Adverse Events and Nocebo Effects in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Food-Based Interventions as Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Important Steps in Diet Trial Design and Reporting of Outcomes

Diet therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an international research priority but guidance for IBD-specific diet trial design is lacking. This review critically evaluates key elements of prospective IBD food-based intervention trials and identifies gaps. Electronic databases were searched for interventional IBD diet studies. Prospective primary studies/trials were included if used food-based dietary strategies. Forty studies/trials evaluating 29 food-based strategies as therapy for IBD were identified. Considerable heterogeneity in diets, trial design, and methodology exists. Thirty-one trials (78%) intended the diet to modulate inflammation but 14/31 (46%) did not have a primary endpoint measuring an objective change in inflammatory activity and 20/31 (65%) controlled for medication stability prior to application of diet at baseline. Higher-quality IBD diet trials used symptom-based assessment tools coupled with an objective evaluation of inflammatory activity. Dietary advice trials are the most common. One-third of trials developed and administered diet education without a dietitian. Evaluation and reporting on adherence to diet therapy occurred in <60% of trials. Failure to include or report on key elements of trial design reduced the interpretability and validity of the results. This is a considerable limitation to advancing scientific knowledge in this area. Diet therapy trials should adhere to similar rigorous quality standards used to develop other IBD therapies. Therefore, a set of practical recommendations was generated to provide the authors' perspective to help inform the future design of high-quality IBD diet trials.

Harms with placebo in trials of biological therapies and small molecules as maintenance therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomised placebo-controlled trials for the induction of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remission involve potential harms to those receiving placebo. Whether these harms are also apparent with placebo during maintenance of remission trials in IBD is unclear. We aimed to examine the potential harms associated with receiving placebo in trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis and luminal Crohn's disease in a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched several medical literature databases including MEDLINE (from Jan 1, 1946, to May 31, 2024), Embase and Embase Classic (Jan 1, 1947, to May 31, 2024), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 31, 2024, for randomised placebo-controlled trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission in adults with IBD reporting data on adverse events over a period of 20 weeks or more. There were no language restrictions or prespecified exclusion criteria. We extracted summary data and pooled data using a random-effects model for any treatment-emergent adverse event, drug-related adverse event, infection, worsening of IBD activity, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infection, serious worsening of IBD activity, or venous thromboembolic events, reporting relative risks (RRs) for placebo versus active drug with 95% CIs for each outcomes. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024542624).

FINDINGS

Our search identified 10 826 citations, of which 45 trials including 16 562 patients (10 319 [62·3%] receiving active drug and 6243 [37·7%] placebo) were eligible. The risks of any treatment-emergent adverse event (7297/9546 [76·4%] patients on active drug vs 4415/5850 [75·5%] on placebo; RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·99-1·04; I2 =47%), serious infection (260/10 242 [2·5%] vs 155/6149 [2·5%]; 0·97, 0·79-1·19; I2 =0%), or venous thromboembolic event (12/4729 [0·3%] vs 9/2691 [0·3%]; 0·72, 0·31-1·66; I2 =0%) were not significantly lower with active drug than placebo. The risks of any infection (3208/8038 [39·9%] vs 1713/4809 [35·6%]; 1·14, 1·05-1·23; I2 =60%) or any drug-related adverse event (1094/2997 [36·5%] vs 609/1950 [31·2%]; 1·24, 1·02-1·50; I2 =75%) were higher with active drug than placebo. However, the risks of any worsening of IBD activity (1038/8090 [12·8%] vs 1181/5191 [22·8%]; 0·58, 0·52-0·64; I2 =40%), any withdrawal due to adverse events (610/10 282 [5·9%] vs 561/6207 [9·0%]; 0·71, 0·60-0·84; I2 =43%), any serious adverse events (1066/10 292 [10·4%] vs 742/6198 [12·0%]; 0·85, 0·77-0·94; I2 =17%), or any serious worsening of IBD activity (101/5707 [1·8%] vs 143/3640 [3·9%]; 0·55, 0·42-0·71; I2 =0%) were lower with active drug than placebo. 21 randomised controlled trials were judged as low risk of bias across all domains.

INTERPRETATION

In maintenance of remission trials in IBD, placebo was associated with some clinically significant potential harms. Patients should be counselled about these before participating in clinical trials and consideration given to alternative designs to test novel drugs in IBD.

FUNDING

None.

Harms with placebo in trials of biological therapies and small molecules as induction therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomised placebo-controlled trials are the gold standard to assess novel drugs in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. However, there might be risks associated with receiving placebo. We aimed to examine the harms associated with receiving placebo in trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for the induction of remission in ulcerative colitis and luminal Crohn's disease in a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Embase Classic, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 30, 2024, for randomised placebo-controlled trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for induction of remission in adults (≥18 years) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis or luminal Crohn's disease reporting data on adverse events over a minimum treatment period of 4 weeks. There were no prespecified study exclusion criteria. We extracted summary data and pooled data using a random-effects model for any treatment-emergent adverse event, any drug-related adverse event, infection, worsening of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) activity, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infection, serious worsening of IBD activity, or venous thromboembolic events (VTEs), reporting relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024527341).

FINDINGS

The search identified 10 826 citations, of which 47 trials including 20 987 patients (14 267 [68·0%] receiving active drug and 6720 [32·0%] receiving placebo) were eligible. The risk of any treatment-emergent adverse event was no different with active drug than with placebo (7660/14 267 [53·7%] patients on active drug vs 3758/6720 [55·9%] on placebo; RR 0·97, 95% CI 0·94-1·00; I2 =36%). However, the risks of worsening of IBD activity (563/13 473 [4·2%] vs 530/6252 [8·5%]; 0·48, 0·40-0·59; I2 =54%), withdrawal due to adverse event (401/13 363 [3·0%] vs 299/6267 [4·8%]; 0·62, 0·48-0·79; I2 =46%), serious adverse event (682/14 267 [4·8%] vs 483/6720 [7·2%]; 0·69, 0·59-0·80; I2 =30%), serious infection (140/14 194 [1·0%] vs 91/6647 [1·4%]; 0·67, 0·50-0·89; I2 =0%), serious worsening of IBD activity (187/11 271 [1·7%] vs 189/5056 [3·7%]; 0·45, 0·34-0·60; I2 =27%), or VTEs (13/7542 [0·2%] vs 12/2981 [0·4%]; 0·45, 0·21-0·94; I2 =0%) were all significantly lower with active drug than placebo. Numbers needed to treat with active drug to avoid these potentially serious adverse events ranged from 23 for worsening of IBD activity to 452 for VTEs. 27 randomised controlled trials were judged as low risk of bias across all domains.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with moderately to severely active IBD receiving placebo are more likely to experience significant worsening of IBD activity and some serious adverse events, which might relate to a reduction in risk of these events with active drug. Patients should be counselled about these potential harms, and alternative trial designs to mitigate these harms should be considered.

FUNDING

None.

The Nocebo Effect: A Bias in Clinical Practice-An Ethical Approach

BACKGROUND

The nocebo effect is often disregarded in medical practice and is certainly much less known than the placebo effect, although, in reality, both can influence therapeutic decision making and the quality of life of patients. However, the nocebo effect raises a number of issues not only of a practical nature related to clinical activity but also ethical dilemmas related to the observance of the patient's autonomy, nonmaleficence, or informed consent and the information on which it is based.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The ethical dilemmas raised by the nocebo effect revolve around how informed consent can be achieved, the accuracy and volume of information that is transmitted to the patient, and how to report negative side effects of therapeutic treatment.

DATA SOURCES

In September 2023, a narrative analysis of the literature was conducted using a combination of keywords such as nocebo, placebo, ethics, therapeutic relationship from PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and so on, as well as from official documents developed at an international level (World Health Organization), for a period of 10 years (2012-2021).

RESULTS

Analyzing the articles that remarked upon the significant impact of ethics in nocebo research or in the therapeutic relationship, we can state that the existence of several relevant issues of interest have been detected regarding the ethical use of nocebo and its impact in research or in clinics and thus the need for proper knowledge and management of the impact of nocebo effects. The ethical paradox of obtaining informed consent with the 2 goals, first, the need for complete information and second, the preservation of the autonomy of the patient, respectively, that of "primum non-nocere" and of avoiding unnecessary harm by revealing probable adverse effects is a point of interest for numerous studies. The potential for a nocebo effect is present when we inform patients about the risks and benefits of treatment, there being a clear link between the moral and ethical duty to inform patients and the need to avoid situations that increase the nocebo impact on how the disease or the adverse effects of the treatment are perceived. Adapting information about the side effects of medicines should focus on ensuring a balance between transparency and caution, especially in patients with a high potential for nocebo effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The nocebo effect had for a long time been unknown or denied, although it can interfere with the results of the treatment used. As the nocebo phenomenon becomes increasingly known in medical practice, the clinical and ethical implications are identified by medical staff, and nocebo's adverse responses are no longer ignored.

A practical guide to combination advanced therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the current literature regarding the use of advanced combination therapy (ACT) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although the treatment of IBD has come a long way, many patients do not respond or will lose response to currently available treatments over time. ACT has been proposed as a model to create sustained remission in difficult-to-treat IBD patient populations. This review discusses the available literature supporting the use of ACT, followed by practical tips for applying this model of treatment to clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Both observational and controlled evidence have demonstrated that there may be an increased benefit of ACT in specific IBD patient populations compared to advanced targeted immunomodulator (TIM) monotherapy. Additional data is required to understand how to best use combination TIMs and the long-term risks associated with this strategy.

SUMMARY

While the literature has demonstrated the potential for benefit in both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, the use of ACT is currently off-label and long-term controlled data is needed. The successful application of ACT requires careful consideration of both patient and disease profiles as well as close monitoring of treatment response and adverse events.

Risk factors associated with nocebo effects: A review of reviews

Objective

This meta-review aims to identify and categorize the risk factors that are associated with nocebo effects. The nocebo effect can exert a negative impact on treatment outcomes and have detrimental outcomes on health. Learning more about its potential predictors and risk factors is a crucial step to mitigating it.

Methods

Literature review studies about the risk factors for nocebo effects were searched through five databases (PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Embase) and through grey literature. Methodological validity and risk of bias were assessed. We conducted a thematic analysis of the results of the forty-three included reviews.

Results

We identified nine categories of risk factors: prior expectations and learning; socio-demographic characteristics; personality and individual differences; neurodegenerative conditions; inflammatory conditions; communication of information and patient-physician relationship; drug characteristics; setting; and self-awareness. We also highlighted the main biochemical and neurophysiological mechanisms underlying nocebo effects.

Conclusions

Nocebo effects arise from expectations of adverse symptoms, particularly when triggered by previous negative experiences. A trusting relationship with the treating physician and clear, tailored treatment instructions can act as protective factors against a nocebo effect. Clinical implications are discussed.

Adverse events of biologic or small molecule therapies in clinical trials for inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Biologic or small-molecule therapies are highly effective for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and approval by the FDA has significantly increased both their clinical use and the development of novel regimens. However, the identification and management of their associated toxicities poses challenges for clinicians and researchers.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 1, 2000, to October 15, 2022, and in the databases. A random-effects model with logit transformation was applied to the analysis heterogeneity between studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic with incidence and 95 % confidence interval (CI) for any adverse events (AEs), and serious AEs (SAEs).

Results

In Crohn's disease (CD), the total AE incidence was 67.0 % (95 % CI, 66.2%-67.8 %; I2 = 97.2 %) for any AEs and 7.3 % (6.9-7.7; 97.2) for serious AEs. In ulcerative colitis (UC), the overall incidence of any and serious AEs was 63.6 % (63.0-64.3; 98.1) and 5.7 % (5.4-6.0; 88.9), respectively. The most common AEs were infections (21.5 [20.3-22.8], 32.6 [31.0-34.2], 25.9 [24.5-27.2], and 13.7 [10.7-16.7]) in CD patients that were treated with TNF antagonists, anti-integrins, anti-IL agents, and JAK inhibitors, respectively, and in UC patients also were infections (22.8 [21.7-24.0], 27.4 [25.9-28.9], and 18.4 [16.7-20.2]), respectively, as well as increases in lactic dehydrogenase levels (23.1 [20.8-25.4]) with JAK inhibitors.

Conclusion

This study offers a comprehensive summary of toxic side effects of IBD treatments and a useful reference for both patients and clinicians.

Nocebo effects and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of chronic constipation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nocebo effects are unavoidable in randomized clinical trials. We aimed to assess the magnitude of nocebo effects and explore the influencing factors in chronic constipation.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to July 2022. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating interventions in chronic constipation were included. We conducted a random effects meta-analysis of the proportion of adverse events (AEs) in placebo-treated participants and evaluated the effect of trial characteristics on nocebo effects.

KEY RESULTS

We identified 20,204 studies from the databases, of which 61 were included in the final analysis. The pooled placebo AE rate was 30.41%, and AE-related withdrawal rate was 1.53%. The most commonly reported AEs were headache (5.67%), diarrhea (4.45%), abdominal pain (3.98%), nasopharyngitis (3.39%), nausea (3.36%), and flatulence (2.95%). The placebo AE rate was lower in trials conducted in Asia compared to those in Europe, North America, and international trials. It was also lower in trials diagnosed by Rome III compared to clinician's opinion and Rome II. Additionally, the placebo AE rate was lower in single-center trials compared to multicenter trials, lower in 5-8 weeks therapy compared to 9-12 weeks therapy, lower in participants with FC compared to those with IBS-C and CC, lower in trials with 2 arms compared to 3 arms, and higher in trials with prokinetic drugs compared to secretagogues and laxatives.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

The placebo AE rate was 30.41% in patients with chronic constipation. Based on our findings, we recommend that researchers take the nocebo effects into consideration when designing and conducting clinical trials and adopt specific measures to mitigate the negative influence of nocebo effects.

The Use of Placebo in Clinical Trials of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

We review concerns regarding use of placebo in clinical trials of inflammatory bowel disease. We propose alternate designs to overcome ethical issues, while providing data that are clinically relevant.

Clinical efficacy and nocebo effect following non-medical biosimilar switch in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy, biomarker activity, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), adverse events (AEs), and nocebo effect in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients who underwent non-medical biosimilar switching.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of consecutive IBD patients who underwent biosimilar switch. Disease activity, biomarkers, TDM, and AEs, including the nocebo effect were captured 8 weeks before switch, at the time of switch (baseline),12 and 24 weeks after the switch.

RESULTS

210 patients were included [81.4% had Crohn's disease (CD), the median age at inclusion: 42 years (IQR 29-61)]. There was no significant difference in the rates of clinical remission at week 8 before switch, baseline, week12, and 24 after switch: 89.0%,93.4%,86.3%,and 90.8%,p = 0.129. The biomarker remission rates were not significantly different; CRP:81.3%,74.7%,81.2%,73.0%,p = 0.343; fecal calprotectin: 78.3%,74.5%,71.7%,76.3%,p = 0.829. The rates of maintaining therapeutic levels (84.7%,83.9%,83.0%,85.3%,p = 0.597) and prevalence of positive anti-drug antibodies remained unchanged. Drug persistence at 12 week of switch was 97.1%, regardless of disease phenotype and originator. The nocebo effect was observed in 13.3%. The discontinuation rate was 4.8%.

CONCLUSION

Despite a significant number of early nocebo complaints within the first 6 months after the biosimilar switch, no significant changes were found in clinical efficacy, biomarkers, therapeutic drug level, or anti-drug antibodies.

Nocebo-associated treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs. A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-arm dropouts in randomized-controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Nocebo is a concept of therapeutics referring to unpleasant symptoms attributed by a patient to a drug, due to negative anticipation. Patients receiving oral anti-osteoporotic drugs in randomized controlled trials (RCT) can experience adverse events leading to dropout, implying that nocebo contributes to treatment discontinuation for these drugs. In this study we aim to investigate the nocebo effect of subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs with a higher compliance rate than orally administered drugs.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases for double-blind trials investigating subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs for osteoporosis (namely, denosumab, teriparatide, abaloparatide and romosozumab) published up to May 2023.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Dropouts due to reported adverse events in the placebo arms ("nocebo dropouts").

RESULTS

Data from 17 trials were extracted. Among 10,529 placebo-treated patients the pooled nocebo-dropout percentage was 3 % for denosumab (average: 0.03; 95 % CI: 0.01-0.05), 1 % for romosozumab (average: 0.01; 95 % CI: 0.00-0.03) and 6 % for teriparatide and abaloparatide (average: 0.06; 95 % CI: 0.05-0.07). Nocebo-dropouts were significantly higher in men than women (6 % vs. 3 %, respectively, p = 0.012), in older (mean age >68 years) than in younger patients (5 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.017) and in those with more severe osteoporosis (based on the percentage of participants with prior fragility-related fractures in the study cohort) compared with patients with no prior fracture history (4 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

Nocebo responses may contribute to treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs in clinical practice. Higher nocebo-related dropout rates in the higher-risk RCT population (older patients, males, those with prior fractures) show that nocebo mechanisms have the potential to hinder therapeutic efforts to specific populations who would benefit most. Prospero registration number CRD42020212843.

Considerations for Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

High-quality colonoscopic surveillance can lead to earlier and increased detection of colorectal neoplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In IBD clinical trials, endoscopy is used to assess mucosal disease activity before and after treatment but also provides an opportunity to surveil for colorectal neoplasia during follow-up.

SUMMARY

Best practices for colorectal cancer identification in IBD clinical trials require engagement and collaboration between the clinical trial sponsor, site endoscopist and/or principal investigator, and central read team. Each team member has unique responsibilities for maximizing dysplasia detection in IBD trials.

KEY MESSAGES

Sponsors should work in accordance with scientific guidelines to standardize imaging procedures, design the protocol to ensure the trial population is safeguarded, and oversee trial conduct. The site endoscopist should remain updated on best practices to tailor sponsor protocol-required procedures to patient needs, examine the mucosa for disease activity and potential dysplasia during all procedures, and provide optimal procedure videos for central read analysis. Central readers may detect dysplasia or colorectal cancer and a framework to report these findings to trial sponsors is essential. Synergistic relationships between all team members in IBD clinical trials provide an important opportunity for extended endoscopic evaluation and colorectal neoplasia identification.

Efficacy and Safety of IL-12/23 and IL-23 Inhibitors for Crohn's Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Targeting interleukin-23 (IL-23) is an important therapeutic strategy for Crohn's disease (CD).

AIMS

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of selective IL-23p19 and IL-12/23p40 inhibitors in patients with moderate-to-severe CD.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to May 24, 2023, for randomized, placebo- or active comparator-controlled induction and/or maintenance trials of selective IL-23p19 and IL-12/23p40 inhibitors in pediatric and adult patients with CD. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in clinical remission. Secondary outcomes were clinical response, endoscopic remission, endoscopic response, and safety. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE criteria, respectively.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials (n = 5561) were included. Most studies were rated as low risk of bias. Targeting IL-23 was significantly superior to placebo for inducing clinical (risk ratio [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-2.21) and endoscopic (RR = 3.20, 95%CI 2.17-4.70) remission and maintaining clinical remission (RR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.10-1.77) (GRADE high certainty evidence for all outcomes). Subgroup analysis showed that targeting IL-23 was superior to placebo for inducing clinical remission in biologic-naïve (RR = 2.20, 95%CI 1.46-3.32, I2 = 0%, p = 0.39) and biologic-experienced patients (RR = 1.82, 95%CI 1.27-2.60, I2 = 56.5%, p = 0.01). Targeting IL-23 was associated with a decreased risk of serious adverse events in induction (RR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.44-0.73) and maintenance (RR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.53-0.98) trials compared to placebo (high certainty evidence).

CONCLUSION

Targeting IL-23 is effective and safe for inducing and maintaining clinical and endoscopic remission in patients with moderate-to-severe CD.

Nocebo response intensity and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of functional dyspepsia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

In this study we aimed to evaluate the nocebo response rate in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD) and to explore its influencing factors.

METHODS

A literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for all articles published up to March 2021. Randomized, parallel-designed, placebo-controlled trials on pharmacological interventions for patients with FD were included. A meta-analysis that utilized random effects to analyze the incidence of adverse events (AEs) among participants who were given placebo was conducted, and the correlation between trial characteristics and the magnitude of the nocebo response rate was analyzed.

RESULTS

Altogether, 27 studies including 1866 paitents were deemed eligible and included in the analysis. The total nocebo response rate was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18%-33%). The most frequently reported AEs included nasopharyngitis (9%), constipation (6%), headache (5%), and diarrhea (3%). There were significant differences in nocebo response rates among studies conducted in different country or region, treatment duration, types of medication, sponsorship and different versions of the Rome criteria used for FD diagnosis. While number of centers engaged in the study, types of FD diagnosis and dosing frequency were not significantly associated with the nocebo response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with FD exhibit notable nocebo response strength in clinical trials. The researchers should adopt a more careful approach when analyzing the relationships between AEs and interventions in such trials.

Amplified gut feelings under inflammation and depressed mood: A randomized fMRI trial on interoceptive pain in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Inflammation and depressed mood constitute clinically relevant vulnerability factors for enhanced interoceptive sensitivity and chronic visceral pain, but their putative interaction remains untested in human mechanistic studies. We tested interaction effects of acute systemic inflammation and sad mood on the expectation and experience of visceral pain by combining experimental endotoxemia with a mood induction paradigm.

METHODS

The double-blind, placebo-controlled, balanced crossover fMRI-trial in N=39 healthy male and female volunteers involved 2 study days with either intravenous administration of low-dose lipopolysaccharide (LPS, 0.4ng/kg body weight; inflammation condition) or saline (placebo condition). On each study, day two scanning sessions were conducted in an experimentally induced negative (i.e., sad) and in a neutral mood state, accomplished in balanced order. As a model of visceral pain, rectal distensions were implemented, which were initially calibrated to be moderately painful. In all sessions, an identical series of visceral pain stimuli was accomplished, signaled by predictive visual conditioning cues to assess pain anticipation. We assessed neural activation during the expectation and experience of visceral pain, along with unpleasantness ratings in a condition combining an inflammatory state with sad mood and in control conditions. All statistical analyses were accomplished using sex as covariate.

RESULTS

LPS administration led to an acute systemic inflammatory response (inflammation X time interaction effects for TNF-α, IL-6, and sickness symptoms, all p<.001). The mood paradigm effectively induced distinct mood states (mood X time interaction, p<.001), with greater sadness in the negative mood conditions (both p<.001) but no difference between LPS and saline conditions. Significant main and interaction effects of inflammation and negative mood were observed for pain unpleasantness (all p<.05). During cued pain anticipation, a significant inflammation X mood interaction emerged for activation of the bilateral caudate nucleus and right hippocampus (all p_FWE<.05). Main effects of both inflammation and mood were observed in multiple regions, including insula, midcingulate cortex, prefrontal gyri, and hippocampus for inflammation, and midcingulate, caudate, and thalamus for mood (all p_FWE<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results support an interplay of inflammation and sad mood on striatal and hippocampal circuitry engaged during visceral pain anticipation as well as on pain experience. This may reflect a nocebo mechanism, which may contribute to altered perception and interpretation of bodily signals. At the interface of affective neuroscience and the gut-brain axis, concurrent inflammation and negative mood may be vulnerability factors for chronic visceral pain.

Nocebo response in dentistry: A systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in analgesic trials of third molar removal

BACKGROUND

The nocebo response refers to the phenomenon where non-specific factors, including negative verbal suggestion and treatment expectations, cause adverse events (AE) following a placebo treatment. Non-specific factors are also likely to influence AE occurrence following administration of active pharmacological treatments.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the nocebo response in dentistry by assessing the AEs prevalence in placebo- and active arms of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing analgesic treatment following third molar (M3) surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies had to report the number of patients experiencing at least one drug-related AE (patients with AE ≥ 1) separately for the active and placebo arms. The proportion of patients with AE ≥ 1 and drug-related dropouts were pooled, and risk differences (RDs) between patients in the placebo- and active arm were calculated.

RESULTS

In 50 independent RCTs of 47 identified articles, the pooled rates of patients with AE ≥ 1 were 22.8% in the placebo arm and 20.6% in the active arm. The pooled rates of drug-related dropout were 0.24% in the placebo arm and 0.08% in the active arm. There were no significant RDs in patients with AE ≥ 1 and drug-related dropouts.

CONCLUSION

These results show that patients in the placebo arm reported AEs to the same extent as patients receiving active treatment, suggesting that most AEs in analgesic medication following M3 surgery may be attributed to the nocebo phenomenon.

Efficacy and safety of vibegron compared with mirabegron for overactive bladder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of mirabegron and vibegron in patients with overactive bladder.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify studies from the date of database inception to January 1, 2022. All randomized controlled trials comparing mirabegron or vibegron with tolterodine, imidafenacin, or placebo were eligible. One reviewer extracted data, and a second reviewer checked. Included trials were assessed for similarity, and networks were developed using Stata 16.0 software. Mean differences for continuous variables and odds ratios for dichotomous variables together with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to rank treatments and compare the differences, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled trials and 10 806 patients were included. For each outcome, results for all licensed treatment doses were included. Both vibegron and mirabegron were more efficacious than placebo at reducing the frequency of micturition, incontinence, urgency, urgency incontinence, and nocturia. Vibegron was more efficacious than mirabegron in reducing mean voided volume/micturition (95% CI [5.15, 14.98]). Safety outcomes for vibegron and mirabegron were similar to those in the placebo group, except for mirabegron, which had a higher risk of nasopharyngitis and cardiovascular adverse events than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs seem to be comparable and well tolerated, particularly as direct comparisons are not available. However, vibegron may be more effective than mirabegron in reducing mean voided volume.

Placebo and nocebo responses in randomized controlled trials of non-tumor necrosis factor biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis showing insufficient response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biologics and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with insufficient response to TNF inhibitors.

METHODS

A meta-analysis on rates of placebo response, adverse effects (AEs), severe AEs (SAEs), and withdrawal due to AEs in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-TNF biologics and JAK inhibitors in patients with RA and an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors was conducted.

RESULTS

In 9 RCTs containing 3442 patients the pooled incidence of ACR20 response rate in placebo-treated patients was 22.1 (95% CI 16.4-29.1%) and 27.9% (95% CI 24.5-31.6%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. Strong negative correlation was observed between ACR20 response and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.762, P = 0.017). Strong positive correlation was observed between ACR20 response in the placebo and active comparator arms, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the greater the treatment response (r = 0.737, P = 0.003). The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients with ≥1 AE was 71.8 (95% CI 57.4-82.7%) and 58.7% (95% CI 52.8-64.3%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients withdrawing due to an AE was 3.8 (95% CI 2.7-5.3%) and 4.0% (95% CI 2.7-6.0%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. Strong positive correlation was observed between AE rates in the placebo and active arms, indicating that the greater the nocebo response, the stronger the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.855, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

There were higher placebo and less nocebo effects of JAK vs. non-TNF inhibitors in RA patients with an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors, and the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response and the greater the efficacy.

Examining the Nocebo Effect in Trials of Neuromodulators for Use in Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nocebo effects are thought to influence the rate of reported adverse events (AEs) and subject withdrawal in both the treatment and placebo groups of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Neuromodulators are commonly prescribed to treat disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBIs), but adherence to these medications is often limited by side effects such as headache, dry mouth, fatigue, and altered bowel habits. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the proportion and risk difference of patients who experienced side effects leading to withdrawal in the placebo arm versus the treatment arm of RCTs of neuromodulators for DGBIs. We also sought to estimate the risk of developing any AE in the placebo arm of these studies as well as the rate of specific individual adverse events.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Searches to identify RCTs that included terms for DGBIs and for commonly prescribed neuromodulators. We calculated pooled proportions of patients experiencing an AE leading to withdrawal in the active treatment group versus the placebo group with 95% confidence intervals (CI), the pooled proportions of patients experiencing any adverse event, the pooled proportions of patients experiencing specific adverse events such as dizziness and headache, the pooled proportions of patients experiencing severe adverse events and corresponding pooled risk differences with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

There were 30 RCTs included representing 2284 DGBI patients. 27 RCTs reported data on AEs leading to withdrawal. The pooled proportion of total patients with AEs leading to withdrawal in the placebo group was 4% (95% CI 0.02 - 0.04). The pooled proportion of patients with AEs leading to withdrawal who received neuromodulators was 9% (95% CI 0.06-0.13). In the 12 studies reporting data on patients experiencing at least one AE, the pooled proportion of patients experiencing any adverse event in the placebo group was 18% (95% CI 0.08 - 0.30), compared to 43% (95% CI 0.24 - 0.63) in the neuromodulator group. Thus, approximately 44% of the rate of withdrawal (0.04/0.09) and 42% of the rate reporting any side effects (0.18/0.43) in the neuromodulator group may be attributed to nocebo effects in the right context. Subgroup analysis by sex, medication class, risk of bias, and specific DGBIs revealed differing withdrawal rates. There was no statistically significant difference in patients experiencing individual AEs of dizziness, headache or diarrhea. Rates of dry mouth, fatigue and constipation were higher in treatment groups compared to placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with DGBIs in RCTs randomized to placebo groups frequently experience AEs and AEs that lead to withdrawal consistent with a strong nocebo effect. Non-specific AEs such as dizziness, headaches and diarrhea occurred similarly in patients receiving placebo compared to those receiving neuromodulators.

Nocebo response intensity and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To estimate the magnitude of the nocebo response and explore its influencing factors in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to March 2021. We performed a random effects meta-analysis of the proportion of adverse events (AEs) in placebo-treated patients with IBS who are involved in parallel-designed, randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating pharmacological interventions and evaluated the effect of trial characteristics on the magnitude of the nocebo response rate.

Results

A total of 6,107 studies were identified from the databases. After evaluation, 53 met the eligibility criteria and were included. The overall pooled nocebo response rate was 32% (95% CI: 26-38%). The most commonly reported AEs were headache (9%), nasopharyngitis (7%), abdominal pain (4%), and nausea (4%). The nocebo response rate was low compared with that in the treatment group applying probiotics, antispasmodics, and Traditional Chinese medicine, but high compared with that in antibiotic treatment group. The nocebo rate in patients using diaries to record AEs was lower than the average, and was higher in patients recording through checkup.

Discussion

Patients with IBS have significant nocebo response intensity in clinical trials. Based on findings in this study, we recommend the researchers pay attention to the common AEs and carefully analyze the relation to the intervention.

The Nocebo Effect in a Non-Medical Switching Program from Originator to Biosimilar Infliximab in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Despite growing awareness of the nocebo effect, few studies have evaluated the nocebo effect using combined assessment of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), clinical indices, and objective biomarkers in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients switching from originator to biosimilar medicines.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare these outcomes across switch and non-switch cohorts to evaluate the nocebo effect in patients with IBD.

METHODS

Parallel cohorts of IBD patients who (1) switched from originator to biosimilar (CT-P13) infliximab and (2) continued biosimilar (CT-P13) infliximab were evaluated over 32 weeks. Clinical disease activity, objective biomarkers and PROMs were assessed at baseline, and weeks 16 and 32 across both cohorts. The PROM of interest was patient-perceived disease activity evaluated using a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS) per the IBD-Control Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Of 81 patients, 47 switched from originator to biosimilar (CT-P13) infliximab. A negative change from baseline patient-reported disease control was observed across the switch cohort compared with the non-switch cohort at week 16 (mean VAS - 8.21 vs. 1.26; p = 0.03), but not at week 32 (mean VAS - 1.21 vs. 1.38; p = 0.58). Corresponding clinical and objective biomarker assessments over these timepoints were comparable across both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated a temporary yet discernible nocebo effect in the first 16 weeks following non-medical switching that was not sustained at week 32. Negative patient perceptions may be overcome by a patient-inclusive approach to non-medical switching in conjunction with close clinical follow-up and disease monitoring.

Sharing online clinical notes with patients: implications for nocebo effects and health equity

Patients in around 20 countries worldwide are now offered online access to at least some of their medical records. Access includes test results, medication lists, referral information, and/or the very words written by clinicians (so-called 'open notes'). In this paper, I discuss the possibility of one unintended negative consequence of patient access to their clinical notes-the potential to increase 'nocebo effects'. A growing body of research shows that nocebo effects arise by engaging perceptual and cognitive processes that influence negative expectancies, and as a consequence, adverse health effects. Studies show that increased awareness about the side effects of medications, the framing of information and the socioemotional context of care can increase the risk of nocebo effects. Connecting research into the nocebo effect with open notes provides preliminary support for the hypothesis that patient access to clinical notes might be a forum for facilitating unwanted nocebo effects. Furthermore, current findings indicate that we might expect to see systematic differences in how nocebo effects are experienced among different patient populations. The ethical implications of the tension between transparency and the potential for harm are discussed, with an emphasis on what open notes might mean for justice and equity in clinical care for a range of already marginalised patient populations. I argue that to resolve these challenges does not thereby justify 'closed notes', and conclude with suggestions for how health systems and clinicians might adapt to this innovation to reduce the risk of potential nocebo effects arising via this novel route.

Placebo and nocebo responses in randomized controlled trials of Janus kinase inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis : A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this meta-analysis was to assess the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis on the rates of placebo response, adverse effects (AEs), severe AEs (SAEs) and withdrawal due to AEs in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of JAK inhibitor therapy for RA.

RESULTS

Five RCTs contained a total of 1422 patients (746 trial participants and 676 controls). The pooled incidence of an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate was 33.0% (95% CI 19.6-44.9%) in placebo-treated patients and 68.3% (95% CI 61.4-74.1%) in active drug-treated patients. A strong negative correlation was observed between drug efficacies (ACR20 response) and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the stronger the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.906, P = 0.034). The pooled estimate of at least one AE was 54.1% (95% CI 44.6-63.4%) in placebo-treated patients and 54.5% (95% CI 46.2-62.6%) in active drug-treated patients. The pooled SAE rate was 3.9% (95% CI 2.7-5.7%) in placebo-treated patients and 3.8% (95% CI 2.5-5.7%) in active comparator-treated patients. The pooled estimate of withdrawal owing to an AE was 4.1% (95% CI 1.4-11.3%) in placebo-treated patients and 2.1% (95% CI 0.8-5.4%) in active drug-treated patients. However, there were no differences in the pooled risk of AE, SAEs, or withdrawal owing to AEs between the active comparator and placebo groups. A strong positive correlation was observed in AE rates between the placebo and active arms, indicating that the stronger the nocebo response, the higher the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.957, P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The frequency of placebo and nocebo responses was 33.0 and 54.1%, respectively, in JAK monotherapy trials for RA. The findings indicated that the strengths of placebo and nocebo responses are inversely proportional and that clinically significant differences were absent between AE, SAE, and dropout owing to AEs.

Increased Risk of Infections with Anti-TNF Agents in Patients with Crohn's Disease After Elective Surgery: Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complication rates in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving preoperative biologics have been analyzed without considering the surgical context. Emergency surgery may be associated with an increased risk of infectious complications, compared to elective operations.

AIMS

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the relationship between preoperative biologic therapy and postoperative outcomes in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), focusing on elective surgery.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched up to February 12, 2020, for studies of patients with IBD undergoing elective abdominal surgery receiving biologic therapy within 3 months before surgery compared to no therapy, or another biologic therapy. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. The primary outcomes were the rate of infections and total complications within 30 days. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included. Preoperative treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in patients with CD undergoing elective surgery was associated with increased odds of infection (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.40-3.01), but not total complications (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.71-1.51). In elective surgery for UC, preoperative anti-TNF therapy was not associated with infectious (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.34-3.07) or total complications (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.29-1.58). Limited data indicate that emergency surgery did not significantly affect the rate of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF therapy prior to elective surgery may increase the odds of postoperative infection in CD, although the certainty of evidence is very low. More evidence is needed, particularly for newer biologics.

Real-life burden of adverse reactions to biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a single-centre prospective case series

Background/aim

Biologics represent a key therapeutic option in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but are associated with several side effects. Post-marketing surveillance, through a spontaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) monitoring system, is essential to assess the safety profile of biologics. The aim of the study was to prospectively evaluate the occurrence of ADRs in IBD patients treated with biologics from a single centre in Southern Italy.

Methods

Data from patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC) who underwent biological therapy were prospectively collected. ADRs were classified according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA®).

Results

Overall, 68 (54% male, 68% with UC and 32% with CD) biologic-naïve IBD patients underwent biological therapy. Mean follow-up was 11.7 ± 6.2 months. As a results of switches, for 68 patients we obtained 96 biologic prescriptions. Overall, 45 ADRs occurred in 36 (53%) patients, distributed as follows (ADRs/prescriptions): 19/37 with IFX-Remicade, 5/12 with IFX-Remsima, 8/9 with GOL, 11/26 with ADA, and 2/12 with VDZ. Mild ADRs were 29 (64%), moderate 15 (34%) and 1 (2%) severe. General disorders and administration related reactions were the most frequent ADRs (35%), followed by skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (20%), infections (15%), musculoskeletal (11%), respiratory (6%) blood (4%), gastrointestinal (4%), and vascular disorders (2%). In 9 cases (20%) the ADRs resulted in definitive discontinuation of biologic therapy.

Conclusion

In a prospective cohort of IBD patients, more than half experienced ADRs during biologic therapy. General disorders and administration related reactions were the most common ADRs, while infections were less common and rarely led to discontinuation of therapy. Findings underline the importance of surveillance in management of IBD patients during biologic therapy and implementing safety protocols with data from real-life settings.

The Placebo and Nocebo Responses in Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Placebo and nocebo responses are mostly discussed in clinical trials with functional bowel disorders. Much less has been investigated and is known in gastrointestinal diseases beyond irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), especially in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). For the purpose of this review, we screened the Journal of Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies (JIPS) database with approximately 4,500 genuine placebo research articles and identified nine meta-analyses covering more than 135 randomized and placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) with more than 10,000 patients with Crohn´s disease (CD) and another five meta-analyses with 150 RCTs and more than 10,000 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Only three discussed nocebo effects, especially in the context of clinical use of biosimilars to treat inflammation. The articles were critically analyzed with respect to the size of the placebo response in CD and UC, its effects on clinical improvement versus maintenance of remission, and mediators and moderators of the response identified. Finally, we discussed and compared the differences and similarities of the placebo responses in IBD and IBS and the nocebo effect in switching from biologics to biosimilars in IBD management.

Nocebo effect and biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases: what's new and what's next?

INTRODUCTION

The use of biosimilars for the treatment of patients with chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) showed to be a valid strategy to reduce the economic burden of biologics on health-care costs and to increase patient access to treatment. However, the nocebo effect constitutes an important limitation to the wide use of biosimilars.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a literature overview to summarize information on nocebo effect in IBD population and to provide physicians with practical key strategies to prevent the nocebo effect in daily clinical practice and to improve patients' outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the proven efficacy and safety of biosimilars, further clinical studies are needed to define the effects of reverse and multiple switches in the management of patients with IBD. The development of new subcutaneous formulations, better accepted by patients, could contribute to reduce patients' negative expectations, and limit the nocebo effect.

Fecal Calprotectin, CRP and Leucocytes in IBD Patients: Comparison of Biomarkers With Biopsy Results

Background

This study aimed to compare fecal calprotectin (FC) levels with other commonly used parameters as part of patient care during evaluation for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods

We recruited adult IBD patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) and compared the results of the patient's biopsy results (i.e., inflamed versus noninflamed) for six sites (i.e., ileum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, rectum) with concentrations of C-reactive protein (CRP), total leucocytes and fecal calprotectin (FC).

Results

We found that FC was significantly elevated in a concentration-dependent manner that correlated with the number of active inflammation sites reported in biopsy. Although CRP and leucocyte measurements trended upwards in line with inflammation reported from biopsy, the results were highly variable and highlighted poor reliability of these biomarkers for indicating IBD inflammation.

Conclusions

These results strongly suggest that FC correlates best with biopsy reports and is a superior marker than CRP and leucocytes.

Multidisciplinary management of the nocebo effect in biosimilar-treated IBD patients: Results of a workshop from the NOCE-BIO consensus group

The high cost of biological drugs for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) considerably impacts on health-care budgets. Since the patent of biological products expired, cheaper biosimilars have entered the market. Available data coming from real-world cohorts and clinical trials indicate that the efficacy and safety of biosimilars is comparable to that of the originator drugs. Treating IBD patients with a biosimilar may be complicated by the risk of the nocebo effect, a negative effect of a pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatment, induced by patients's expectations and unrelated to the physiological action of the treatment. The nocebo effect can negatively affect treatment outcomes and hamper the cost-savings of biosimilars. Reducing the nocebo effect requires a multidisciplinary effort of all health-care providers in charge of biosimilar-treated IBD patients. The aim of the review is to reflect the key messages of an international workshop on this topic, including viewpoints from the perspective of physicians, nurses, psychologists, pharmacists and patients.