Placebo and Active Treatment Additivity in Placebo Analgesia: Research to Date and Future Directions

Abstract

Placebo analgesia is a robust experimental and clinical phenomenon. While our understanding of the mechanisms of placebo analgesia has developed rapidly, some central questions remain unanswered. Among the important questions is how placebo anal-gesia interacts with active analgesic effects. It is an assumption underlying double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) that the true effect of a treatment can be determined by examining the effect of the active treatment arm and subtracting the response in the placebo group (“the assumption of additivity”). However, despite the importance of this assumption for the interpretation of RCTs, it has rarely been formally examined. This article reviews the assumption of additivity in placebo analgesia by examining studies employing factorial designs manipulating both the receipt of an active analgesic and instructions about the treatment being delivered. In reviewing the literature, we identified seven studies that allowed a test of additivity. Of these, four found evidence against additivity, while the remaining three studies found results consistent with additivity. While the limited available data are somewhat mixed, the evidence suggests that at least under some conditions the assumption of additivity does not hold in placebo analgesia. The concordance between mechanisms of the active analgesic and placebo analgesia may influence whether additivity occurs or not. However, more research using factorial designs is needed to disentangle the relationship between placebo analgesia and the active effect of analgesic treatments.

Placebo From an Enactive Perspective

“…However, the apparent independence of physiological and psychological variables cannot be easily generalized from these cases to longer timescales. Linear additivity among different factors therefore can be acceptable in particular experimental settings (Benedetti et al, 2019), but not in general (Kleijnen et al, 1994;Coleshill et al, 2018). The tendency to study isolated variables looking for linear causes, while useful in particular cases, is not sufficient to fully comprehend complex phenomena across scales.…”

John D. Loeser Award Lecture: Size does matter, but it isn't everything: the challenge of modest treatment effects in chronic pain clinical trials

“…As noted by Kaptchuk, 58 this premise takes “for granted that the active drug response results partly from a placebo effect and that the placebo effect buried in the active arm is identical to the placebo effect of the dummy treatment.” But it is possible that response to the active treatment supplants at least part of the placebo group response, in which case the specific effects of the active treatment and the non-specific effects of trial participation, including placebo treatment, would be subadditive, that is, some of the nonspecific effects that occur in the placebo group would not occur in the active treatment group. 6 , 66 , 73 …”

Pharmacogenomics and Placebo Response in a Randomized Clinical Trial in Asthma

“…Drug efficacy in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is determined by subtracting treatment response in the placebo arm from response in the study arm. This simple calculation is based on the assumption that responses in the drug and placebo treatment arms are additive . However, a growing number of studies have identified genetic variants that differentially modify outcomes in both the drug and placebo treatment arms of RCTs .…”