Nocebo effects on pain are widely thought to be driven by negative expectations. This suggests that anticipatory processing, or some other form of top-down cognitive activity prior to the experience of pain, takes place to form sensory-augmenting expectations. However, little is known about the neural markers of anticipatory processing for nocebo effects. In this event-related potential study on healthy participants (n = 42), we tested whether anticipatory processing for classically conditioned nocebo-augmented pain differed from pain without nocebo augmentation using stimulus preceding negativity (SPN), and Granger Causality (GC). SPN is a slow-wave ERP component thought to measure top-down processing, and GC is a multivariate time series analysis used to measure functional connectivity between brain regions. Fear of pain was assessed with the Fear of Pain Questionnaire-III and tested for correlation with SPN and GC metrics. We found evidence that both anticipatory processing measured with SPN and functional connectivity from frontal to temporoparietal brain regions measured with GC were increased for nocebo pain stimuli relative to control pain stimuli. Other GC node pairs did not yield significant effects, and a lag in the timing of nocebo pain stimuli limited interpretation of the results. No correlations with trait fear of pain measured after the conditioning procedure were detected, indicating that while differences in neural activity could be detected between the anticipation of nocebo and control pain trials, they likely were not related to fear. These results highlight the role that top-down processes play in augmenting sensory perception based on negative expectations before sensation occurs.

@en

This study investigated for the first time the effects of individual and combined application of 3 learning techniques (verbal suggestions, classical conditioning, and observational learning) on placebo analgesia and extinction. Healthy participants (N = 206) were assigned to 8 different groups in which they were taught through either a verbal suggestion, a conditioning paradigm, a video observing someone, or any combination thereof that a placebo device (inactive transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation [TENS]) was capable of alleviating heat pain, whereas one group did not (control). Placebo analgesia was quantified as the within-group difference in experienced pain when the placebo device was (sham) ‘activated’ or ‘inactivated’ during equal pain stimuli, and compared between groups. Placebo analgesia was induced in groups with 2 or 3 learning techniques. Significantly stronger placebo analgesia was induced in the combination of all 3 learning techniques as compared to the individual learning techniques or control condition, underlining the additional contribution of 3 combined techniques. Extinction did not differ between groups. Furthermore, pain expectancies, but not state anxiety or trust, mediated placebo analgesia. Our findings emphasize the added value of combining 3 learning techniques to optimally shape expectancies that lead to placebo analgesia, which can be used in experimental and clinical settings. Perspective: This unique experimental study compared the individual versus combined effects of 3 important ways of learning (verbal suggestions, classical conditioning, and observational learning) on expectation-based pain relief. The findings indicate that placebo effects occurring in clinical practice could be optimally strengthened if healthcare providers apply these techniques in combination.

@en

Objective In past decades, the field of nocebo research has focused on studying how sensory perception can be shaped by learning. Nocebo effects refer to aggravated sensory experiences or increased sensitivity to sensations such as pain and itch resulting from treatment-related negative experiences. Behavioral conditioning and verbal suggestions of a negative treatment outcome may aggravate pain and itch perception. Gaining a comprehensive view of the magnitude of nocebo effects and contributing factors will help steer nocebo research toward fruitful directions for understanding complex sensory phenomena. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of a total of 37 distinct experimental nocebo studies on healthy participants (all published in English between 2008 and 2021), with four separate meta-analyses for nocebo effects on pain or itch. We conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression on factors such as type and intensity of sensory stimuli, and length of conditioning paradigms. Results This meta-analysis showed that, on average, effect sizes of nocebo effects were moderate to large (Hedges g between 0.26 and 0.71 for the four primary outcomes). The combination of conditioning and verbal suggestions yielded stronger nocebo responses on pain in particular. Subgroup analyses, including factors such as the type of sensory stimulation, did not explain the moderate heterogeneity in nocebo magnitudes between different studies. Risk of bias was generally low and was not related to nocebo magnitudes either. Conclusions We discuss these results in relation to the role of conditioning and aversive learning, and we recommend more consistency in designing and reporting nocebo experiments.

@en

Learning and negative outcome expectations can increase pain sensitivity, a phenomenon known as nocebo hyperalgesia. Here, we examined how a targeted pharmacological manipulation of learning would impact nocebo responses and their brain correlates. Participants received either a placebo (n = 27) or a single 80 mg dose of d-cycloserine (a partial NMDA receptor agonist; n = 23) and underwent fMRI. Behavioral conditioning and negative suggestions were used to induce nocebo responses. Participants underwent pre-conditioning outside the scanner. During scanning, we first delivered baseline pain stimulations, followed by nocebo acquisition and extinction phases. During acquisition, high intensity thermal pain was paired with supposed activation of sham electrical stimuli (nocebo trials), whereas moderate pain was administered with inactive electrical stimulation (control trials). Nocebo hyperalgesia was induced in both groups (p < 0.001). Nocebo magnitudes and brain activations did not show significant differences between d-cycloserine and placebo. In acquisition and extinction, there were significantly increased activations bilaterally in the amygdala, ACC, and insula, during nocebo compared to control trials. Nocebo acquisition trials also showed increased vlPFC activation. Increased opercular activation differentiated nocebo-augmented pain aggravation from baseline pain. These results support the involvement of integrative cognitive-emotional processes in nocebo hyperalgesia.

@en

Placebo effects, positive treatment outcomes that go beyond treatment processes, can alter sensations through learning mechanisms. Understanding how methodological factors contribute to the magnitude of placebo effects will help define the mechanisms by which these effects occur. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental placebo studies in cutaneous pain and itch in healthy samples, focused on how differences in methodology contribute to the resulting placebo effect magnitude. We conducted meta-analyses by learning mechanism and sensation, namely, for classical conditioning with verbal suggestion, verbal suggestion alone, and observational learning, separately for pain and itch. We conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression on the type of sensory stimuli, placebo treatment, number of acquisition and evocation trials, differences in calibrated intensities for placebo and control stimuli during acquisition, age, and sex. We replicated findings showing that a combination of classical conditioning with verbal suggestion induced larger placebo effects on pain (k = 68, g = 0.59) than verbal suggestion alone (k = 39, g = 0.38) and found a smaller effect for itch with verbal suggestion alone (k = 7, g = 0.14). Using sham electrodes as placebo treatments corresponded with larger placebo effects on pain than when topical gels were used. Other methodological and demographic factors did not significantly affect placebo magnitudes. Placebo effects on pain and itch reliably occur in experimental settings with varied methods, and conditioning with verbal suggestion produced the strongest effects. Although methods may shape the placebo effect to some extent, these effects appear robust overall, and their underlying learning mechanisms may be harnessed for applications outside the laboratory.@en

This study aimed to identify electrophysiological correlates of nocebo-augmented pain. Nocebo hyperalgesia (i.e., increases in perceived pain resulting from negative expectations) has been found to impact how healthy and patient populations experience pain and is a phenomenon that could be better understood in terms of its neurophysiological underpinnings. In this study, nocebo hyperalgesia was induced in 36 healthy participants through classical conditioning and negative suggestions. Electroencephalography was recorded during rest (pre- and post-acquisition) and during pain stimulation (baseline, acquisition, evocation) First, participants received baseline high thermal pain stimulations. During nocebo acquisition, participants learned to associate an inert gel applied to their forearm with administered high pain stimuli, relative to moderate intensity control stimuli administered without gel. During evocation, all stimuli were accompanied by moderate pain, to measure nocebo responses to the inert gel. Pre- to post-acquisition beta-band alterations in long-range temporal correlations (LRTC) were negatively associated with nocebo magnitudes. Individuals with strong resting LRTC showed larger nocebo responses than those with weaker LRTC. Nocebo acquisition trials showed reduced alpha power. Alpha power was higher while LRTC were lower during nocebo-augmented pain, compared to baseline. These findings support nocebo learning theories and highlight a role of nocebo-induced cognitive processing.

@en