Cargando…

Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies

Sex has been speculated to be a predictor of the placebo and nocebo effect for many years, but whether this holds true or not has rarely been investigated. We utilized a placebo literature database on various aspects of the genuine placebo/nocebo response. In 2015, we had extracted 75 systematic rev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Enck, Paul, Klosterhalfen, Sibylle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6409330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30886569
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00160
_version_ 1783401942057222144
author Enck, Paul
Klosterhalfen, Sibylle
author_facet Enck, Paul
Klosterhalfen, Sibylle
author_sort Enck, Paul
collection PubMed
description Sex has been speculated to be a predictor of the placebo and nocebo effect for many years, but whether this holds true or not has rarely been investigated. We utilized a placebo literature database on various aspects of the genuine placebo/nocebo response. In 2015, we had extracted 75 systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-regressions performed in major medical areas (neurology, psychiatry, internal medicine). These meta-analyses were screened for whether sex/gender differences had been noted to contribute to the placebo/nocebo effect: in only 3 such analyses female sex was associated with a higher placebo effect, indicating poor evidence for a contribution of sex to it in RCTs. This was updated with another set of meta-analyses for the current review, but did not change the overall conclusion. The same holds true for 18 meta-analyses investigating adverse event (nocebo) reporting in RCT in the placebo arm of trials. We also screened our database for papers referring to sex/gender and the placebo effect in experimental studies, and identified 28 papers reporting 29 experiments. Their results can be summarized as follows: (a) Despite higher sensitivity of pain in females, placebo analgesia is easier to elicit in males; (b) It appears that conditioning is effective specifically eliciting nocebo effects; (c) Conditioning works specifically well to elicit placebo and nocebo effects in females and with nausea; (d) Verbal suggestions are not sufficient to induce analgesia in women, but work in men. These results will be discussed with respect to the question why nausea and pain may be prone to be responsive to sex/gender differences, while other symptoms are less. Lastly, we will discuss the apparent discrepancy between RCT with low relevance of sex, and higher relevance of sex in specific experimental settings. We argue that the placebo response is predominantly the result of a conditioning (learning) response in females, while in males it predominantly may be generated via (verbal) manipulating of expectancies. In RCT therefore, the net outcome of the intervention may be the same despite different mechanisms generating the placebo effect between the sexes, while in experimental work when both pathways are separated and explicitly explored, such differences may surface.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6409330
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64093302019-03-18 Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies Enck, Paul Klosterhalfen, Sibylle Front Neurosci Neuroscience Sex has been speculated to be a predictor of the placebo and nocebo effect for many years, but whether this holds true or not has rarely been investigated. We utilized a placebo literature database on various aspects of the genuine placebo/nocebo response. In 2015, we had extracted 75 systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-regressions performed in major medical areas (neurology, psychiatry, internal medicine). These meta-analyses were screened for whether sex/gender differences had been noted to contribute to the placebo/nocebo effect: in only 3 such analyses female sex was associated with a higher placebo effect, indicating poor evidence for a contribution of sex to it in RCTs. This was updated with another set of meta-analyses for the current review, but did not change the overall conclusion. The same holds true for 18 meta-analyses investigating adverse event (nocebo) reporting in RCT in the placebo arm of trials. We also screened our database for papers referring to sex/gender and the placebo effect in experimental studies, and identified 28 papers reporting 29 experiments. Their results can be summarized as follows: (a) Despite higher sensitivity of pain in females, placebo analgesia is easier to elicit in males; (b) It appears that conditioning is effective specifically eliciting nocebo effects; (c) Conditioning works specifically well to elicit placebo and nocebo effects in females and with nausea; (d) Verbal suggestions are not sufficient to induce analgesia in women, but work in men. These results will be discussed with respect to the question why nausea and pain may be prone to be responsive to sex/gender differences, while other symptoms are less. Lastly, we will discuss the apparent discrepancy between RCT with low relevance of sex, and higher relevance of sex in specific experimental settings. We argue that the placebo response is predominantly the result of a conditioning (learning) response in females, while in males it predominantly may be generated via (verbal) manipulating of expectancies. In RCT therefore, the net outcome of the intervention may be the same despite different mechanisms generating the placebo effect between the sexes, while in experimental work when both pathways are separated and explicitly explored, such differences may surface. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6409330/ /pubmed/30886569 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00160 Text en Copyright © 2019 Enck and Klosterhalfen. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Enck, Paul
Klosterhalfen, Sibylle
Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title_full Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title_fullStr Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title_full_unstemmed Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title_short Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies
title_sort does sex/gender play a role in placebo and nocebo effects? conflicting evidence from clinical trials and experimental studies
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6409330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30886569
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00160
work_keys_str_mv AT enckpaul doessexgenderplayaroleinplaceboandnoceboeffectsconflictingevidencefromclinicaltrialsandexperimentalstudies
AT klosterhalfensibylle doessexgenderplayaroleinplaceboandnoceboeffectsconflictingevidencefromclinicaltrialsandexperimentalstudies