Chapter Fifteen - Nocebo Effects: Neurobiological Mechanisms and Strategies for Prevention and Optimizing Treatment
Introduction
The psychosocial context is an essential and inevitable part of most medical treatments. Evidence gained in the recent past highlights the importance of the various mechanisms involved in shaping this therapeutic context, such as patients’ expectations, learning mechanisms, and the patient–physician relationship. Positive physiological or psychological effects induced by the treatment context are referred to as placebo effects or placebo responses and are known to represent complex psychoneurobiological phenomena (Benedetti et al., 2005; Enck et al., 2013). Importantly, placebo effects are not restricted to placebo treatments; rather, we know that they can substantially modulate the efficacy and tolerability of active pharmacological therapies, for example.
On the other hand, the negative effects the treatment context induces—defined as nocebo effects (nocere, lat. = to hurt)—can impair medical (treatment) outcomes on various levels including the development and maintenance of new symptoms (Crichton & Petrie, 2015), as well as the efficacy and tolerability of medical treatments including pharmacotherapy. However, despite their potentially detrimental effects on treatment outcomes, the neurobiological and neurochemical mechanisms involved in nocebo effects are largely unknown and much less studied than placebo effects. In this chapter, we highlight the levels at which different nocebo effects interfere negatively with medical and treatment outcomes, and propose strategies for preventing or even overcoming their influence so as to optimize treatment outcomes.
Section snippets
Psychosocial Mechanisms
From a psychological point of view, nocebo effects are induced and/or moderated by several factors that ultimately converge to negative treatment outcome expectations. These include, among others, negative prior information regarding a treatment or health outcome provided by healthcare professionals, the media or a social peer, or negative personal experiences as evidence following treatment failure. These latter learning mechanisms are not restricted to first-hand experiences. Negative
Neurobiological Correlates
Despite their potentially detrimental clinical consequences, the mechanisms underlying nocebo effects including nocebo hyperalgesia have received very little attention so far. Initial fMRI studies have shown that nocebo hyperalgesia is associated with increased activity in pain-processing areas (Keltner et al., 2006; Sawamoto et al., 2000), but the specific mechanisms underlying this amplification of nociceptive information have not been adequately explored. Placebo analgesia is known to be
Symptom Development
A well-known nocebo effect is symptom augmentation, as Benedetti, Durando, and Vighetti (2014) showed recently in a study investigating nocebo and placebo effects in hypobaric hypoxia headache. As a symptom of acute mountain sickness, hypobaric hypoxia headache results from a rise in the concentration of prostaglandins due to hypoxia at high altitudes (Benedetti et al., 2014). In this trial, negative information (i.e., the induction of a negative expectation) from other study volunteers (social
Treatment Efficacy and Course of Disease
A recent meta-analysis involving studies with experimental, acute (e.g., procedural or postoperative), and chronic pain (e.g., chronic back pain) settings reveals that different positive (placebo-)expectations—either verbally induced, by conditioning or by imagery—can lead to pain relief, especially in case of acute pain, therefore improving pain therapy and its outcome (Peerdeman et al., 2016). In contrast, negative expectations are not just able to augment symptoms. It has long been suggested
Unwanted/Adverse Events
Aside from the harm nocebo effects have on treatment efficacy, negative expectations or prior experiences may also facilitate the occurrence and development of side effects during drug and other therapies. This is well demonstrated by Rief et al. (2009), who studied the reported adverse effects in 12,742 patients randomized to the placebo arm of RCTs investigating tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Although all patients analyzed in this meta-analysis
References (28)
- et al.
Nocebo and placebo modulation of hypobaric hypoxia headache involves the cyclooxygenase-prostaglandins pathway
Pain
(2014) Blockade of nocebo hyperalgesia by the cholecystokinin antagonist proglumide
Pain
(1997)- et al.
The role of learning in nocebo and placebo effects
Pain
(2008) - et al.
Health complaints and wind turbines: The efficacy of explaining the nocebo response to reduce symptom reporting
Environmental Research
(2015) Distinct neural representations of placebo and nocebo effects
Neuroimage
(2015)Adverse events associated with unblinded, but not with blinded, statin therapy in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Lipid-Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial and its non-randomised non-blind extension phase
Lancet
(2017)- et al.
Neuropharmacological dissection of placebo analgesia: Expectation-activated opioid systems versus conditioning-activated specific subsystems
The Journal of Neuroscience
(1999) Neurobiological mechanisms of the placebo effect
The Journal of Neuroscience
(2005)The biochemical and neuroendocrine bases of the hyperalgesic nocebo effect
The Journal of Neuroscience
(2006)- et al.
Avoiding nocebo effects to optimize treatment outcome
JAMA
(2014)
The effect of treatment expectation on drug efficacy: Imaging the analgesic benefit of the opioid remifentanil
Science Translational Medicine
Nocebo and pain: An overview of the psychoneurobiological mechanisms
Pain Reports
Cognitive reversal of expected nitrous oxide analgesia for acute pain
Anesthesia and Analgesia
The placebo response in medicine: Minimize, maximize or personalize?
Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery
Cited by (29)
Response and Adverse Event Rates With Placebo in Gastroparesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
2023, Clinical Gastroenterology and HepatologyAvoiding nocebo and other undesirable effects in chiropractic, osteopathy and physiotherapy: An invitation to reflect
2022, Musculoskeletal Science and PracticeCitation Excerpt :Trying to overcome this aversion, researchers are now communicating that placebo effects are inherent, neurophysiologically grounded parts of healthcare (Evers et al., 2021), likely more so in inherently social and complex interventions such as COP (Rossettini et al., 2020a; Testa and Rossettini, 2016). These effects should be embraced rather than dismissed (Evers et al., 2018; Kleine-Borgmann and Bingel, 2018). Indeed, COP curricula now place more emphasis on relationship-building and communication skills.
Moving forward: Implementing health psychology research to improve patient acceptance of biosimilars
2022, Research in Social and Administrative PharmacyNocebo Response in the Pharmacological Management of Overactive Bladder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
2021, European Urology FocusCitation Excerpt :Unwanted adverse events may occur as a consequence of the informed consent procedure and/or prior side-effect expectation. The nocebo response can, thus, impair the treatment procedure in various ways [7]. Several studies have evaluated the role of the placebo response in urology [8–10].