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

Is It All in Your Head? Placebo Effects in Concussion Prevention

Sports-related concussions (SRCs) are a major health issue in athletes of varying ages, ability levels, and sports. Concerns over the short- and long-term consequences of SRCs have incentivized a wealth of products and policies aimed at reducing SRC risk. Research suggesting the effectiveness of such interventions at reducing SRCs has facilitated their adoption by sports organizations and, in some cases, product commercialization. However, the body of SRC mitigation research is almost entirely devoid of placebo or sham groups, which raises important questions about the true clinical effectiveness of these interventions. This Current Opinion explores the plausibility of placebo effects within the scope of SRC prevention, describes why the lack of placebo/sham groups in the current body of literature is problematic, and provides recommendations for including placebo/sham groups in future SRC research.

Placebo effects in randomized trials of pharmacological and neurostimulation interventions for mental disorders: An umbrella review

There is a growing literature exploring the placebo response within specific mental disorders, but no overarching quantitative synthesis of this research has analyzed evidence across mental disorders. We carried out an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of biological treatments (pharmacotherapy or neurostimulation) for mental disorders. We explored whether placebo effect size differs across distinct disorders, and the correlates of increased placebo effects. Based on a pre-registered protocol, we searched Medline, PsycInfo, EMBASE, and Web of Knowledge up to 23.10.2022 for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses reporting placebo effect sizes in psychopharmacological or neurostimulation RCTs. Twenty meta-analyses, summarising 1,691 RCTs involving 261,730 patients, were included. Placebo effect size varied, and was large in alcohol use disorder (g = 0.90, 95% CI [0.70, 1.09]), depression (g = 1.10, 95% CI [1.06, 1.15]), restless legs syndrome (g = 1.41, 95% CI [1.25, 1.56]), and generalized anxiety disorder (d = 1.85, 95% CI [1.61, 2.09]). Placebo effect size was small-to-medium in obsessive-compulsive disorder (d = 0.32, 95% CI [0.22, 0.41]), primary insomnia (g = 0.35, 95% CI [0.28, 0.42]), and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (standardized mean change = 0.33, 95% CI [0.22, 0.44]). Correlates of larger placebo response in multiple mental disorders included later publication year (opposite finding for ADHD), younger age, more trial sites, larger sample size, increased baseline severity, and larger active treatment effect size. Most (18 of 20) meta-analyses were judged 'low' quality as per AMSTAR-2. Placebo effect sizes varied substantially across mental disorders. Future research should explore the sources of this variation. We identified important gaps in the literature, with no eligible systematic reviews/meta-analyses of placebo response in stress-related disorders, eating disorders, behavioural addictions, or bipolar mania.

Citrus supplementation in subjective cognitive decline: results of a 36-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Developing interventions for older adults with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) has the potential to prevent dementia in this at-risk group. Preclinical models indicate that Citrus-derived phytochemicals could benefit cognition and inflammatory processes, but results from clinical trials are still preliminary. The aim of this study is to determine the effects of long-term supplementation with Citrus peel extract on cognitive performance and inflammation in individuals with SCD.

METHODS

Eighty participants were randomly assigned to active treatment (400 mg of Citrus peel extract containing 3.0 mg of naringenin and 0.1 mg of auraptene) or placebo at 1:1 ratio for 36 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) total score across the 36-week trial period. Other cognitive outcomes included tests and scales evaluating verbal memory, attention, executive and visuospatial functions, and memory concerns. The secondary endpoint was the change of interleukin-8 (IL-8) levels over the 36-week trial period in a subsample of 60 consecutive participants. An Intention-to-treat approach with generalized linear mixed models was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The RBANS total score showed significant improvement in both Citrus peel extract and placebo groups at 36 weeks (p for time < .001, d = 0.36, p time x treatment = .910). Significant time effects were also found in cognitive domains of short- and long-term verbal memory (p < .001) and scales of subjective memory (p < .01), with no significant time x treatment interaction. The largest effect sizes were observed in verbal memory in the placebo group (d = 0.69 in short-term, and d = 0.78 in long-term verbal memory). Increased IL-8 levels were found at 36-week follow-up in both Citrus peel extract and placebo groups (p for time = .010, d = 0.21, p time x treatment = .772). Adverse events were balanced between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized clinical trial, long-term Citrus peel extract supplementation did not show cognitive benefits over placebo in participants with SCD, possibly due to high placebo response. These findings might have specific implications for designing future nutraceutical trials in individuals experiencing SCD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been registered at the United States National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health Registry of Clinical Trials under the code NCT04744922 on February 9th, 2021 ( https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04744922 ).

The impact of patients' pre-treatment expectations on immunosuppressive treatment outcomes in myasthenia gravis: A pilot correlational study

INTRODUCTION/AIMS

The impact of treatment expectations on active treatment outcomes has not been specifically investigated in neuromuscular disorders. We thus explored in myasthenia gravis (MG) the contribution of patients' pre-treatment expectations combined with an immunosuppressant drug on treatment outcomes.

METHODS

This pilot correlational study involved 17 patients with generalized MG, scheduled to start immunosuppressant azathioprine. At baseline, a healthcare professional administered: (i) the Stanford Expectations of Treatment Scale; (ii) a structured checklist paper form asking patients which side-effects they expected to develop after starting azathioprine, coupled with a standardized framing of statements. Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) score and daily dose of concomitant drugs were assessed by neurologists as clinical outcomes. Clinical outcomes and side-effects were re-assessed at 3 and 6 months, and clinical outcomes were monitored at 18 months.

RESULTS

Clinically significant improvement in the QMG scores was achieved at 3 or 6 months. The level of state anxiety appeared to act as moderator of pre-treatment negative expectations (strong, positive, indicative correlation, rs = .733, p = .001). The latter were, in turn, associated with the fulfillment of side-effects that patients expected to develop with the new treatment (moderate, positive, indicative correlation, rs = .699, p = .002). No significant correlation emerged between positive and negative expectations.

DISCUSSION

Our findings show a very quick clinical response and also suggest that patients' expectations and anxiety contributed to treatment outcomes, highlighting the importance of promoting safety messages and education strategies around newly introduced treatments. Future goals include evaluating a larger cohort that includes a matched control group.

Risk factors associated with nocebo effects: A review of reviews

Objective

This meta-review aims to identify and categorize the risk factors that are associated with nocebo effects. The nocebo effect can exert a negative impact on treatment outcomes and have detrimental outcomes on health. Learning more about its potential predictors and risk factors is a crucial step to mitigating it.

Methods

Literature review studies about the risk factors for nocebo effects were searched through five databases (PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Embase) and through grey literature. Methodological validity and risk of bias were assessed. We conducted a thematic analysis of the results of the forty-three included reviews.

Results

We identified nine categories of risk factors: prior expectations and learning; socio-demographic characteristics; personality and individual differences; neurodegenerative conditions; inflammatory conditions; communication of information and patient-physician relationship; drug characteristics; setting; and self-awareness. We also highlighted the main biochemical and neurophysiological mechanisms underlying nocebo effects.

Conclusions

Nocebo effects arise from expectations of adverse symptoms, particularly when triggered by previous negative experiences. A trusting relationship with the treating physician and clear, tailored treatment instructions can act as protective factors against a nocebo effect. Clinical implications are discussed.

Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects

OBJECTIVE

Treatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions.

METHODS

N = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q).

RESULTS

Whereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = -0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = -0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.576, p < .001; flu: β = -0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.005, p = .93; flu: β = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61).

CONCLUSION

Expectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.

Belief That Caffeine Ingestion Improves Performance in a 6-Minute Time Trial Test without Affecting Pacing Strategy

This study aimed to analyze the placebo effect associated with caffeine ingestion on running performance.

METHODS

Thirteen recreationally trained males in long-distance running (age: 38.5 ± 11.9 years, 11.0 ± 8.8 years of running experience) performed a 6 min time trial test in each experimental condition (caffeine-informed/placebo ingested (placebo) and non-ingested (control)) separated by 7 days. The total distance covered was measured, and partial times of each 400 m were used to analyze the pacing strategy. Heart rate and kinematic variables were recorded for each split. In addition, the rate of perceived exertion and prevalence of caffeine side effects was measured using questionnaires.

RESULTS

Placebo ingestion improved running performance in the 6 min time trial test (1668 ± 139 m placebo vs. 1642 ± 158 m control, t = 2.49; p = 0.03; moderate ES = 0.69), while pacing, heart rate, RPE, and kinematic variables were similar between conditions (p > 0.05 in all cases). Minor side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Beliefs of caffeine ingestion can improve running performance at speeds around maximal aerobic speed in recreationally trained runners without affecting pacing strategy so this "nutritional" strategy could be useful in competition scenarios. As a practical application, recreationally trained runners could improve ≈5 s in 1500 m or mile competitions.