Back

Advancing the prediction and understanding of placebo responses in chronic back pain using large language models

A.P. Nunes, D.; Furer, D.; Berger, S.; Cecchi, G.; Ferreira-Gomes, J.; Neto, F.; Martins de Matos, D.; Apkarian, A. V.; Branco, P.

2025-01-22 pain medicine
10.1101/2025.01.21.25320888
Show abstract

Placebo analgesia in chronic pain is a widely studied clinical phenomenon, where expectations about the effectiveness of a treatment can result in substantial pain relief when using an inert treatment agent. While placebos offer an opportunity for non-pharmacological treatment in chronic pain, not everyone demonstrates an analgesic response. Prior research has identified biopsychosocial factors that determine the likelihood of an individual to respond to a placebo, yet generalizability and ecological validity in those studies have been limited due to the inability to account for dynamic personal and treatment effects--which are well-known to play a role. Here, we assessed the potential of using fine-tuned large language models (LLMs) to predict placebo responders in chronic low-back pain using contextual features extracted from patient interviews, as they speak about their lifestyle, pain, and treatment history. We re-analyzed data from two clinical trials where individuals performed open-ended interviews and used these to develop a predictive model of placebo response. Our findings demonstrate that semantic features extracted with LLMs accurately predicted placebo responders, achieving a classification accuracy of 74% in unseen data, and validating with 70% accuracy in an independent cohort. Further, LLMs eliminated the need for pre-selecting search terms or to use dictionary approaches, enabling a fully data-driven approach. This LLM method further provided interpretable insights into psychosocial factors underlying placebo responses, highlighting nuanced linguistic patterns linked to responder status, which tap into semantic dimensions such as "anxiety," "resignation," and "hope." These findings expand on prior research by integrating state-of-art NLP techniques to address limitations in interpretability and context sensitivity of standard methods like bag-of-words and dictionary-based approaches. This method highlights the role of language models to link language and psychological states, paving the way for a deeper yet quantitative exploration of biopsychosocial phenomena, and to understand how they relate to treatment outcomes, including placebo.

Matching journals

1
Pain
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.2%
158× avg
2
Scientific Reports
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 701 published papers
Top 5%
3.0× avg
3
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Frontiers Media SA · based on 11 published papers
#1
182× avg
4
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 52%
9.3%
5
The Journal of Pain
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.4%
77× avg
6
Journal of Medical Internet Research
JMIR Publications Inc. · based on 81 published papers
Top 3%
8.8× avg
7
PLOS Digital Health
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 88 published papers
Top 4%
5.8× avg
8
Social Science & Medicine
Elsevier BV · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.2%
36× avg
9
Science Advances
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) · based on 52 published papers
Top 0.5%
15× avg
10
npj Digital Medicine
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 85 published papers
Top 8%
2.6× avg
11
Brain
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 69 published papers
Top 5%
4.5× avg
12
Human Brain Mapping
Wiley · based on 53 published papers
Top 4%
4.6× avg
13
Frontiers in Digital Health
Frontiers Media SA · based on 18 published papers
Top 2%
11× avg
14
eLife
eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd · based on 262 published papers
Top 19%
1.5%
15
BMC Neurology
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 11 published papers
Top 1%
18× avg
16
British Journal of Anaesthesia
Elsevier BV · based on 13 published papers
Top 1%
11× avg
17
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Wiley · based on 19 published papers
Top 1%
7.5× avg
18
Clinical and Translational Science
Wiley · based on 14 published papers
Top 2%
10.0× avg
19
Blood Advances
American Society of Hematology · based on 16 published papers
Top 1%
9.4× avg
20
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Elsevier BV · based on 25 published papers
Top 6%
3.7× avg