Meta-analysis of placebo responses in central neuropathic pain: impact of subject, study, and pain characteristics

Placebos in Healthcare: A Behavioral Study on How Treatment Responsiveness Affects Therapy Decisions in a Simulated Patient-Physician Interaction

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Treatment choice during clinical practice is crucial to best help each patient. One of the physicians' main goals is choosing a personalized effective treatment, but it also represents a challenging issue. Here, we explored different treatment choices in a simulated patient-physician interaction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical students (n = 48) and young Practicing Physicians (n = 20) were recruited to behave as "physicians" while fellow researchers acted as "patients". Participants were divided equally into a Belief Group, which received positive information about placebo efficacy, and a Non-Belief Group, which received negative information. Empathy traits and psychological variables were measured in both groups. During the task, participants were asked to choose between an active (TENS treatment) or a placebo treatment, to reduce patients' pain. Patients never underwent the painful stimulation but acted as if they had, simulating high or low pain responses to the placebo treatment (placebo-responders/placebo non-responders) and low pain to the TENS treatment.

RESULTS

Behavioral results showed that the Belief Group gave significantly more placebo treatments when faced with a patient that simulated placebo responsiveness, while the Non-Belief group showed a mirrorlike behavior, administrating more believed TENS treatments when faced with a placebo non-responder. No differences were found between Medical Students and Practicing Physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

This study constitutes a frame of reference for medical treatment decisions, indicating that physicians' treatment choices are influenced by patients' responsiveness to the treatments, as well as by their prior beliefs and empathy traits.

Learning pain in context: Response-conditioned placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia in male rats with chronic neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Animal models of placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia have great potential to assist in the development of novel treatments for chronic pain that exploit or inhibit these phenomena. This study sought to elicit both conditioned placebo analgesia and conditioned nocebo hyperalgesia in rats with chronic neuropathic pain using non-pharmacological, contextual conditioning approaches, similar to those most often used in humans.

METHODS

Sciatic nerve-injured male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 80), and sham controls (n = 16), underwent a conditioning procedure in which three different thermal stimulus intensities (4 °C, 20 °C or 30 °C) were paired with contextual cues. Injured hind paw withdrawal behaviours were used to determine pain sensitivity, and either conditioned analgesia or conditioned hyperalgesia was evoked by re-exposing the rats to the same context with either an increased or decreased thermal stimulus, respectively.

RESULTS

Stronger conditioned analgesia and conditioned hyperalgesia were seen when rats were conditioned in a more complex environment, highlighting the importance of context in these processes. Rats that did not undergo conditioning procedures showed fewer hind paw withdrawals, indicating a learned component to these pain behaviours.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data call attention to context and learning as two critical factors in the development of placebo and nocebo effects in male rodents with a neuropathic injury. Additionally, the response-conditioning model we present in this study affords better comparisons between human and animal studies, in particular for those seeking to identify commonalities in the neurobiological mechanisms of placebo and nocebo responses.

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.

Psycho-Neuro-Endocrine-Immunological Basis of the Placebo Effect: Potential Applications beyond Pain Therapy

The placebo effect can be defined as the improvement of symptoms in a patient after the administration of an innocuous substance in a context that induces expectations regarding its effects. During recent years, it has been discovered that the placebo response not only has neurobiological functions on analgesia, but that it is also capable of generating effects on the immune and endocrine systems. The possible integration of changes in different systems of the organism could favor the well-being of the individuals and go hand in hand with conventional treatment for multiple diseases. In this sense, classic conditioning and setting expectations stand out as psychological mechanisms implicated in the placebo effect. Recent advances in neuroimaging studies suggest a relationship between the placebo response and the opioid, cannabinoid, and monoaminergic systems. Likewise, a possible immune response conditioned by the placebo effect has been reported. There is evidence of immune suppression conditioned through the insular cortex and the amygdala, with noradrenalin as the responsible neurotransmitter. Finally, a conditioned response in the secretion of different hormones has been determined in different studies; however, the molecular mechanisms involved are not entirely known. Beyond studies about its mechanism of action, the placebo effect has proved to be useful in the clinical setting with promising results in the management of neurological, psychiatric, and immunologic disorders. However, more research is needed to better characterize its potential use. This review integrates current knowledge about the psycho-neuro-endocrine-immune basis of the placebo effect and its possible clinical applications.

Evidence Mapping Based on Systematic Reviews of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on the Motor Cortex for Neuropathic Pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is vast published literature proposing repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) technology on the motor cortex (M1) for the treatment of neuropathic pain (NP). Systematic reviews (SRs) focus on a specific problem and do not provide a comprehensive overview of a research area. This study aimed to summarize and analyze the evidence of rTMS on the M1 for NP treatment through a new synthesis method called evidence mapping.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and The Cochrane Library to identify the studies that summarized the effectiveness of rTMS for NP. The study type was restricted to SRs with or without meta-analysis. All literature published before January 23, 2021, was included. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted the data. The methodological quality of the included SRs was assessed by using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2). Data were extracted following a defined population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework from primary studies that included SRs. The same PICO was categorized into PICOs according to interventions [frequency, number of sessions (short: 1-5 sessions, medium: 5-10 sessions, and long: >10 sessions)] and compared. The evidence map was presented in tables and a bubble plot.

RESULTS

A total of 38 SRs met the eligibility criteria. After duplicate primary studies were removed, these reviews included 70 primary studies that met the scope of evidence mapping. According to the AMSTAR-2 assessment, the quality of the included SRs was critically low. Of these studies, 34 SRs scored "critically low" in terms of methodological quality, 2 SR scored "low," 1 SR scored "moderate," and 1 SR scored "high."

CONCLUSION

Evidence mapping is a useful methodology to provide a comprehensive and reliable overview of studies on rTMS for NP. Evidence mapping also shows that further investigations are necessary to highlight the optimal stimulation protocols and standardize all parameters to fill the evidence gaps of rTMS. Given that the methodological quality of most included SRs was "critically low," further investigations are advised to improve the methodological quality and the reporting process of SRs.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain on the Non-Motor Cortex: An Evidence Mapping of Systematic Reviews

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed to summarize and analyze the quality of the available evidence in systematic reviews (SRs) of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the non-motor cortex (non-M1) for neuropathic pain (NP) through an evidence mapping approach.

METHODS

We follow the Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) methodology. Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Library. The study type was restricted to SRs with or without meta-analysis. All literature published before January 23, 2021, were included. The methodological quality of the included SRs was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2). Data were extracted according to a defined population-intervention-comparison-outcome (PICO) framework from primary studies that included SRs. The same PICO was categorized into PICOs according to interventions (stimulation target, frequency, number of sessions (short: 1-5 sessions, medium: 5-10 sessions, and long: >10 sessions)) and comparison (sham rTMS or other targets). The evidence mapping was presented in tables and a bubble plot.

RESULTS

A total of 23 SRs were included. According to the AMSTAR-2, 20 SRs scored "very low" in terms of methodological quality, 2 SRs scored "low," and 1 SR scored "high." A total of 17 PICOs were extracted. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is the most studied of the non-motor cortex targets. PICOs of DLPFC, premotor cortex (PMC), frontal cortex, and secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) were mainly categorized with a "potentially better" conclusion. High-frequency (5-20 Hz) rTMS of non-M1 usually lead to "potentially better" conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

DLPFC, PMC, frontal cortex, and S2 seem to be promising new targets for rTMS treatment of certain NP. Evidence mapping is a useful and reliable methodology to identify and present the existing evidence gap that more research efforts are necessary in order to highlight the optimal stimulation protocols for non-M1 targets and standardize parameters to fill the evidence gaps of rTMS. Further investigation is advised to improve the methodological quality and the reporting process of SRs.

Meta-analysis comparing placebo responses in clinical trials of painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy and diabetic polyneuropathy

Background and aims The placebo response has been identified as one factor responsible for the lack of therapeutic trials with positive outcomes in neuropathic pain. Reviews have suggested that certain neuropathic pain conditions, including HIV-associated sensory neuropathy (HIV-SN), exhibit a greater placebo response than other neuropathic aetiologies. If true, such a finding could substantially affect clinical trial design and therapeutic developments for these conditions. This study aimed to identify any difference in placebo response between trials of systemic pharmacological intervention in HIV-SN and a comparable neuropathic condition, diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and to identify factors influencing the placebo response. Methods A systematic review search to identify randomised, double-blind studies of systemic pharmacological interventions for painful HIV-SN and DPN published between January 1966 and June 2019 was performed. A meta-analysis of the magnitude of placebo response and the proportion of placebo responders was conducted and compared between the two disease conditions. A meta-regression was used to assess for any study and participant characteristics that were associated with the placebo response. Only studies meeting a methodological quality threshold were included. Results Seventy-five trials were identified. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of placebo responders (HIV-SN = 0.35; versus DPN = 0.27, p = 0.129). The difference observed in the magnitude of the placebo response [pain reduction of 1.68 (1.47-1.88) DPN; 2.38 (1.87-2.98) in HIV-SN] was based on only 2 trials of HIV-SN and 35 of DPN. Potential factors influencing the placebo response such as psychological measures, were reported inconsistently. Conclusions We found no statistically significant difference in the placebo response rate between painful HIV-SN and DPN. Too few studies were available that reported the necessary information to clarify potential differences in the magnitude of placebo response or to elucidate parameters that could be contributing such differences. Implications The placebo response is one factor that may contribute to a lack of positive trials in neuropathic pain; some etiologies may display larger responses than others. This meta-analysis found no significant difference in placebo response between trials of HIV-associated sensory neuropathy and painful diabetic polyneuropathy, although limited data were available.

Placebo effect of rTMS on post-stroke motor rehabilitation: a meta-analysis

Previous studies have shown that placebo repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was effective on post-stroke motor rehabilitation. However, the placebo effect has not been systematically assessed. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to resolve this issue and explore potential influencing factors further. PubMed, Embase, web of science and the Cochrane Library were searched for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with placebo rTMS treatment of stroke recovery until May 2019. The placebo effect size (Hedges' g) was estimated using the motor outcome of pre- and post- placebo rTMS treatment. Meta-regression analysis was also performed to explore potential influencing factors for the placebo effect. Twenty-six placebo-controlled trials (including 381 patients in placebo group) were selected. Effect size results (Hedges' g = 0.466, 95% CI 0.207-0.726; P < 0.05) showed a medium and significant placebo rTMS effect on improving post-stroke motor recovery. The mean ratio of the effect size of sham to real stimulation was 56%. Meta-regression analysis did not find significant result except for the treatment sessions, which was significantly correlated with the placebo effect size (r = 0.465, p = 0.031). In the follow-up observations (1, 2 and 3 months), the sham rTMS groups manifested gradually increased motor improvement, which was similar to the real group, but the amplitude was lower, which was sustained for at least 3 months. Placebo effect of rTMS on post-stroke motor recovery was medium but significant. Regarding different sham styles, the number of stimulation sessions had an impact on the effect.

Oral appliances in the management of neuropathic orofacial pain: A retrospective case series

OBJECTIVE

Neuropathic orofacial pain disorders are frequently managed with topical or systemic medications that carry a risk of dangerous side effects such as drowsiness, disorientation, and/or physical addiction. The aim of this paper is to report the use of neurosensory oral appliances as a safe means of providing symptomatic relief for neuropathic orofacial pain.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective chart review of patients with diagnoses of persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP), painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN), or an oral dysesthesia, who utilized neurosensory appliances with or without the use of topical anesthetic gel.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were identified. Eight patients (62.5%) found benefit with the neurosensory appliance alone, and three patients (37.5%) found relief with the addition of lidocaine 2% gel. All patients reported >50% resolution of their symptoms, with three (37.5%) reporting complete resolution. Seven patients maintained follow-up ≥3 months, with efficacy lasting for a range of at least 3-8 months.

CONCLUSION

Oral neurosensory appliances, whether used alone as a physical barrier or as a vehicle to deliver topical anesthetic, represent a safe and effective modality for the management of neuropathic orofacial pain disorders. Additional studies are needed to assess long-term efficacy.

Placebos in chronic pain: evidence, theory, ethics, and use in clinical practice

Despite their ubiquitous presence, placebos and placebo effects retain an ambiguous and unsettling presence in biomedicine. Specifically focused on chronic pain, this review examines the effect of placebo treatment under three distinct frameworks: double blind, deception, and open label honestly prescribed. These specific conditions do not necessarily differentially modify placebo outcomes. Psychological, clinical, and neurological theories of placebo effects are scrutinized. In chronic pain, conscious expectation does not reliably predict placebo effects. A supportive patient-physician relationship may enhance placebo effects. This review highlights "predictive coding" and "bayesian brain" as emerging models derived from computational neurobiology that offer a unified framework to explain the heterogeneous evidence on placebos. These models invert the dogma of the brain as a stimulus driven organ to one in which perception relies heavily on learnt, top down, cortical predictions to infer the source of incoming sensory data. In predictive coding/bayesian brain, both chronic pain (significantly modulated by central sensitization) and its alleviation with placebo treatment are explicated as centrally encoded, mostly non-conscious, bayesian biases. The review then evaluates seven ways in which placebos are used in clinical practice and research and their bioethical implications. In this way, it shows that placebo effects are evidence based, clinically relevant, and potentially ethical tools for relieving chronic pain.

Pain Response to Open Label Placebo in Induced Acute Pain in Healthy Adult Males

Background

Open label placebos with patient education are effective in reducing chronic pain, and recent studies on their effect on pain have established interest in this field. Nevertheless, data on their effect on acute pain are scarce, and on hyperalgesia and allodynia, absent. This study assessed the effect of open label placebos on acute pain in healthy adult males and the influence of placebo education.

Methods

Thirty-two healthy males were included in this prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded crossover, single-center study assessing pain intensities (via numeric rating scale), area of hyperalgesia (von Frey filament), and allodynia (dry cotton swab) in a pain model utilizing intracutaneous electrical stimulation. The authors compared the effect of intravenous open label placebo on pain compared to no treatment. The authors further examined the effect of placebo on hyperalgesia and allodynia, and the influence of education (short vs. detailed) before placebo application. Saliva cortisol concentrations were also measured.

Results

Pain ratings (median, first to third quartile) were 21% lower during placebo treatment compared to no treatment, 4.0 (3.2 to 4.9) versus 5.1 (4.7 to 5.4), respectively (P = 0.001). The areas of hyperalgesia and allodynia were lower during placebo treatment compared to no treatment (hyperalgesia, 30 cm2 [17 to 47] vs. 55 cm2 [42 to 68], P = 0.003; allodynia, 24 cm2 [11 to 39] vs. 45 cm2 [31 to 62], P = 0.007). This corresponds to reductions of 47%. The extent of placebo education had no effect on pain. Saliva cortisol decreased significantly over time and was under the limit of detectability in the majority of participants in postbaseline measurements in both treatment branches. Baseline cortisol was not associated with the placebo effect or strength applied of current to reach defined pain ratings.

Conclusions

Open label placebos might play a role in multimodal analgesic concepts.

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Factors Influencing Placebo Responses in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

A better understanding of placebo responses and the specific factors influencing these outcomes is important for clinical trial design. We investigated the magnitude of placebo responses at 3 months and the potential factors influencing these outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials of pharmacological agents for RA identified from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. The primary placebo outcome was American College of Rheumatology 20% response rate (ACR20). Data were pooled with a random-effects model. Factors influencing placebo response were assessed by meta-regression analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies conducted in non-Western countries only versus in Western countries (North America and/or Europe) only or both.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 88 studies comprising 8406 patients receiving a placebo. The pooled estimate of placebo ACR20 was 29.0% (range 10.0-46.2; 95% confidence interval 27.2-30.9). Placebo ACR20 was negatively associated with trials in non-Western (Asian) countries and patient populations showing an inadequate response to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the multivariable analysis, whereas it was positively associated with the year of publication. No background DMARD treatment was also a negative predictor (albeit statistically non-significant). In subgroup analyses of Western and multiregional studies, study population and publication year were significant factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests that study location, patient population, and a background DMARD treatment influence placebo ACR20. These along with placebo response temporal profiles have important implications for designing and interpreting RA clinical trials.

[Use of placebo in French hospitals: data from polyvalent medicine units]

A placebo drug is defined as a treatment without any specific pharmacological efficacy, that works when the patient thinks to receive an active treatment, through a psychological and physiological mechanism. This study aimed to evaluate the use of placebo in French hospitals, in Polyvalent Medicine units. A questionnaire comprising 15 items was sent to 372 units. The analysis of 153 responses was conducted from dynamic crosstabs in Excel and using the R software available online. The survey confirmed that the use of placebos in hospital is frequent, with nearly 2/3 of professionals answering the questionnaire declared to use it. The oral capsule is the most commonly used form. Placebo is mainly administered at night, in case of pain, insomnia or anxiety, to so-called "difficult" patients. Placebo is not always given after medical prescription. In most cases, patients are not informed that they receive a placebo. The majority of professionals believed in the placebo effect but considered to be insufficiently informed and trained in the use of placebo in current practice. Although the placebo effect is now demonstrated, ethical and legal considerations recommend placebo treatment only on medical prescription, with the prior information of the patient. The placebo could be used as complementary therapy to conventional treatment in the cases of this therapeutic effectiveness has been demonstrated. Professionals should be trained in the use of placebo in order to avoid nocebo effect and potentiate beneficial effects of placebo.

EEG Correlates of Self-Managed Neurofeedback Treatment of Central Neuropathic Pain in Chronic Spinal Cord Injury

BACKGROUND

Neurofeedback (NFB) is a neuromodulatory technique that enables voluntary modulation of brain activity in order to treat neurological condition, such as central neuropathic pain (CNP). A distinctive feature of this technique is that it actively involves participants in the therapy. In this feasibility study, we present results of participant self-managed NFB treatment of CNP.

METHODS

Fifteen chronic spinal cord injured (SCI) participants (13M, 2F), with chronic CNP equal or greater than 4 on the Visual Numeric Scale, took part in the study. After initial training in hospital (up to 4 sessions), they practiced NF at home, on average 2-3 times a week, over a period of several weeks (min 4, max 20). The NFB protocol consisted of upregulating the alpha (9-12 Hz) and downregulating the theta (4-8 Hz) and the higher beta band (20-30 Hz) power from electrode location C4, for 30 min. The output measures were pain before and after NFB, EEG before and during NFB and pain questionnaires. We analyzed EEG results and show NFB strategies based on the Power Spectrum Density of each single participant.

RESULTS

Twelve participants achieved statistically significant reduction in pain and in eight participants this reduction was clinically significant (larger than 30%). The most successfully regulated frequency band during NFB was alpha. However, most participants upregulated their individual alpha band, that had an average dominant frequency at αp = 7.6 ± 0.8 Hz (median 8 Hz) that is lower than the average of the general population, which is around 10 Hz. Ten out of fifteen participants significantly upregulated their individual alpha power (αp ± 2 Hz) as compared to 4 participants who upregulated the power in the fixed alpha band (8-12 Hz). Eight out of the twelve participants who achieved a significant reduction of pain, significantly upregulated their individual alpha band power. There was a significantly larger increase in alpha power (p < 0.0001) and decrease of theta power (p < 0.04) in participant specific rather than in fixed frequency bands.

CONCLUSION

Neurofeedback is a neuromodulatory technique that gives participants control over their pain and can be self-administered at home. Regulation of individual frequency band was related to a significant reduction in pain.

Unique aspects of clinical trials of invasive therapies for chronic pain

Nearly all who review the literature conclude that the role of invasive procedures to treat chronic pain is poorly characterized because of the lack of “definitive” studies. The overt nature of invasive treatments, along with the risks, technical skills, and costs involved create challenges to study them. However, these challenges do not completely preclude evaluating invasive procedure effectiveness and safety using well-designed methods. This article reviews the challenges of studying outcomes of invasive therapies to treat pain and discuss possible solutions. Although the following discussion can apply to most invasive therapies to treat chronic pain, it is beyond the scope of the article to individually cover every invasive therapy used. Therefore, most of the examples focus on injection therapies to treat spine pain, spinal cord stimulation, and intrathecal drug therapies.

Is the rationale more important than deception? A randomized controlled trial of open-label placebo analgesia

Research on open-label placebos questions whether deception is a necessary characteristic of placebo effects. Yet, comparisons between open-label and deceptive placebos (DPs) are lacking. We therefore assessed effects of open-label placebos and DPs in comparison with no treatment (NT) with a standardized experimental heat pain paradigm in a randomized controlled trial in healthy participants. Participants (N = 160) were randomly assigned to NT, open-label placebo without rationale (OPR-), open-label placebo with rationale (OPR), and DP. We conducted baseline and posttreatment measurements of heat pain threshold and tolerance. Apart from the NT, all groups received an application of a placebo cream. Primary outcomes were planned comparisons of heat pain tolerance and the corresponding intensity and unpleasantness ratings. Objective posttreatment pain tolerance did not differ among groups. However, for subjective heat pain ratings at the posttreatment tolerance level, groups with a rationale (OPR and DP) reported diminished heat pain intensity (t(146) = -2.15, P = 0.033, d = 0.43) and unpleasantness ratings (t(146) = -2.43, P = 0.016, d = 0.49) compared with the OPR-group. Interestingly, the OPR and the DP groups did not significantly differ in heat pain intensity (t(146) = -1.10, P = 0.272) or unpleasantness ratings (t(146) = -0.05, P = 0.961) at the posttreatment tolerance level. Our findings reveal that placebos with a plausible rationale are more effective than without a rationale. Even more, open-label placebos did not significantly differ in their effects from DPs. Therefore, we question the ubiquitously assumed necessity of concealment in placebo administration.

What Is the Role of the Placebo Effect for Pain Relief in Neurorehabilitation? Clinical Implications From the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation

Background

It is increasingly acknowledged that the outcomes of medical treatments are influenced by the context of the clinical encounter through the mechanisms of the placebo effect. The phenomenon of placebo analgesia might be exploited to maximize the efficacy of neurorehabilitation treatments. Since its intensity varies across neurological disorders, the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation (ICCP) summarized the studies on this field to provide guidance on its use.

Methods

A review of the existing reviews and meta-analyses was performed to assess the magnitude of the placebo effect in disorders that may undergo neurorehabilitation treatment. The search was performed on Pubmed using placebo, pain, and the names of neurological disorders as keywords. Methodological quality was assessed using a pre-existing checklist. Data about the magnitude of the placebo effect were extracted from the included reviews and were commented in a narrative form.

Results

11 articles were included in this review. Placebo treatments showed weak effects in central neuropathic pain (pain reduction from 0.44 to 0.66 on a 0-10 scale) and moderate effects in postherpetic neuralgia (1.16), in diabetic peripheral neuropathy (1.45), and in pain associated to HIV (1.82). Moderate effects were also found on pain due to fibromyalgia and migraine; only weak short-term effects were found in complex regional pain syndrome. Confounding variables might have influenced these results.

Clinical implications

These estimates should be interpreted with caution, but underscore that the placebo effect can be exploited in neurorehabilitation programs. It is not necessary to conceal its use from the patient. Knowledge of placebo mechanisms can be used to shape the doctor-patient relationship, to reduce the use of analgesic drugs and to train the patient to become an active agent of the therapy.

Placebo response in neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: a meta-analysis of individual participant data

Background

Understanding factors associated with high placebo responses in clinical trials increases the likelihood of detecting a meaningful treatment effect. The aim of the present study was to identify subject-level factors that contribute to placebo variability in patients with neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury (SCI).

Methods

Multiple regression analysis of patient data from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (duration >4 weeks) involving individuals with SCI was performed. Patient demographics, as well as injury and pain characteristics were examined for their association with changes in pain rating from baseline to the end of the trial (i.e., placebo response). The overall effect of individual predictors was quantified with meta-analysis statistics.

Results

A total of 276 patients with SCI from six studies were included in the analysis. Based on the meta-analysis of subject-level predictors, larger placebo responses were associated with male subjects (β=0.635; standard error [SE]=0.262; p=0.016) and higher baseline pain (β=−0.146; SE=0.073; p=0.044). There were no significant effects for injury characteristics (i.e., severity, level, and time since injury) or pain characteristics (i.e., location and evoked). No significant publication bias was detected.

Conclusion

The current meta-analysis of individual patient data demonstrated the importance of sex and baseline pain intensity on changes in pain ratings in the placebo arm of SCI central neuropathic pain randomized controlled clinical trials. Overall, our findings indicate that placebo responses occur independent of injury characteristics.

Dronabinol Is a Safe Long-Term Treatment Option for Neuropathic Pain Patients

Treatment of neuropathic pain (NP) symptoms associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) is frequently insufficient. Yet, cannabis is still rarely offered for treatment of pain. This clinical trial aimed at showing the positive benefit-risk ratio of dronabinol. Two hundred forty MS patients with central NP entered a 16-weeks placebo-controlled phase-III study followed by a 32-weeks open-label period. One hundred patients continued therapy for overall up to 119 weeks. Primary endpoint was change of pain intensity on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale over a 16-weeks treatment period. Safety was assessed on the basis of adverse reactions (ARs), signs of dependency and abuse. Pain intensity during 16-weeks dronabinol and placebo treatment was reduced by 1.92 and 1.81 points without significant difference in between (p = 0.676). Although the proportion of patients with ARs was higher under dronabinol compared to placebo (50.0 vs. 25.9%), it decreased during long-term use of dronabinol (26%). No signs of drug abuse and only one possible case of dependency occurred. The trial results demonstrate that dronabinol is a safe long-term treatment option.

Ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve stimulation for neuropathic pain after brachial plexus injury: two case reports

Brachial plexus injury (BPI) often causes severe neuropathic pain that becomes chronic and difficult to treat pharmacologically or surgically. Here, we describe two cases of successful treatment of BPI with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). Both patients had experienced severe neuropathic pain after incomplete BPI for a long time (32 and 17 years) and did not response to medication, radiofrequency neuroablation, or spinal cord stimulation. After PNS using ultrasound, their pain was relieved by more than 50% over the course of 1 year. Both patients were satisfied with their improved sleep and quality of life. We conclude that PNS could be an alternative therapeutic modality for neuropathic pain after BPI as it provides direct nerve stimulation, has few complications, and is easy to perform.

Targeting inflammation as a treatment modality for neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial

Background

The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of an anti-inflammatory intervention as a treatment for neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (SCI).

Methods

This randomized, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial (NCT02099890) examined 20 participants with varying levels and severities of SCI, randomized (3:2) to either a 12-week anti-inflammatory diet, or control group. Outcome measures consisted of self-determined indices of pain as assessed using the neuropathic pain questionnaire (NPQ) and markers of inflammation as assessed by various pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, as well as the eicosanoids PGE2 and LTB4.

Results

A significant group × time interaction was found for sensory pain scores (p < 0.01). A Mann-Whitney test revealed that the change scores (3-month baseline) were significantly different between groups for IFN-y (U = 13.0, p = 0.01), IL-1β (U = 14.0, p = 0.01), and IL-2 (U = 12.0, p = 0.01). A Friedman test revealed the treatment group had a significant reduction in IFN-y (x² = 8.67, p = 0.01), IL-1β (x² = 17.78, p < 0.01), IL-6 (x² = 6.17, p < 0.05), while the control group showed no significant change in any inflammatory mediator. A stepwise backward elimination multiple regression analysis showed that the change in sensory neuropathic pain was a function of the change in the proinflammatory cytokines IL-2 and IFN-y, as well as the eicosanoid PGE2 (R = 0.689, R² = 0.474).

Conclusions

Overall, the results of the study demonstrate the efficacy of targeting inflammation as a means of treating neuropathic pain in SCI, with a potential mechanism relating to the reduction in proinflammatory cytokines and PGE2.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02099890

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12974-016-0625-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Psychological Treatments and Psychotherapies in the Neurorehabilitation of Pain: Evidences and Recommendations from the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation

BACKGROUND

It is increasingly recognized that treating pain is crucial for effective care within neurological rehabilitation in the setting of the neurological rehabilitation. The Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation was constituted with the purpose identifying best practices for us in this context. Along with drug therapies and physical interventions, psychological treatments have been proven to be some of the most valuable tools that can be used within a multidisciplinary approach for fostering a reduction in pain intensity. However, there is a need to elucidate what forms of psychotherapy could be effectively matched with the specific pathologies that are typically addressed by neurorehabilitation teams.

OBJECTIVES

To extensively assess the available evidence which supports the use of psychological therapies for pain reduction in neurological diseases.

METHODS

A systematic review of the studies evaluating the effect of psychotherapies on pain intensity in neurological disorders was performed through an electronic search using PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Based on the level of evidence of the included studies, recommendations were outlined separately for the different conditions.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 2352 results and the final database included 400 articles. The overall strength of the recommendations was medium/low. The different forms of psychological interventions, including Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy, cognitive or behavioral techniques, Mindfulness, hypnosis, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Brief Interpersonal Therapy, virtual reality interventions, various forms of biofeedback and mirror therapy were found to be effective for pain reduction in pathologies such as musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, Central Post-Stroke pain, Phantom Limb Pain, pain secondary to Spinal Cord Injury, multiple sclerosis and other debilitating syndromes, diabetic neuropathy, Medically Unexplained Symptoms, migraine and headache.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychological interventions and psychotherapies are safe and effective treatments that can be used within an integrated approach for patients undergoing neurological rehabilitation for pain. The different interventions can be specifically selected depending on the disease being treated. A table of evidence and recommendations from the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation is also provided in the final part of the paper.