Impact of television coverage on the number and type of symptoms reported during a health scare: a retrospective pre-post observational study

COVID-19 Vaccines and Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: The Impact of Media Attention on Reporting to EudraVigilance

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, over 34,000 reports of heavy menstrual bleeding following the administration of COVID-19 vaccines originating in the Economic European Area were submitted to EudraVigilance, the European Union database of suspected adverse drug reactions. More than 90% of these reports were sent by consumers while the remaining by healthcare professionals. Public concerns regarding menstruation disorders in COVID-19 vaccinees were also covered by the media. We investigated the impact of media attention on the reporting trends of heavy menstrual bleeding to EudraVigilance.

METHODS

We used media outlets published in the Economic European Area on menstrual disorders and COVID-19 vaccines from the beginning of the vaccination campaign in the Economic European Area (1 January, 2021) until December 2022 (i.e., after the regulatory request to add the adverse event to the product information) and spontaneous reports from EudraVigilance.

RESULTS

We found that the publication of safety updates from regulatory authorities and subsequent coverage in media outlets preceded increased reporting to EudraVigilance. Furthermore, the heavy menstrual bleeding reported in the cases occurred several weeks or months earlier and were not submitted to the respective date. The analysis suggests that the spikes in reporting of heavy menstrual bleeding were to some extent influenced by media coverage in some countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumer reporting to the European Union spontaneous data collection system, EudraVigilance, was of high value for regulatory safety reviews, albeit the reporting behaviours were not free of the influence of the media. These sources of information can be investigated to understand the context of safety concerns of public health interest.

Media coverage of COVID-19 vaccination-associated cerebral venous sinus thrombosis was followed by a surge in emergency presentations due to headache - observations from a university hospital in Germany

Nocebo effects describe all negative outcomes for well-being brought about by negative health-related expectations. Media coverage of drug side effects can fuel nocebo effects and lead to increased symptom reports. This retrospective observational analysis of emergency reports at the neurological emergency room at University Hospital Essen, Germany, examines whether media communication about a cumulation of very rare cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) after COVID-19 vaccination with the AstraZeneca compound (ChAdOx-1 nCoV-19) was followed by an increase in weekly presentation rates of patients with the main complaint of headache, a symptom commonly occurring as a vaccination reaction but also communicated as a warning symptom for CVST. The rate of headache presentations increased by 171.7% during the five weeks after the first announcement of CVSTs in Germany on 11 March 2021, compared to the five weeks immediately prior. Furthermore, more young women sought consultation for headache, reflecting the communicated at-risk profile for CVST. The increased rate of headache presenters contributed to a 32.1% rise in total neurological emergency cases, causing an increased strain on the emergency facility after the side effect risk was publicized. We discuss a causal role of negative side effect expectations after vaccination with AstraZeneca as a driver for this increase. While transparent communication about benefits and potential side effects is crucial for vaccination acceptance, increased vigilance toward nocebo effects in health-related media communication is needed due to its potential harm to the individual and society, especially when emergency medical resources are stretched thin.

Self-reported side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among the public

Background

The safety, side effects and efficacy profile of COVID-19 vaccines remain subjects of ongoing concern among the public in Malaysia. The aim of this study was to determine the types of adverse effects following immunisation with COVID-19 vaccines and the differences based on various types of COVID-19 vaccines to raise public awareness and reduce vaccine hesitancy among the public.

Methods

A total of 901 Malaysian adults (≥18 years) who received various COVID-19 vaccines were selected to participate in our cross-sectional study through an online survey between December 2021 and January 2022.

Results

A total of 814 (90.3%) of the participants reported ≥1 side effect following COVID-19 immunisation. Of these, the predominant symptoms were swelling at the injection site (n = 752, 83.5%), headache (n = 638, 70.8%), pain or soreness at the injection site (n = 628, 69.7%), fatigue or tiredness (n = 544, 60.4%), muscle weakness (n = 529, 58.7%) and diarrhea (n = 451, 50.1%). Recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech (Comirnaty ®) vaccine reported the highest number of adverse effects (n = 355, 43.6%), followed by mixed COVID-19 vaccines (n = 254, 31.2%), the Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1-®[recombinant]) vaccine (n = 113, 13.9%) and the Sinovac (CoronaVac®) vaccine (n = 90, 11.1%). The study showed that individuals who reported significantly more side effects were of elderly age, female gender and high educational level [P value < 0.05]. Mixed COVID-19 vaccine recipients also reported significantly more local and systemic symptoms after the first dose and third dose when compared with other single vaccine recipients.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the types of self-reported adverse effects following immunisation with single and mixed COVID-19 vaccines. These findings may provide the side effects of different COVID-19 vaccines with the hope of educating the public on the safety profiles of these vaccines and reducing vaccine hesitancy among the public.

Health Scares: Tracing Their Nature, Growth and Spread

Background

Health scares are highly publicised threats to health that increase public concern and protective behaviours but are later shown to be unfounded. Although health scares have become more common in recent times, they have received very little research attention. This is despite the fact that health scares often have negative outcomes for individuals and community by affecting health behaviours and causing high levels of often unnecessary anxiety.

Method

In this paper we undertook a review and analysis of the major types of health scares as well as the background factors associated with health scares and their spread.

Results

We found most health scares fell into seven main categories; environmental contaminants, food, malicious incidents, medical treatments, public health interventions, radiation from technology and exotic diseases. For most health scares there are important background factors and incident characteristics that affect how they develop. Background factors include conspiracy theories, trust in governmental agencies, anxiety, modern health worries and wariness of chemicals. Incident characteristic include being newly developed, not understood or unseen, man-made rather than natural and whether the incident is out of personal control. We also identified the aspects of traditional and social media that exacerbate the rapid spread of health scares.

Conclusion

More research is needed to identify the characteristics of media stories that intensify the levels of public concern. Guidelines around the media's reporting of health incidents and potential health threats may be necessary in order to reduce levels of public anxiety and the negative public health impact of health scares.

Impact of Television Depictions of Gout on Perceptions of Illness: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Gout is a chronic disease that can be effectively managed with long-term urate-lowering therapy. However, it is frequently portrayed on screen as an acute disease caused by a poor diet that should be managed with lifestyle changes. This study was undertaken to investigate the impact of a fictional television depiction of gout on perceptions of the disease and its management.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled single-blind study, 200 members of the public watched either a 19-minute commercial television comedy episode that depicted gout as an acute disease caused by poor diet and managed with lifestyle changes, or a control episode from the same television series that did not mention gout or other diseases. Participants completed a survey regarding their perceptions of gout, its likely causes, and management strategies.

RESULTS

Participants randomized to watch the gout-related episode believed gout had greater consequences (mean score of 7.1 versus 6.2 on an 11-point Likert scale; P < 0.001) and were more likely to rank the most important cause as poor eating habits compared to the control group (70% versus 38%; P < 0.001). They were also less likely to believe it is caused by genetic factors or chance. Participants watching the gout-related episode believed a change in diet would be a more effective management strategy (9.0 versus 8.4; P = 0.004) and long-term medication use would be less effective (6.9 versus 7.6; P = 0.007) compared to participants in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Television depictions of gout can perpetuate inaccurate beliefs regarding causes of the disease and underemphasize effective medical strategies required in chronic disease management.

Modern health worries and annoyance from environmental factors are largely unrelated to smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity

OBJECTIVE

Modern health worries, as well as environmental annoyance from chemical agents, noise, and electromagnetic exposure are associated with symptom reporting and marked affective-behavioural changes. As promotion and protection of health is a primary characteristic of these conditions, it can be expected that they will be related to less risk behaviour (smoking and alcohol consumption) and more health behaviour (physical activity), both cross-sectionally and longitudinally.

METHODS

Hypotheses were tested in a sample of 2336 individuals participating in T1 and T2 data collection (3 years apart) of the Västerbotten Environmental Health Study, Sweden. Health-related behaviours were assessed using single self-report questions. Smoking was measured on a binary (yes-or-no) scale; frequency of alcohol consumption and physical activity was measured on a 5-point and a 4-point scale, respectively.

RESULTS

Modern health worries showed no cross-sectional association with the three behaviours, whereas annoyance was typically inversely, very weakly, related to smoking and alcohol consumption. Physical activity was significantly positively associated only with chemical annoyance. None of the variables significantly predicted change of behaviours at T2 after controlling for the respective T1 value and demographic variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with high levels of modern health worries and annoyance from various environmental agents are not clearly characterized by a healthier lifestyle. Perhaps they focus on the alleviation of their existing symptoms; alternatively, somatic symptom distress decreases their cognitive-affective resources necessary for a long-term life style change.

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.

Social communication pathways to COVID-19 vaccine side-effect expectations and experience

OBJECTIVE

Negative beliefs about medication and vaccine side-effects can spread rapidly through social communication. This has been recently documented with the potential side-effects from the COVID-19 vaccines. We tested if pre-vaccination social communications about side-effects from personal acquaintances, news reports, and social media predict post-vaccination side-effect experiences. Further, as previous research suggests that side-effects can be exacerbated by negative expectations, we assessed if personal expectations mediate the relationships between social communication and side-effect experience.

METHOD

In a prospective longitudinal survey (N = 551), COVID-19 vaccine side-effect information from three sources-social media posts, news reports, and first-hand accounts from personal acquaintances-as well as side-effect expectations, were self-reported pre-vaccination. Vaccination side-effect experience was assessed post-vaccination.

RESULTS

In multivariate regression analyses, the number of pre-vaccination social media post views (β = 0.17) and impressions of severity conveyed from personal acquaintances (β = 0.42) significantly predicted an increase in pre-vaccination side-effect expectations, and the same variables (βs = 0.11, 0.14, respectively) predicted post-vaccination side-effect experiences. Moreover, pre-vaccination side-effect expectations mediated the relationship between both sources of social communication and experienced side-effects from a COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies links between personal acquaintance and social media communications and vaccine side-effect experiences and provides evidence that pre-vaccination expectations account for these relationships. The results suggest that modifying side-effect expectations through these channels may change the side-effects following a COVID-19 vaccination as well as other publicly discussed vaccinations and medications.

Factors Associated With the Intention to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccine: Cross-sectional National Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health crisis, and vaccines are the most effective means of preventing severe consequences of this disease. Hesitancy regarding vaccines persists among adults in the United States, despite overwhelming scientific evidence of safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to use the Health Belief Model (HBM) and reasoned action approach (RAA) to examine COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy by comparing those who had already received 1 vaccine to those who had received none.

METHODS

This study examined demographic and theory-based factors associated with vaccine uptake and intention among 1643 adults in the United States who completed an online survey during February and March 2021. Survey items included demographic variables (eg, age, sex, political ideology), attitudes, and health belief variables (eg, perceived self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility). Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used for vaccine uptake/intent. The first model included demographic variables. The second model added theory-based factors to examine the association of health beliefs and vaccine uptake above and beyond the associations explained by demographic characteristics alone.

RESULTS

The majority of participants were male (n=974, 59.3%), White (n=1347, 82.0%), and non-Hispanic (n=1518, 92.4%) and reported they had already received a COVID-19 vaccine or definitely would when it was available to them (n=1306, 79.5%). Demographic variables significantly associated with vaccine uptake/intent included age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.06), other race (AOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27-0.83 vs White), and political ideology (AOR 15.77, 95% CI 7.03-35.35 very liberal vs very conservative). The theory-based factors most strongly associated with uptake/intention were attitudes (AOR 3.72, 95% CI 2.42-5.73), self-efficacy (AOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.34-2.29), and concerns about side effects (AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.76). Although race and political ideology were significant in the model of demographic characteristics, they were not significant when controlling for attitudes and beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination represents one of the best tools to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as other possible pandemics in the future. This study showed that older age, attitudes, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, and self-efficacy are positively associated with vaccine uptake and intent, whereas perceived side effects and lack of trust in the vaccine are associated with lower uptake and intent. Race and political ideology were not significant predictors when attitudes and beliefs were considered. Before vaccine hesitancy can be addressed, researchers and clinicians must understand the basis of vaccine hesitancy and which populations may show higher hesitancy to the vaccination so that interventions can be adequately targeted.

Changes in Reported Symptoms Attributed to Office Environments in Sweden between 1995 and 2020

Non-specific building-related symptoms (NBRSs) describe various symptoms in those affected. Questionnaires are the first step in investigating suspected NBRSs in office environments and have been used for over two decades. However, changes in reporting of symptoms among office workers over time are currently unknown. The overall aim was thus to investigate if reported symptoms and perceived causality to the office environment have changed during 25 years of using the MM 040 NA Office questionnaire. A cross-sectional study of 26,477 questionnaires from 1995-2020 was conducted, where 12 symptoms and perceived causality to office environment were examined using logistic regression analyses of 5-year groups adjusted for sex and atopy. Reporting trends in the year groups varied slightly among symptoms, but eight symptoms were statistically significant in the 2015-2020 group compared to the 1995-1999 group. Seven symptoms had increased: fatigue, heavy-feeling head, headache, difficulties concentrating, itchy/irritated eyes, congested/runny nose, and dry/red hands. One symptom decreased: hoarseness/dry throat. Perceived causality of symptoms to the office environment decreased to a statistically significant degree in 2015-2020 for 11 symptoms, and there was an overall trend of decreasing perceived causality throughout the year groups for most symptoms. The observed time trends suggest a need for up-to-date reference data, to keep up with changes in symptom reporting in office environments over time.

Psychological models of development of idiopathic environmental intolerances: Evidence from longitudinal population-based data

The origin of idiopathic environmental intolerances (IEIs) is an open question. According to the psychological approaches, various top-down factors play a dominant role in the development of IEIs. The general psychopathology model assumes a propensity towards mental ill-health (negative affectivity) increases the probability of developing IEIs. The attribution model emphasizes the importance of mistaken attribution of experienced somatic symptoms; thus, more symptoms should lead to more IEIs. Finally, the nocebo model highlights the role of expectations in the development of IEIs. In this case, worries about the harmful effects of environmental factors are assumed to evoke IEIs. We estimated cross-lagged panel models with latent variables based on longitudinal data obtained at two time points (six years apart) from a large near-representative community sample to test the hypothesized associations. Indicators of chemical intolerance, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and sound sensitivity fit well under a common latent factor of IEIs. This factor, in turn, showed considerable temporal stability. However, whereas a positive association was found between IEIs and increased somatic symptoms and modern health worries six years later, the changes therein could not be predicted as hypothesized by the three psychological models. We discuss the implications of these results, as well as methodological aspects in the measurement and prediction of change in IEIs.

Exploring reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers in Ethiopia

INTRODUCTION

the World Health Organization has identified vaccine hesitancy as one of the top ten threats to global health. The purpose of this study was to explore factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers, their perspectives regarding vaccine uptake by the public and their recommendations to improve vaccine uptake in Ethiopia.

METHODS

a phenomenological qualitative study was conducted among purposively selected healthcare providers working in the Ministry of Health (MoH), regulatory authority, public and private hospitals and health centres who hesitated to take the COVID-19 vaccine in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in June 2021. A total of twenty in-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured open-ended interview guide. Participants included nurses, physicians, pharmacists, health officers, Medical Laboratory technologists and midwives. A qualitative content analysis approach was chosen to analyse the data.

RESULTS

all the participants agreed (n=20) that lack of consistent information and inadequate evidence about COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy and quality were the main reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. History of perceived and confirmed COVID-19 infection history, misinformation, religious views, unknown short and long-term effects of the vaccine and undefined length of time of vaccine´s protection were also other reasons mentioned by the participants.

CONCLUSION

healthcare providers were hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccine mainly due to lack of clear evidence regarding the vaccine´s short and long-term safety, efficacy and quality profiles. Hence, the long-term safety and efficacy of the vaccine should be extensively studied and evidence dissemination and communication should be clear and transparent.

Side-effect expectations from COVID-19 vaccination: Findings from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey (CoVAccS - wave 2)

OBJECTIVES

Concern about side effects is one of the most common reasons for refusing vaccination. Side-effect expectations are known to predict perception of side effects. We aimed to investigate the percentage of people who thought side effects from COVID-19 vaccination were likely and investigate factors associated with side-effect expectation.

METHODS

Online cross-sectional survey of 1470 UK adults who had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 (conducted 13 to 15 January 2021). We asked participants how likely they thought side effects from COVID-19 vaccination were. Linear regression analyses were used to investigate associations with side-effect expectations.

RESULTS

Most participants were uncertain whether they would experience side effects from a COVID-19 vaccine; only a minority reported that side effects were very likely (9.4%, 95% CI 7.9% to 10.9%, n = 138/1470). Personal and clinical characteristics, general, and COVID-19 vaccination beliefs and attitudes explained 29.7% of the variance in side-effect expectation, with COVID-19 vaccination beliefs alone accounting for 17.2%. Side-effect expectations were associated with: older age, being clinically extremely vulnerable to COVID-19, being afraid of needles, lower perceived social norms for COVID-19 vaccination, lower perceived necessity and safety of COVID-19 vaccination, and perceived lack of information about COVID-19 and vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Side-effect expectation was associated with believing that COVID-19 vaccination was unsafe, ineffective and that others would be less likely to approve of you having a COVID-19 vaccination. Communications should emphasise the safety, effectiveness, and widespread uptake of vaccination, while promoting accurate perceptions of the incidence of vaccination side effects.

Increasing and dampening the nocebo response following medicine-taking: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The nocebo effect is the adverse effects of treatment that cannot be attributed to a medicine. We investigated if we could increase or decrease nocebo responding following medicine taking. A nocebo explanation to reduce side effects was compared with a negative medication news item designed to increase side effects and a control condition.

METHODS

108 healthy participants enrolled in a between-subjects study purportedly testing the effect of lamotrigine (actually placebo) on mood and cognition. Participants were randomised to watch either a video explaining the nocebo effect; a negative media item on lamotrigine, or control video prior to receiving the tablet. Side effects were assessed at 45-min and 48-h.

RESULTS

The negative media group reported significantly more side effects (M = 0.78, SD = 1.53) than the control group (M = 0.46, SD = 1.80, p = .035) at the end of session and a greater proportion of the negative media group (33%) reported at least one side effect compared to the nocebo explanation (11%) and control group (11%, p = .020). The nocebo explanation group reported significantly fewer side effects (M = 0.38, SD = 1.16) than the control group (M = 1.37, SD = 2.98, p = .038) at the 48-h follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Explaining the nocebo effect may be a beneficial addition to standard medicine information for reducing side effect reporting. Negative media coverage about a drug is likely to generate increased side effects. Future research should examine the benefit of nocebo explanation in patients starting new medicines.

The mode of delivery and content of communication strategies used in mandatory and non-mandatory biosimilar transitions: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Effective patient-provider communication is crucial to promote shared decision-making. However, it is unclear how to explain treatment changes to ensure patient acceptance, such as when transitioning from a bio-originator to a biosimilar. This review investigates communication strategies used to educate patients on transitioning to biosimilars and explores whether the willingness to transition and treatment persistence differs for the delivery (verbal or written) and the amount of information provided. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and relevant conference databases were systematically searched. Communication strategies from 33 studies (88% observational cohort studies) published from 2012 to 2020 were synthesized and willingness to transition, persistence, and subjective adverse events explored. Patients only received information verbally in 11 studies. The remaining 22 studies also provided written information. Cost-saving was the main reason provided for the transition. Patients were most willing to transition when receiving written and verbal information (χ² = 5.83, p = .02) or written information that only addressed a few (3-5) concerns (χ² = 16.08, p < .001). There was no significant difference for persistence or subjective adverse events (p's > .05). Few randomized controlled trials have been conducted. Available data shows more willingness to transition when patients received written and verbal information. Initial documents should contain basic information and consultations or telephone calls used to address concerns.

An evaluation of the FDA adverse event reporting system and the potential for reporting bias

BACKGROUND

The FDA maintains the Adverse Event Reporting System (CAERS) database, which contains product complaint reports for foods, dietary supplements, and cosmetics. Product line perception and subsequent adverse event reporting may be impacted by negative media attention.

METHODS

The purpose of this analysis was to use the CAERS database to analyze temporal trends in adverse event reporting before and after media coverage of alleged health effects, using WEN by Chaz Dean (WCD) cleansing conditioners as a case study. WCD cleansing conditioner adverse event reports from January 2005 to December 2018 were abstracted from the CAERS database. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression models were used to analyze the rate of adverse events (WCD events/10,000 WCD cleansing conditioner units sold/month), adjusted for temporal trends in CAERS.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant higher rate of adverse event reporting after negative media coverage in December 2015 (IRR 16.71 [95% CI: 7.89-35.39]) when compared to the rate of adverse event reporting before December 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis highlights the importance of assessing potential external factors, such as negative news media coverage, that may alter reporting behaviors due to societal shifts in product-specific risk perception. Consideration of these factors in post-market surveillance programs would result in more comprehensive safety evaluations.

Rethinking Clinical Trials and Personalized Medicine with Placebogenomics and Placebo Dose

Pharmacogenomics, nutrigenomics, vaccinomics, and the nascent field of plant omics are examples of variability science. They are embedded within an overarching framework of personalized medicine. Across these public health specialties, the significance and biology of the placebo response have been historically neglected. A placebo is any substance such as a sugar pill administered in the guise of medication, but one that does not have pharmacological activity. Placebos do have clinical effects, however, that can be substantive in magnitude and vary markedly from person-to-person depending, for example, on the type of disease, symptoms, or clinical trial design. Research over the past several decades attests to a genuine neurobiological basis for placebo effects. All drugs have placebo components that contribute to their overall treatment effect. Placebos are used in clinical trials as control groups to ascertain the net pharmacological effect of a drug candidate. Not only less well known but also relevant to rational therapeutics and personalized medicine is the nocebo. A nocebo effect occurs when an inert substance is administered in a context that induces negative expectations, worsening patients' symptoms. With the COVID-19 pandemic, there are high public expectations for new vaccines and medicines to end the contagion, while at the same time antiscience, post-truth, and antivaccine movements are worrisomely on the rise. These social movements, changes in public health cultures, and conditioned behavioral responses can trigger both placebo and nocebo effects. Hence, in clinical trials, forecasting and explaining placebo and nocebo variability are more important than ever for robust science and personalized health care. Against this overarching context, this article provides (1) a brief history of placebo and (2) a discussion on biology, mechanisms, and variability of placebo effects, and (3) discusses three emerging new concepts: placebogenomics, nocebogenomics, and augmented placebo, that is, the notion of a "placebo dose." We conclude with a roadmap for placebogenomics, its synergies with the nascent field of social pharmacology, and the ways in which a new taxonomy of drug and placebo variability can be anticipated in the next decade.

A systematic review of factors associated with side-effect expectations from medical interventions

BACKGROUND

Fear of side-effects can result in non-adherence to medical interventions, such as medication and chemotherapy. Side-effect expectations have been identified as strong predictors of later perception of side-effects. However, research investigating predictors of side-effect expectations is disparate.

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with side-effect expectations.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We systematically searched Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they investigated associations between any predictive factor and expectations of side-effects from any medical intervention.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted information about participant characteristics, medication, rates of side-effects expected and predictors of side-effect expectations. Data were narratively synthesized.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified sixty-four citations, reporting on seventy-two studies. Predictors fell into five categories: personal characteristics, clinical characteristics, psychological traits and state, presentation format of information, and information sources used. Using verbal risk descriptors (eg 'common') compared to numerical descriptors (eg percentages), having lower quality of life or well-being, and currently experiencing symptoms were associated with increased side-effect expectations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Decreasing unrealistic side-effect expectations may lead to decreased experience of side-effects and increased adherence to medical interventions. Widespread communications about medical interventions should describe the incidence of side-effects numerically. Evidence suggests that clinicians should take particular care with patients with lower quality of life, who are currently experiencing symptoms and who have previously experienced symptoms from treatment. Further research should investigate different clinical populations and aim to quantify the impact of the media and social media on side-effect expectations.

The effect of television and print news stories on the nocebo responding following a generic medication switch

Background

Following a nationwide switch to a generic antidepressant, a series of negative media stories publicised the experiences of some patients having side effects following the switch. This occurred first in print media and five months later it occurred again in television news. In this study we examined the effect of television news stories compared to print stories on adverse drug reaction reporting. We also examined the change in reporting rate of specific side effects mentioned in the TV news bulletins.

Method

Using an interrupted time series analysis of data from a national adverse reactions database, we compared the number of adverse reaction reports after the print and television coverage and the changes in reporting rate of side effects mentioned and not mentioned in TV news stories.

Results

We found a significant increase in adverse reaction reports following TV news items that discussed patients’ reports of side effects following the medication switch (interruption effect = 73.25, p = .046). The reporting rate of symptoms mentioned in the TV news bulletins also increased, in particular suicidal thoughts (interruption effect = 23.60, p = .031). The effect of TV stories on adverse reaction reports was 211% greater than the print articles.

Conclusions

Television stories have a much stronger effect than print media on nocebo responding and specific symptoms mentioned in the bulletins have a direct influence on the type of side effects subsequently reported. Media guidelines should be developed to reduce the negative public health effects of media coverage following medication switches.

Statins in a Distorted Mirror of Media

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Statins have proven efficacy with a favorable safety profile yet, despite being widely affordable, remain profoundly underutilized. Statins have acquired a bad reputation, which is likely contributing to high rates of nonadherence and discontinuation. The degree to which negative media perceptions contribute to underutilization is unclear.

RECENT FINDINGS

The media has a key role in informing discussion on the public agenda but also on how issues are framed. In this context, the majority of studies evaluating news coverage suggest that the content on statins is predominantly negative and focused on potential harm. Studies utilizing quasi-experimental and interrupted time series design have shown periods of negative news stories on statins in multiple countries are associated with (a) less statin commencement in eligible patients, (b) high rates of discontinuation, and (c) poor long-term adherence. This review highlights the deleterious impact of negative media coverage on statin utilization through misattribution of muscle complaints and the nocebo effect. Academia must work with the media to harmonize the public health messaging; however, individual physicians have a critical role in mitigating a harmful narrative of misinformation and actively discredit malinformation.

[Biosimilars and the nocebo effect]

Biosimilars have been approved for use in Germany for many years and in the meantime also in rheumatology but only a few years ago. Biosimilars, which are biotechnologically manufactured products the same as reference biologicals, have actually now achieved a substantial proportion of the market in some regions but there are still doubters among patients and physicians who fear a loss of quality even if there is no evidence for this. A part of this problem can be explained by the nocebo effect but which furthermore also has a substantial medical importance. This effect is described and explained in this article. Psychosocial and context-related factors, such as the relationship between patient and physician, previous experience with treatment and treatment expectations can either improve or impair the efficacy of treatment interventions. These phenomena are commonly known as placebo and nocebo effects. As placebo and nocebo effects can influence the development of symptoms, the frequency of undesired events and the efficacy of treatment, it is decisive to know these effects and to develop strategies for prevention in order to optimize the treatment results. Although in recent years experimental studies have achieved substantial progress in the clarification of the psychosocial and neurobiological mechanisms of placebo effects, detailed mechanisms of nocebo effects are still widely unexplored. An improved understanding of these mechanisms promises the development of user-friendly strategies for the clinical care to improve treatment results and patient satisfaction.

Existence of Notoriety Bias in FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database and Its Impact on Signal Strength

Background: Notoriety bias is defined as "a selection bias in which a case has a greater chance of being reported if the subject is exposed to the studied factor known to cause, thought to cause, or likely to cause the event of interest." This study aimed to determine the existence of notoriety bias in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database and estimate the impact of potential notoriety bias induced by safety alerts on signal estimation using disproportionality analysis. Methods: Publicly available FAERS data were downloaded and used for analysis. Thirty-one drugs which had label change/safety alert issued by FDA from 2009 to 2013 were considered. These drugs were reviewed 4 quarters before and after the safety alert notification for the existence of notoriety bias. The impact of notoriety bias induced by safety alerts was analyzed by comparing the signal strength using reporting odds ratio (ROR) and proportional reporting ratio (PRR), 2 years before and after the safety alert. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine whether there were a statistically significant difference before and after the safety alert. Results: There was increased reporting for 11 drugs after the safety alert/label change by the FDA. The reporting of 20 drugs decreased or remained unchanged after the safety alert/label change by the FDA. Wilcoxon signed rank test showed that there is no statistically significant difference with respect to the number of reports before and after the safety alert (P = .330, Z = -0.974). Fourteen (45.16%) drugs had an increase in ROR, while 17 (54.83%) drugs had a decrease in ROR after safety alert issued by FDA (P = .953, Z = -0.059). Fourteen (45.16%) drugs had an increase in PRR, while 17 (54.83%) drugs had a decrease in PRR after safety alert issued by the FDA (P = .914, Z = -0.108). Conclusion: Although few FDA safety alert/warnings had a strong and immediate impact, many had no impact on reporting of AE and signal strength. This study found that overreporting due to notoriety bias does not exist in the FAERS database and the overall disproportionality in signal estimates is not altered by the safety alert.

Nocebos in rheumatology: emerging concepts and their implications for clinical practice

Nocebo effects are noxious reactions to therapeutic interventions that occur because of negative expectations of the patient. In the past decade, neurobiological data have revealed specific neural pathways induced by nocebos (that is, interventions that cause nocebo effects), as well as the associated mechanisms and predisposing factors of nocebo effects. Epidemiological data suggest that nocebos can have a notable effect on medication adherence, clinical outcomes and health-care policy. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) indicate that withdrawal of treatment by placebo-arm participants owing to adverse events is common; a proportion of these events could be nocebo effects. Moreover, in large-scale, open-label studies of patients with RMDs who transition from bio-originator to biosimilar therapeutics, biosimilar retention rates were much lower than in previous double-blind switch RCTs. This discrepancy suggests that in addition to the lack of response in some patients because of intrinsic differences between the drugs, nocebos might have an important role in low biosimilar retention, thus increasing the need for awareness and early identification of nocebo effects by rheumatologists and allied health-care professionals.

The impact of valence framing on response expectancies of side effects and subsequent experiences: a randomised controlled trial

Objective: Pre-treatment side effect expectancies often influence subsequent experiences; however, expectancy-based reduction strategies are lacking. We explored whether framing information about adverse responses (in positive or negative formats) altered expectancies and experiences of a cold pressor task. We further investigated associations between expectancies and experiences, to inform potential interventions. Design: Healthy volunteers (N = 134), randomised to receive positively- or negatively-framed pre-cold pressor task information, self-rated 12 expectancies for cold pressor experiences, emotional state and coping style. Main Outcome Measures: Self-reports of the same 12-experiences (recorded during and after the experiment) were assessed. Results: Framing had minimal impact on expectancies and experiences; however, discomfort threshold (p = .08, d = 0.22) showed a trend in the expected direction. Hierarchical regressions revealed expectancies uniquely, significantly predicted 6-23% of the variance for 11 subsequent experiences. Following a popular charity event (Ice Bucket Challenge), all participants showed higher 'discomfort thresholds' (p = .001, d = 0.59), and those in the negative frame reported more overall 'discomfort' (p = .01, d = 0.60) than participants in the positive condition. Conclusion: Expectancies uniquely influenced subsequent cold pressor experiences. Framing had minimal impact in this 'analogue' medical setting, only influencing 'discomfort threshold'. 'Discomfort threshold' and overall 'discomfort' were also impacted by a social media challenge, highlighting a potential area for intervention.

Evidence of a Media-Induced Nocebo Response Following a Nationwide Antidepressant Drug Switch

In 2017, patients on a generic or branded antidepressant venlafaxine were switched to a new generic formulation (Enlafax). In February and April 2018, two major NZ media outlets ran stories about the new generic being less effective and causing specific side effects. This study aimed to examine the effect of the media coverage on drug side effects reported to the national Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (CARM) and whether the specific symptoms reported in the media increased compared to side effects not reported in the media.

We analysed monthly adverse reaction reports for Enlafax to CARM from October 2017 to June 2018 and compared adverse reports, complaints of decreased therapeutic effect and specific symptom reports before and after the media coverage using an interrupted time series analysis.

We found the number of side effects and complaints of reduced therapeutic effect increased significantly following the media stories (interruption effect = 41.83, 95% CI [25.25, 58.41], p = .003; interruption effect = 15.49, 95% CI [7.01, 23.98], p = .012, respectively). The specific side effects mentioned in the media coverage, including suicidal thoughts, also increased significantly compared to other side effects not mentioned in the media.

In the context of a drug switch, media reports of side effects appear to cause a strong nocebo response by increasing both the overall rate of side effect reporting and an increase in the specific side effects mentioned in the media coverage, including reduced drug efficacy and heightened suicidal thoughts.

The study provides further evidence that media coverage of side effects can induce a nocebo effect.

This is the first study to look at media coverage of an antidepressant brand switch.

The increase in reported adverse events was higher for those symptoms mentioned in the media reports.

Nocebo Effects and Negative Suggestions in Daily Clinical Practice - Forms, Impact and Approaches to Avoid Them

Medical situations are hot spots in the life of a patient with potentially long lasting effects arising from the use of either negative expressions or encouraging statements, or the lack of empathy or a positive physician-patient relationship. Health care personnel should be aware of and evaluate what patients are exposed to, hear and see. Knowing more about the effects of nocebos and negative suggestions, combined with increased attention to these matters, provides the basis for better recognition of detrimental influences in their own clinical environment and to be able to avoid, stop or neutralize them. After anamnesis patients should not be left with a focus on a negative past, but shifted to positive experiences prior to their illness, or to positive expectations in the future following surgery and rehabilitation. For example, after examining an injured leg the doctor should not turn to the computer for documentation unless he has shifted the patient's focus on the other, unimpaired leg. "Is that painful too? No? Good! Can you feel that? Yes? Perfect! Can you bend that knee, move these toes? Great! That's good." This example draws attention to the fact that negative effects (discussed in the following) substantially are dependent on the focus of the patient and thus can be affected by focus shift and distraction. Patients, their symptoms and their healing are negatively affected by the omission of placebo effects, by nocebo effects and by negative suggestions.

Psychobiological Mechanisms of Placebo and Nocebo Effects: Pathways to Improve Treatments and Reduce Side Effects

Placebo effects constitute a major part of treatment success in medical interventions. The nocebo effect also has a major impact, as it accounts for a significant proportion of the reported side effects for many treatments. Historically, clinical trials have aimed to reduce placebo effects; however, currently, there is interest in optimizing placebo effects to improve existing treatments and in examining ways to minimize nocebo effects to improve clinical outcome. To achieve these aims, a better understanding of the psychological and neurobiological mechanisms of the placebo and nocebo response is required. This review discusses the impact of the placebo and nocebo response in health care. We also examine the mechanisms involved in the placebo and nocebo effects, including the central mechanism of expectations. Finally, we examine ways to enhance placebo effects and reduce the impact of the nocebo response in clinical practice and suggest areas for future research.

Causal language and strength of inference in academic and media articles shared in social media (CLAIMS): A systematic review

Background

The pathway from evidence generation to consumption contains many steps which can lead to overstatement or misinformation. The proliferation of internet-based health news may encourage selection of media and academic research articles that overstate strength of causal inference. We investigated the state of causal inference in health research as it appears at the end of the pathway, at the point of social media consumption.

Methods

We screened the NewsWhip Insights database for the most shared media articles on Facebook and Twitter reporting about peer-reviewed academic studies associating an exposure with a health outcome in 2015, extracting the 50 most-shared academic articles and media articles covering them. We designed and utilized a review tool to systematically assess and summarize studies’ strength of causal inference, including generalizability, potential confounders, and methods used. These were then compared with the strength of causal language used to describe results in both academic and media articles. Two randomly assigned independent reviewers and one arbitrating reviewer from a pool of 21 reviewers assessed each article.

Results

We accepted the most shared 64 media articles pertaining to 50 academic articles for review, representing 68% of Facebook and 45% of Twitter shares in 2015. Thirty-four percent of academic studies and 48% of media articles used language that reviewers considered too strong for their strength of causal inference. Seventy percent of academic studies were considered low or very low strength of inference, with only 6% considered high or very high strength of causal inference. The most severe issues with academic studies’ causal inference were reported to be omitted confounding variables and generalizability. Fifty-eight percent of media articles were found to have inaccurately reported the question, results, intervention, or population of the academic study.

Conclusions

We find a large disparity between the strength of language as presented to the research consumer and the underlying strength of causal inference among the studies most widely shared on social media. However, because this sample was designed to be representative of the articles selected and shared on social media, it is unlikely to be representative of all academic and media work. More research is needed to determine how academic institutions, media organizations, and social network sharing patterns impact causal inference and language as received by the research consumer.

The Influence of Social Modeling, Gender, and Empathy on Treatment Side Effects

Background

Social modeling has the capacity to shape treatment outcomes, including side effects.

Purpose

This study investigated the influence of social modeling of treatment side effects, gender, and participant empathy, on side effects of a placebo treatment.

Methods

Ninety-six participants (48 females) completed a study purportedly investigating the influence of modafinil (actually placebo) on alertness and fatigue. The participants were randomly seated with a male or female confederate and saw this confederate report experiencing side effects or no side effects. Participant empathy was assessed at baseline. Changes in modeled and general symptoms, and misattribution of symptoms, were assessed during the session and at 24-hr follow-up.

Results

During the experimental session, seeing side effect modeling significantly increased modeled symptoms (p = .023, d = 0.56) but not general or misattributed symptoms. Regardless of modeling condition, female participants seated with a female model reported significantly more general symptoms during the session. However, response to social modeling did not differ significantly by model or participant gender. At follow-up, the effect of social modeling of side effects had generalized to other symptoms, resulting in significantly higher rates of modeled symptoms (p = .023, d = 0.48), general symptoms (p = .013, d = 0.49), and misattributed symptoms (p = .022, d = 0.50). The experience of modeled symptoms in response to social modeling was predicted by participants’ levels of baseline empathy.

Conclusions

Social modeling of symptoms can increase the side effects following treatment, and this effect appears to generalize to a broader range of symptoms and symptom misattribution over time. Higher baseline empathy seems to increase response to social modeling.

The Impact of Experiencing Adverse Drug Reactions on the Patient's Quality of Life: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study in the Netherlands

Introduction

There is little information as to what extent adverse drug reactions (ADRs) influence patients’ health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). From a pharmacovigilance perspective, capturing and making the best use of this information remains a challenge. The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb received about 1800 reports after the packaging of the drug Thyrax^® (levothyroxine; Aspen Pharma Trading Limited, Dublin, Ireland) changed from a brown glass bottle to a blister package in the Netherlands.

Objective

The objective of this study was to explore the impact of ADRs on HR-QOL in patients who reported a possible ADR to Lareb in relation to the change in the packaging of the drug Thyrax^®. A secondary objective was to explore factors correlated with change in HR-QOL.

Methods

Patients who reported an ADR in relation to the Thyrax^® packaging change were included in this study. A web-based adapted version of the COOP/WONCA questionnaire was sent to explore the HR-QOL before versus during the ADR, expressed on a 5-point scale from no impact (1) to high impact (5). Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to identify factors correlated with change in HR-QOL.

Results

Overall, 1167 patients returned the questionnaire (71.2 % response rate). The difference in HR-QOL was −0.8 for physical, −1.2 for mental, −1.4 for daily activities, −1.3 for social, and −1.3 for overall health status (p < 0.001 for each domain). Age, sex, educational level of the patient, and absence from work due to an ADR were correlated with at least one domain, while severity of the ADR was found to be correlated with all domains of HR-QOL.

Conclusion

Patients who reported possible ADRs after the Thyrax^® packaging change experienced a significant decrease in HR-QOL. This impact was highest for the domains ‘daily activities’, ‘overall health status’, and ‘mental health’ and lowest for ‘physical fitness’.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-016-0422-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Bad news: The influence of news coverage and Google searches on Gardasil adverse event reporting

BACKGROUND

Human papilloma virus vaccines are a safe and effective tool for reducing HPV infections that can cause cervical cancer. However, uptake of these vaccines has been suboptimal, with many people holding negative beliefs and misconceptions. Such beliefs have been linked with the experience of unpleasant side effects following medical treatment, and media coverage may heighten such concerns.

METHODS

The present study sought to assess the influence of news coverage (number of news articles per month) on adverse event reporting in response to Gardasil vaccination in New Zealand over a 7.5-year period, and whether the influence of news coverage was mediated by internet search activity (Google search volumes). Multiple linear regression analyses and simple mediation analyses were used, controlling for year and number of vaccinations delivered.

RESULTS

News coverage in the previous month, and Google search volumes in the same month, were significant predictors of adverse event reporting, after accounting for vaccination rates and year. Concurrent Google search volumes partially mediated the effect of prior news coverage.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that some of the adverse events reported were not related to the vaccination itself, but to news coverage and internet search volumes, which may have contributed to public concerns about potentially unpleasant or harmful outcomes. These findings have implications for the importance of psychological and social factors in adverse event reporting, and the role of the news media in disseminating health information.

Somatosensory amplification - An old construct from a new perspective

The paper reviews and summarizes the history and the development of somatosensory amplification, a construct that plays a substantial role in symptom reports. Although the association with negative affect has been supported by empirical findings, another key elements of the original concept (i.e. body hypervigilance and the tendency of focusing on mild body sensations) have never been appropriately addressed. Recent findings indicate that somatosensory amplification is connected with phenomena that do not necessarily include symptoms (e.g. modern health worries, or expectations of symptoms and medication side effects), and also with the perception of external threats. In conclusion, somatosensory amplification appears to refer to the intensification of perceived external and internal threats to the integrity of the body ("somatic threat amplification") rather than amplification of perceived or actual bodily events only. Practical implications of this new approach are also discussed.

A content analysis of the representation of statins in the British newsprint media

OBJECTIVE

This study reviewed the news media coverage of statins, seeking to identify specific trends or differences in viewpoint between media outlets and examine common themes.

DESIGN

The study is a content analysis of the frequency and content of the reporting of statins in a selection of the British newsprint media. It involved an assessment of the number, timing and thematic content of articles followed by a discourse analysis examining the underlying narratives. The sample was the output of four UK newspapers, covering a broad-spectrum readership, over a six month timeframe 1 October 2013 to 31 March 2014.

RESULTS

A total of 67 articles included reference to statins. The majority (39, 58%) were reporting or responding to publication of a clinical study. The ratio of negative to positive coverage was greater than 2:1 overall. In the more politically right-leaning newspapers, 67% of coverage was predominantly negative (30/45 articles); 32% in the more left-leaning papers (7/22 articles). Common themes were the perceived 'medicalisation' of the population; the balance between lifestyle modification and medical treatments in the primary prevention of heart disease; side effects and effectiveness of statins; pharmaceutical sponsorship and implications for the reliability of evidence; trust between the public and government, institutions, research organisations and the medical profession.

CONCLUSIONS

Newsprint media coverage of statins was substantially influenced by the publication of national guidance and by coverage in the medical journals of clinical studies and comment. Statins received a predominantly negative portrayal, notably in the more right-leaning press. There were shared themes: concern about the balance between medication and lifestyle change in the primary prevention of heart disease; the adverse effects of treatment; and a questioning of the reliability of evidence from research institutions, scientists and clinicians in the light of their potential allegiances and funding.

Are media reports able to cause somatic symptoms attributed to WiFi radiation? An experimental test of the negative expectation hypothesis

People suffering from idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) experience numerous non-specific symptoms that they attribute to EMF. The cause of this condition remains vague and evidence shows that psychological rather than bioelectromagnetic mechanisms are at work. We hypothesized a role of media reports in the etiology of IEI-EMF and investigated how somatosensory perception is affected. 65 healthy participants were instructed that EMF exposure can lead to enhanced somatosensory perception. Participants were randomly assigned to watch either a television report on adverse health effects of EMF or a neutral report. During the following experiment, participants rated stimulus intensities of tactile (electric) stimuli while being exposed to a sham WiFi signal in 50% of the trials. Sham WiFi exposure led to increased intensity ratings of tactile stimuli in the WiFi film group, especially in participants with higher levels of somatosensory amplification. Participants of the WiFi group reported more anxiety concerning WiFi exposure than the Control group and tended to perceive themselves as being more sensitive to EMF after the experiment compared to before. Sensational media reports can facilitate enhanced perception of tactile stimuli in healthy participants. People tending to perceive bodily symptoms as intense, disturbing, and noxious seem most vulnerable. Receiving sensational media reports might sensitize people to develop a nocebo effect and thereby contribute to the development of IEI-EMF. By promoting catastrophizing thoughts and increasing symptom-focused attention, perception might more readily be enhanced and misattributed to EMF.

Enhancing treatment effectiveness through social modelling: A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Medical treatments take place in social contexts; however, little research has investigated how social modelling might influence treatment outcomes. This experimental pilot study investigated social modelling of treatment effectiveness and placebo treatment outcomes.

DESIGN

Fifty-nine participants took part in the study, ostensibly examining the use of beta-blockers (actually placebos) for examination anxiety. Participants were randomly assigned to observe a female confederate report positive treatment effects (reduced heart rate, relaxed, calm) or feeling no different.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Heart rate, anxiety and blood pressure were assessed, as were symptoms and attributed side effects.

RESULTS

Heart rate decreased significantly more in the social modelling compared to control condition, p = .027 (d = .63), and there were trends towards effects in the same direction for both anxiety, p = .097 (d = .46), and systolic blood pressure, p = .077 (d = .51). Significant pre-post placebo differences in heart rate, anxiety and diastolic blood pressure were found in the social modelling group, ps < .007 (ds = .77-1.37), but not the control condition, ps > .28 (ds = .09-.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Social observation of medication effectiveness enhanced placebo effectiveness in heart rate, and showed a trend towards enhancing treatment effectiveness in both anxiety and systolic blood pressure. Social modelling may have utility in enhancing the effectiveness of many active medical treatments.

Spontaneous Adverse Event Reports Associated with Zolpidem in the United States 2003-2012

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Stimulated reporting occurs when patients and healthcare professionals are influenced or "stimulated" by media publicity to report specific drug-related adverse reactions, significantly biasing pharmacovigilance analyses. Among countries where the non-benzodiazepine hypnotic drug zolpidem is marketed, the United States experienced a comparable surge of media reporting during 2006-2009 linking the above drug with the development of complex neuropsychiatric sleep-related behaviors. However, the effect of this stimulated reporting in the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System has not been explored.

METHODS

Using disproportionality analyses, reporting odds ratios for zolpidem exposure and the following adverse events; parasomnia, movement-based parasomnia, nonmovement-based parasomnia, amnesia, hallucination, and suicidality were determined and compared to all other medications in the database, followed by specific comparison to the benzodiazepine hypnotic class, year-by-year from 2003 to 2012.

RESULTS

Odds ratios were increased significantly during and after the period of media publicity for parasomnias, movement-based parasomnias, amnesias and hallucinations. We also observed that zolpidem adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports have higher odds for parasomnias, movement-based parasomnias, amnesias, hallucinations, and suicidality compared to all other drugs, even before the media publicity cluster.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our results indicate that zolpidem reports have higher odds for the ADR of interest even before the media publicity cluster, negative media coverage greatly exacerbated the reporting of these adverse reactions. The effect of such reporting must be borne in mind when decisions around drugs which have been the subject of intense media publicity are made by health professionals or regulatory bodies.

From Me to You

The social context in which people take medicines can strongly influence the drug response in both positive and negative ways. We first examine the role of social modeling in influencing treatment outcomes through modifying placebo and nocebo responses, and then explore possible mechanisms for these effects. Viewing another person show improvement after taking a drug can increase the placebo component of the medicine and thus the overall potency of the treatment. Likewise, seeing another person who has taken the same medicine report side effects can substantially increase adverse effects. Such effects can also occur on a wider scale following changes in medicine formulations or from vaccinations programs, when the media transmit adverse effects from these treatments to a wider audience. Females seem to be more susceptible than males to the social modeling of adverse effects of treatments. A greater awareness of the effects of social modeling has potential to improve the effectiveness of medical treatments, minimize side-effect burden, and also lead to more effective management of health scares.

Impact of statin related media coverage on use of statins: interrupted time series analysis with UK primary care data

OBJECTIVE

 To quantify how a period of intense media coverage of controversy over the risk:benefit balance of statins affected their use.

DESIGN

 Interrupted time series analysis of prospectively collected electronic data from primary care.

SETTING

 Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

 Patients newly eligible for or currently taking statins for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention in each month in January 2011-March 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

 Adjusted odds ratios for starting/stopping taking statins after the media coverage (October 2013-March 2014).

RESULTS

 There was no evidence that the period of high media coverage was associated with changes in statin initiation among patients with a high recorded risk score for cardiovascular disease (primary prevention) or a recent cardiovascular event (secondary prevention) (odds ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.13; P=0.92) and 1.04 (0.92 to 1.18; P=0.54), respectively), though there was a decrease in the overall proportion of patients with a recorded risk score. Patients already taking statins were more likely to stop taking them for both primary and secondary prevention after the high media coverage period (1.11 (1.05 to 1.18; P<0.001) and 1.12 (1.04 to 1.21; P=0.003), respectively). Stratified analyses showed that older patients and those with a longer continuous prescription were more likely to stop taking statins after the media coverage. In post hoc analyses, the increased rates of cessation were no longer observed after six months.

CONCLUSIONS

 A period of intense public discussion over the risks:benefit balance of statins, covered widely in the media, was followed by a transient rise in the proportion of people who stopped taking statins. This research highlights the potential for widely covered health stories in the lay media to impact on healthcare related behaviour.

Neuro-Bio-Behavioral Mechanisms of Placebo and Nocebo Responses: Implications for Clinical Trials and Clinical Practice

The placebo effect has often been considered a nuisance in basic and particularly clinical research. This view has gradually changed in recent years due to deeper insight into the neuro-bio-behavioral mechanisms steering both the placebo and nocebo responses, the evil twin of placebo. For the neuroscientist, placebo and nocebo responses have evolved as indispensable tools to understand brain mechanisms that link cognitive and emotional factors with symptom perception as well as peripheral physiologic systems and end organ functioning. For the clinical investigator, better understanding of the mechanisms driving placebo and nocebo responses allow the control of these responses and thereby help to more precisely define the efficacy of a specific pharmacological intervention. Finally, in the clinical context, the systematic exploitation of these mechanisms will help to maximize placebo responses and minimize nocebo responses for the patient's benefit. In this review, we summarize and critically examine the neuro-bio-behavioral mechanisms underlying placebo and nocebo responses that are currently known in terms of different diseases and physiologic systems. We subsequently elaborate on the consequences of this knowledge for pharmacological treatments of patients and the implications for pharmacological research, the training of healthcare professionals, and for the health care system and future research strategies on placebo and nocebo responses.

Drug-induced progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy: Lessons learned from contrasting natalizumab and rituximab

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) has been identified as a serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) of several immunomodulatory biologicals. In this study, we contrasted the reporting patterns of PML for two biologicals for which the risk was identified at different points in their lifecycle: natalizumab (before reapproval) and rituximab (nine years postapproval). We found that, apart from the differences in clinical characteristics (age, gender, indication, time to event, fatality), which reflect the diversity in context of use, PML reports for natalizumab were more complete and were received sooner after occurrence. This study serves as an important reminder that spontaneous reports should only be used with great caution to quantify and compare safety profiles across products over time. The observed variability in reporting patterns and heterogeneity of PML cases presents challenges to such comparisons. Lumping uncharacterized PML reports together without taking these differences into account may result in biased comparisons and flawed conclusions about differential safety.

The impact of the media on the decision of parents in South Wales to accept measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) immunization

A large measles outbreak occurred in South Wales in 2012/2013. The outbreak has been attributed to low take-up of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) immunization in the early 2000s. To understand better the factors that led to this outbreak we present the findings of a case-control study carried out in the outbreak area in 2001 to investigate parents' decision on whether to accept MMR. Parents who decided not to take-up MMR at the time were more likely to be older and better educated, more likely to report being influenced by newspapers [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3·07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·62-5·80], television (aOR 3·30, 95% CI 1·70-6·43), the internet (aOR 7·23, 3·26-16·06) and vaccine pressure groups (aOR 5·20, 95% CI 2·22-12·16), and less likely to be influenced by a health visitor (aOR 0·30, 95% CI 0·16-0·57). In this area of Wales, daily English-language regional newspapers, UK news programmes and the internet appeared to have a powerful negative influence. We consider the relevance of these findings to the epidemiology of the outbreak and the subsequent public health response.