Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
53 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-02-28
2021-08-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Role of Learning in Nocebo Hyperalgesia
NCT03793790
Pain-related Fear as a Facilitator of Nocebo Hyperalgesia
NCT04197154
Reducing Nocebo Effects on Pressure Pain
NCT05284383
Psychobiological Mechanisms of Placebo and Nocebo Effects in the Treatment of Chronic Back Pain
NCT02157389
Learning Mechanisms for Placebo and Nocebo Studies on Somatosensory Sensations: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
NCT04387851
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
\- The magnitude of induced nocebo hyperalgesia is defined as the difference in pain ratings for the first nocebo trial compared to the first control trial of the extinction phase.
A significant difference here is assessed within the mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA), comparing within-subjects differences for control and nocebo trials between DCS and placebo groups.
Time frame: On the day of the experimental session, during the extinction phase
Secondary outcome variables:
* The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the acquisition of nocebo effects.
* The classification accuracy (into pharmacological groups), indicating that patterns of activation in the network of a priori ROIs form a model that can detect differences in neural activations during the acquisition of nocebo effects.
* The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the extinction of nocebo effects.
* The classification accuracy (into pharmacological groups), indicating that patterns of activation in the network of a priori ROIs form a model that can detect differences in neural activations during the first trials of the extinction phase.
* The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pain at baseline and nocebo-augmented pain.
* The classification accuracy, indicating that patterns of activation in the network of a priori ROIs form a model that can detect commonalities and differences in neural activations between the experience of pain at baseline and nocebo-augmented pain.
* The prediction accuracy, indicating that patterns of activation in the network of a priori ROIs form a model that can predict the magnitude of induced nocebo effects based on patterns of activations during the acquisition of nocebo effects.
* The moderation of the magnitude of induced nocebo effects in the first trials of the extinction phase by scores on the psychological questionnaires.
0\. Manipulation checks: Pain intensity responses during the acquisition phase To assess the effectiveness of the conditioning paradigm, pain ratings during acquisition will be analysed using a 2x1 mixed model ANOVA with group as a between-subjects factor (DCS, placebo), and pain intensity scores as a within-subjects, repeated measure with two levels (conditioned and unconditioned trials).
Effect of DCS on learning The Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV) subtest Verbal Paired Associates will be used to assess whether DCS enhanced learning. A 2x1 mixed model ANOVA with group as the between-subjects factor and WMS-IV scores as the within-subjects repeated measure with two measurements, before administering DCS or placebo versus at two hours post-administration, before the beginning of the conditioning paradigm.
1. Primary hypothesis:
The magnitude of the induced nocebo effect on pain is hypothesized to be larger in the DCS group relative to the placebo group. The magnitude of the nocebo effect is measured as the difference between self-reported pain on a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) between the first conditioned and control extinction phase trials.
2. Secondary hypotheses:
2.1. The magnitude of the conditioned nocebo effects still present after extinction is measured as the change from the average nocebo effect reported in the first trials of the extinction phase (after acquisition) and the average nocebo effect reported in last trials of the extinction phase (after extinction).
2.2. DCS and placebo groups will be characterized by divergent neural activity across a set of a priori regions of interest (ROIs) during acquisition. ROI analysis of differences in BOLD responses will be performed on periaqueductal grey, (PAG), ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, (vlPFC), and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex (aCC), hippocampus, rostral ventromedial medulla (RVM), thalamus, insula.
2.3 Multivariate pattern analysis (i.e., machine learning methods) will be used to investigate differences in BOLD responses during the acquisition of nocebo effects and thereby classify participants into pharmacological treatment groups (1) DCS, or 2) placebo) based on neural activity in the following ROIs: PAG, vlPFC, dlPFC, aCC, RVM, amygdala, thalamus, insula.
2.4. DCS and placebo groups will be characterized by divergent BOLD responses across a set of a priori ROIs during extinction. ROI analysis for differences in BOLD responses between DCS and placebo groups will be performed on the following ROIs: PAG, vlPFC, dlPFC, aCC, RVM, amygdala, thalamus, insula.
2.5 Multivariate pattern analysis will be used to investigate differences in BOLD responses during the extinction of nocebo effects and thereby classify participants into pharmacological treatment groups (1) DCS, or 2) placebo) based on neural activity in the following ROIs: PAG, vlPFC, dlPFC, aCC, RVM, amygdala, thalamus, insula.
2.6. Pain and baseline, and nocebo augmented pain of a similar intensity will be characterized by divergent neural activations. Within the placebo group, ROI analysis for differences in BOLD responses between nocebo experiences and sensory experiences of pain based on BOLD responses in the following ROIs: PAG, vlPFC, dlPFC, aCC, RVM, amygdala, thalamus, insula.
2.7. Pain and baseline, and nocebo augmented pain of a similar intensity will be characterized by divergent neural activations. Within the placebo group, multivariate pattern analysis will be used to investigate the differences in BOLD responses between nocebo experiences and sensory experiences of pain based on neural activity in the following ROIs: PAG, vlPFC, dlPFC, aCC, RVM, amygdala, thalamus, insula.
. 2.8. Patterns of BOLD responses measured during the acquisition of nocebo effects in all pharmacological groups (1) DCS, or 2) placebo) at the previously listed ROIs, will predict the magnitude of nocebo effects on pain during extinction.
3. Questionnaires To assess the influence of psychological traits, questionnaires will also be included. These will include the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PSC), Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and the Body Vigilance Scale (BVS).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
BASIC_SCIENCE
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Augmented learning
Conditioning and extinction of a nocebo response to the activation of a sham electrode, controlled within subjects. All participants in this arm receive a double-blind oral dose of DCS two hours prior to conditioning and fMRI
D-cycloserine
Antibiotic medication that augments the function of NMDA-receptors
Conditioning
During nocebo acquisition trials, the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of a sham electrode that can increase pain sensitivity, is paired to unconditioned high-pain stimuli (nocebo trials). During control trials of the acquisition phase, moderate-pain stimuli are paired to no sham electrode activation.
Extinction
During nocebo extinction, moderate pain stimulations are administered both after the administration of the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of the sham electrode) and the control stimulus (no activation of the sham electrode), in order to evoke nocebo responses to the sham hyperalgesic procedure.
fMRI
In both arms of the study, BOLD response data will be collected with fMRI during the acquisition and extinction of nocebo effects on pain.
Baseline learning
Conditioning and extinction of a nocebo response to the activation of a sham electrode, controlled within subjects. All participants in this arm receive a double-blind oral dose of placebo two hours prior to conditioning and fMRI
Conditioning
During nocebo acquisition trials, the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of a sham electrode that can increase pain sensitivity, is paired to unconditioned high-pain stimuli (nocebo trials). During control trials of the acquisition phase, moderate-pain stimuli are paired to no sham electrode activation.
Extinction
During nocebo extinction, moderate pain stimulations are administered both after the administration of the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of the sham electrode) and the control stimulus (no activation of the sham electrode), in order to evoke nocebo responses to the sham hyperalgesic procedure.
fMRI
In both arms of the study, BOLD response data will be collected with fMRI during the acquisition and extinction of nocebo effects on pain.
Placebo
Placebo control in oral form
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
D-cycloserine
Antibiotic medication that augments the function of NMDA-receptors
Conditioning
During nocebo acquisition trials, the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of a sham electrode that can increase pain sensitivity, is paired to unconditioned high-pain stimuli (nocebo trials). During control trials of the acquisition phase, moderate-pain stimuli are paired to no sham electrode activation.
Extinction
During nocebo extinction, moderate pain stimulations are administered both after the administration of the conditioned stimulus (i.e., activation of the sham electrode) and the control stimulus (no activation of the sham electrode), in order to evoke nocebo responses to the sham hyperalgesic procedure.
fMRI
In both arms of the study, BOLD response data will be collected with fMRI during the acquisition and extinction of nocebo effects on pain.
Placebo
Placebo control in oral form
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Good understanding of the English language
* Normal or corrected to normal vision
Exclusion Criteria
2. History of chronic pain or itch conditions
3. Experiencing pain or itch of 1 or more on a 0-10 pain / itch NRS on the day of testing
4. Currently using antihistamines, analgesic medication, or itch-reducing medication (in the 24 hours prior to testing)
5. Use of psychotropic drugs (including recreational drugs such as cannabis and psychotropic prescription-medication; in the past month)
6. Currently being (or intending to become) pregnant, or currently breastfeeding, or planning to father a child in the next 3 months
7. Colour-blindness
8. Body Mass Index under 16 or over 30
10. Having too high of a threshold for pain (where high pain cannot be induced with temperatures lower than 49.5 °C).
18 Years
35 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Leiden University
OTHER
Leiden University Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
AWMEvers
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Andrea WM Evers, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Leiden University Medical Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Leiden University
Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NL66693.058.18
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.