Usefulness of the placebo lead-in design for clinical trials with binary outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In placebo-controlled clinical trials to develop new drugs for the treatment of psychiatric or neurological disorders, a high and sometimes greater-than-expected placebo response makes it difficult to show the superiority of an investigational drug over a corresponding placebo. To avoid such difficulty, a placebo lead-in design has been presented, but its usefulness has been open to discussion. Although the statistical properties of the placebo lead-in design are investigated in the context of continuous outcomes, whether these properties can be generalized for binary or ordinal cases remains unclear. METHODS: We investigate whether the placebo lead-in design is useful in clinical trials with binary outcomes through mathematical formulae and a numerical investigation. Specifically, we compare the proportion of placebo responders, the drug-placebo difference, and the effect size between two populations: one enriched for placebo nonresponders and the other comprising the all-comers. RESULTS: Under positive correlation of the data between the lead-in stage and the randomized stage for both treatment groups, we mathematically show that the proportion of responders in the population enriched for placebo nonresponders is less than that in the all-comers population, and whether the placebo lead-in design increases the drug-placebo difference depends on the variances of outcomes in both treatment groups as well as the correlations of the outcomes between two stages. Further, through a numerical investigation, we show that whether the placebo lead-in design increases the effect size strongly depends on the magnitude of the correlations and their difference. CONCLUSION: If the correlation of the placebo-placebo group is much higher than that of the placebo-drug group, the placebo lead-in design is advantageous in most cases but has an impact on an estimand in placebo nonresponders. Therefore, we do not recommend using the placebo lead-in design for clinical trials with binary outcomes.

Sequential parallel comparison design with two coprimary endpoints.

A placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial is required to demonstrate that an experimental treatment is superior to its corresponding placebo on multiple coprimary endpoints. This is particularly true in the field of neurology. In fact, clinical trials for neurological disorders need to show the superiority of an experimental treatment over a placebo in two coprimary endpoints. Unfortunately, these trials often fail to detect a true treatment effect for the experimental treatment versus the placebo owing to an unexpectedly high placebo response rate. Sequential parallel comparison design (SPCD) can be used to address this problem. However, the SPCD has not yet been discussed in relation to clinical trials with coprimary endpoints. In this article, our aim was to develop a hypothesis-testing method and a method for calculating the corresponding sample size for the SPCD with two coprimary endpoints. In a simulation, we show that the proposed hypothesis-testing method achieves the nominal type I error rate and power and that the proposed sample size calculation method has adequate power accuracy. In addition, the usefulness of our methods is confirmed by returning to an SPCD trial with a single primary endpoint of Alzheimer disease-related agitation.

Sequential parallel comparison design for "gold standard" noninferiority trials with a prespecified margin.

Three-arm noninferiority trials (involving an experimental treatment, a reference treatment, and a placebo)-called the "gold standard" noninferiority trials-are conducted in patients with mental disorders whenever feasible, but often fail to show superiority of the experimental treatment and/or the reference treatment over the placebo. One possible reason is that some of the patients receiving the placebo show apparent improvement in the clinical condition. An approach to addressing this problem is the use of the sequential parallel comparison design (SPCD). Nonetheless, the SPCD has not yet been discussed in relation to gold standard noninferiority trials. In this article, our aim was to develop a hypothesis-testing method and its corresponding sample size calculation method for gold standard noninferiority trials with the SPCD. In a simulation, we show that the proposed hypothesis-testing method achieves the nominal type I error rate and power and that the proposed sample size calculation method has adequate power accuracy.

A Novel Strategy to Identify Placebo Responders: Prediction Index of Clinical and Biological Markers in the EMBARC Trial.

BACKGROUND: One in three clinical trial patients with major depressive disorder report symptomatic improvement with placebo. Strategies to mitigate the effect of placebo responses have focused on modifying study design with variable success. Identifying and excluding or controlling for individuals with a high likelihood of responding to placebo may improve clinical trial efficiency and avoid unnecessary medication trials. METHODS: Participants included those assigned to the placebo arm (n = 141) of the Establishing Moderators and Biosignatures for Antidepressant Response in Clinical Care (EMBARC) trial. The elastic net was used to evaluate 283 baseline clinical, behavioral, imaging, and electrophysiological variables to identify the most robust yet parsimonious features that predicted depression severity at the end of the double-blind 8-week trial. Variables retained in at least 50% of the 100 imputed data sets were used in a Bayesian multiple linear regression model to simultaneously predict the probabilities of response and remission. RESULTS: Lower baseline depression severity, younger age, absence of melancholic features or history of physical abuse, less anxious arousal, less anhedonia, less neuroticism, and higher average theta current density in the rostral anterior cingulate predicted a higher likelihood of improvement with placebo. The Bayesian model predicted remission and response with an actionable degree of accuracy (both AUC > 0.73). An interactive calculator was developed predicting the likelihood of placebo response at the individual level. CONCLUSION: Easy-to-measure clinical, behavioral, and electrophysiological assessments can be used to identify placebo responders with a high degree of accuracy. Development of this calculator based on these findings can be used to identify potential placebo responders.

Manipulating the Placebo Response in Experimental Pain by Altering Doctor's Performance Style.

BACKGROUND: Performance is paramount in traditional healing rituals. From a Western perspective, such performative behavior can be understood principally as inducing patients' faith in the performer's supernatural healing powers and effecting positive changes through the same mechanisms attributed to the placebo response, which is defined as improvement of clinical outcome in individuals receiving inactive treatment. Here we examined the possibility of using theatrical performance tools, including stage directions and scripting, to reproducibly manipulate the style and content of a simulated doctor-patient encounter and influence the placebo response in experimental pain. METHODS: A total of 122 healthy volunteers (18-45 years, 76 men) exposed to experimental pain (the cold pressor test) were assessed for pain threshold and tolerance before and after receiving a placebo cream from a "doctor" impersonated by a trained actor. The actor alternated between two distinct scripts and stage directions, i.e., performance styles created by a theater director/playwright, one emulating a standard doctor-patient encounter (scenario A) and the other emphasizing attentiveness and strong suggestion, elements also present in ritual healing (scenario B). The placebo response size was calculated as the %difference in pain threshold and tolerance after exposure relative to baseline. In addition, subjects demonstrating a ≥30% increase in pain threshold or tolerance relative to baseline were defined as responders. Each encounter was videotaped in its entirety. RESULTS: Inspection of the videotapes confirmed the reproducibility and consistency of the distinct scenarios enacted by the "doctor"-performer. Furthermore, scenario B resulted in a significant increase in pain threshold relative to scenario A. Interestingly, this increase derived from the placebo responder subgroup; as shown by two-way analysis of variance (performance style, F = 4.30; p = 0.040; η(2) = 0.035; style × responder status interaction term, F = 5.21; p = 0.024) followed by post hoc analysis showing a ∼60% increase in pain threshold in responders exposed to scenario B (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: These results support the hypothesis that structured manipulation of physician's verbal and non-verbal performance, designed to build rapport and increase faith in treatment, is feasible and may have a significant beneficial effect on the size of the response to placebo analgesia. They also demonstrate that subjects, who are not susceptible to placebo, are also not susceptible to performance style.

Remarks on designs enriching for placebo non-responders.

BACKGROUND: High response under placebo constitutes a concern in clinical studies, particularly in psychiatry. Discontinuation of placebo responders identified during a placebo run-in is often recommended to avoid failures of clinical trials in the presence of high placebo effects. Evidence for the benefit of this approach is ambiguous. PURPOSE: We investigate under which conditions a placebo lead-in can be beneficial in the context of continuous data, assuming that the data in the placebo run-in and the treatment stage follow a bivariate normal distribution. Placebo responders are defined as patients with an effect during placebo lead-in which is larger than a pre-defined threshold on the absolute value or the absolute or relative change from baseline or a combination thereof. RESULTS: Data are less variable under either placebo or test treatment after placebo responders have been removed. Whether the effect of test over placebo increases or decreases after enrichment for placebo non-responders depends on the parameters of the distribution, in particular the covariance structure, and the threshold in the definition of placebo responders. LIMITATIONS: The results apply in the continuous case, and the binary or ordinary case is not studied. The findings explain to some extent the ambiguity in the assessments of the usefulness of placebo lead-in periods in clinical trials; however, besides the clear statement on variability reduction, it is not straightforward to judge upfront whether placebo lead-in is useful. Concerns relating to the conduct and interpretation of results of such trials are mentioned.

Who responds to placebos? Considering the "placebo personality" via a transactional model.

The placebo effect is now recognised as a genuine psychobiological phenomenon; however, the question of how it can be systematically harnessed to improve health outcomes is not yet clear. One issue that remains unresolved is why some respond to placebos and others do not. A number of traits have been linked to responding, but findings are scattered. In extending prior work, this paper offers three considerations. First, attempts to describe the placebo responder via a single personality trait may be limiting. A synthesis of findings to date suggests placebo responsiveness may reflect a two-faceted construct, with "inward" and "outward" orientation representing the different but related facets of placebo responsiveness. Second, the lack of theoretically driven research may be hindering progress. Personality measures rather than personality theory appear to be driving research and higher order traits are descriptive tools with limited use in predicting behaviour. A biologically based stimulus-response model of personality that considers how individuals respond to certain environmental cues may be more appropriate. Third, a transactional model of placebo responding in which dispositional characteristics interact with environmental contingencies is presented. Responsiveness may manifest in placebo environments where there is a match between an individual's biological trait-like response systems and environmental contingencies. This type of model may be useful in both research and clinical settings. Systematic consideration of how different individuals might respond to different placebo environments might facilitate identification of stable individual characteristics predictive of responding. The ability to determine who is responsive to placebo treatments, and in what context, may enable the matching of individual to treatment, thereby maximising the effectiveness of treatment and minimising possible iatrogenic harm. In the increasingly overtaxed modern health care industry, non-pharmacological treatment alternatives are of critical importance.

Investigating the 'placebo personality' outside the pain paradigm.

AIM: To identify personality traits related to placebo responding outside the context of pain. METHODS: Sixty three healthy volunteers completed the study. Personality traits were measured online one week prior to a laboratory session in which two psychosocial stress tests were administered. Prior to the second test, the placebo group received an intranasal spray of 'serotonin' (placebo) with the suggestion that it would enhance recovery. Subjective stress, heart rate and heart rate variability were measured. Self reported and physiological responses to the placebo suggestion were assessed against personality variables. RESULTS: Placebo effects were demonstrated in both self reported and physiological stress metrics. Lower optimism and less empathic concern predicted greater perceived benefits from the placebo treatment; and lower drive, fun, and sensation seeking were related to a greater physiological response to the manipulation. Multivariate analyses revealed lower optimism and behavioural drive to be predictive of responding to the placebo manipulation. CONCLUSION: Findings are in contrast with prior work in pain paradigms which found higher levels of the same traits to be related to greater placebo analgesic responses. A cluster of traits characterised by behavioural drive, extraversion, optimism and novelty or fun seeking appears to be germane to placebo responsiveness, but contextual stimuli may generate different patterns of responding. A new conceptualisation of placebo responsiveness may be useful. Rather than a 'placebo personality' it may be that responsiveness is better typified by a two faceted transactional model, in which different personality facets respond to different contextual contingencies.