-time "Booster" in Part 2 will be derived from Part 1 with additional statistical tools such as a broken-stick mixed-effect model.

Discussion

This study aims to further characterize the analgesic effects of OLPs. In doing so, it will provide valuable information needed for later implementation of OLPs in clinical practice, where they could play a role in multimodal analgesic concepts.

Ethics and dissemination

The "Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz" (BASEC 2023-00296) approved the study protocol. Results of the analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Clinical Trial Registration

This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05819476) and is listed in the Swiss National Registry at kofam.ch (SNCTP000005470).

Placebo and nocebo effects and mechanisms associated with pharmacological interventions: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to summarise the existing knowledge about placebo and nocebo effects associated with pharmacological interventions and their mechanisms.

DESIGN

Umbrella review, adopting the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 tool for critical appraisal.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial were searched in September 2022, without any time restriction, for systematic reviews, narrative reviews, original articles. Results were summarised through narrative synthesis, tables, 95% CI.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Mechanisms underlying placebo/nocebo effects and/or their effect sizes.

RESULTS

The databases search identified 372 studies, for a total of 158 312 participants, comprising 41 systematic reviews, 312 narrative reviews and 19 original articles. Seventy-three per cent of the examined systematic reviews were of high quality.Our findings revealed that mechanisms underlying placebo and/or nocebo effects have been characterised, at least in part, for: pain, non-noxious somatic sensation, Parkinson's disease, migraine, sleep disorders, intellectual disability, depression, anxiety, dementia, addiction, gynaecological disorders, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, immune and endocrine systems, cardiovascular and respiratory systems, gastrointestinal disorders, skin diseases, influenza and related vaccines, oncology, obesity, physical and cognitive performance. Their magnitude ranged from 0.08 to 2.01 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.89) for placebo effects and from 0.32 to 0.90 (95% CI 0.24 to 1.00) for nocebo effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a valuable tool for clinicians and researchers, identifying both results ready for clinical practice and gaps to address in the near future.

FUNDING

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy with the 'Finanziamento Ponte 2022' grant.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023392281.

The role of the communicated treatment rationale on treatment outcome: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Placebo effects are a well-established phenomenon in the treatment of depression. However, the mechanism underlying these effects are not fully understood. Treatment expectations are considered one explanation for why placebos work. Treatment expectations are likely to be affected by clinician-patient interactions. This study aims to investigate the role of the communicated treatment rationale in modulating treatment expectations and its effects on the treatment outcomes of a pharmacological and a psychological active placebo intervention for depression. In this study, treatment expectations are modulated by presenting illness models that are either congruent or incongruent with the treatment intervention that follows.

METHODS

This 2 × 2 randomized controlled trial will involve patients with major depression. Participants will either receive a biological or a psychological illness model from a clinician. Following this, they are randomly assigned to receive either a pharmacological or a psychological active placebo intervention. The illness model and the treatment are either congruent or incongruent with each other, resulting in four groups. In addition, a natural course control group will be included.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide insights into the mechanism of expectation modulation in active placebo treatments for major depression. The results may provide insights for clinicians to improve their communication with patients by focusing on treatment expectations. By identifying the factors that contribute to placebo effects, this study has the potential to improve the effectiveness of existing depression treatments and reduce the burden of this highly prevalent mental health condition.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier: NCT04719663. Registered on January 22, 2021.

The impact of pharmaceutical form and simulated side effects in an open-label-placebo RCT for improving psychological distress in highly stressed students

Open-label placebo (OLP) may be utilized to reduce psychological distress. Yet, potential contextual effects have not been explored. We investigated the impact of pharmaceutical form and the simulation of side effects in a parallel group RCT (DRKS00030987). A sample of 177 highly stressed university students at risk of depression were randomly assigned by computer generated tables to a 1-week intervention with active or passive OLP nasal spray or passive OLP capsule or a no-treatment control group. After the intervention, groups differed significantly in depressive symptoms but not regarding other outcomes of psychological distress (stress, anxiety, sleep quality, somatization), well-being or treatment expectation. OLP groups benefitted significantly more compared to the no-treatment control group (d = .40), OLP nasal spray groups significantly more than the OLP capsule group (d = .40) and the active OLP group significantly more than the passive OLP groups (d = .42). Interestingly, before intervention, most participants, regardless of group assignment, believed that the OLP capsule would be most beneficial. The effectiveness of OLP treatments seems to be highly influenced by the symptom focus conveyed by the OLP rationale. Moreover, pharmaceutical form and simulation of side effects may modulate efficacy, while explicit treatment expectation seems to play a minor role.

Reduction in caffeine withdrawal after open-label decaffeinated coffee

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal from addictive drugs can be reduced by administering placebo deceptively, but in the clinic it is unethical to deceive the patient. Open-label placebo effects have been observed across a range of psychophysiological phenomena, and may also apply to drug withdrawal.

METHOD

24-hour abstinent heavy coffee drinkers (N = 61) rated their caffeine withdrawal symptoms before being allocated to one of three groups. The Deceptive group was given decaffeinated coffee (decaf) and told it was caffeinated, the Open-Label group given decaf and told it was decaf and the Control group given water and told it was water. After 45 min, caffeine withdrawal was measured again. All participants rated their expectancies of withdrawal reduction from caffeinated coffee, decaf and water prior to being randomised and the end of the study.

RESULTS

There was a significant 9.5-point reduction in caffeine withdrawal in the Open-Label group (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.7, 14.3; p = 0.002), which was 8.6 points less than the Deceptive group (95%CI: 0.4, 16.8; p = 0.014) but 8.9 points greater than the Control group (95%CI: 0.6, 17.2; p = 0.012). Pre-randomisation, participants expected caffeinated coffee to reduce their withdrawal symptoms the most, followed by water and decaf, Pre-randomisation expectancy of withdrawal was only associated with amount of withdrawal reduction in the Deceptive group.

CONCLUSION

It appears as if open-label placebo caffeine (i.e. decaf) can reduce caffeine withdrawal symptoms, even when people do not hold a conscious expectancy it will do so. There may be ways to integrate open-label placebo procedures into clinical interventions for drug dependence without violating informed consent.

Deceptive and open-label placebo effects in experimentally induced guilt: a randomized controlled trial in healthy subjects

Placebos are known to yield significant effects in many conditions. We examined deceptive and open-label placebo effects on guilt, which is important for self-regulation and a symptom of mental disorders. Following an experimental induction of guilt, healthy subjects were randomized to deceptive placebo (DP; n = 35), open-label placebo (OLP; n = 35), or no treatment (NT; n = 39). The primary outcome was guilt responses assessed in area under the curve (AUC). Secondary outcomes were shame, guilt, and affect. We hypothesized that DP and OLP would reduce guilt compared to NT. Guilt responses were higher in the NT group than in the placebo groups (estimate = 2.03, 95% CI = 0.24-3.82, d = 0.53), whereas AUC guilt did not differ significantly between the placebo groups (estimate = -0.38, 95% CI = -2.52-1.76, d = -0.09). Placebos are efficacious in reducing acute guilt responses, regardless of the placebo administration (i.e., open vs. deceptive). Furthermore, we observed narrative-specific effects with significant changes of guilt but not shame, pride, or affect. These results indicate not only that guilt is amenable to placebos but also that placebos can be administered in an ethical and potentially emotion-specific manner.

Can placebos reduce intrusive memories?

After traumatic experiences, intrusive memories can flash back and evoke significant distress. Here, we investigated whether the frequency and severity of intrusions can be reduced by the provision of placebo. After the (online) exposure to the trauma-film paradigm, healthy participants (N = 112) received deceptive placebo (DP), open-label placebo (OLP), or no treatment. In the DP group, participants were led to believe to receive a dopamine-modulating drug, which was supposed to disrupt the consolidation of traumatic memories, although they in fact received the same placebo tablets as the OLP group for one week. The results show that the groups did not differ in the frequency of intrusive memories after one week. However, participants receiving OLP reported a significantly reduced intensity of intrusions as compared to DP. Across groups, negative expectations about the intensity and controllability of intrusions were associated with a higher frequency of intrusions, higher distress, higher burden, and more negative appraisal. The results suggest that expectations play an important role in the emergence of intrusive memories and that some of the disabling aspects of intrusive memories can be reduced by placebo. This may carry clinical potential because placebos are an accessible, cost-effective intervention to reduce the risk of intrusive memories.

Placebo: a brief updated review

Our aims were to provide updated information on placebo/nocebo effect and the potential use of placebo in clinical practice. This article can only provide a rough overview on the placebo and nocebo effect and is intended to serve as a starting point for the reader to go deeper into the corresponding literature. The placebo effect has been observed in multiple medical conditions, after oral administration, with manual therapies as well as with surgery and invasive procedures. The use of placebo in clinical trials is fundamental, although the ethics of its use is under discussion. The placebo may behave like a drug from the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic point of view and can also be associated with adverse events (nocebo effect). Placebo can modify treatment by increasing or decreasing the effects of drugs. The factors associated with the occurrence of placebo effect are multiple, but in addition to those that depend on the placebo itself, the doctor-patient relationship would be the most important. As a result of findings that were published in the last two decades, the psycho-neurobiological basis of placebo is becoming better understood, although further studies are needed. In conclusion, the placebo effect in the clinic exhibits weak to moderate intensity. Placebo, in addition to its use in the clinical trial, should be considered another therapeutic remedy either as stand alone or in association with treatment, and could be useful in certain circumstances. The use of placebo should be regulated by the European health authorities through a guide in clinical practice that will improve patient care.

Even when you know it is a placebo, you experience less sadness: First evidence from an experimental open-label placebo investigation

BACKGROUND

Recent studies demonstrate substantial effects of deceptive placebo on experimentally induced sadness, even on autonomic activity. Whether deception is necessary, remains to be elucidated. We investigated the effect of an open-label placebo (OLP) treatment, i.e. an openly administered placebo delivered with a convincing rationale for its sadness-protecting effect.

METHODS

Eighty-four healthy females were randomized to an OLP group or a no-treatment control group. All participants received the same detailed information about the OLP effect, only the OLP group received an OLP nasal spray. Before and after the OLP intervention, participants underwent a sad mood induction procedure combining self-deprecating statements (Velten's method) and sad music. Sadness was assessed by the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS-X). Autonomic activity was measured continuously.

RESULTS

Participants in the OLP group reported a significantly attenuated increase in sadness upon mood induction and less sadness after induction compared to the control group (d = 0.79). Regardless of intervention, heart rate decreased during mood inductions with a more pronounced deceleration in the second mood induction.

LIMITATIONS

Generalizability is limited due to the selective sample and the reliance on an experimentally controlled mood induction.

CONCLUSION

OLP treatment had a beneficial effect on perceived sadness, at least at the subjective level. Hence, deception may not necessarily be required for placebos to modulate experienced sad mood. Investigating the beneficial effects of OLP in (sub-)clinical samples would seem a promising and required next step towards a clinical use of placebo-associated positive treatment expectations.

Placebo induced expectations of mood enhancement generate a positivity effect in emotional processing

A perceptual bias towards negative emotions is a consistent finding in mood disorders and a major target of therapeutic interventions. Placebo responses in antidepressant treatment are substantial, but it is unclear whether and how underlying expectancy effects can modulate response biases to emotional inputs. In a first attempt to approach this question, we investigated how placebo induced expectation can shape the perception of specific emotional stimuli in healthy individuals. In a controlled cross-over design, positive treatment expectations were induced by verbal instructions and a hidden training manipulation combined with an alleged oxytocin nasal spray before participants performed an emotion classification task on happy and fearful facial expressions with varying intensity. Analyses of response criterion and discrimination ability as derived from emotion-specific psychometric functions demonstrate that expectation specifically lowered participants’ threshold for identifying happy emotions in general, while they became less sensitive to subtle differences in emotional expressions. These indications of a positivity bias were directly correlated with participants’ treatment expectations as well as subjective experiences of treatment effects and went along with a significant mood enhancement. Our findings show that expectations can induce a perceptual positivity effect in healthy individuals which is probably modulated by top-down emotion regulation and which may be able to improve mood state. Clinical implications of these promising results now need to be explored in studies of expectation manipulation in patients with mood disorders.

Patients' experiences treated with open-label placebo versus double-blind placebo: a mixed methods qualitative study

Background

There is increasing evidence suggesting that open-label placebo (OLP) is an effective treatment for several medical conditions defined by self-report. However, little is known about patients’ experiences with OLP, and no studies have directly compared patients’ experiences in double-blind placebo (DBP) conditions.

Methods

This study was nested in a large randomized-controlled trial comparing the effects of OLP and DBP treatments in individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We randomly selected 33 participants for interviews concerning their experiences in the parent trial. The data were qualitatively analyzed using an iterative immersion/crystallization approach. We then compared the qualitative interview data to the quantitative IBS severity data assessed during the parent trial, using a mixed methods approach.

Results

Two prominent interview themes were identified: (1) the participants’ feelings about their treatment allocation and (2) their reflections about the treatment. Both OLP and DBP participants mentioned hope and curiosity as major feelings driving them to engage with their treatment. However, while DBP participants tended to be more enthusiastic about their allocation, OLP participants were more ambivalent. Furthermore, OLP participants reflected more on their treatment, often involving noticeable cognitive and emotional processes of self-reflection. They offered a variety of explanations for their symptom improvement and were significantly less likely to attribute it to the treatment itself than DBP participants (Χ² [3] = 8.28; p = .041). Similarly, the participants’ retrospective narratives of symptom improvement were significantly correlated with their corresponding quantitative IBS severity scores only in DBP (p’s ≤ .006) but not in OLP (p’s ≥ .637).

Conclusion

OLP and DBP participants share feelings of hope, uncertainty and curiosity but differ in the extent of conscious reflection. The counter-intuitive OLP prompts more self-examination, ambivalent feelings and active engagement compared to DBP. At the same time, OLP participants are more reluctant to attribute symptom improvement to their treatment. Our findings substantially add to the emerging picture of factors that distinguish OLP and DBP and their potential mechanisms.

Placebo nasal spray protects female participants from experimentally induced sadness and concomitant changes in autonomic arousal

BACKGROUND

To investigate the powerful placebo effects in antidepressant drug trials and their mechanisms, recent pioneering experimental studies showed that expectation manipulation combined with an active placebo attenuated induced sadness. In the present study, we aimed at extending these findings by assessing the psychophysiological response in addition to mere self-report.

METHODS

One hundred and thirteen healthy female students were randomly assigned to a drug expectation group (active placebo, positive treatment expectation), placebo expectation group (active placebo, no treatment expectation), or a no-treatment group (no placebo, no treatment expectation). After placebo intake, sadness was induced by self-deprecating statements using the Velten method combined with sad music, including a rumination phase. Sadness was measured using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Expanded Form (PANAS-X). Heart rate and skin conductance were assessed continuously.

RESULTS

After mood induction and after rumination, self-reported sadness was significantly lower, and skin conductance level was significantly higher, in the drug expectation group than in the no-treatment group. The mood induction was further accompanied by a heart rate deceleration within all groups.

LIMITATIONS

Generalizability is limited by sample selectivity and focusing on sadness as a symptom of depression, exclusively.

CONCLUSION

Expectation-induced placebo effects significantly influenced sadness-correlated changes in autonomic arousal, and not only subjectively reported sadness, indicating that placebo effects in the context of affect are not merely due to subjective response bias. The systematic modification of treatment expectation could be utilized in clinical practice to optimize current therapeutic approaches to improve mood regulation.

Open-Label Placebo Treatment for Acute Postoperative Pain (OLP-POP Study): Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Open-label placebos have been proposed as way of using long recognized analgesic placebo effects in an ethical manner. Recent evidence shows efficacy of open-label placebos for clinical conditions, but there is need for more research on open-label placebos in acute pain. In the treatment of acute postoperative pain, minimization of opioid related side effects remains one of the key challenges. Therefore, this study aims at investigating the potential of adding unconditioned open-label placebos to treatment as usual as a means of reducing opioid consumption and its related side effects in patients with acute postoperative pain. Methods and Analysis: This is the protocol of an ongoing single site randomized controlled trial. The first patient was enrolled in May 2020. In total, 70 patients suffering from acute postoperative pain following dorsal lumbar interbody fusion are randomized to either a treatment as usual group or an experimental intervention group. The treatment as usual group consists of participants receiving a patient-controlled morphine pump. On day 1 and 2 post-surgery, patients in the intervention group receive, in addition to treatment as usual, two open-label placebo injections per day along with an evidence-based treatment rationale explaining the mechanisms of placebos. The primary outcome is measured by means of self-administered morphine during day 1 and 2 post-surgery. Several other outcome measures including pain intensity and adverse events as well as potential predictors of placebo response are assessed. Analysis of covariance will be used to answer the primary research question and additional statistical techniques such as generalized linear mixed models will be applied to model the temporal course of morphine consumption. Discussion: This study will provide valuable insights into the efficacy of open-label placebos in acute pain and will potentially constitute an important step toward the implementation of open-label placebos in the clinical management of acute postoperative pain. In addition, it will shed light on a cost-efficient and patient-centered strategy to reduce opioid consumption and its related side effects, without any loss in pain management efficacy. Ethics and Dissemination: The "Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz" (BASEC2020-00099) approved the study protocol. Results of the analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Clinical Trial Registration: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04339023) and is listed in the Swiss national registry at kofam.ch (SNCTP000003720).