Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36351953›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

A randomized pharmacological fMRI trial investigating D-cycloserine and brain plasticity mechanisms in learned pain responses.

Mia A Thomaidou, Joseph S Blythe, Dieuwke S Veldhuijzen, Kaya J Peerdeman, Johan Hans P A van Lennep, Erik J Giltay, Henk R Cremers, Andrea W M Evers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 56% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mia A ThomaidouFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands. a.m.thomaidou@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Joseph S BlytheFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Dieuwke S VeldhuijzenFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Kaya J PeerdemanFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Johan Hans P A van LennepFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Erik J GiltayDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Henk R CremersFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Amsterdam, 1001 NK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Andrea W M EversFaculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 45316004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learning and negative outcome expectations can increase pain sensitivity, a phenomenon known as nocebo hyperalgesia. Here, we examined how a targeted pharmacological manipulation of learning would impact nocebo responses and their brain correlates. Participants received either a placebo (n = 27) or a single 80 mg dose of D-cycloserine (a partial NMDA receptor agonist; n = 23) and underwent fMRI. Behavioral conditioning and negative suggestions were used to induce nocebo responses. Participants underwent pre-conditioning outside the scanner. During scanning, we first delivered baseline pain stimulations, followed by nocebo acquisition and extinction phases. During acquisition, high intensity thermal pain was paired with supposed activation of sham electrical stimuli (nocebo trials), whereas moderate pain was administered with inactive electrical stimulation (control trials). Nocebo hyperalgesia was induced in both groups (p < 0.001). Nocebo magnitudes and brain activations did not show significant differences between D-cycloserine and placebo. In acquisition and extinction, there were significantly increased activations bilaterally in the amygdala, ACC, and insula, during nocebo compared to control trials. Nocebo acquisition trials also showed increased vlPFC activation. Increased opercular activation differentiated nocebo-augmented pain aggravation from baseline pain. These results support the involvement of integrative cognitive-emotional processes in nocebo hyperalgesia.

Indexed as

HyperalgesiaMagnetic Resonance ImagingCycloserineHumansNeuronal PlasticityPainPlacebo EffectCycloserine

Identifiers

PMID36351953
PMCPMC9646732
OpenAlexW4308736134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.