Gitte Laue Petersen

Factors contributing to large analgesic effects in placebo mechanism studies conducted between 2002 and 2007.

ABSTRACT Recent meta‐analyses find various magnitudes of placebo analgesia effects in placebo mechanism trials versus placebo control trials, which have led to debate. To further investigate the magnitude of placebo analgesia in placebo mechanism trials the databases “PubMed”, “PsycINFO” and “Web of Science” (2002–2007) were searched with the term “placebo analgesia”. Twenty‐one articles including 24 studies fulfilled the selection criteria (concerning: mechanisms, control, placebo treatment, randomization and pain measures). The validity of studies was assessed by the authors and effect sizes were calculated via difference scores. The magnitude of placebo analgesia in placebo mechanism studies was large (d = 1.00) and about five times larger than placebo analgesia effects in placebo control studies (d = 0.15–0.27). Differences in magnitude between the two types of studies appear to result from different types of suggestions given for pain relief. The magnitude of placebo effects was larger in studies that used long‐term pain stimuli >20 s (d = 0.96) as opposed to short‐term stimuli (d = 0.81) and the largest placebo effects were found in studies wherein hyperalgesia was present (d = 1.88). These results replicate our previous finding that placebo analgesic effects are higher in mechanism studies than in placebo control studies. However, since magnitudes of placebo analgesic effects are highly variable it may be valuable to investigate the factors and mechanisms that contribute to this variability as well as differences in magnitudes across types of studies.

Placebo manipulations reduce hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain

Summary Placebo effects in neuropathic pain were investigated. Placebo manipulations reduced the area of hyperalgesia, and this effect was related to low levels of negative affect. ABSTRACT Several studies have shown that placebo analgesia effects can be obtained in healthy volunteers, as well as patients suffering from acute postoperative pain and chronic pain conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome. However, it is unknown whether placebo analgesia effects can be elicited in chronic pain conditions with a known pathophysiology such as a nerve injury. Nineteen patients who had developed neuropathic pain after thoracotomy were exposed to a placebo manipulation in which they received either open or hidden administrations of lidocaine. Before the treatment, the patients rated their levels of spontaneous pain and expected pain and completed a questionnaire on their emotional feelings (Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule) and went through quantitative sensory testing of evoked pain (brush and cold allodynia, heat pain tolerance, area of pinprick hyperalgesia, wind‐up‐like pain after pinprick stimulation). The placebo manipulation significantly reduced the area of pinprick hyperalgesia (P = .027), and this placebo effect was significantly related to low levels of negative affect (P = .008; R2 = 0.362) but not to positive affect or expected pain levels. No placebo effect was observed in relation to spontaneous pain or evoked pain, which is most likely due to low pain levels resulting in floor effects. This is the first study to demonstrate a placebo effect in neuropathic pain. The possible mechanisms underlying the placebo effects in hyperalgesia are discussed, and implications for treatment are outlined.

Randomised controlled trials may underestimate drug effects: balanced placebo trial design.

Background It is an inherent assumption in randomised controlled trials that the drug effect can be estimated by subtracting the response during placebo from the response during active drug treatment. Objective To test the assumption of additivity. The primary hypothesis was that the total treatment effect is smaller than the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect. The secondary hypothesis was that non-additivity was most pronounced in participants with large placebo effects. Methods We used a within-subject randomised blinded balanced placebo design and included 48 healthy volunteers (50% males), mean (SD) age 23.4 (6.2) years. Experimental pain was induced by injections of hypertonic saline into the masseter muscle. Participants received four injections with hypertonic saline along with lidocaine or matching placebo in randomised order: A: received hypertonic saline/told hypertonic saline; B: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline; C: received hypertonic saline+placebo/told hypertonic saline+pain killer; D: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline+pain killer. The primary outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC, mm2) of pain intensity during injections. Results There was a significant difference between the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect (mean AUC 6279 mm2 (95% CI, 4936–7622)) and the total treatment effect (mean AUC 5455 mm2 (95% CI, 4585–6324)) (P = 0.049). This difference was larger for participants with large versus small placebo effects (P = 0.015), and the difference correlated significantly with the size of the placebo effect (r = 0.65, P = 0.006). Conclusion Although this study examined placebo effects and not the whole placebo response as in randomised controlled trials, it does suggest that the additivity assumption may be incorrect, and that the estimated drug effects in randomised controlled trials may be underestimated, particularly in studies reporting large placebo responses. The implications for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews need to be discussed.

Expectations and positive emotional feelings accompany reductions in ongoing and evoked neuropathic pain following placebo interventions

Summary Large placebo but not nocebo effects were seen in ongoing and evoked neuropathic pain, and patients’ expectations about these treatments coexisted with emotional feelings. ABSTRACT Research on placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia has primarily included healthy subjects or acute pain patients, and it is unknown whether these effects can be obtained in ongoing pain in patients with chronic pain caused by an identifiable nerve injury. Eighteen patients with postthoracotomy neuropathic pain were exposed to placebo and nocebo manipulations, in which they received open and hidden administrations of pain‐relieving (lidocaine) or pain‐inducing (capsaicin) treatment controlled for the natural history of pain. Immediately after the open administration, patients rated their expected pain levels on a mechanical visual analogue scale (M‐VAS). They also reported their emotional feelings via a quantitative/qualitative experiential method. Subsequently, patients rated their ongoing pain levels on the M‐VAS and underwent quantitative sensory testing of evoked pain (brush, pinprick, area of hyperalgesia, wind‐up‐like pain). There was a significant placebo effect on both ongoing (P = .009 to .019) and evoked neuropathic pain (P = .0005 to .053). Expected pain levels accounted for significant amounts of the variance in ongoing (53.4%) and evoked pain (up to 34.5%) after the open lidocaine administration. Furthermore, patients reported high levels of positive and low levels of negative emotional feelings in the placebo condition compared with the nocebo condition (P ⩽ .001). Pain increases during nocebo were nonsignificant (P = .394 to 1.000). To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate placebo effects in ongoing neuropathic pain. It provides further evidence for placebo‐induced reduction in hyperalgesia and suggests that patients’ expectations coexist with emotional feelings about treatments.

Review of neuroimaging studies related to pain modulation

Abstract Background and purpose: A noxious stimulus does not necessarily cause pain. Nociceptive signals arising from a noxious stimulus are subject to modulation via endogenous inhibitory and facilitatory mechanisms as they travel from the periphery to the dorsal horn or brainstem and on to higher brain sites. Research on the neural structures underlying endogenous pain modulation has largely been restricted to animal research due to the invasiveness of such studies (e.g., spinal cord transection, brain lesioning, brain site stimulation). Neuroimaging techniques (e.g., magnetoencephalography (MEG), positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)) provide non-invasive means to study neural structures in humans. The aim is to provide a narrative review of neuroimaging studies related to human pain control mechanisms. Methods: The approach taken is to summarise specific pain modulation mechanisms within the somatosensory (diffuse noxious inhibitory controls, acupuncture, movement), affective (depression, anxiety, catastrophizing, stress) and cognitive (anticipation/placebo, attention/distraction, hypnosis)domains with emphasis on the contribution of neuroimaging studies. Results and conclusions: Findings from imaging studies are complex reflecting activation or deactivation in numerous brain areas. Despite this, neuroimaging techniques have clarified supraspinal sites involved in a number of pain control mechanisms. The periaqueductal grey (PAG) is one area that has consistently been shown to be activated across the majority of pain mechanisms. Activity in the rostral ventromedial medulla known to relay descending modulation from the PAG, has also been observed both during acupuncture analgesia and anxiety-induced hyperalgesia. Other brain areas that appear to be involved in a number of mechanisms are the anterior cingulate cortex, prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens, but their exact role is less clear. Implications: Neuroimaging studies have provided essential information about the pain modulatory pathways under normal conditions, but much is still to be determined. Understanding the mechanisms of pain control is important for understanding the mechanisms that contribute to failed pain control in chronic pain. Applying fMRI outside the brain, such as in the trigeminal nucleus caudalis of the spinotrigeminal pathway and in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, and coupling brain activity with activity at these sites may help improve our understanding of the function of brain sites and shed light on functional connectivity in the pain pathway.

Placebo Effects in Idiopathic and Neuropathic Pain Conditions

The magnitude of placebo analgesia effect appears to be large in chronic pain patients experiencing hyperalgesic states. So far, placebo effects have primarily been investigated in idiopathic pain conditions, such as irritable bowel pain syndrome, but more recently they have also been investigated in neuropathic pain patients, in which the underlying nerve injury is known. Expected pain levels and emotional feelings are central to placebo effects in both types of pain. They appear to help patients to engage in a mindset for pain relief and activate the pain-modulating system. Furthermore, expectations, emotional feelings, and the experience of pain seem to interact over time, thereby maintaining or enhancing the pain-relieving effect. Expectations and emotional feelings also contribute to the effect of active drugs, and recent studies indicate that drug effects and placebo effects interact in ways that may complicate the interpretations of the findings from clinical trials. It is suggested that expectations and emotional feelings may act as additional or alternative measures in the testing of new pharmacological agents, thereby improving the understanding of the interaction between pharmacological effects and placebo effects, which may have far-reaching implications for research and clinical practice.

The magnitude of placebo analgesia effects depends on how they are conceptualized

OBJECTIVE Placebo effects are usually calculated as the difference between placebo treatments and no treatments. Recently, placebo-like effects have been investigated using open and hidden administrations of active treatments. The aim of the study was to directly compare the two types of placebo effects and examine how they are influenced by personality traits. METHODS In a within-subject, randomized, blinded, balanced placebo trial design study with 48 healthy volunteers, we compared placebo and placebo-like effects and tested if expectancy, absorption and suggestibility correlated with these effects. Subjects completed the Tellegen Absorption Scale and the Sensory Suggestibility Scale, and pain was induced by injections of hypertonic saline into the masseter muscle. Participants received four injections of hypertonic saline with lidocaine or matching placebo in randomized order: open treatment, hidden treatment, placebo and control. The placebo effect was defined as the difference in pain between the placebo and the control condition and the placebo-like effect as the difference in pain between the open and hidden condition. RESULTS Placebo effects were significant both in the traditional paradigm: mean placebo effect AUC 1626 mm(2) (95% CI 958-2293) and the open-hidden paradigm: mean placebo-like effect AUC 801 mm(2) (95% CI 134-1469), but there was a significant difference between the magnitude of the two effects (p=0.049). Absorption and suggestibility did not predict the placebo or the placebo-like effect. Estimated expected pain relief correlated with placebo effects but not placebo-like effects. CONCLUSION The magnitude of placebo effects differs depending on how they are conceptualized and calculated.

Dopaminergic tone does not influence pain levels during placebo interventions in patients with chronic neuropathic pain

Abstract Placebo effects have been reported in patients with chronic neuropathic pain. Expected pain levels and positive emotions are involved in the observed pain relief, but the underlying neurobiology is largely unknown. Patients with neuropathic pain are highly motivated for pain relief, and as motivational factors such as expectations of reward, as well as pain processing in itself, are related to the dopaminergic system, it can be speculated that dopamine release contributes to placebo effects in neuropathic pain. Nineteen patients with neuropathic pain after thoracic surgery were tested during a placebo intervention consisting of open and hidden applications of the pain-relieving agent lidocaine (2 mL) and no treatment. The dopamine antagonist haloperidol (2 mg) and the agonist levodopa/carbidopa (100/25 mg) were administered to test the involvement of dopamine. Expected pain levels, desire for pain relief, and ongoing and evoked pain were assessed on mechanical visual analog scales (0-10). Significant placebo effects on ongoing (P ⩽ 0.003) and evoked (P ⩽ 0.002) pain were observed. Expectancy and desire accounted for up to 41.2% and 71.5% of the variance in ongoing and evoked pain, respectively, after the open application of lidocaine. We found no evidence for an effect of haloperidol and levodopa/carbidopa on neuropathic pain levels (P = 0.071-0.963). Dopamine seemed to influence the levels of expectancy and desire, yet there was no evidence for indirect or interaction effects on the placebo effect. This is the first study to suggest that dopamine does not contribute to placebo effects in chronic neuropathic pain.