Cited by 238Pain Management and Placebo EffectPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology

Blockade of nocebo hyperalgesia by the cholecystokinin antagonist proglumide

Benedetti, Fabrizio, Amanzio, Martina, Casadio, Caterina, Oliaro, Alberto, Maggi, Giuliano·1997·Pain

Abstract

In patients who reported mild postoperative pain, we evoked a nocebo response, a phenomenon equal but opposite to placebo. Patients who gave informed consent to increase their pain for 30 min received a substance known to be non-hyperalgesic (saline solution) and were told that it produced a pain increase. A nocebo effect was observed when saline was administered. However, if a dose of 0.5 or 5 mg of the cholecystokinin antagonist proglumide was added to the saline solution, the nocebo effect was abolished. A dose of 0.05 mg of proglumide was ineffective. The blockade of the nocebo hyperalgesic response was not reversed by 10 mg of naloxone. These results suggest that cholecystokinin mediates pain increase in the nocebo response and that proglumide blocks nocebo through mechanisms not involving opioids. Since the nocebo procedure represents an anxiogenic stimulus and previous studies showed a role for cholecystokinin in anxiety, we suggest that nocebo hyperalgesia may be due to a cholecystokinin-dependent increase of anxiety.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(97)03346-0

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Behavioral studies have highlighted a dominant role of cholecystokinin (CCK) in nocebo hyperalgesia via anticipatory anxiety mechanisms.

    “Behavioral studies have highlighted a dominant role of cholecystokinin (CCK) in nocebo hyperalgesia via anticipatory anxiety mechanisms (Benedetti et al., 1997; Benedetti et al., 2006).”

    From Distinct neural representations of placebo and nocebo effects (2015) · cites this paper as Benedetti et al., 1997

  • Seeing, feeling, smelling, or tasting a medication tends to create higher placebo effects.

    “Seeing, feeling, smelling, or tasting a medication tends to create higher placebo effects.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 238

Authors
Benedetti, F., Amanzio, M., Casadio, C., Oliaro, A., & Maggi, G.
Affiliations
University of Turin (IT)
Corresponding author
Benedetti, Fabrizio
Venue
Pain
Published
1997-06
Volume
71
Issue
2
Pages
135-140
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2011285008
Cited by
238
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Keywords
nocebo effect, nocebo hyperalgesia, proglumide, cholecystokinin, cholecystokinin antagonists, postoperative pain, naloxone, opioid mechanisms, anxiety, pain perception
MeSH terms
Cholecystokinin, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Hyperalgesia, Male, Middle Aged, Naloxone, Narcotic Antagonists, Postoperative Pain, Proglumide, Placebo Effect, Analgesics, Non-Narcotic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review