Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Neurology 6/2015

01-06-2015 | Review

Characterization of the adverse events profile of placebo-treated patients in randomized controlled trials on drug-resistant focal epilepsies

Authors: Fabio Giovannelli, Gaetano Zaccara, Massimo Cincotta, Giulia Loiacono, Alberto Verrotti

Published in: Journal of Neurology | Issue 6/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

In epilepsy trials a substantial proportion of patients receiving placebo has some improvement or experience adverse events (AEs) which match those related to active drug. The characterization of factors influencing these responses is crucial for a better comprehension of study results and to improve design of new trials. Seventy-one placebo-controlled, double-blind trials in drug-resistant focal epilepsies has been selected. The effect of multiple factors on some outcome measures were explored using a meta-regression model. For subjective and objective AEs, risk difference (RD) was calculated and entered in an inverse variance-weighted linear meta-regression model as independent variable to evaluate the relationship with data reported in placebo-treated patients. The number of study arms influence the percentage of patients withdrawing because of AEs and the highest dose of the experimental drug used in each RCT correlates with withdrawal because of AEs and with subjective AEs. Higher titration speed is associated with lower percentages of responders and higher reporting of both objective and subjective AEs. The correlation between proportions of placebo-treated patients with subjective and objective neurological AEs and relative RD, was significant (P = 0.002 r = 0.364 and P < 0.001 r = 0.650, respectively). Efficacy and tolerability outcomes of the placebo groups are intrinsically tied to the trial methodology and to the outcomes observed in patients treated with the active drug. The correlation for objective and subjective AEs between RD and the placebo-treated patients suggest that investigators are influenced by factors which operate within each specific trial.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Murray D, Stoessl AJ (2013) Mechanisms and therapeutic implications of the placebo effect in neurological and psychiatric conditions. Pharmacol Ther 140:306–318CrossRefPubMed Murray D, Stoessl AJ (2013) Mechanisms and therapeutic implications of the placebo effect in neurological and psychiatric conditions. Pharmacol Ther 140:306–318CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Perucca E (2012) What clinical trial designs have been used to test antiepileptic drugs and do we need to change them? Epileptic Disord 14:124–131PubMed Perucca E (2012) What clinical trial designs have been used to test antiepileptic drugs and do we need to change them? Epileptic Disord 14:124–131PubMed
3.
go back to reference Enck P, Klosterhalfen S, Weimer K et al (2011) The placebo response in clinical trials: more questions than answers. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 27(366):1889–1895CrossRef Enck P, Klosterhalfen S, Weimer K et al (2011) The placebo response in clinical trials: more questions than answers. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 27(366):1889–1895CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Amanzio M, Corazzini LL, Vase L, Benedetti F (2009) A systematic review of adverse events in placebo groups of anti-migraine clinical trials. Pain 146:261–269CrossRefPubMed Amanzio M, Corazzini LL, Vase L, Benedetti F (2009) A systematic review of adverse events in placebo groups of anti-migraine clinical trials. Pain 146:261–269CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Rief W, Nestoriuc Y, von Lilienfeld-Toal A et al (2009) Differences in adverse effect reporting in placebo groups in SSRI and tricyclic antidepressant trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Saf 32:1041–1056CrossRefPubMed Rief W, Nestoriuc Y, von Lilienfeld-Toal A et al (2009) Differences in adverse effect reporting in placebo groups in SSRI and tricyclic antidepressant trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Saf 32:1041–1056CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD (2010) Nocebo effects in multiple sclerosis trials: a meta-analysis. Mult Scler 16:816–828CrossRefPubMed Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD (2010) Nocebo effects in multiple sclerosis trials: a meta-analysis. Mult Scler 16:816–828CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Mitsikostas DD, Mantonakis LI, Chalarakis NG (2011) Nocebo is the enemy, not placebo. A meta-analysis of reported side effects after placebo treatment in headaches. Cephalalgia 31:550–561CrossRefPubMed Mitsikostas DD, Mantonakis LI, Chalarakis NG (2011) Nocebo is the enemy, not placebo. A meta-analysis of reported side effects after placebo treatment in headaches. Cephalalgia 31:550–561CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Häuser W, Sarzi-Puttini P, Tölle TR, Wolfe F (2012) Placebo and nocebo responses in randomised controlled trials of drugs applying for approval for fibromyalgia syndrome treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 30(6 Suppl 74):78–87PubMed Häuser W, Sarzi-Puttini P, Tölle TR, Wolfe F (2012) Placebo and nocebo responses in randomised controlled trials of drugs applying for approval for fibromyalgia syndrome treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 30(6 Suppl 74):78–87PubMed
10.
go back to reference Mitsikostas DD, Chalarakis NG, Mantonakis LI et al (2012) Nocebo in fibromyalgia: meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials and implications for practice. Eur J Neurol 19:672–680CrossRefPubMed Mitsikostas DD, Chalarakis NG, Mantonakis LI et al (2012) Nocebo in fibromyalgia: meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials and implications for practice. Eur J Neurol 19:672–680CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD (2012) A meta-analytic approach to estimating nocebo effects in neuropathic pain trials. J Neurol 259:436–447CrossRefPubMed Papadopoulos D, Mitsikostas DD (2012) A meta-analytic approach to estimating nocebo effects in neuropathic pain trials. J Neurol 259:436–447CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Stathis P, Smpiliris M, Konitsiotis S, Mitsikostas DD (2013) Nocebo as a potential confounding factor in clinical trials for Parkinson’s disease treatment: a meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol 20:527–533CrossRefPubMed Stathis P, Smpiliris M, Konitsiotis S, Mitsikostas DD (2013) Nocebo as a potential confounding factor in clinical trials for Parkinson’s disease treatment: a meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol 20:527–533CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Guekht AB, Korczyn AD, Bondareva IB et al (2010) Placebo responses in randomized trials of antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsy Behav 17:64–69CrossRefPubMed Guekht AB, Korczyn AD, Bondareva IB et al (2010) Placebo responses in randomized trials of antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsy Behav 17:64–69CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Rheims S, Perucca E, Cucherat et al (2011) Factors determining response to antiepileptic drugs in randomized controlled trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsia 52:219–233PubMed Rheims S, Perucca E, Cucherat et al (2011) Factors determining response to antiepileptic drugs in randomized controlled trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsia 52:219–233PubMed
15.
go back to reference Zaccara G, Giovannelli F, Cincotta M, Loiacono G, Verrotti A (2014) Adverse events of placebo-treated, drug-resistant, focal epileptic patients in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. J Neurol [Epub ahead of print] Zaccara G, Giovannelli F, Cincotta M, Loiacono G, Verrotti A (2014) Adverse events of placebo-treated, drug-resistant, focal epileptic patients in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. J Neurol [Epub ahead of print]
16.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Open Med 3:e123–e130PubMedCentralPubMed Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Open Med 3:e123–e130PubMedCentralPubMed
17.
go back to reference Wallace BC, Schmid CH, Lau J et al (2009) Meta-Analyst: software for meta-analysis of binary, continuous and diagnostic data. BMC Med Res Methodol 9:80PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Wallace BC, Schmid CH, Lau J et al (2009) Meta-Analyst: software for meta-analysis of binary, continuous and diagnostic data. BMC Med Res Methodol 9:80PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Brinkhaus B, Pach D, Lüdtke R et al (2008) Who controls the placebo? Introducing a placebo quality checklist for pharmacological trials. Contemp Clin Trials 29:149–156CrossRefPubMed Brinkhaus B, Pach D, Lüdtke R et al (2008) Who controls the placebo? Introducing a placebo quality checklist for pharmacological trials. Contemp Clin Trials 29:149–156CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Zaccara G, Perucca P, Gangemi PF (2012) The adverse event profile of pregabalin across different disorders: a meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 68:903–912CrossRefPubMed Zaccara G, Perucca P, Gangemi PF (2012) The adverse event profile of pregabalin across different disorders: a meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 68:903–912CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Zaccara G, Perucca P, Loiacono G, Giovannelli F, Verrotti A (2013) The adverse event profile of lacosamide: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Epilepsia 54:66–74CrossRefPubMed Zaccara G, Perucca P, Loiacono G, Giovannelli F, Verrotti A (2013) The adverse event profile of lacosamide: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Epilepsia 54:66–74CrossRefPubMed
21.
22.
go back to reference Benedetti F, Amanzio M (2011) The placebo response: how words and rituals change the patient’s brain. Patient Educ Couns 84:413–419CrossRefPubMed Benedetti F, Amanzio M (2011) The placebo response: how words and rituals change the patient’s brain. Patient Educ Couns 84:413–419CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Levine ME, Stern RM, Koch KL (2006) The effects of manipulating expectations through placebo and nocebo administration on gastric tachyarrhythmia and motion-induced nausea. Psychosom Med 68:478–486CrossRefPubMed Levine ME, Stern RM, Koch KL (2006) The effects of manipulating expectations through placebo and nocebo administration on gastric tachyarrhythmia and motion-induced nausea. Psychosom Med 68:478–486CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Liccardi G, Senna G, Russo M et al (2004) Evaluation of the nocebo effect during oral challenge in patients with adverse drug reactions. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 14:104–107PubMed Liccardi G, Senna G, Russo M et al (2004) Evaluation of the nocebo effect during oral challenge in patients with adverse drug reactions. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 14:104–107PubMed
25.
go back to reference Flaten MA, Simonsen T, Olsen H (1999) Drug-related information generates placebo and nocebo responses that modify the drug response. Psychosom Med 61:250–255CrossRefPubMed Flaten MA, Simonsen T, Olsen H (1999) Drug-related information generates placebo and nocebo responses that modify the drug response. Psychosom Med 61:250–255CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
go back to reference Rosenthal R (1966) Experimenter effects in behavioral research. Appleton Century Crofts, New York Rosenthal R (1966) Experimenter effects in behavioral research. Appleton Century Crofts, New York
28.
go back to reference Golomb BA, McGraw JJ, Evans MA et al (2007) Physician response to patient reports of adverse drug effects. Drug Saf 80:669–678CrossRef Golomb BA, McGraw JJ, Evans MA et al (2007) Physician response to patient reports of adverse drug effects. Drug Saf 80:669–678CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Rief W, Avorn J, Barsky AJ (2006) Medication-attributed adverse effects in placebo groups: implications for assessment of adverse effects. Arch Intern Med 166:155–160CrossRefPubMed Rief W, Avorn J, Barsky AJ (2006) Medication-attributed adverse effects in placebo groups: implications for assessment of adverse effects. Arch Intern Med 166:155–160CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Ben-Menachem E, Gabbai AA, Hufnagel A et al (2010) Eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 89:278–285CrossRefPubMed Ben-Menachem E, Gabbai AA, Hufnagel A et al (2010) Eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 89:278–285CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Characterization of the adverse events profile of placebo-treated patients in randomized controlled trials on drug-resistant focal epilepsies
Authors
Fabio Giovannelli
Gaetano Zaccara
Massimo Cincotta
Giulia Loiacono
Alberto Verrotti
Publication date
01-06-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Journal of Neurology / Issue 6/2015
Print ISSN: 0340-5354
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1459
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-014-7535-0

Other articles of this Issue 6/2015

Journal of Neurology 6/2015 Go to the issue