Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nocebo in Headaches: Implications for Clinical Practice and Trial Design

  • Headache (I Garza, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The term nocebo refers to a harmful, unpleasant or undesirable adverse event a subject manifests after receiving an inert dummy drug or placebo. This reaction is originating by the patients fear and negative expectation that medical treatment most likely will produce unfavorable consequences instead of healing. Like placebo, nocebo shares key functions in pain conditions. Two recent systemic meta-analyses searched for nocebo in trials for prevention of migraine and tension-type headache and revealed that 1 out of 20 patients treated with placebo withdraw treatment due to adverse effects. Additionally, adverse events in placebo groups mirrored the adverse events expected of the active medication studied, confirming that pretrial suggestions induce the adverse events in placebo-treated patients. Therefore, nocebo reduces the study population by 10% and limits the treatment outcomes in randomized controlled trials for primary headaches. The potential implications of this substantial nocebo effect for both trial designing and clinical practice are discussed in this article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Kennedy WP. The nocebo reaction. Med World. 1961;95:203–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF. Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA. 2002;287:622–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Enck P, Benedetti F, Schedlowski M. New insights into the placebo and nocebo responses. Neuron. 2008;59:195–206.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD. Nocebo effects in multiple sclerosis trials: a meta-analysis. Mult Scler. 2010;16:816–28.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. van Laarhoven AI, Vogelaar ML, Wilder-Smith OH, et al. Induction of nocebo and placebo effects on itch and pain by verbal suggestions. Pain. 2011;152:1486–94. Epub 2011 Feb 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Varelmann D, Pancaro C, Cappiello EC, Camann WR. Nocebo-induced hyperalgesia during local anesthetic injection. Anesth Analg. 2010;110:868–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Colloca L, Sigaudo M, Benedetti F. The role of learning in nocebo and placebo effects. Pain. 2008;136:211–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Benedetti F, Lanotte M, Lopiano L, Colloca L. When words are painful: unraveling the mechanisms of the nocebo effect. Neuroscience. 2007 29;147:260–71.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Vase L, Robinson ME, Verne GN, Price DD. The contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients. An empirical investigation. Pain. 2003;105:17–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Benedetti F, Amanzio M. The placebo response: How words and rituals change the patient's brain. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84:413–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Benedetti F, Amanzio M. The neurobiology of placebo analgesia: from endogenous opioids to cholecystokinin. Prog Neurobiol. 1997;52:109–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Benedetti F, Amanzio M, Casadio C, et al. Blockade of nocebo hyperalgesia by the cholecystokinin antagonist proglumide. Pain. 1997;71:135–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Benedetti F, Amanzio M, Vighetti S, Asteggiano G. The biochemical and neuroendocrine bases of the hyperalgesic nocebo effect. J Neurosci. 2006;26:12014–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kong J, Gollub RL, Polich G, et al. A functional magnetic resonance imaging study on the neural mechanisms of hyperalgesic nocebo effect. J Neurosci. 2008;28:13354–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Scott DJ, Stohler CS, Egnatuk CM, et al. Placebo and nocebo effects are defined by opposite opioid and dopaminergic responses. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008;65:220–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. • Tracey I. Getting the pain you expect: mechanisms of placebo, nocebo and reappraisal effects in humans. Nat Med. 2010;16:1277-83. This is an extensive review of all biochemical and molecular mechanisms underlying nocebo and placebo.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Evans WR. Headaches and the nocebo effect. Headache. 2003;43:1111–5.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Colloca L, Miller FG. The nocebo effect and its relevance for clinical practice. Psychosom Med. 2011 Aug 23. [Epub ahead of print]

  19. Merikangas KR, Cui L, Richardson AK, et al. Magnitude, impact, and stability of primary headache subtypes: 30 year prospective Swiss cohort study. BMJ. 2011;343:d5076.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lipton RB. Chronic migraine, classification, differential diagnosis, and epidemiology. Headache. 2011;51 Suppl 2:77–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Reuter U, Sanchez del Rio M, Carpay JA, et al. GSK headache masters program: placebo adverse events in headache trials: headache as an adverse event of placebo. Cephalalgia. 2003;23:496–503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Loder E, Goldstein R, Biondi D. Placebo effects in oral triptan trials: the scientific and ethical rationale for continued use of placebo controls. Cephalalgia. 2004;25:124–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. •• Amanzion M, Corazzini LL, Vase L, Benedetti F. A systematic review of adverse events in placebo groups of anti-migraine clinical trials. Pain 2009; 146: 261–269. This is a systematic review of placebo-controlled trials for migraine treatment (either symptomatic or preventive). The authors aimed to evaluate the AEs recorded by patients treated with specific class antimigraine agents in relation to the AEs recorded by the patients treated with placebo. They found that the AEs in both groups were closely similar, indicating that nocebo adverse events are not un-specific symptoms. In the contrary, nocebo consists of drug-related AEs that the patients have been told by the investigators that they may experience. This finding is in line with the expectation theory of placebo and nocebo.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. •• Mitsikostas DD, Mantonakis LI, Chalarakis NG. Nocebo is the enemy, not placebo. A meta-analysis of reported side effects after placebo treatment in headaches. Cephalalgia 2011;31:550-61. In this systematic review, all placebo-controlled randomized trials for the treatment of any primary headache, published in the last decade, were analyzed to estimate the pooled average of placebo-treated patients who experienced any AE, or discontinued treatment due to AE. One out 20 patients treated for prophylaxis of migraine was discontinued due to AEs, although treated with placebo. Nocebo dropout was equal in trials for TTH. This finding has essential significance for both clinical practice and trial designing.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Amanzio M. Do we need a new procedure for the assessment of adverse events in anti-migraine clinical trials? Recent Pat CNS Drug Discov. 2011;6:41–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Dodick DW, Turkel CC, DeGryse RE, et al. PREEMPT Chronic Migraine Study Group: OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: pooled results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phases of the PREEMPT clinical program. Headache. 2010;50:921–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Manzoni GC, Torelli P. Epidemiological classification and social impact of chronic headache. Intern Emerg Med. 2010;5 Suppl 1:S1–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stovner LJ, Andree C. Prevalence of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project. J Headache Pain. 2010;11:289–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD. A meta-analytic approach to estimating nocebo effects in neuropathic pain trials. J Neurol. 2011 Aug 3. [Epub ahead of print].

  30. Mitsikostas DD, Chalarakis NG, Mantonakis LI, et al. Nocebo in fibromyalgia: meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials and implications for practice. Eur J Neurol 2011 Oct 4. doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2011.03528.x.

  31. de la Cruz M, Hui D, Parsons HA, Bruera E. Placebo and nocebo effects in randomized double-blind clinical trials of agents for the therapy for fatigue in patients with advanced cancer. Cancer. 2010;116:766–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Price DD, Craggs JG, Zhou Q, et al. Widespread hyperalgesia in irritable bowel syndrome is dynamically maintained by tonic visceral impulse input and placebo/nocebo factors: evidence from human psychophysics, animal models, and neuroimaging. NeuroImage. 2009;47:995–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Nonspecific side effects of oral contraceptives: nocebo or noise? Contraception. 2011;83:5–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Weissenfeld J, Stock S, Lüngen M, Gerber A. The nocebo effect: a reason for patients' non-adherence to generic substitution? Pharmazie. 2010;65:451–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Vernia P, Di Camillo M, Foglietta T, et al. Diagnosis of lactose intolerance and the "nocebo" effect: the role of negative expectations. Dig Liver Dis. 2010;42:616–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Haga SB, Warner LR, O'Daniel J. The potential of a placebo/nocebo effect in pharmacogenetics. Public Health Genomics. 2009;12:158–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neurology Department, Athens Naval Hospital, 77A Vas. Sofias Avenue, Athens, 11529, Greece

    Dimos D. Mitsikostas

Authors
  1. Dimos D. Mitsikostas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dimos D. Mitsikostas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mitsikostas, D.D. Nocebo in Headaches: Implications for Clinical Practice and Trial Design. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 12, 132–137 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-011-0245-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-011-0245-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation