Showing posts with label Placebo Effect. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Placebo Effect. Show all posts

Aug 24, 2024

Placebos reduce stress, anxiety, depression -- even when people know they are placebos

A study out of Michigan State University found that nondeceptive placebos, or placebos given with people fully knowing they are placebos, effectively manage stress -- even when the placebos are administered remotely.

Researchers recruited participants experiencing prolonged stress from the COVID-19 pandemic for a two-week randomized controlled trial.

Half of the participants were randomly assigned to a nondeceptive placebo group and the other half to the control group that took no pills.

The participants interacted with a researcher online through four virtual sessions on Zoom.

Those in the nondeceptive placebo group received information on the placebo effect and were sent placebo pills in the mail along with and instructions on taking the pills.

The study, published in Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, found that the nondeceptive group showed a significant decrease in stress, anxiety and depression in just two weeks compared to the no-treatment control group.

Participants also reported that the nondeceptive placebos were easy to use, not burdensome and appropriate for the situation.

"Exposure to long-term stress can impair a person's ability to manage emotions and cause significant mental health problems long-term, so we're excited to see that an intervention that takes minimal effort can still lead to significant benefits," said Jason Moser, co-author of the study and professor in MSU's Department of Psychology.

"This minimal burden makes nondeceptive placebos an attractive intervention for those with significant stress, anxiety and depression."

The researchers are particularly hopeful in the ability to remotely administer the nondeceptive placebos by health care providers.

Read more at Science Daily

Jul 25, 2024

Neuroscientists discover brain circuitry of placebo effect for pain relief

The placebo effect is very real. This we've known for decades, as seen in real-life observations and the best double-blinded randomized clinical trials researchers have devised for many diseases and conditions, especially pain. And yet, how and why the placebo effect occurs has remained a mystery. Now, neuroscientists have discovered a key piece of the placebo effect puzzle.

Publishing in Nature, researchers at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine- with colleagues from Stanford, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the Allen Institute for Brain Science -- discovered a pain control pathway that links the cingulate cortex in the front of the brain, through the pons region of the brainstem, to cerebellum in the back of the brain.

The researchers, led by Greg Scherrer, PharmD, PhD, associate professor in the UNC Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, the UNC Neuroscience Center, and the UNC Department of Pharmacology, then showed that certain neurons and synapses along this pathway are highly activated when mice expect pain relief and experience pain relief, even when there is no medication involved.

"That neurons in our cerebral cortex communicate with the pons and cerebellum to adjust pain thresholds based on our expectations is both completely unexpected, given our previous understanding of the pain circuitry, and incredibly exciting," said Scherrer. "Our results do open the possibility of activating this pathway through other therapeutic means, such as drugs or neurostimulation methods to treat pain."

Scherrer and colleagues said research provides a new framework for investigating the brain pathways underlying other mind-body interactions and placebo effects beyond the ones involved in pain.

The Placebo Paradox

It is the human experience, in the face of pain, to want to feel better. As a result -- and in conjunction with millennia of evolution -- our brains can search for ways to help us feel better. It releases chemicals, which can be measured. Positive thinking and even prayer have been shown to benefit some patients. And the placebo effect -- feeling better even though there was no "real" treatment -- has been documented as a very real phenomenon for decades.

In clinical research, the placebo effect is often seen in what we call the "sham" treatment group. That is, individuals in this group receive a fake pill or intervention that is supposed to be inert; no one in the control group is supposed to see a benefit. Except that the brain is so powerful and individuals so desire to feel better that some experience a marked improvement in their symptoms. Some placebo effects are so strong that individuals are convinced they received a real treatment meant to help them.

In fact, it's thought that some individuals in the "actual" treatment group also derive benefit from the placebo effect. This is one of the reasons why clinical research of therapeutics is so difficult and demands as many volunteers as possible so scientists can parse the treatment benefit from the sham. One way to help scientists do this is to first understand what precisely is happening in the brain of someone experiencing the placebo effect.

Enter the Scherrer lab

The authors of the Nature paper knew that the scientific community's understanding of the biological underpinnings of pain relief through placebo analgesia -- when the positive expectation of pain relief is sufficient for patients to feel better -- came from human brain imaging studies, which showed activity in certain brain regions. Those imaging studies did not have enough precision to show what was actually happening in those brain regions. So Scherrer's team designed a set of meticulous, complementary, and time-consuming experiments to learn in more detail, with single nerve cell precision, what was happening in those regions.

First, the researchers created an assay that generates in mice the expectation of pain relief and then very real placebo effect of pain relief. Then the researchers used a series of experimental methods to study the intricacies of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), which had been previously associated with the pain placebo effect. While mice were experiencing the effect, the scientists used genetic tagging of neurons in the ACC, imaging of calcium in neurons of freely behaving mice, single-cell RNA sequencing techniques, electrophysiological recordings, and optogenetics -- the use of light and fluorescent-tagged genes to manipulate cells.

These experiments helped them see and study the intricate neurobiology of the placebo effect down to the brain circuits, neurons, and synapses throughout the brain.

The scientists found that when mice expected pain relief, the rostral anterior cingulate cortex neurons projected their signals to the pontine nucleus, which had no previously established function in pain or pain relief. And they found that expectation of pain relief boosted signals along this pathway.

"There is an extraordinary abundance of opioid receptors here, supporting a role in pain modulation," Scherrer said. "When we inhibited activity in this pathway, we realized we were disrupting placebo analgesia and decreasing pain thresholds. And then, in the absence of placebo conditioning, when we activated this pathway, we caused pain relief.

Lastly, the scientists found that Purkinje cells -- a distinct class of large branch-like cells of the cerebellum -- showed activity patterns similar to those of the ACC neurons during pain relief expectation. Scherrer and first author Chong Chen, MD, PhD, a postdoctoral research associate in the Scherrer lab, said that this is cellular-level evidence for the cerebellum's role in cognitive pain modulation.

"We all know we need better ways to treat chronic pain, particularly treatments without harmful side effects and addictive properties," Scherrer said. "We think our findings open the door to targeting this novel neural pain pathway to treat people in a different but potentially more effective way."

Read more at Science Daily

Nov 29, 2023

Understanding subjective beliefs could be vital to tailoring more effective treatments for depression and ADHD

Taking into account whether people believe they are receiving a real treatment or a fake one (placebo) could provide better insights that could help improve interventions for conditions such as depression and ADHD.

A team of psychologists, led by Professor Roi Cohen Kadosh from the University of Surrey, analysed five independent studies that covered different types of neurostimulation treatments to understand the role of patients' subjective beliefs.

These patients included both clinical patients being treated for ADHD and depression, as well as healthy adults.

The study found that patients' beliefs about whether they were receiving real or placebo treatments explained the treatment outcomes in four of the five studies.

On some occasions, the subjects' beliefs explained the treatment's results better than the actual treatment itself.

Assumptions about the treatment intensity also played a significant role in the treatment.

Professor Roi Cohen Kadosh from the University of Surrey said that the results have provided a twist that scientists must consider in future research:

"The common wisdom is that the same medical treatment would produce similar results across patients, but our latest study suggests a fascinating twist. While you'd expect uniform improvements in a group of people with depression undergoing the same neurostimulation treatment, outcomes can vary widely.

"What's truly eye-opening is that this variability could be largely influenced by the participants' own beliefs about the treatment they're receiving. In essence, if an individual believes they're receiving an effective treatment -- even when given a placebo -- that belief alone might contribute to significant improvements in their condition."

In the first study analysed, 121 participants were treated with different forms of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) for depression.

The results showed that participants' perceptions about receiving real or placebo treatment mattered more than the actual type of rTMS in reducing depression.

The second study involved 52 older people with late-life depression who received either a real or placebo of deep rTMS.

Surrey researchers found that the effect of treatment on reducing depression scores depended on the combination of the participants' perceptions about receiving real or placebo treatment and the actual treatment they received.

In the third dataset, researchers investigated the effects of home-based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) treatment on 64 adults diagnosed with ADHD.

At the end of the study, participants' beliefs about the treatment they thought they had received were also collected.

This study differed from the first two as both the subjects' beliefs and the actual treatment had a dual effect on reducing inattention scores.

In the fourth study, 150 healthy participants got varying doses of tDCS for mind wandering.

Those who believed they got a more potent dose reported more mind wandering, even if the actual treatment wasn't a factor.

The fifth study analysed the impact of transcranial random noise stimulation on working memory.

Unlike previous studies, participants' beliefs didn't affect the results, highlighting the varying influence of beliefs in brain stimulation research.

Thus, Roi Cohen Kadosh and his team show how subjective beliefs can vary in their effect on research -- from fully explaining results beyond the actual treatment, to interacting with the treatment, to having no influence at all.

Dr Shachar Hochman, a co-author on this work from the University of Surrey, said:

"The concept that a placebo or sham treatment can mimic genuine treatment effects is well-established in science. While researchers have closely monitored this phenomenon, it has been typically catalogued separately from the in-depth analyses of the actual treatment outcomes. What sets our study apart is that we have brought together these two datasets -- subjective beliefs and objective treatment measures. This has the potential to reveal new insights into treatment efficacy."

Read more at Science Daily

Mar 3, 2021

New study gives the most detailed look yet at the neuroscience of placebo effects

 A large proportion of the benefit that a person gets from taking a real drug or receiving a treatment to alleviate pain is due to an individual's mindset, not to the drug itself. Understanding the neural mechanisms driving this placebo effect has been a longstanding question. A meta-analysis published in Nature Communications finds that placebo treatments to reduce pain, known as placebo analgesia, reduce pain-related activity in multiple areas of the brain.

Previous studies of this kind have relied on small-scale studies, so until now, researchers did not know if the neural mechanisms underlying placebo effects observed to date would hold up across larger samples. This study represents the first large-scale mega-analysis, which looks at individual participants' whole brain images. It enabled researchers to look at parts of the brain that they did not have sufficient resolution to look at in the past. The analysis was comprised of 20 neuroimaging studies with 600 healthy participants. The results provide new insight on the size, localization, significance and heterogeneity of placebo effects on pain-related brain activity.

The research reflects the work of an international collaborative effort by the Placebo Neuroimaging Consortium, led by Tor Wager , the Diana L. Taylor Distinguished Professor in Neuroscience at Dartmouth and Ulrike Bingel, a professor at the Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences in the department of neurology at University Hospital Essen, for which Matthias Zunhammer and Tamás Spisák at the University Hospital Essen, served as co-authors. The meta-analysis is the second with this sample and builds on the team's earlier research using an established pain marker developed earlier by Wager's lab.

"Our findings demonstrate that the participants who showed the most pain reduction with the placebo also showed the largest reductions in brain areas associated with pain construction," explains co-author Wager, who is also the principal investigator of the Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience Lab at Dartmouth. "We are still learning how the brain constructs pain experiences, but we know it's a mix of brain areas that process input from the body and those involved in motivation and decision-making. Placebo treatment reduced activity in areas involved in early pain signaling from the body, as well as motivational circuits not tied specifically to pain."

Across the studies in the meta-analysis, participants had indicated that they felt less pain; however, the team wanted to find out if the brain responded to the placebo in a meaningful way. Is the placebo changing the way a person constructs the experience of pain or is it changing the way a person thinks about it after the fact? Is the person really feeling less pain?

With the large sample, the researchers were able to confidently localize placebo effects to specific zones of the brain, including the thalamus and the basal ganglia. The thalamus serves as a gateway for sights and sounds and all kinds of sensory motor input. It has lots of different nuclei, which act like processing stations for different kinds of sensory input. The results showed that parts of the thalamus that are most important for pain sensation were most strongly affected by the placebo. In addition, parts of the somatosensory cortex that are integral to the early processing of painful experiences were also affected. The placebo effect also impacted the basal ganglia, which are important for motivation and connecting pain and other experiences to action. "The placebo can affect what you do with the pain and how it motivates you, which could be a larger part of what's happening here," says Wager. "It's changing the circuitry that's important for motivation."

The findings revealed that placebo treatments reduce activity in the posterior insula, which is one of the areas that are involved in early construction of the pain experience. This is the only site in the cortex that you can stimulate and invoke the sense of pain. The major ascending pain pathway goes from parts of the thalamus to the posterior insula. The results provide evidence that the placebo affects that pathway for how pain is constructed.

Prior research has illustrated that with placebo effects, the prefrontal cortex is activated in anticipation of pain. The prefrontal cortex helps keep track of the context of the pain and maintain the belief that it exists. When the prefrontal cortex is activated, there are pathways that trigger opioid release in the midbrain that can block pain and pathways that can modify pain signaling and construction.

The team found that activation of the prefrontal cortex is heterogeneous across studies, meaning that no particular areas in this region were activated consistently or strongly across the studies. These differences across studies are similar to what is found in other areas of self-regulation, where different types of thoughts and mindsets can have different effects. For example, other work in Wager's laboratory has found that rethinking pain by using imagery and storytelling typically activates the prefrontal cortex, but mindful acceptance does not. Placebo effects likely involve a mix of these types of processes, depending on the specifics of how it is given and people's predispositions.

"Our results suggest that placebo effects are not restricted solely to either sensory/nociceptive or cognitive/affective processes, but likely involves a combination of mechanisms that may differ depending on the placebo paradigm and other individual factors," explains Bingel. "The study's findings will also contribute to future research in the development of brain biomarkers that predict an individual's responsiveness to placebo and help distinguish placebo from analgesic drug responses, which is a key goal of the new collaborative research center, Treatment Expectation ."

Read more at Science Daily