Cited by 47Pain Management and Placebo EffectPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Catechol-O-methyltransferase Val158Met polymorphism is associated with somatosensory amplification and nocebo responses

Open access
Wendt, Laura, Albring, Antje, Benson, Sven, Engler, Harald, Engler, Andrea, Hinney, Anke, Rief, Winfried, Witzke, Oliver +1 more·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

A large number of unwanted adverse events and symptoms reported by patients in clinical trials are not caused by the drug provided, since most of adverse events also occur in corresponding placebo groups. These nocebo effects also play a major role in drug discontinuation in clinical practice, negatively affecting treatment efficacy as well as patient adherence and compliance. Experimental and clinical data document a large interindividual variability in nocebo responses, however, data on psychological, biological or genetic predictors of nocebo responses are lacking. Thus, with an established paradigm of behaviorally conditioned immunosuppressive effects we analyzed possible genetic predictors for nocebo responses. We focused on the genetic polymorphisms in the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene (Val158Met) and analyzed drug specific and general side effects before and after immunosuppressive medication and subsequent placebo intake in 62 healthy male subjects. Significantly more drug-specific as well as general side effects were reported from homozygous carriers of the Val158 variant during medication as well as placebo treatment compared to the other genotype groups. Val158/Val158 carriers also had significantly higher scores in the somatosensory amplification scale (SSAS) and the BMQ (beliefs about medicine questionnaire). Together these data demonstrate potential genetic and psychological variables predicting nocebo responses after drug and placebo intake, which might be utilized to minimize nocebo effects in clinical trials and medical practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0107665

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The basic psychological mechanisms underlying the formation of negative expectations and nocebo effects are anticipation of and information about negative outcomes, prior lack of therapeutic effectiveness, and observation of other patients' pain worsening.

    “The basic psychological mechanisms underlying the formation of negative expectations and thus, nocebo effects, are anticipation of and information about negative outcomes,34,76 prior lack of therapeutic effectiveness,33,34 and observation of other patients' pain worsening.42,60,74,77,78”
  • Catastrophizing, an important psychological factor for pain management therapies, was found to be relevant for nocebo effects.

    “Catastrophizing, an important psychological factor for pain management therapies, was also found to be relevant for nocebo effects.77”
  • In a different study, the same research group found that the nocebo response was positively associated with pain catastrophizing.

    “In a different study, the same research group found that the nocebo response was positively associated with pain catastrophizing.77”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wendt, L., Albring, A., Benson, S., Engler, H., Engler, A., Hinney, A., Rief, W., Witzke, O., & Schedlowski, M.
Affiliations
  • Essen University Hospital (DE)
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Schedlowski, Manfred
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-09-15
Volume
9
Issue
9
Pages
e107665
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985370266
Cited by
47
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SCHE 341/17-1, SCHE 341/17-2, FOR1328)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
nocebo effect, catechol-O-methyltransferase, COMT Val158Met polymorphism, somatosensory amplification, placebo response, adverse drug reactions, immunosuppressants, medication beliefs, interindividual variability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Catechol O-Methyltransferase, Genotype, Humans, Immunosuppressive Agents, Male, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Genetic Association Studies, Nocebo Effect

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