Characteristics of panic disorder patients responding to placebo

Use of a placebo in clinical trials

The use of a placebo control group in the evaluation of a new product is today considered by most as a necessary condition of experimental drug research. Placebo response is an essential consideration in all clinical trials. If not properly controlled, incorrect and dangerous conclusion may be inferred for a product efficacy and safety profile. However, the inclusion of a placebo group in clinical trials in neuropsychiatric research raises several ethical and scientific questions. Whereas in certain indications, such as suicidal patients and severe and psychotic depression, the use of a placebo is generally not accepted, it is difficult to assess drug efficacy. This article discusses the concept of placebo in clinical trials, the occurrence of adverse events after placebo treatment and the high response rate of placebo in neuropsychiatric clinical research. The experimental methodology to adequately control all the factors involved is also analysed and discussed.

Antidepressants versus placebo for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes, and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. It is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Association for Psychopharmacology consider antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Several classes of antidepressants have been studied and compared, but it is still unclear which antidepressants have a more or less favourable profile in terms of effectiveness and acceptability in the treatment of this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antidepressants for panic disorder in adults, specifically:1. to determine the efficacy of antidepressants in alleviating symptoms of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison to placebo;2. to review the acceptability of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo; and3. to investigate the adverse effects of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, including the general prevalence of adverse effects, compared to placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders' (CCMD) Specialised Register, and CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to May 2017. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) allocating adults with panic disorder to antidepressants or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. We entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and settings. Primary outcomes included failure to respond, measured by a range of response scales, and treatment acceptability, measured by total number of dropouts for any reason. Secondary outcomes included failure to remit, panic symptom scales, frequency of panic attacks, agoraphobia, general anxiety, depression, social functioning, quality of life and patient satisfaction, measured by various scales as defined in individual studies. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one unique RCTs including 9377 participants overall, of whom we included 8252 in the 49 placebo-controlled arms of interest (antidepressant as monotherapy and placebo alone) in this review. The majority of studies were of moderate to low quality due to inconsistency, imprecision and unclear risk of selection and performance bias.We found low-quality evidence that revealed a benefit for antidepressants as a group in comparison with placebo in terms of efficacy measured as failure to respond (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.79; participants = 6500; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 7 (95% CI 6 to 9): that means seven people would need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. We observed the same finding when classes of antidepressants were compared with placebo.Moderate-quality evidence suggested a benefit for antidepressants compared to placebo when looking at number of dropouts due to any cause (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97; participants = 7850; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a NNTB of 27 (95% CI 17 to 105); treating 27 people will result in one person fewer dropping out. Considering antidepressant classes, TCAs showed a benefit over placebo, while for SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs) we observed no difference.When looking at dropouts due to adverse effects, which can be considered as a measure of tolerability, we found moderate-quality evidence showing that antidepressants as a whole are less well tolerated than placebo. In particular, TCAs and SSRIs produced more dropouts due to adverse effects in comparison with placebo, while the confidence interval for SNRI, noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (NRI) and other antidepressants were wide and included the possibility of no difference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies comprehensively address the objectives of the present review.Based on these results, antidepressants may be more effective than placebo in treating panic disorder. Efficacy can be quantified as a NNTB of 7, implying that seven people need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. Antidepressants may also have benefit in comparison with placebo in terms of number of dropouts, but a less favourable profile in terms of dropout due to adverse effects. However, the tolerability profile varied between different classes of antidepressants.The choice of whether antidepressants should be prescribed in clinical practice cannot be made on the basis of this review.Limitations in results include funding of some studies by pharmaceutical companies, and only assessing short-term outcomes.Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.

Something out of nothing: the placebo effect

The history of the concept of the placebo effect and research into its quantification and mechanisms are reviewed, particularly in relation to psychiatry. Research has demonstrated a notable placebo effect in depression: a large proportion of the clinical effect of antidepressant medication is attributable to the effect. Various mechanisms have been hypothesised: anxiety relief, expectation, transference, ‘meaning effects' and conditioning. Recent research from neuroimaging has unveiled that the effect is associated with biological correlates in the brain. Despite the renewal of research into the placebo effect, many questions remain unanswered. This partly reflects philosophical obstacles such as the mind/body dichotomy, which are inherent in conceptualising the effect. However, it also demonstrates the vast scope for further research into this area. Ultimately, an understanding of the processes that underlie the placebo effect should allow a rationalised therapeutic approach to be developed to maximise the clinical benefit of the therapeutic encounter.

Antidepressants and benzodiazepines for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. Panic disorder is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, antidepressants and benzodiazepines are the mainstay of treatment for panic disorder. Different classes of antidepressants have been compared; and the British Association for Psychopharmacology, and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) consider antidepressants (mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)) as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). In addition to antidepressants, benzodiazepines are widely prescribed for the treatment of panic disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the effects of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for panic disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

The Specialised Register of the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group (CCMDCTR) to 11 September 2015. This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950-), Embase (1974-) and PsycINFO (1967-). Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were handsearched. We contacted experts in this field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind randomised controlled trials allocating adult patients with panic disorder to antidepressants or benzodiazepines versus any other active treatment with antidepressants or benzodiazepines.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. Data were entered in RevMan 5.3 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, settings and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five studies, including 6785 participants overall (of which 5365 in the arms of interest (antidepressant and benzodiazepines as monotherapy)) were included in this review; however, since studies addressed many different comparisons, only a few trials provided data for primary outcomes. We found low-quality evidence suggesting no difference between antidepressants and benzodiazepines in terms of response rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.47; participants = 215; studies = 2). Very low-quality evidence suggested a benefit for benzodiazepines compared to antidepressants in terms of dropouts due to any cause, even if confidence interval (CI) ranges from almost no difference to benefit with benzodiazepines (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.63; participants = 1449; studies = 7). We found some evidence suggesting that serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are better tolerated than TCAs (when looking at the number of patients experiencing adverse effects). We failed to find clinically significant differences between individual benzodiazepines. The majority of studies did not report details on random sequence generation and allocation concealment; similarly, no details were provided about strategies to ensure blinding. The study protocol was not available for almost all studies so it is difficult to make a judgment on the possibility of outcome reporting bias. Information on adverse effects was very limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies are not sufficient to comprehensively address the objectives of the present review. The majority of studies enrolled a small number of participants and did not provide data for all the outcomes specified in the protocol. For these reasons most of the analyses were underpowered and this limits the overall completeness of evidence. In general, based on the results of the current review, the possible role of antidepressants and benzodiazepines should be assessed by the clinician on an individual basis. The choice of which antidepressant and/or benzodiazepine is prescribed can not be made on the basis of this review only, and should be based on evidence of antidepressants and benzodiazepines efficacy and tolerability, including data from placebo-controlled studies, as a whole. Data on long-term tolerability issues associated with antidepressants and benzodiazepines exposure should also be carefully considered.The present review highlights the need for further higher-quality studies comparing antidepressants with benzodiazepines, which should be conducted with high-methodological standards and including pragmatic outcome measures to provide clinicians with useful and practical data. Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.

Mechanisms of the placebo effect in pain and psychiatric disorders

Placebo effect research over the past 15 years has improved our understanding of how placebo treatments reduce patient symptoms. The expectation of symptom improvement is the primary factor underlying the placebo effect. Such expectations are shaped by past experiences, contextual cues and biological traits, which ultimately modulate one's degree of response to a placebo. The body of evidence that describes the physiology of the placebo effect has been derived from mechanistic studies primarily restricted to the setting of pain. Imaging findings support the role of endogenous opioid and dopaminergic networks in placebo analgesia in both healthy patients as well as patients with painful medical conditions. In patients with psychiatric illnesses such as anxiety disorders or depression, a vast overlap in neurological changes is observed in drug responders and placebo responders supporting the role of serotonergic networks in placebo response. Molecular techniques have been relatively underutilized in understanding the placebo effect until recently. We present an overview of the placebo responder phenotypes and genetic markers that have been associated with the placebo effect in pain, schizophrenia, anxiety disorders and depression.

Placebo response in the prophylaxis of migraine: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Migraine constitutes a good model for the study of placebo response. It is a well-defined disease, affects a large population and a great number of clinical trials have been performed, which have given homogeneous outcomes.

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the placebo response rate in migraine prophylaxis in all published clinical trials since 1988 and to estimate the influence of study design in response variability.

METHODS

A computer-based information search was conducted on the Medline database. The outcomes studied were patients who improved (reduction in migraine attacks of 50% or more); attacks per month, and patients with adverse events. Study design and countries in which the study was carried out were also analysed. The meta-analysis was computed using the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

In the final analysis, 32 papers were considered. The pooled estimate of the placebo response (patients who improved) was 21%. The placebo response rates were significantly higher in studies with a parallel design than those in cross-over studies (p<0.01). This response was also higher in European studies than in those performed in North America (p<0.001). Adverse events occurred in 30% of the patients who took a placebo, and the percentage of patients with adverse events was significantly higher in the North American studies than in those conducted in Europe (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

These data reinforce the need to consider the placebo effect when ascertaining the true therapeutic effect of any drug, as well as to design any clinical trial in the prophylaxis of migraine.

The role of endogenous opioids in the placebo effect in post-traumatic stress disorder

The concept of the placebo effect has received a considerable attention over the past several decades. The placebo effect has been observed in different psychiatric disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a chronic and severe disorder precipitated by exposure to a psychologically distressing event. The placebo response rates in patients with PTSD range from 19% to 62%. A considerable number of research publications suggest that endogenous opioids are involved in the mechanisms of the placebo effect. Endogenous opioid peptides play an important role in stress response and in the pathophysiology of PTSD. Therefore, endogenous opioids may be involved in the neurobiology of the placebo effect in PTSD. Possibly, the endogenous opioid system mediates the effect of placebo on all 3 PTSD symptom clusters (re-experiencing symptoms, avoidance and numbing, and physiologic arousal). The placebo effect-related activation of the endogenous opioid system may result in an improvement in intrusive symptomatology and symptoms of increased arousal because the administration of exogenous opioids improve these symptoms. The placebo effect-related activation of the endogenous opioid system may have a mood-enhancing effect, and, consequently, diminish avoidance and numbing. Multiple neurotransmitter and neuroendocrine pathways may be involved in the mechanisms of the placebo effect in PTSD. Further studies of the neurobiology of the placebo effect on patients with PTSD and other psychiatric disorders may produce interesting and important results.

Correlates of therapeutic response in panic disorder presenting with palpitations: heart rate variability, sleep, and placebo effect

OBJECTIVE

To examine the correlates of therapeutic response of patients with panic disorder presenting with palpitations, we hypothesized that therapeutic response would correlate with heart rate variability (HRV) and sleep measures.

METHODS

After a 1-week placebo washout, 27 patients free of structural heart disease and not on cardioactive drugs were randomized in a double-blinded fashion to 4 weeks of treatment with clonazepam (a known antipanic agent) or placebo. We performed standard sleep measures and recorded HRV from 24-hour Holter acquisitions at baseline and end of study. We defined response to therapy as a 50% improvement in the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) score, confirmed by questionnaires and reaction to sodium lactate infusion.

RESULTS

There were 12 responders and 15 nonresponders. Normalization of sleep pattern (including less stage 1 and rapid eye movement [REM] sleep) was observed in both drug and placebo responders (P = 0.011 and P = 0.05, respectively) and in placebo responders alone, compared with nonresponders (P = 0.006 and P = 0.013, respectively). Placebo responders were more likely to show less depression, but even after we controlled for depression, main sleep effects remained. None of the HRV measures correlated with response, but compared with placebo, clonazepam led to a decrease in all the time and frequency domain measures of HRV (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Central mechanisms are related to the therapeutic response of patients with panic disorder presenting with palpitations, but this does not directly correlate with HRV. Larger and longer studies may allow objective explanations of placebo response in panic disorder.

The placebo response and effect of time in a trial of acupuncture to treat nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy

OBJECTIVES

The sham control is widely used in acupuncture research, and its adequacy may be assessed by exploring the 'credibility' of the intervention. We aimed to examine the credibility of the study intervention, to quantify the size of the placebo response and effect of time in reducing nausea in early pregnancy.

DESIGN

Five hundred and ninety-three women with nausea or vomiting in early pregnancy volunteered to participate in a randomised controlled trial, conducted at the Women's and Children's Hospital, South Australia.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Women completed the Rhodes Index of Nausea and Vomiting and the Credibility Rating Scale.

RESULTS

The credibility of the acupuncture and sham acupuncture interventions were not different. The relative change in nausea at the end of the first week of the study was estimated to be 28% attributed to a time effect and 7% to the placebo response. At the end of the third week, there was a further small increase in time effect (32%) and the placebo response (17%).

CONCLUSION

Sham acupuncture is a credible control and allows assessment of the size of the placebo response.

Residual symptoms and comorbidity in panic disorder

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of the comorbid conditions of panic disorder after 1 year of treatment, emphasizing the detection of residual symptoms and their relationship to other clinical variables.

METHODS

Subjects (N = 64) were assessed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Comorbidity with other disorders, scores on Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale were assessed at baseline and after 12 months. Criteria for residual anxiety/somatic symptoms were defined.

RESULTS

Reduction in generalized anxiety disorder rates accounted for a significant decrease in comorbidity at 1-year follow-up, with regard to baseline assessment. When the more severe symptoms of the disorder had remitted, a third of the patients referred physical symptoms with some concern over a fluctuating state of anxiety. The said symptoms were neither a recurrence of panic disorder nor did they account for other anxiety or somatoform disorders. Lower scores on extraversion predict higher risk of residual symptoms.

DISCUSSION

The persistence of residual anxiety/somatic symptoms in a third of the patients who apparently achieved a good response to treatment of panic disorder might characterize a minor form of chronic persistence of this condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The subgroup of patients with residual symptoms would not be detectable by follow-up studies, which focus on the assessment of relapse of panic disorder by means of strictly defined diagnostic criteria.

The placebo effect in neurological disorders

Recent evidence suggests that the placebo effect is mediated by the dopaminergic reward mechanisms in the human brain and that it is related to the expectation of clinical benefit. On the basis of this theory, we propose some criteria for the proper investigation of the placebo effect, and review the evidence for a placebo effect in Parkinson's disease, depression, pain, and other neurological disorders. We also discuss the evidence for the use of placebos in long-term substitution programmes for the treatment of drug addiction.

The placebo response in social phobia

The placebo response forms a growing problem in randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials in psychiatry. Research into the placebo response is on the increase, but remains very limited in relation to social phobia. Together with the dropout rate, the placebo effect is an important factor limiting the discriminative properties of any study. In this study, we reviewed 15 placebo-controlled studies in social phobia, focussing on patients and study characteristics. In social phobia, the placebo effect has turned out to be moderately large and has shown no increase over the past decade. Placebo response was highest in large, multicentred trials and was independent of study duration. No validation for a placebo run-in was found. Taking into account both response to placebo and active drug, as well as dropout rate, the most discriminative results are probably to be expected in a sample of patients who are moderately to severely impaired. More research in the field of the placebo response is needed.

Placebos and paradoxes in psychiatric research: an ethics perspective

The use of placebos in clinical trials, particularly in research with mentally ill people, has emerged as a subject of considerable controversy. We first outline ethical aspects of the primary scientific arguments for and against placebo use in research. Three examples of paradoxical aspects of the ethical use of placebos are discussed: involvement of relatively more vulnerable populations, use of apparently "less than standard" therapy, and the omission of information in placebo comparisons. In the current scientific and regulatory context, placebo use in psychiatric research may be necessary for scientific reasons, and when certain conditions are present, it may be justified on ethical grounds. Four key recommendations to facilitate the ethical use of placebos in research trials are presented. We conclude that placebo trials should be undertaken only after careful evaluation of alternative scientific strategies and, as with all human research, with great respect and genuine consideration for the individuals who choose to participate in these protocols.

The role of the endogenous opioid system in the pathogenesis of anxiety disorders

The author suggests that anxiety disorders are related to a deficiency in the endogenous opioid system. The author classifies deficiencies of the endogenous opioid system as congenital or acquired, and also as real or relative. Individuals with 'real deficiency' cannot function adequately in any situations, including situations which are natural for human beings. Persons with 'relative deficiency' are unable to function adequately under circumstances which are unnatural for humans: their 'adaptational reserve' is insufficient. The use of opioid substances and alcohol is a form of self-medication to reduce anxiety. Acupuncture and its variations, psychotherapy, and the administration of placebo can decrease anxiety because these therapeutic maneuvers activate the endogenous opioid system.

The placebo effect on mood and behavior: the role of the endogenous opioid system

Evidence from clinical and experimental studies has shown that placebos influence mood and behavior, that endogenous opioids are involved in the placebo effect, and that the endogenous opioid system is related to psychological events. Recent studies have also demonstrated that the endogenous opioid system is closely connected with other neurotransmitter systems in the brain. The author suggests that the interaction between the endogenous opioid system and different neurotransmitter systems in the brain mediates the placebo effect on mood and behavior of both healthy and sick people.

Placebo response in anxiety disorders

OBJECTIVE

To review literature on placebo response in anxiety, to discuss sources and levels of placebo response in various anxiety disorders, and to suggest methods to prevent high placebo response rates in clinical research trials.

DATA SOURCE

Data from scientific literature were identified using a MEDLINE search, and were extracted and summarized for this review.

STUDY SELECTION

Representative findings were selected from clinical and epidemiologic studies, review articles, letters to the editor, book chapters, and proceedings.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data from English-language reports of studies on humans were included. Only the most representative conclusions drawn from review articles were used.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Anxiety disorders in general are thought to be extremely susceptible to a variety of influences, including patient characteristics and environmental variables. Reported placebo response levels in clinical studies of anxiolytics for generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder vary widely, with a tendency to be rather high, although studies in social phobia and obsessive compulsive disorder appear to have consistently low placebo response rates. Comparisons of anxiety studies with studies of other indications, such as depression, show similar overall placebo response rates. To determine efficacy, drug response rates and placebo response rates must be clearly differentiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Examination of the literature suggests that placebo response rates in studies of anxiolytics are influences by a number of factors, including both endogenous and exogenous variables. High placebo response rates may mask true drug response rates and may result from poor study design or lack of procedural standardization. The use of certain design methods may help to prevent high placebo response rates in anxiolytic clinical trials.

Drug treatment of panic disorder

Drug treatment of panic disorder is reviewed with focus on recent controlled studies. The efficacy of alprazolam, a triazolobenzodiazepine, and imipramine, a tricyclic antidepressant, has consistently been demonstrated, but there is reasonable evidence that other benzodiazepines or antidepressants might also be effective if equipotent doses are used. Most controlled studies demonstrate drug efficacy on several psychopathological symptoms, including the core symptom panic attacks. Limited evidence indicates that alprazolam may be more efficacious in treating panic attacks than avoidance behaviour, and the reverse when imipramine is concerned. Drug efficacy appears to be most consistently documented in moderately to severely ill panic patients. The benzodiazepines are better tolerated than antidepressants in terms of patient acceptance, and the improvement sets in faster with benzodiazepines. In the presence of depressive symptoms considered secondary to panic attacks and/or agoraphobia, both types of drugs appear efficacious. Difficulty discontinuing high-dose benzodiazepine treatment remains the most important side effect of the treatment but sedation can, like anticholinergic side effects of the tricyclic antidepressants, be troublesome, thereby diminishing patient compliance. The role of newly developed antidepressants with a more specific mode of action and milder side effects awaits evaluation in controlled trials.

Alprazolam, imipramine and placebo treatment of panic disorder: predicting therapeutic response

Factors that predicted the outcome of drug treatment (alprazolam or imipramine) of panic disorder were studied in a sample of 123 Scandinavian patients participating in a multicenter placebo-controlled 8-week trial. The attrition rate was 95% for alprazolam, 73% for imipramine and 46% for placebo. For the intention-to-treat and 3-week-completer samples, drugs and anxiety symptoms at baseline were the best predictors of improvement on the Global Improvement Scale and on symptom scales focusing on panic attacks, phobic behavior and anticipatory anxiety. For completers of the 8-week trial, only baseline scores predicted outcome. Generally, more severe symptoms at baseline predicted a worse outcome. A subsample of patients had a marked placebo response. Avoidance, sex, age, childhood psychopathology and previous treatment experience had no or only a weak impact on the outcome. The relationship between panic disorder and mood disorder is presented elsewhere.