Placebo effect of medication cost in Parkinson disease
A randomized double-blind study
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To examine the effect of cost, a traditionally “inactive” trait of intervention, as contributor to the response to therapeutic interventions.
Methods: We conducted a prospective double-blind study in 12 patients with moderate to severe Parkinson disease and motor fluctuations (mean age 62.4 ± 7.9 years; mean disease duration 11 ± 6 years) who were randomized to a “cheap” or “expensive” subcutaneous “novel injectable dopamine agonist” placebo (normal saline). Patients were crossed over to the alternate arm approximately 4 hours later. Blinded motor assessments in the “practically defined off” state, before and after each intervention, included the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale motor subscale, the Purdue Pegboard Test, and a tapping task. Measurements of brain activity were performed using a feedback-based visual-motor associative learning functional MRI task. Order effect was examined using stratified analysis.
Results: Although both placebos improved motor function, benefit was greater when patients were randomized first to expensive placebo, with a magnitude halfway between that of cheap placebo and levodopa. Brain activation was greater upon first-given cheap but not upon first-given expensive placebo or by levodopa. Regardless of order of administration, only cheap placebo increased activation in the left lateral sensorimotor cortex and other regions.
Conclusion: Expensive placebo significantly improved motor function and decreased brain activation in a direction and magnitude comparable to, albeit less than, levodopa. Perceptions of cost are capable of altering the placebo response in clinical studies.
Classification of evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that perception of cost is capable of influencing motor function and brain activation in Parkinson disease.
GLOSSARY
- CGI=
- Clinical Global Impression;
- IRB=
- institutional review board;
- PD=
- Parkinson disease;
- S&E=
- Schwab and England;
- UPDRS-III=
- Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, Part III
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
Editorial, page 766
Supplemental data at Neurology.org
- Received March 18, 2014.
- Accepted in final form October 2, 2014.
- © 2015 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
For assistance, please contact:
AAN Members (800) 879-1960 or (612) 928-6000 (International)
Non-AAN Member subscribers (800) 638-3030 or (301) 223-2300 option 3, select 1 (international)
Sign Up
Information on how to subscribe to Neurology and Neurology: Clinical Practice can be found here
Purchase
Individual access to articles is available through the Add to Cart option on the article page. Access for 1 day (from the computer you are currently using) is US$ 39.00. Pay-per-view content is for the use of the payee only, and content may not be further distributed by print or electronic means. The payee may view, download, and/or print the article for his/her personal, scholarly, research, and educational use. Distributing copies (electronic or otherwise) of the article is not allowed.
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
- Calibrated use of deception in assessing the placebo effect
- Alberto J Espay, Principal Investigator, University of Cincinnatiaespay@gmail.com
- Alok Dwivedi, El Paso, TX; Anthony E. Lang, Toronto, CA; Michael J. Linke, Cincinnati, OH; Jerzy P. Szaflarski, Birmingham, AL
Submitted February 11, 2015 - Should we tap patients beliefs?
- Alain Braillon, Senior consultant, University hospital. 8000 Amiens. Francebraillon.alain@gmail.com
Submitted February 10, 2015 - An Alternative Explanation of the Results
- John M. Kelley, Deputy Director, Program in Placebo Studies, Harvard Medical Schooljkelley@endicott.edu
Submitted February 06, 2015
NOTE: All authors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within the last 8 weeks.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.