search
Back to results

Pain, Learning, and Nocebo (PIPLE)

Primary Purpose

Chronic Pain, Pain Syndrome

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Netherlands
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
D-cycloserine
Conditioning
Extinction
fMRI
Placebo
Sponsored by
Leiden University Medical Center
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional basic science trial for Chronic Pain focused on measuring Nocebo, Pain, BOLD, fMRI, Conditioning

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 35 Years (Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Aged 18 - 35 years
  • Good understanding of the English language
  • Normal or corrected to normal vision

Exclusion Criteria:

A potential participant who meets any of the following exclusion criteria will be excluded from participation in this study:

  1. History of serious or chronic medical or psychiatric conditions (e.g., convulsions (epilepsy), cardiovascular problems, depression; careful and detailed screening will be carried out for both medical and psychiatric conditions)
  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
  9. Meeting any exclusion criteria in the fMRI examination questionnaire which would prohibit fMRI scanning.
  10. Having too high of a threshold for pain (where high pain cannot be induced with temperatures lower than 49.5 °C).

Sites / Locations

  • Leiden University

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Placebo Comparator

Arm Label

Augmented learning

Baseline learning

Arm Description

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

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

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Magnitude of induced nocebo hyperalgesia
is defined as the difference in pain numerical rating scale ratings (self-report, scale from 0 - no pain to 10 - worst pain imaginable) 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 ANOVA, comparing within-subjects differences for the control and nocebo trials between DCS and placebo groups

Secondary Outcome Measures

The difference in blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the acquisition of nocebo effects.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo- and hyper- activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
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.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the extinction of nocebo effects.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
The classification accuracy (into pharmacological groups), indicating that patterns of BOLD 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.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pain at baseline and nocebo-augmented pain.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
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.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
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.
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups

Full Information

First Posted
December 13, 2020
Last Updated
January 10, 2022
Sponsor
Leiden University Medical Center
Collaborators
Leiden University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04762836
Brief Title
Pain, Learning, and Nocebo
Acronym
PIPLE
Official Title
Manipulating NMDA-dependent Learning to Alter Nocebo Effects: A Pharmacological fMRI Study on Pain
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
February 28, 2021 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
August 20, 2021 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
August 20, 2021 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Leiden University Medical Center
Collaborators
Leiden University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Nocebo effects, negative responses to inert or active treatments which are putatively induced by negative outcome expectations, have been shown to play a significant role in pain perception. The underlying neurobiological mechanisms of these effects remain largely unexplored. The primary objective of this study is to test the role of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor-dependent learning in an experimental model of conditioned nocebo effects on self-reported pain. Secondary objectives are to examine the role of the NMDA manipulation and related neural correlates during the acquisition and extinction of nocebo effects using statistical learning models. This study will utilize a placebo controlled, double-blind design with respect to the pharmacological administration of 80 mg D-Cycloserine (DCS), an NMDA agonist, or placebo. Validated conditioning and verbal suggestion (VS) paradigms will induce nocebo effects on pain in a random sample of 50 healthy adults. The primary endpoint of the study is the magnitude of the induced nocebo effect on pain measured as the difference between self-reported pain, between the first conditioned and control extinction trials. Secondary endpoints include the classification analysis of the Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) responses of participants into pharmacological groups with multivariate pattern analysis. This study will be conducted at Leiden University and the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), The Netherlands.
Detailed Description
Main outcome variable: - 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. 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. 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. 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).

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Chronic Pain, Pain Syndrome
Keywords
Nocebo, Pain, BOLD, fMRI, Conditioning

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Basic Science
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantInvestigator
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
53 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Augmented learning
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
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
Arm Title
Baseline learning
Arm Type
Placebo Comparator
Arm Description
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
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
D-cycloserine
Other Intervention Name(s)
DCS
Intervention Description
Antibiotic medication that augments the function of NMDA-receptors
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Conditioning
Intervention Description
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.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Extinction
Intervention Description
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.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
fMRI
Intervention Description
In both arms of the study, BOLD response data will be collected with fMRI during the acquisition and extinction of nocebo effects on pain.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Placebo
Intervention Description
Placebo control in oral form
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Magnitude of induced nocebo hyperalgesia
Description
is defined as the difference in pain numerical rating scale ratings (self-report, scale from 0 - no pain to 10 - worst pain imaginable) 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 ANOVA, comparing within-subjects differences for the control and nocebo trials between DCS and placebo groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
The difference in blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the acquisition of nocebo effects.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo- and hyper- activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
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.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pharmacological groups during the extinction of nocebo effects.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
The classification accuracy (into pharmacological groups), indicating that patterns of BOLD 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.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
The difference in BOLD response at a series of a priori ROIs between pain at baseline and nocebo-augmented pain.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
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.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks
Title
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.
Description
This will be measured via functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessing BOLD activations, for example hypo and hyper activation differences between the two pharmacological groups
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 2 weeks

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Gender Based
Yes
Gender Eligibility Description
Participants whose lived gender is male, will be included as male. Participants whose lived gender is female, will be included as female.
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
35 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Aged 18 - 35 years Good understanding of the English language Normal or corrected to normal vision Exclusion Criteria: A potential participant who meets any of the following exclusion criteria will be excluded from participation in this study: History of serious or chronic medical or psychiatric conditions (e.g., convulsions (epilepsy), cardiovascular problems, depression; careful and detailed screening will be carried out for both medical and psychiatric conditions) History of chronic pain or itch conditions Experiencing pain or itch of 1 or more on a 0-10 pain / itch NRS on the day of testing Currently using antihistamines, analgesic medication, or itch-reducing medication (in the 24 hours prior to testing) Use of psychotropic drugs (including recreational drugs such as cannabis and psychotropic prescription-medication; in the past month) Currently being (or intending to become) pregnant, or currently breastfeeding, or planning to father a child in the next 3 months Colour-blindness Body Mass Index under 16 or over 30 Meeting any exclusion criteria in the fMRI examination questionnaire which would prohibit fMRI scanning. Having too high of a threshold for pain (where high pain cannot be induced with temperatures lower than 49.5 °C).
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Andrea WM Evers, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
Leiden University Medical Center
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Leiden University
City
Leiden
State/Province
South Holland
ZIP/Postal Code
2333 AK
Country
Netherlands

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
All data are collected pseudonymised thus no personal data are stored or shared. Consent forms are the only sources containing personal data and will not be shared, but are monitored by the department's Data Monitor. Supporting Information: Study Protocol; Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP); Analytic Code
IPD Sharing Time Frame
Data will become available immediately after publication of the study and will be retained for 15 years.
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Anonymized data can be shared with scientists in relevant fields for the purpose of future studies such as replication or meta-analysis (or with designated persons for monitoring purposes).

Learn more about this trial

Pain, Learning, and Nocebo

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs