Nocebo phenomena may be enhanced in aging: Implications for clinical practice

Nocebo-associated treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs. A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-arm dropouts in randomized-controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Nocebo is a concept of therapeutics referring to unpleasant symptoms attributed by a patient to a drug, due to negative anticipation. Patients receiving oral anti-osteoporotic drugs in randomized controlled trials (RCT) can experience adverse events leading to dropout, implying that nocebo contributes to treatment discontinuation for these drugs. In this study we aim to investigate the nocebo effect of subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs with a higher compliance rate than orally administered drugs.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases for double-blind trials investigating subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs for osteoporosis (namely, denosumab, teriparatide, abaloparatide and romosozumab) published up to May 2023.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Dropouts due to reported adverse events in the placebo arms ("nocebo dropouts").

RESULTS

Data from 17 trials were extracted. Among 10,529 placebo-treated patients the pooled nocebo-dropout percentage was 3 % for denosumab (average: 0.03; 95 % CI: 0.01-0.05), 1 % for romosozumab (average: 0.01; 95 % CI: 0.00-0.03) and 6 % for teriparatide and abaloparatide (average: 0.06; 95 % CI: 0.05-0.07). Nocebo-dropouts were significantly higher in men than women (6 % vs. 3 %, respectively, p = 0.012), in older (mean age >68 years) than in younger patients (5 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.017) and in those with more severe osteoporosis (based on the percentage of participants with prior fragility-related fractures in the study cohort) compared with patients with no prior fracture history (4 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

Nocebo responses may contribute to treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs in clinical practice. Higher nocebo-related dropout rates in the higher-risk RCT population (older patients, males, those with prior fractures) show that nocebo mechanisms have the potential to hinder therapeutic efforts to specific populations who would benefit most. Prospero registration number CRD42020212843.

The influence of video-based social modelling on the nocebo effect

OBJECTIVE

Seeing someone else experience side effects (i.e., social modelling) can increase negative expectations and subsequent nocebo effects. In face-to-face contexts, this effect appears stronger in female participants. Less is known about the influence of gender on negative expectations and nocebo effects generated via video-based social modelling.

METHODS

One hundred and seven undergraduate participants recruited from a participant pool at an Australian university took part in a study ostensibly investigating the influence of beta-blocker medications (actually a sham treatment) on physiological and psychological aspects of anxiety. Participants were randomly assigned to either a no-treatment control group, a standard treatment group, or a video modelling group, in which participants viewed video-recorded confederates (one male, one female) report experiencing four side effects (two each) after taking the study treatment. Symptoms were assessed 15-min following pill ingestion, and at follow-up 24 h later.

RESULTS

Video modelling of side effects, compared to standard treatment, interacted with gender and was associated with increased reporting of modelled symptoms in female compared to male participants, p = .01, η_p²=0.06. Video modelling also increased negative expectations in female compared to male participants, p = .03, η_p²=0.07, and expectations mediated the influence of modelling on modelled symptoms in female participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Social modelling of side effects via video increased negative expectations, and nocebo symptoms, to a greater extent in female participants. These findings suggest that males and females are differentially impacted by video-based side effect modelling. Results have implications for social modelling of side effects via social media and patient-support websites.

The Effects of Expectations and Worries on the Experience of COVID-19 Symptoms

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has been shown to have profound effects on both mental and physical health. Distress and widespread uncertainty about global events and personal risk are associated with increased worry and negative expectations that impact physical health. Thus, the current pandemic poses a possibility for the experience of nocebo effects.

Objective

To evaluate the likelihood of nocebo-induced COVID-19 symptoms in a US sample.

Methods

An online study on the mental health impact of COVID-19 asked participants to complete a set of biweekly surveys over a 6-month period between April 2020 and May 2021. We focus on responses from 3,027 individuals who reported never testing positive for COVID-19. We assessed the association between two types of worry and self-reported symptoms of COVID-19. We used multi-level models to examine variations across and within participants over time. We further investigated the effects of pre-existing health conditions and mental health status.

Results

There was a positive association between symptoms and both general (b= 2.56, p<0.01) and personal worry (b=2.77, p<0.01). However, worry reported at one timepoint was not specifically associated with symptoms reported two weeks later (p = 0.63, p=0.56). We also found that a greater number of prior clinical comorbidities and greater mental health burden were significant predictors of symptom reporting.

Conclusions

These results suggest that increased worries during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with greater symptoms. Further studies investigating worry and symptoms in populations with confirmed negative COVID-19 tests or isolated populations will be needed to isolate the occurrence of true nocebo effects during the pandemic.

Impact of media coverage on side effect reports from the COVID-19 vaccine

OBJECTIVE

Past research shows that media coverage of medicine side effects can produce a nocebo response. New Zealand news media discussed myocarditis following the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. This study examined whether side effects mentioned in the media increased compared to control symptoms not mentioned.

METHODS

The study analysed 64,086 vaccine adverse reaction reports, retrieved from the medicine safety authority. Generalised linear regressions compared the side effect rate during three discrete periods of media reporting (August 2021, December 2021, April 2022) with the pre-media baseline rate. The outcomes were weekly reports of chest discomfort, monthly reports of chest, heart and breathing symptoms, and myocarditis, pericarditis, and anxiety. Control symptoms were fever, numbness, and musculoskeletal pain. Logistic regressions investigated factors associated with side effect reporting.

RESULTS

The reporting rate of chest discomfort was 190% greater in the five weeks after the first media item (p < .001). The monthly reporting rates of the symptoms mentioned in the media were significantly greater after the news coverage (ps ≤ 0.001). There was no effect of media on the control side effect fever (p = .06). There was an effect of media on myocarditis, pericarditis and anxiety (ps < 0.001). Anxiety, male gender, and younger age were significantly associated with side effects.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that a media-induced nocebo response occurred. This is most likely due to increased expectations and awareness of COVID-19 vaccine side effects, elevated symptom experience from anxiety, and consequently greater reporting of the symptoms in line with the media coverage.

Young female participants show blunted placebo effects associated with blunted responses to a cue predicting a safe stimulus in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex

Discrimination of cues predicting non-nociceptive/nociceptive stimuli is essential for predicting whether a non-painful or painful stimulus will be administered and for eliciting placebo/nocebo (pain reduction/pain enhancement) effects. Dysfunction of the neural system involved in placebo effects has been implicated in the pathology of chronic pain, while female sex is one of the important risk factors for development of chronic pain in young adults. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dl-PFC) is suggested to be involved in placebo effects and is sensitive to sex and age. In this study, to examine the neural mechanisms by which sex and age alter placebo and nocebo effects, we analyzed cerebral hemodynamic activities in the dl-PFC in different sex and age groups during a differential conditioning task. During the training session, two different sounds were followed by low- and high-intensity electrical shocks. In the following recording session, electrical shocks, the intensity of which was mismatched to the sounds, were occasionally administered to elicit placebo and nocebo effects. In young female participants, both placebo effects and hemodynamic responses to the conditioned sounds in the right dl-PFC were significantly lower than those in elderly female participants, while there were no age differences in male participants. The hemodynamic responses to the sound paired with the safe stimulus in the right dl-PFC were significantly correlated with placebo effects, except in the young female group. These results suggest that blunted placebo effects in the young female participants are ascribed to blunted responses to the sound associated with the safe stimulus in the right dl-PFC, and that sex- and age-related factors may alter the responsiveness of the right dl-PFC to associative cues predicting a safe stimulus.

Factors Associated with Non-Severe Adverse Reactions after Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: A Cohort Study of 908,869 Outpatient Vaccinations in Germany

BACKGROUND

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 significantly reduces the transmissibility of the virus and the likelihood of a severe course of COVID-19, and is thus a critical component in overcoming the current pandemic. The factors associated with adverse reactions after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 have not yet been sufficiently evaluated.

METHODS

We used the Disease Analyzer database (IQVIA) to identify 531,468 individuals who received a total of 908,869 SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in 827 general practices in Germany between April and September 2021. Cox regression models were used to analyze the frequency of vaccination-related side effects reported within 14 days after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, as well as subjects' demographic characteristics and comorbidities.

RESULTS

The total number of side effects documented was 28,287 (3.1% of all vaccinations). Pain in the limb (24.3%), fatigue (21.0%), dizziness (17.9%), joint pain (15.7%), fever (9.5%), nausea (7.5%), and myalgia (6.4%) were the most common side effects documented among the 12,575 vaccinations with definite side effects. In the multivariate regression analysis, young age was associated with much higher odds of reported side effects (OR18-30 years: 4.45, OR31-40 years: 3.50, OR41-50 years: 2.89). In addition, pre-existing comorbidities such as dementia (OR: 1.54), somatoform disorder (OR: 1.53), anxiety disorder (OR: 1.43), depression (OR: 1.37), chronic respiratory tract disease (OR: 1.27), hypertension (OR: 1.20), and obesity (1.14) significantly increased the odds of side effects. Finally, the male sex was associated with increased odds of reported side effects (OR: 1.17).

CONCLUSION

Our study, based on a large outpatient database from Germany, identified young age, male sex, and pre-existing comorbidities such as dementia, somatoform disorders, anxiety disorders, and depression as factors associated with vaccine-related adverse events diagnosed in GP practices. These data could help to identify subgroups needing particular advice and care in the context of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations.

Unraveling Negative Expectations and Nocebo-Related Effects in Musculoskeletal Pain

This Perspective adapts the ViolEx Model, a framework validated in several clinical conditions, to better understand the role of expectations in the recovery and/or maintenance of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. Here, particular attention is given to the condition in which dysfunctional expectations are maintained despite no longer being supported by confirmatory evidence (i.e., belief-lifting the arm leads to permanent tendon damage; evidence-after the patient lifts the arm no tendon damage occurs). While the ViolEx Model suggests that cognitive immunization strategies are responsible for the maintenance of dysfunctional expectations, we suggest that such phenomenon can also be understood from a Bayesian Brain perspective, according to which the level of precision of the priors (i.e., expectations) is the determinant factor accounting for the extent of priors' updating (i.e., we merge the two frameworks, suggesting that highly precise prior can lead to cognitive immunization responses). Importantly, this Perspective translates the theory behind these two frameworks into clinical suggestions. Precisely, it is argued that different strategies should be implemented when treating MSK pain patients, depending on the nature of their expectations (i.e., positive or negative and the level of their precision).

How do nocebo effects in placebo groups of randomized controlled trials provide a possible explicative framework for the COVID-19 pandemic?

Introduction: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are useful to study the role of individual and contextual factors in which therapies vs placebos are administered and to provide an important perspective for understanding the phenomenon of nocebo-related risks.Areas covered: The results of nocebo effects in RCT placebo groups, measured in terms of adverse events (AEs) and dropouts, will be presented as an explicative framework for the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are the only RCTs routinely conducted during the pandemic. Information about efficacy and safety of different vaccines represents a fertile ground for nocebo phenomena. Individual and contextual factors will be emphasized in order to understand the presence of a refusal of immunization associated with a specific vaccine considered less effective and safe. Critical aspects and some guidelines will be presented in order to counteract the nocebo effects and to improve adherence to drug treatments and the vaccination campaign.Expert opinion: The nocebo effect could explain the presence of strong resistance in European countries to immunization with a vaccine perceived as less effective, compared to others. Increased awareness of the nocebo effect would be relevant as it could lead to a greater participation in the vaccination campaign and in protecting individuals against SARS-CoV-2 infection.