The safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cytisine in achieving six-month continuous smoking abstinence in tuberculosis patients-protocol for a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Tuberculosis (TB) patients who quit smoking have much better disease outcomes than those who continue to smoke. In general populations, behavioural support combined with pharmacotherapy is the most effective strategy in helping people to quit. However, there is no evidence for the effectiveness of this strategy in TB patients who smoke. We will assess the safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cytisine-a low-cost plant-derived nicotine substitute-for smoking cessation in TB patients compared with placebo, over and above brief behavioural support.

DESIGN

Two-arm, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre (30 sites in Bangladesh and Pakistan), individually randomized trial.

SETTING

TB treatment centres integrated into public health care systems in Bangladesh and Pakistan.

PARTICIPANTS

Newly diagnosed (in the last 4 weeks) adult pulmonary TB patients who are daily smokers (with or without dual smokeless tobacco use) and are interested in quitting (n = 2388).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome measure is biochemically verified continuous abstinence from smoking at 6 months post-randomization, assessed using Russell Standard criteria. The secondary outcome measures include continuous abstinence at 12 months, lapses and relapses; clinical TB outcomes; nicotine dependency and withdrawal; and adverse events.

COMMENTS

This is the first smoking cessation trial of cytisine in low- and middle-income countries evaluating both cessation and TB outcomes. If found effective, cytisine could become the most affordable cessation intervention to help TB patients who smoke.

German Public Support for Tobacco Control Policy Measures: Results from the German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA), a Representative National Survey

Smoking prevalence in Germany remains high at approximately 28%. We assessed public support for tobacco legislation and associations between level of support and smoking and socio-demographic characteristics. Data from 2087 people were collected as part of the German Study on Tobacco Use ("DEBRA"): a nationally representative, face-to-face household survey. Public support was measured on total ban of sale, raising the minimum age for sales, taxation of tobacco industry sales, research into e-cigarettes, and ban of smoking in cars when children are present. Associations were assessed with multivariate logistic regression. Over 50% of the German population support taxing industry profits (57.3%) and assessing e-cigarettes as an aid to quit smoking (55.5%). Over 40% support raising the legal age of sale (43.1%), and 22.9% support a total ban on tobacco sales. A smoking ban in cars when children are present was most popular (71.5%), even among current smokers (67.0%). There is public support for stricter tobacco control measures in Germany. A smoking ban in cars when children are present could be a feasible policy to implement.

The Use of Tobacco, E-Cigarettes, and Methods to Quit Smoking in Germany

BACKGROUND

Current data on tobacco use are a necessary prerequisite for the study of the implementation of tobacco control measures in the general population. The German Study on Tobacco Use (Deutsche Befragung zum Rauchverhalten, DEBRA) provides previously lacking data on key indicators of smoking behavior and on the consumption of new products such as e-cigarettes. The continual acquisition and accumulation of data permits the analysis of trends and precise statistical evaluation.

METHODS

Data were obtained by repeated face-to-face interviews, at 2-month intervals, of representative samples of approximately 2000 persons across Germany aged 14 years and above. For this article, data from 12 273 persons that were acquired in 6 waves of the survey (June/July 2016 to April/May 2017) were aggregated and weighted.

RESULTS

The one-year prevalence of current tobacco consumption was 28.3% (95% confidence interval: [27.5; 29.1]) in the overall survey population and 11.9% [8.9; 14.9] among persons under age 18. Higher tobacco consumption was correlated with lower educational attainment and lower income. 28.1% of the smokers had tried to quit smoking in the past year; the most commonly used method of quitting was e-cigarettes (9.1%). Brief physician advice or pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation were tried by 6.1% and 7.0%, respectively. 1.9% of the overall survey population but only 0.3% of persons who had never smoked were current consumers of e-cigarettes.

CONCLUSION

Tobacco consumption is very high in Germany compared to other countries in Western and Northern Europe, and its distribution across the population is markedly uneven, with a heavy influence of socioeconomic status.

Protocol for the mixed-methods process and context evaluation of the TB & Tobacco randomised controlled trial in Bangladesh and Pakistan: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study

INTRODUCTION

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a significant public health problem in South Asia. Tobacco use increases the risks of TB infection and TB progression. The TB& Tobacco placebo-controlled randomised trial aims to (1) assess the effectiveness of the tobacco cessation medication cytisine versus placebo when combined with behavioural support and (2) implement tobacco cessation medication and behavioural support as part of general TB care in Bangladesh and Pakistan. This paper summarises the process and context evaluation protocol embedded in the effectiveness-implementation hybrid design.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We are conducting a mixed-methods process and context evaluation informed by an intervention logic model that draws on the UK Medical Research Council's Process Evaluation Guidance. Our approach includes quantitative and qualitative data collection on context, recruitment, reach, dose delivered, dose received and fidelity. Quantitative data include patient characteristics, reach of recruitment among eligible patients, routine trial data on dose delivered and dose received, and a COM-B ('capability', 'opportunity', 'motivation' and 'behaviour') questionnaire filled in by participating health workers. Qualitative data include semistructured interviews with TB health workers and patients, and with policy-makers at district and central levels in each country. Interviews will be analysed using the framework approach. The behavioural intervention delivery is audio recorded and assessed using a predefined fidelity coding index based on behavioural change technique taxonomy.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study complies with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethics approval for the study and process evaluation was granted by the University of Leeds (qualitative components), University of York (trial data and fidelity assessment), Bangladesh Medical Research Council and Bangladesh Drug Administration (trial data and qualitative components) and Pakistan Medical Research Council (trial data and qualitative components). Results of this research will be disseminated through reports to stakeholders and peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN43811467; Pre-results.

Effectiveness of intensive practice nurse counselling versus brief general practitioner advice, both combined with varenicline, for smoking cessation: a randomized pragmatic trial in primary care

AIMS

To study the effectiveness of intensive counselling by a practice nurse (PN) versus brief advice by a general practitioner (GP), each combined with pharmacotherapy, for 6 months' tobacco abstinence (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included 12-month abstinence, medication adherence and incremental costs per life-year gained.

DESIGN

A multi-site (n = 10), two-group, parallel, pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

A network of primary health-care centres in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 295 adult daily smokers (mean age = 48 years; mean cigarettes/day = 19).

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Patients were randomized to receive individual counselling by a practice nurse (PN) (n = 149) or brief advice by a general practitioner (GP) (146). All patients received 12 weeks of open-label varenicline.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was prolonged biochemically validated abstinence from weeks 9 to 26 after treatment initiation. Secondary outcomes included abstinence from weeks 9 to 52, good dosing adherence (> 80% days taken) and incremental costs per life-year gained.

FINDINGS

Abstinence rates in the PN versus GP groups were 32.2% (n = 48) versus 39.0% [n = 57; odds ratio (OR) = 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.44-1.16] from weeks 9 to 26 and 25.5% (n = 38) versus 28.8% (n = 42; OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.50-1.43) from weeks 9 to 52, respectively. Values of the Bayes factor indicated that the PN and GP were equally effective. Good dosing adherence was significantly lower in the PN (45.5%, n = 56/123) than in the GP group (62.0%, n = 75/121; OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.26-0.77), and the incremental costs per life-year gained were -€416.10.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people seeking help to stop smoking from their general practice, one-off brief advice from a general practitioner appears to be as effective as several sessions of behavioural support from a practice nurse when smoking cessation medication is provided.

Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric risks of varenicline and bupropion in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Varenicline and bupropion are effective smoking cessation treatments, but there are concerns about their safety in smokers with COPD.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether varenicline and bupropion are associated with serious adverse cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events in smokers with COPD.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study, we used data from 14 350 patients with COPD included in the QResearch database, which holds data from 753 National Health Service general practices across England. We identified patients with COPD who received a prescription of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; N=10 426; reference group), bupropion (N=350) or varenicline (N=3574) in the period between January 2007 and June 2012. Patients were followed up for 6 months to compare incident cardiovascular (ie, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and cardiac arrhythmias) and neuropsychiatric (ie, depression and self-harm) events using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for potential confounders. Propensity score analysis was used as an additional approach to account for potential confounding by indication. We also modelled the effects of possible unmeasured confounders.

RESULTS

Neither bupropion nor varenicline showed an increased risk of adverse events compared with NRT. Varenicline was associated with a significantly reduced risk of heart failure (HR=0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.92) and depression (HR=0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.86). Similar results were obtained from the propensity score analysis. Modelling of unmeasured confounding provided additional evidence that an increased risk of these adverse events was very unlikely.

CONCLUSION

In smokers with COPD, varenicline and bupropion do not appear to be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, depression or self-harm in comparison with NRT.

Healthcare financing systems for increasing the use of tobacco dependence treatment

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death worldwide, which makes it essential to stimulate smoking cessation. The financial cost of smoking cessation treatment can act as a barrier to those seeking support. We hypothesised that provision of financial assistance for people trying to quit smoking, or reimbursement of their care providers, could lead to an increased rate of successful quit attempts. This is an update of the original 2005 review.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of reducing the costs for tobacco smokers or healthcare providers for using or providing smoking cessation treatment through healthcare financing interventions on abstinence from smoking. The secondary objectives were to examine the effects of different levels of financial support on the use or prescription of smoking cessation treatment, or both, and on the number of smokers making a quit attempt (quitting smoking for at least 24 hours). We also assessed the cost effectiveness of different financial interventions, and analysed the costs per additional quitter, or per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and interrupted time series studies involving financial benefit interventions to smokers or their healthcare providers, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for individual studies on an intention-to-treat basis and performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

In the current update, we have added six new relevant studies, resulting in a total of 17 studies included in this review involving financial interventions directed at smokers or healthcare providers, or both.Full financial interventions directed at smokers had a favourable effect on abstinence at six months or longer when compared to no intervention (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.28, I² = 33%, 9333 participants). There was no evidence that full coverage interventions increased smoking abstinence compared to partial coverage interventions (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.48, I² = 64%, 5914 participants), but partial coverage interventions were more effective in increasing abstinence than no intervention (RR 1.27 95% CI 1.02 to 1.59, I² = 21%, 7108 participants). The economic evaluation showed costs per additional quitter ranging from USD 97 to USD 7646 for the comparison of full coverage with partial or no coverage.There was no clear evidence of an effect on smoking cessation when we pooled two trials of financial incentives directed at healthcare providers (RR 1.16, CI 0.98 to 1.37, I² = 0%, 2311 participants).Full financial interventions increased the number of participants making a quit attempt when compared to no interventions (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.17, I² = 15%, 9065 participants). There was insufficient evidence to show whether partial financial interventions increased quit attempts compared to no interventions (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.31, I² = 88%, 6944 participants).Full financial interventions increased the use of smoking cessation treatment compared to no interventions with regard to various pharmacological and behavioural treatments: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT): RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.09, I² = 35%, 9455 participants; bupropion: RR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.34, I² = 71%, 6321 participants; behavioural therapy: RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65, I² = 75%, 9215 participants.There was evidence that partial coverage compared to no coverage reported a small positive effect on the use of bupropion (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29, I² = 0%, 6765 participants). Interventions directed at healthcare providers increased the use of behavioural therapy (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.86, I² = 85%, 25820 participants), but not the use of NRT and/or bupropion (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18, I² = 6%, 2311 participants).We assessed the quality of the evidence for the main outcome, abstinence from smoking, as moderate. In most studies participants were not blinded to the different study arms and researchers were not blinded to the allocated interventions. Furthermore, there was not always sufficient information on attrition rates. We detected some imprecision but we judged this to be of minor consequence on the outcomes of this study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Full financial interventions directed at smokers when compared to no financial interventions increase the proportion of smokers who attempt to quit, use smoking cessation treatments, and succeed in quitting. There was no clear and consistent evidence of an effect on smoking cessation from financial incentives directed at healthcare providers. We are only moderately confident in the effect estimate because there was some risk of bias due to a lack of blinding in participants and researchers, and insufficient information on attrition rates.

Why do physicians lack engagement with smoking cessation treatment in their COPD patients? A multinational qualitative study

Smoking cessation is the only effective intervention to slow down the accelerated decline in lung function in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nevertheless, physicians often do not routinely provide evidence-based smoking cessation treatment to their patients. To understand underlying reasons, we explored how physicians engage in smoking cessation treatment in their chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. In total, 21 focus group discussions were held with general practitioners and pulmonologists in seven different countries in Europe and Asia. We generated three themes, whereby some of the issues concerned smokers in general: first, 'physicians' frustration with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients who smoke'. These frustrations interfered with the provision of evidence-based treatment and could result in this group of patients being treated unequally. Second: 'physicians' limited knowledge of, and negative beliefs about, smoking cessation treatment'. This hindered treating smokers effectively. Third: 'healthcare organisational factors that influence the use of smoking cessation treatments'. Money and time issues, as well as the failure to regard smoking as a disease, influenced how physicians engaged in smoking cessation treatment. Our results indicate that there is a number of barriers to the provision of effective smoking cessation treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and smokers in general. Introducing an informative smoking cessation programme, including communication skills and ethical issues, in the vocational and postgraduate medical training may help to address these barriers. This is important in order to increase engagement with smoking cessation treatment and to improve quality of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care.

CHRONIC LUNG DISEASE

CHANGING ATTITUDES TO HELP PATIENTS STOP SMOKING: Doctors should be given careful, ethically-informed guidance during medical training to help them to support patients to quit smoking. The most important part of treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is help to stop smoking. However, there is evidence to suggest that doctors don't always motivate COPD patients to quit. Eva Anne Marije van Eerd at Maastrict University, The Netherlands, together with an international team of scientists, conducted focus group interviews with doctors in seven different countries to assess barriers to smoking cessation. They found that doctors' frustration with and negative attitudes towards patients who continued to smoke contributed to poor cessation management and treatment inequalities in some cases. Many doctors also cited a lack of experience with smoking cessation techniques alongside time and money issues as barriers to effective treatment.

A comparison of the characteristics of iOS and Android users of a smoking cessation app

iOS and Android smartphone users may differ in ways that affect their use and likelihood of success when using a smoking cessation application (app). If so, it may be necessary to take the device type (iOS and Android) into account when designing smoking cessation apps and in studies evaluating app effectiveness. How do socio-demographic and smoking characteristics, potentially relevant to engagement and cessation outcomes, of the SF28 app users differ between those using the iOS version and those using the Android version? Data were collected between October 2013 and April 2015. The variables measured were age, gender, social grade, time since the most recent quit attempt, choice of medication use (nicotine replacement therapy or varenicline), weekly expenditure on cigarettes, cigarettes smoked per day, reason for using the app and quit date set. The alpha was set to p < 0.006 to adjust for multiple comparisons. A total of 1368 users were included in the analysis. iOS and Android device users were similar in terms of age, social grade, weekly expenditure on cigarettes and cigarettes smoked per day. Compared with Android users, iOS users were more likely to have downloaded the app for a serious quit attempt (74.3 versus 69.6%, p = 0.001), made a quit attempt within the last 12 months (59.6 versus 45.9%, p < 0.001) and set their quit date on the day of registration (61 versus 46.2%, p < 0.001). They were less likely to have used stop-smoking medication to support their quit attempt (31.5 versus 48.6%, p < 0.001). Differences between smokers using the iOS version of smoking cessation apps and those using the Android version may influence quit success.

Study protocol of the German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA): a national household survey of smoking behaviour and cessation

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of tobacco smoking in Germany is high (~27%). Monitoring of national patterns of smoking behaviour and data on the "real-world" effectiveness of cessation methods are needed to inform policies and develop campaigns aimed at reducing tobacco-related harm. In England, the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS) has been tracking such indicators since 2006, resulting in the adaptation of tobacco control policies. However, findings cannot be directly transferred into the German health policy context. The German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA: "Deutsche Befragung zum Rauchverhalten") aims to provide such nationally representative data.

METHODS/DESIGN

In June 2016, the study started collecting data from computer-assisted, face-to-face household interviews in people aged 14 years and older. Over a period of 3 years, a total of ~36,000 respondents will complete the survey with a new sample of ~2000 respondents every 2 months (=18 waves). This sample will report data on demographics and the use of tobacco and electronic (e-)cigarettes. Per wave, about 500-600 people are expected to be current or recent ex-smokers (<12 months since quitting). This sample will answer detailed questions about smoking behaviour, quit attempts, exposure to health professionals' advice on quitting, and use of cessation aids. Six-month follow-up data will be collected by telephone.

DISCUSSION

The DEBRA study will be an important source of data for tobacco control policies, health strategies, and future research. The methodology is closely aligned to the STS, which will allow comparisons with data from England, a country with one of the lowest smoking prevalence rates in Europe (18%).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00011322 ) on 25th November 2016.

The effect of financial incentives on top of behavioral support on quit rates in tobacco smoking employees: study protocol of a cluster-randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Stimulating successful tobacco cessation among employees has multiple benefits. Employees who quit tobacco are healthier, more productive, less absent from work, and longer employable than employees who continue to use tobacco. Despite the evidence for these benefits of tobacco cessation, a successful method to stimulate employees to quit tobacco is lacking. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether adding a financial incentive to behavioral support (compared with no additional incentive) is effective and cost-effective in increasing abstinence rates in tobacco smoking employees participating in a smoking cessation group training.

METHODS/DESIGN

In this cluster-randomized trial employees in the intervention and control group both participate in a smoking cessation group training consisting of seven weekly counseling sessions of ninety minutes each. In addition to the training, employees in the intervention group receive a voucher as an incentive for being abstinent from smoking at the end of the training (€50), after three months (€50), after six months (€50), and after one year (€200). The control group does not receive any incentive. The primary outcome is carbon monoxide validated 12-month continuous abstinence from smoking (Russel's standard). Additionally, an economic evaluation is performed from a societal and an employer perspective.

DISCUSSION

The present paper describes the methods and design of this cluster-randomized trial in detail. We hypothesize that the financial incentive for abstinence in the form of vouchers increases abstinence rates over and above the group training. The results of this study can provide important recommendations for enhancement of employee tobacco cessation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register: NTR5657 . First received 27-01-2016.

Smoking cessation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation is the most important treatment for smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but little is known about the effectiveness of different smoking cessation interventions for this particular group of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural or pharmacological smoking cessation interventions, or both, in smokers with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched all records in the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials. In addition to this electronic search, we searched clinical trial registries for planned, ongoing, and unpublished trials. We searched all databases from their inception. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and of other systematic reviews in relevant topic areas. We searched for errata or retractions from eligible trials on PubMed. We conducted our most recent search in March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of any behavioural or pharmacological treatment, or both, in smokers with COPD reporting at least six months of follow-up abstinence rates.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and performed the methodological quality assessment for each study. We resolved any disagreements by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (involving 13,123 participants) in this systematic review, two of which were of high quality. These two studies showed that nicotine sublingual tablet and varenicline increased the quit rate over placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2.60 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29 to 5.24) and RR 3.34 (95% CI 1.88 to 5.92)). Pooled results of two studies also showed a positive effect of bupropion compared with placebo (RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.26 to 3.28)). When pooling these four studies, we found high-quality evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy plus high-intensity behavioural treatment compared with placebo plus high-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.53 (95% CI 1.83 to 3.50)). Furthermore, we found some evidence that high-intensity behavioural treatment increased abstinence rates when compared with usual care (RR 25.38 (95% CI 8.03 to 80.22)) or low-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.18 (95% CI 1.05 to 4.49)). Finally, the results showed effectiveness of various combinations of psychosocial and pharmacological interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-quality evidence in a meta-analysis including four (1,540 participants) of the 16 included studies that a combination of behavioural treatment and pharmacotherapy is effective in helping smokers with COPD to quit smoking. Furthermore, we conclude that there is no convincing evidence for preferring any particular form of behavioural or pharmacological treatment.