Expectations and Prior Experiences Associated With Adverse Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination

Pre-treatment expectations and their influence on subjective symptom change in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Treatment expectations reportedly shape treatment outcomes, but have not been studied in the context of multimodal therapy in Crohn's disease (CD). Therefore, the current study investigated the role of treatment expectations for subjective symptom changes in CD patients who have undergone an integrative multimodal therapy program.

METHODS

Validated questionnaires were completed at the start of the treatment program and post intervention. Pre-treatment expectations and experienced symptom change were assessed with the Generic Rating Scale for Previous Treatment Experiences, Treatment Expectations, and Treatment Effects (GEEE); stress levels were quantified with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) and disease specific quality of life was quantified with the disease-specific Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ). We performed multiple linear and Bayesian regression to determine how expectations related to symptom change.

RESULTS

N = 71 CD patients (66.2% female) were included. Stronger expectations regarding symptom improvement (b = 0.422, t = 3.70, p < .001) were associated with higher experienced symptom improvement. Additionally, Bayesian analysis provided strong evidence for including improvement expectations as a predictor of improvement experience (BFinclusion = 13.78).

CONCLUSIONS

In line with research in other disorders, we found that positive treatment expectations were associated with experienced symptom improvement. In contrast, we found no indication that an experience of symptom worsening was associated with positive or negative baseline treatment expectations. Induction of positive expectations might be a potential avenue for improving treatment outcomes in CD therapy.

Migraine worsening after COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination: Are we facing a nocebo effect?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In clinical practice patients may report migraine worsening as a consequence of COVID-19 (either infection or vaccines), however, data in this area are lacking. We aimed to investigate the link between COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination with migraine worsening and its associated factors.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to migraine patients followed up in a Spanish Headache Clinic, collecting demographic data, and information regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. We asked patients if they had noticed worsening of their migraine after these events and assessed concerns about infection, vaccination and migraine worsening. We also extracted data from participants' own electronic diaries (e-diaries), including 1-month data before and after their reported infection and/or vaccination. We compared participants who self-reported migraine worsening since infection or vaccination with those who did not.

RESULTS

Of 550 participants, 44.9% (247/550) reported having had COVID-19 at least once and 83.3% (458/550) had been vaccinated. Sixty-one patients reported migraine worsening since COVID-19 and 52 since the vaccination. Among the risk factors for perceived migraine worsening in the two settings (infection and vaccination) was concern about migraine worsening itself (infection: odds ratio [OR] 2.498 [95% CI: 1.02-6.273], p = 0.046; vaccination: OR 17.3 [95% CI: confidence interval 5.3-68], p < 0.001). e-diary information was available for 136 of the 550 patients, 38.2% (52/136) for COVID-19 and 39.7% (54/136) for vaccination. We observed no significant difference in headache frequency 1 month before and after infection or vaccination, even when comparing patients with and without self-reported migraine worsening.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary data point to a negligible role of the infection and vaccination on migraine worsening and to the possible presence of a nocebo effect in these settings, as a remarkable proportion of patients had a clear perception of migraine worsening.

The influence of psychological traits and prior experience on treatment expectations

BACKGROUND

Placebo and nocebo responses are modulated by the treatment expectations of participants and patients. However, interindividual differences predicting treatment expectations and placebo responses are unclear. In this large-scale pooled analysis, we aim to investigate the influence of psychological traits and prior experiences on treatment expectations.

METHODS

This paper analyses data from six different placebo studies (total n = 748). In all studies, participants' sociodemographic information, treatment expectations and prior treatment experiences and traits relating to stress, somatization, depression and anxiety, the Big Five and behavioral inhibition and approach tendencies were assessed using the same established questionnaires. Correlation coefficients and structural equation models were calculated to investigate the relationship between trait variables and expectations.

RESULTS

We found small positive correlations between side effect expectations and improvement expectations (r = 0.187), perceived stress (r = 0.154), somatization (r = 0.115), agitation (r = 0.108), anhedonia (r = 0.118), and dysthymia (r = 0.118). In the structural equation model previous experiences emerged as the strongest predictors of improvement (β = 0.32, p = .005), worsening (β = -0.24, p = .005) and side effect expectations (β = 0.47, p = .005). Traits related to positive affect (β = - 0.09; p = .007) and negative affect (β = 0.04; p = .014) were associated with side effect expectations.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first large analysis to investigate the relationship between traits, prior experiences and treatment expectations. Exploratory analyses indicate that experiences of symptom improvement are associated with improvement and worsening expectations, while previous negative experiences are only related to side effect expectations. Additionally, a proneness to experience negative affect may be a predictor for side effect expectation and thus mediate the occurrence of nocebo responses.

Twenty-Month Monitoring of Humoral Immune Response to BNT162b2 Vaccine: Antibody Kinetics, Breakthrough Infections, and Adverse Effects

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is one of the most effective life-saving medical interventions, and the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines was intended to prevent the serious implications of COVID-19. The objectives of the study were (i) to observe the humoral immune response to the BNT162b2 vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 infection (mainly breakthrough infections), (ii) to demonstrate the persistence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies over time in relation to the number of received vaccine doses and the course of infection, and (iii) to determine the adverse effects after primary vaccine doses.

METHODS

To assess the humoral response, IgG and IgA anti-S1 antibodies were quantified by ELISA assays. In total, the tests were carried out seven times in almost two years.

RESULTS

We demonstrated strong immunogenicity (compared to levels before primary vaccination, 150- and 20-fold increases in IgG and IgA, respectively) of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Over time, we observed a systematic decline in antibody levels, which may have contributed to breakthrough infections. Although they caused seroconversion similar to the booster, antibody levels in such patients fell more rapidly than after re-vaccination. On the other hand, in individuals who did not receive booster(s) and who did not present breakthrough infection, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies returned to pre-vaccination levels after 20 months. The most commonly recognized adverse effects were injection site redness and swelling.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination is highly effective in preventing the most severe outcomes of COVID-19 and should be performed regardless of prior infection. Booster doses significantly enhance anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels and, in contrast to those obtained by breakthrough infection, they remain longer.

How Can Experimental Endotoxemia Contribute to Our Understanding of Pain? A Narrative Review

The immune system and the central nervous system exchange information continuously. This communication is a prerequisite for adaptive responses to physiological and psychological stressors. While the implicate relationship between inflammation and pain is increasingly recognized in clinical cohorts, the underlying mechanisms and the possibilities for pharmacological and psychological approaches aimed at neuro-immune communication in pain are not fully understood yet. This calls for preclinical models which build a bridge from clinical research to laboratory research. Experimental models of systemic inflammation (experimental endotoxemia) in humans have been increasingly recognized as an approach to study the direct and causal effects of inflammation on pain perception. This narrative review provides an overview of what experimental endotoxemia studies on pain have been able to clarify so far. We report that experimental endotoxemia results in a reproducible increase in pain sensitivity, particularly for pressure and visceral pain (deep pain), which is reflected in responses of brain areas involved in pain processing. Increased levels of blood inflammatory cytokines are required for this effect, but cytokine levels do not always predict pain intensity. We address sex-dependent differences in immunological responses to endotoxin and discuss why these differences do not necessarily translate to differences in behavioral measures. We summarize psychological and cognitive factors that may moderate pain sensitization driven by immune activation. Together, studying the immune-driven changes in pain during endotoxemia offers a deeper mechanistic understanding of the role of inflammation in chronic pain. Experimental endotoxemia models can specifically help to tease out inflammatory mechanisms underlying individual differences, vulnerabilities, and comorbid psychological problems in pain syndromes. The model offers the opportunity to test the efficacy of interventions, increasing their translational applicability for personalized medical approaches.