Comparative effectiveness of 5 smoking cessation pharmacotherapies in primary care clinics

Electronic nicotine delivery systems ("e-cigarettes"): review of safety and smoking cessation efficacy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cigarette smoking is common among cancer patients and is associated with negative outcomes. Electronic nicotine delivery systems ("e-cigarettes") are rapidly growing in popularity and use, but there is limited information on their safety or effectiveness in helping individuals quit smoking.

DATA SOURCES

The authors searched PubMed, Web of Science, and additional sources for published empirical data on safety and use of electronic cigarettes as an aid to quit smoking.

REVIEW METHODS

We conducted a structured search of the current literature up to and including November 2013.

RESULTS

E-cigarettes currently vary widely in their contents and are sometimes inconsistent with labeling. Compared to tobacco cigarettes, available evidence suggests that e-cigarettes are often substantially lower in toxic content, cytotoxicity, associated adverse effects, and secondhand toxicity exposure. Data on the use of e-cigarettes for quitting smoking are suggestive but ultimately inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians are advised to be aware that the use of e-cigarettes, especially among cigarette smokers, is growing rapidly. These devices are unregulated, of unknown safety, and of uncertain benefit in quitting smoking.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In the absence of further data or regulation, oncologists are advised to discuss the known and unknown safety and efficacy information on e-cigarettes with interested patients and to encourage patients to first try FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation.

Smoking cessation

Cigarette smoking is a major preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the major risk factor for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the developed world. Smoking is a chronic relapsing disease. Optimal treatment includes nonpharmacologic support, together with pharmacotherapy. All clinicians should be comfortable with the use of nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline. Second-line therapies can be used by those familiar with their use. Effective use of these medications requires their integration into an effective management plan, which is likely to be a long-term undertaking, involving several cycles of remission and relapse.

Tobacco use treatment in primary care patients with psychiatric illness

The prevalence of smoking is higher in patients with psychiatric illness compared with the general population. Smoking causes chronic illnesses, which lead to premature mortality in those with psychiatric illness, is associated with greater burden of psychiatric symptoms, and contributes to the social isolation experienced by individuals with psychiatric disorders. Most patients with a psychiatric illness present initially to primary care rather than specialty care settings, and some patients receive care exclusively in the primary care setting. Therefore, family physicians and other primary care clinicians have an important role in the recognition and treatment of tobacco use disorders in patients with psychiatric illnesses. In this article we review common myths associated with smoking and psychiatric illness, techniques for implementing evidence-based tobacco use treatments, the evidence base for tobacco use treatment for patients with specific psychiatric diagnoses, and factors to consider when treating tobacco use disorders in patients with psychiatric illness.

Bupropion-SR for smoking reduction and cessation in alcohol-dependent outpatients: a naturalistic, open-label study

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine whether sustained-release bupropion (bupropion-SR) reduces smoking and promotes smoking cessation among alcohol-dependent (AD) smokers while they are in early recovery from alcohol.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, naturalistic study among AD smokers enrolled in an outpatient treatment program. The treatment group (n=58) was offered bupropion-SR and brief smoking cessation counseling. A control group (n=57) was matched to the treatment group by age, sex, ethnicity, cigarette use, and years of alcohol dependence. The controls received no smoking cessation intervention. We collected tobacco and alcohol abstinence data for 6 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

Participants in the treatment group were more likely to abstain from smoking than controls, at any of the followup time points. The treatment group smoked less cigarettes per day (CPD) at baseline, 30 days and 180 days post-baseline, compared to controls. These findings persisted after adjusting for possible covariates.

CONCLUSION

Bupropion-SR may be helpful to quit or reduce smoking for recently abstinent AD individuals.

Impact of baseline weight on smoking cessation and weight gain in quitlines

BACKGROUND

The use and effectiveness of tobacco quitlines by weight is still unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine if baseline weight is associated with treatment engagement, cessation, or weight gain following quitline treatment.

METHODS

Quitline participants (n = 595) were surveyed at baseline, 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

Baseline weight was not associated with treatment engagement. In unadjusted analyses, overweight smokers reported higher quit rates and were more likely to gain weight after quitting than obese or normal weight smokers. At 3 months, 40 % of overweight vs. 25 % of normal weight or obese smokers quit smoking (p = 0.01); 42 % of overweight, 32 % of normal weight, and 33 % of obese quitters gained weight (p = 0.05). After adjusting for covariates, weight was not significantly related to cessation (approaching significance at 6 months, p = 0.06) or weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first quitline study of this kind, we found no consistent patterns of association between baseline weight and treatment engagement, cessation, or weight gain.

Clinical strategies to enhance the efficacy of nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: a review of the literature

A number of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies have led to increases in quitting and thus to significant benefits to public health. Among existing medications, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has been available the longest, has the largest literature base in support, and is the only option for over-the-counter access. While the short-term efficacy of NRT is well documented in clinical trials, long-term abstinence rates associated with using NRT are modest, as most smokers will relapse. This literature review examines emerging clinical strategies to improve NRT efficacy. After an initial overview of NRT and its FDA-approved indications for use, we review randomized trials in which clinical delivery of NRT was manipulated and tested, in an attempt to enhance efficacy, through (1) duration of use (pre-quit and extended use), (2) amount of use (high-dose and combination NRT), (3) tailoring to specific smoker groups (genotype and phenotype), or (4) use of NRT for novel purposes (relapse prevention, temporary abstinence, cessation induction). Outcomes vary within and across topic area, and we highlight areas that offer stronger promise. Combination NRT likely represents the most promising strategy moving forward; other clinical strategies offer conflicting evidence but deserve further testing (pre-quit NRT or tailored treatment) or offer potential utility but are in need of further, direct tests. Some areas, though based on a limited set of studies, do not offer great promise (high-dose and extended treatment NRT). We conclude with a brief discussion of emergent NRT products (e.g., oral nicotine spray, among others), which may ultimately offer greater efficacy than current formulations. In order to further lower the prevalence of smoking, novel strategies designed to optimize NRT efficacy are needed.

Antidepressants for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

There are at least three reasons to believe antidepressants might help in smoking cessation. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms or precipitate a major depressive episode and antidepressants may relieve these. Secondly, nicotine may have antidepressant effects that maintain smoking, and antidepressants may substitute for this effect. Finally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways (e.g. inhibiting monoamine oxidase) or receptors (e.g. blockade of nicotinic-cholinergic receptors) underlying nicotine addiction.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to assess the effect and safety of antidepressant medications to aid long-term smoking cessation. The medications include bupropion; doxepin; fluoxetine; imipramine; lazabemide; moclobemide; nortriptyline; paroxetine; S-Adenosyl-L-Methionine (SAMe); selegiline; sertraline; St. John's wort; tryptophan; venlafaxine; and zimeledine.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in July 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized trials comparing antidepressant medications to placebo or an alternative pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation or to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in patients smoking at baseline, expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four new trials were identified since the 2009 update, bringing the total number of included trials to 90. There were 65 trials of bupropion and ten trials of nortriptyline, with the majority at low or unclear risk of bias. There was high quality evidence that, when used as the sole pharmacotherapy, bupropion significantly increased long-term cessation (44 trials, N = 13,728, risk ratio [RR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49 to 1.76). There was moderate quality evidence, limited by a relatively small number of trials and participants, that nortriptyline also significantly increased long-term cessation when used as the sole pharmacotherapy (six trials, N = 975, RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78). There is insufficient evidence that adding bupropion (12 trials, N = 3487, RR 1.9, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51) or nortriptyline (4 trials, N = 1644, RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.55) to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) provides an additional long-term benefit. Based on a limited amount of data from direct comparisons, bupropion and nortriptyline appear to be equally effective and of similar efficacy to NRT (bupropion versus nortriptyline 3 trials, N = 417, RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; bupropion versus NRT 8 trials, N = 4096, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; no direct comparisons between nortriptyline and NRT). Pooled results from four trials comparing bupropion to varenicline showed significantly lower quitting with bupropion than with varenicline (N = 1810, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.83). Meta-analyses did not detect a significant increase in the rate of serious adverse events amongst participants taking bupropion, though the confidence interval only narrowly missed statistical significance (33 trials, N = 9631, RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.69). There is a risk of about 1 in 1000 of seizures associated with bupropion use. Bupropion has been associated with suicide risk, but whether this is causal is unclear. Nortriptyline has the potential for serious side-effects, but none have been seen in the few small trials for smoking cessation.There was no evidence of a significant effect for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on their own (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.22, N = 1594; 2 trials fluoxetine, 1 paroxetine, 1 sertraline) or as an adjunct to NRT (3 trials of fluoxetine, N = 466, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.82). Significant effects were also not detected for monoamine oxidase inhibitors (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.79, N = 827; 1 trial moclobemide, 5 selegiline), the atypical antidepressant venlafaxine (1 trial, N = 147, RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.32), the herbal therapy St John's wort (hypericum) (2 trials, N = 261, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.53), or the dietary supplement SAMe (1 trial, N = 120, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.07).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The antidepressants bupropion and nortriptyline aid long-term smoking cessation. Adverse events with either medication appear to rarely be serious or lead to stopping medication. Evidence suggests that the mode of action of bupropion and nortriptyline is independent of their antidepressant effect and that they are of similar efficacy to nicotine replacement. Evidence also suggests that bupropion is less effective than varenicline, but further research is needed to confirm this finding. Evidence suggests that neither selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluoxetine) nor monoamine oxidase inhibitors aid cessation.

Understanding the role of cessation fatigue in the smoking cessation process

BACKGROUND

To understand the dynamic process of cessation fatigue (i.e., the tiredness of trying to quit smoking) with respect to its average trend, effect on relapse, time-varying relations with craving and negative affect, and differences among genders and treatment groups.

METHOD

Randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. Participants received either placebo, monotherapy (bupropion SR, nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge), or combined pharmacotherapy (bupropion SR+nicotine lozenge, nicotine patch+nicotine lozenge). Data were collected from 1504 daily smokers who were motivated to quit smoking. The participants completed baseline assessments and ecological momentary assessments for 2 weeks post-quit.

RESULTS

Cessation fatigue reduced the likelihood of 6-month post-quit abstinence (OR=0.97, 95% CI (0.95, 0.99)), and was positively associated with craving and negative affect. After controlling for these two factors, average cessation fatigue increased over time. Compared to men, women experienced greater fatigue (t=-10.69, p<0.0001) and a stronger relation between fatigue and craving (t=-8.80, p<0.0001). The relationship between fatigue and negative affect was significantly stronger in men (t=5.73, p<0.0001). Cessation fatigue was significantly reduced by combined pharmacotherapy (t=-13.4, p<0.0001), as well as monotherapy (t=-6.2, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cessation fatigue was closely related to craving, negative affect, and cessation outcomes. Women reported greater cessation fatigue than men. Current treatments appeared to reduce fatigue and weaken its relations with craving and negative affect.

A preliminary study on the effect of combined nicotine replacement therapy on alcohol responses and alcohol self-administration

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Limiting alcohol consumption may help prevent alcohol-mediated smoking relapse in heavy drinking smokers. This pilot study examined whether combining a nicotine patch with nicotine nasal spray has stronger attenuating effects on alcohol response and consumption than a nicotine patch alone.

METHODS

Twenty-two non-alcohol dependent heavy drinking smokers completed the double-blind cross-over, placebo-controlled study (21 mg nicotine patch + nicotine or placebo nasal spray). Six hours after 21 mg nicotine patch application, subjective and physiological responses to a priming drink (0.3 g/kg) were assessed, followed by two 1-hr alcohol self-administration periods, with possible consumption of up to 4 drinks per period (each 0.15 g/kg). Nasal spray (1 mg [active] or 0 mg [placebo] per dose) was administered 10 min prior to the priming dose and each self-administration period.

RESULTS

Active nasal spray did not increase serum nicotine levels, compared with placebo administration. The number of drinks consumed did not differ by the nasal spray conditions. However, positive subjective responses to the priming drink were lower in the active nasal spray condition than the placebo nasal spray condition. During the self-administration period, urge to drink was also lower in the active spray condition than the placebo condition.

CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Augmenting the nicotine patch with nicotine nasal spray attenuated positive subjective alcohol response and craving and suggests that future studies should investigate whether these findings translate to a clinical setting.

EffiCiency and Safety of an eLectronic cigAreTte (ECLAT) as tobacco cigarettes substitute: a prospective 12-month randomized control design study

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are becoming increasingly popular with smokers worldwide. Users report buying them to help quit smoking, to reduce cigarette consumption, to relieve tobacco withdrawal symptoms, and to continue having a 'smoking' experience, but with reduced health risks. Research on e-cigarettes is urgently needed in order to ensure that the decisions of regulators, healthcare providers and consumers are based on science. Methods ECLAT is a prospective 12-month randomized, controlled trial that evaluates smoking reduction/abstinence in 300 smokers not intending to quit experimenting two different nicotine strengths of a popular e-cigarette model ('Categoria'; Arbi Group Srl, Italy) compared to its non-nicotine choice. GroupA (n = 100) received 7.2 mg nicotine cartridges for 12 weeks; GroupB (n = 100), a 6-week 7.2 mg nicotine cartridges followed by a further 6-week 5.4 mg nicotine cartridges; GroupC (n = 100) received no-nicotine cartridges for 12 weeks. The study consisted of nine visits during which cig/day use and exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) levels were measured. Smoking reduction and abstinence rates were calculated. Adverse events and product preferences were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Declines in cig/day use and eCO levels were observed at each study visits in all three study groups (p<0.001 vs baseline), with no consistent differences among study groups. Smoking reduction was documented in 22.3% and 10.3% at week-12 and week-52 respectively. Complete abstinence from tobacco smoking was documented in 10.7% and 8.7% at week-12 and week-52 respectively. A substantial decrease in adverse events from baseline was observed and withdrawal symptoms were infrequently reported during the study. Participants' perception and acceptance of the product under investigation was satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

In smokers not intending to quit, the use of e-cigarettes, with or without nicotine, decreased cigarette consumption and elicited enduring tobacco abstinence without causing significant side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01164072 NCT01164072.

Smoking cessation in patients with respiratory disease: existing treatments and future directions

Tobacco use is a leading cause of preventable death worldwide. Respiratory diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer, account for a large proportion of tobacco-related deaths. Smoking cessation benefits almost all smokers, irrespective of the age at which they quit, making smoking cessation a core component of prevention and treatment of respiratory diseases. Evidence shows that psychosocial counselling and pharmacotherapy are effective smoking cessation methods and are most effective when used together. The first-line drugs licensed to aid smoking cessation (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline) are effective in patients with COPD. Efforts are underway to improve the efficacy of existing treatments and increase the proportion of smokers who try to quit, and who use treatment when doing so. However, existing smoking cessation counselling and drugs are among the most cost-effective clinical preventive services available. Incorporation of such treatment into routine clinical practice is essential for provision of high-quality care to all patients, especially those with respiratory disease.

Enhancing tobacco quitline effectiveness: identifying a superior pharmacotherapy adjuvant

INTRODUCTION

Telephone tobacco quitlines are effective and are widely used, with more than 500,000 U.S. callers in 2010. This study investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 3 different quitline enhancements: combination nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), longer duration of NRT, and counseling to increase NRT adherence.

METHODS

In this study, 987 quitline callers were randomized to a combination of quitline treatments in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design: NRT duration (2 vs. 6 weeks), NRT type (nicotine patch only vs. patch plus nicotine gum), and standard 4-call counseling (SC) versus SC plus medication adherence counseling (MAC). The primary outcome was 7-day point-prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 6 months postquit in intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses.

RESULTS

Combination NRT for 6 weeks yielded the highest 6-month PPA rate (51.6%) compared with 2 weeks of nicotine patch (38.4%), odds ratios [OR] = 1.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]:1.20-2.45). A similar result was found for 2 weeks of combination NRT (48.2%), OR = 1.49 (95% CI: 1.04-2.14) but not for 6 weeks of nicotine patch alone (46.2%), OR = 1.38 (95% CI: 0.96-1.97). The MAC intervention effect was nonsignificant. Cost analyses showed that the 2-week combination NRT group had the lowest cost per quit ($442 vs. $464 for 2-week patch only, $505 for 6-week patch only, and $675 for 6-week combination NRT).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination NRT for 2 or 6 weeks increased 6-month abstinence rates by 10% and 13%, respectively, over rates produced by 2 weeks of nicotine patch when offered with quitline counseling. A 10% improvement would potentially yield an additional 50,000 quitters annually, assuming 500,000 callers to U.S. quitlines per year.

Randomized trial of the effectiveness of combined behavioral/pharmacological smoking cessation treatment in Syrian primary care clinics

AIMS

Effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation has not been evaluated in low income countries, such as Syria, where it is expensive and not widely available. We evaluated whether nicotine patch boosts smoking cessation rates when used in conjunction with behavioral support in primary care clinics in Aleppo, Syria.

DESIGN

Two arm, parallel group, randomized, placebo controlled, double-blinded multi-site trial.

SETTING

Four primary care clinics in Aleppo, Syria.

PARTICIPANTS

 Two hundred and sixty-nine adult primary care patients received behavioral cessation counseling from a trained primary care physician and were randomized to receive six weeks of treatment with nicotine versus placebo patch.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary end-points were prolonged abstinence (no smoking after a 2-week grace period) at end of treatment, and 6 and 12 months post-quit day, assessed by self-report and exhaled carbon monoxide levels of <10 p.p.m.

FINDINGS

Treatment adherence was excellent and nicotine patch produced expected reductions in urges to smoke and withdrawal symptoms, but no treatment effect was observed. The proportion of patients in the nicotine and placebo groups with prolonged abstinence was 21.6% and 20.0%, respectively, at end of treatment, 13.4% and 14.1% at 6 months, and 12.7% and 11.9% at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

 Nicotine patches may not be effective in helping smokers in low-income countries to stop when given as an adjunct to behavioural support.

Interventions for tobacco smoking

Around 19% of US adults smoke cigarettes, and smoking remains the leading avoidable cause of death in this country. Without treatment only ~5% of smokers who try to quit achieve long-term abstinence, but evidence-based cessation treatment increases this figure to 10% to 30%. The process of smoking cessation comprises different pragmatically defined phases, and these can help guide smoking treatment development and evaluation. This review evaluates the effectiveness of smoking interventions for smokers who are unwilling to make a quit attempt (motivation phase), who are willing to make a quit attempt (cessation phase), who have recently quit (maintenance phase), and who have recently relapsed (relapse recovery phase). Multiple effective treatments exist for some phases (cessation), but not others (relapse recovery). A chronic care approach to treating smoking requires effective interventions for every phase, especially interventions that exert complementary effects both within and across phases and that can be disseminated broadly and cost-effectively.

[Consensus report for the clinical care of smoking cessation in Spain. Comité Nacional para la Prevención del Tabaquismo]

Tobacco use presents an odd confluence of circumstances: it is a significant and high threat to health, and there is a lack of motivation among health workers to act accordingly. Yet we have effective interventions. It is really hard to identify any other determinant of health presenting this mixture of lethality, prevalence, and lack of care, despite having effective treatments readily available. On the other hand, smoking cessation interventions are considered as the gold standard of preventive interventions, far above other preventive measures commonly used. This has prompted the National Committee for Smoking Prevention to develop a consensus document for the Clinical Care of Smoking Cessation in Spain. The purpose of this technical and scientific document is to agree on a basic proposal of quality of care to tackle smokers to quit. This document would serve as a guideline in the clinical practice in our country. The aims of this agreement are to review the effectiveness of the existing therapies for smoking cessation, to synthesize their available evidence, and to set the basic minimum standards of care in the clinical practice of patients who smoke. The consensus sets the strategies, and the evidences that support them, in order to assist both the smokers who want to quit, and the smokers who do not, setting out the steps to intervene in the most adequate.

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The aim of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is to temporarily replace much of the nicotine from cigarettes to reduce motivation to smoke and nicotine withdrawal symptoms, thus easing the transition from cigarette smoking to complete abstinence.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were: To determine the effect of NRT compared to placebo in aiding smoking cessation, and to consider whether there is a difference in effect for the different forms of NRT (chewing gum, transdermal patches, oral and nasal sprays, inhalers and tablets/lozenges) in achieving abstinence from cigarettes. To determine whether the effect is influenced by the dosage, form and timing of use of NRT; the intensity of additional advice and support offered to the smoker; or the clinical setting in which the smoker is recruited and treated. To determine whether combinations of NRT are more likely to lead to successful quitting than one type alone. To determine whether NRT is more or less likely to lead to successful quitting compared to other pharmacotherapies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for papers mentioning 'NRT' or any type of nicotine replacement therapy in the title, abstract or keywords. Date of most recent search July 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials in which NRT was compared to placebo or to no treatment, or where different doses of NRT were compared. We excluded trials which did not report cessation rates, and those with follow-up of less than six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the type of participants, the dose, duration and form of nicotine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 150 trials; 117 with over 50,000 participants contributed to the primary comparison between any type of NRT and a placebo or non-NRT control group. The risk ratio (RR) of abstinence for any form of NRT relative to control was 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53 to 1.68). The pooled RRs for each type were 1.49 (95% CI 1.40 to 1.60, 55 trials) for nicotine gum; 1.64 (95% CI 1.52 to 1.78, 43 trials) for nicotine patch; 1.95 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.36, 6 trials) for oral tablets/lozenges; 1.90 (95% CI 1.36 to 2.67, 4 trials) for nicotine inhaler; and 2.02 (95% CI 1.49 to 2.73, 4 trials) for nicotine nasal spray. One trial of oral spray had an RR of 2.48 (95% CI 1.24 to 4.94). The effects were largely independent of the duration of therapy, the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. The effect was similar in a small group of studies that aimed to assess use of NRT obtained without a prescription. In highly dependent smokers there was a significant benefit of 4 mg gum compared with 2 mg gum, but weaker evidence of a benefit from higher doses of patch. There was evidence that combining a nicotine patch with a rapid delivery form of NRT was more effective than a single type of NRT (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.51, 9 trials). The RR for NRT used for a short period prior to the quit date was 1.18 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.40, 8 trials), just missing statistical significance, though the efficacy increased when we pooled only patch trials and when we removed one trial in which confounding was likely. Five studies directly compared NRT to a non-nicotine pharmacotherapy, bupropion; there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.18). A combination of NRT and bupropion was more effective than bupropion alone (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.45, 4 trials). Adverse effects from using NRT are related to the type of product, and include skin irritation from patches and irritation to the inside of the mouth from gum and tablets. There is no evidence that NRT increases the risk of heart attacks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All of the commercially available forms of NRT (gum, transdermal patch, nasal spray, inhaler and sublingual tablets/lozenges) can help people who make a quit attempt to increase their chances of successfully stopping smoking. NRTs increase the rate of quitting by 50 to 70%, regardless of setting. The effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the individual. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT.

Strategies to help a smoker who is struggling to quit

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death worldwide. Stopping tobacco use benefits virtually every smoker. Most of the 19% of US residents who smoke want to quit and have tried to do so. Most individual quit attempts fail, but two-thirds of smokers use no treatment when trying to quit. Treating tobacco dependence is one of the most cost-effective actions in health care. With a brief intervention, physicians can prompt smokers to attempt to quit and connect them to evidence-based treatment that includes pharmacotherapy and behavioral support (ie, counseling). Physicians can link smokers to effective counseling support offered by a free national network of telephone quit lines. Smokers who use nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, or varenicline when trying to quit double their odds of success. The most effective way to use NRT is to combine the long-acting nicotine patch with a shorter-acting product (lozenge, gum, inhaler, or nasal spray) and extend treatment beyond 12 weeks. Observational studies have not confirmed case reports of behavior changes associated with varenicline and bupropion, and these drugs' benefits outweigh potential risks. A chronic disease management model is effective for treating tobacco dependence, which deserves as high a priority in health care systems as treating other chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension.

Comparative effectiveness of post-discharge interventions for hospitalized smokers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

A hospital admission offers smokers an opportunity to quit. Smoking cessation counseling provided in the hospital is effective, but only if it continues for more than one month after discharge. Providing smoking cessation medication at discharge may add benefit to counseling. A major barrier to translating this research into clinical practice is sustaining treatment during the transition to outpatient care. An evidence-based, practical, cost-effective model that facilitates the continuation of tobacco treatment after discharge is needed. This paper describes the design of a comparative effectiveness trial testing a hospital-initiated intervention against standard care.

Methods/design

A two-arm randomized controlled trial compares the effectiveness of standard post-discharge care with a multi-component smoking cessation intervention provided for three months after discharge. Current smokers admitted to Massachusetts General Hospital who receive bedside smoking cessation counseling, intend to quit after discharge and are willing to consider smoking cessation medication are eligible. Study participants are recruited following the hospital counseling visit and randomly assigned to receive Standard Care or Extended Care after hospital discharge. Standard Care includes a recommendation for a smoking cessation medication and information about community resources. Extended Care includes up to three months of free FDA-approved smoking cessation medication and five proactive computerized telephone calls that use interactive voice response technology to provide tailored motivational messages, offer additional live telephone counseling calls from a smoking cessation counselor, and facilitate medication refills. Outcomes are assessed at one, three, and six months after hospital discharge. The primary outcomes are self-reported and validated seven-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at six months. Other outcomes include short-term and sustained smoking cessation, post-discharge utilization of smoking cessation treatment, hospital readmissions and emergency room visits, and program cost per quit.

Discussion

This study tests a disseminable smoking intervention model for hospitalized smokers. If effective and widely adopted, it could help to reduce population smoking rates and thereby reduce tobacco-related mortality, morbidity, and health care costs.

Trial registration

United States Clinical Trials Registry NCT01177176.

Healthcare costs around the time of smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act mandates that new insurance plans cover smoking-cessation therapy without cost-sharing. Previous cost difference estimates, which show a spike around the time of cessation, suggest premiums might rise as a result of covering these services.

PURPOSE

The goal of the study was to test (1) whether individuals in an RCT of pharmacotherapy and counseling for smoking cessation differed in their healthcare costs around the cessation period, and (2) whether the healthcare costs of those in the trial who successfully quit were different from a matched sample of smokers in the community.

METHODS

Generalized linear regression models were used to analyze healthcare cost data on individuals enrolled in a comparative effectiveness trial of cessation therapies between October 2005 and May 2007 (1346 total participants; 1338 with requisite data for further analysis). Cost differences for the period preceding and subsequent to the cessation attempt were assessed by trial participants' 12-month sustained quit status. Healthcare cost differences between sustained quitters and a sample of community-dwelling smokers, matched to these quitters on the basis of health services use around the time trial participant enrolled and by demographics, were also examined. Data were analyzed in 2011.

RESULTS

All three groups had a spike in cost associated with the index clinic visit. Regression results revealed little difference in healthcare costs by quit status for trial participants until the sixth quarter post-quit. By that quarter, continuous sustained quitters cost $541 (p<0.001) less than continuing smokers. Continuous sustained quitters cost less than their matched community- dwelling smokers in almost every quarter observed. The cost difference ranged from $270 (p=0.01) during the quarter of quit, to $490 (p<0.01) in the 6th quarter after quitting.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of smoking-cessation therapy does not appear to raise short-term healthcare costs. By the sixth quarter post-quit, sustained quitters were less costly than trial participants who continued smoking.

The emerging phenomenon of electronic cigarettes

The need for novel and more effective approaches to tobacco control is unquestionable. The electronic cigarette is a battery-powered electronic nicotine delivery system that looks very similar to a conventional cigarette and is capable of emulating smoking, but without the combustion products accountable for smoking's damaging effects. Smokers who decide to switch to electronic cigarettes instead of continuing to smoke would achieve large health gains. The electronic cigarette is an emerging phenomenon that is becoming increasingly popular with smokers worldwide. Users report buying them to help quit smoking, to reduce cigarette consumption, to relieve tobacco withdrawal symptoms due to workplace smoking restrictions and to continue to have a 'smoking' experience but with reduced health risks. The focus of the present article is the health effects of using electronic cigarettes, with consideration given to the acceptability, safety and effectiveness of this product to serve as a long-term substitute for smoking or as a tool for smoking cessation.

Pharmacologic agents for tobacco dependence treatment: 2011 update

Tobacco use remains the most important worldwide cause of preventable death due mainly to cancer, cardiovascular disease, and chronic lung disease. If the current tobacco pandemic continues for another 20 years, the annual global tobacco-attributable mortality will exceed 8 million. In the US and many European countries, public health and tobacco control efforts combined with effective tobacco dependence treatment using combined behavioral treatment and pharmacotherapy have contributed significantly to steadily declining rates of tobacco use. Subsequent declines in cardiovascular disease and lung cancer death rates are directly attributable to these lower rates of tobacco use. Despite smoking bans, health warnings and effective pharmacotherapy, one in five Americans continue to smoke. Continued research in tobacco dependence treatment has resulted in newer and more effective pharmacotherapy. In this review, we provide a current update of pharmacologic agents for tobacco dependence treatment and a discussion of recent controversy regarding adverse effects of some these medications.

Why two smoking cessation agents work better than one: role of craving suppression

OBJECTIVE

This research examined why smokers receiving combination medication for smoking cessation are more likely to quit smoking than are those who receive either single agent (monotherapy) or placebo.

METHOD

Data were collected from 1,504 current smokers (58.2% women, 83.9% White; mean age = 44.67 years, SD = 11.08) participating in a cessation clinical trial who were randomized to 1 of 6 cessation pharmacotherapy conditions (placebo, nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge, bupropion, nicotine patch + nicotine lozenge, and bupropion + nicotine lozenge). Participants completed ecological momentary assessments 4 times a day, concerning 5 hypothesized mediators (negative affect, positive affect, craving, smoking expectations, and withdrawal) of pharmacotherapy effects. Medications were provided for 8-12 weeks post-quit along with 6 individual counseling sessions. Mediational paths were estimated via a novel Bayesian approach with estimation of multiple mediator models.

RESULTS

Biochemically confirmed 8-week abstinence was the outcome variable, with the monotherapy and combination pharmacotherapy composites producing 45% (n = 689) and 54% (n = 478) abstinence rates, respectively. The univariate models suggested that the combination treatments produced higher abstinence rates than the monotherapies because of greater suppression of withdrawal, craving, and smoking expectations. However, multiple mediator models showed that the suppression of craving on the quit day produced the strongest mediational effects and could account for the mediational effects of other tested variables.

CONCLUSION

Suppression of craving on the quit day significantly mediates the clinical effects of monotherapies and combination smoking pharmacotherapies, and the higher abstinence rates for combination therapy versus monotherapies appear primarily due to greater craving suppression.

Should all smokers use combination smoking cessation pharmacotherapy? Using novel analytic methods to detect differential treatment effects over 8 weeks of pharmacotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Combination pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation has been shown to be more effective than monotherapy in meta-analyses. We address the question of whether combination pharmacotherapy should be used routinely with smokers or if some types of smokers show little or no benefit from combination pharmacotherapy versus monotherapy.

METHODS

Two smoking cessation trials were conducted using the same assessments and medications (bupropion, nicotine lozenge, nicotine patch, bupropion + lozenge, and patch + lozenge). Participants were smokers presenting either to primary care clinics in southeastern Wisconsin for medical treatment (Effectiveness trial, N = 1,346) or volunteering for smoking cessation treatment at smoking cessation clinics in Madison and Milwaukee, WI (Efficacy trial, N = 1,504). For each trial, decision tree analyses identified variables predicting outcome from combination pharmacotherapy versus monotherapy at the end of treatment (smoking 8 weeks after the target quit day).

RESULTS

All smokers tended to benefit from combination pharmacotherapy except those low in nicotine dependence (longer latency to smoke in the morning as per item 1 of the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence) who also lived with a spouse or partner who smoked.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination pharmacotherapy was generally more effective than monotherapy among smokers, but one group of smokers, those who were low in nicotine dependence and who lived with a smoking spouse, did not show greater benefit from using combination pharmacotherapy. Use of monotherapy with these smokers might be justified considering the expense and side effects of combination pharmacotherapy.

Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Most people who stop smoking gain weight. There are some interventions that have been designed to reduce weight gain when stopping smoking. Some smoking cessation interventions may also limit weight gain although their effect on weight has not been reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effect of: (1) Interventions targeting post-cessation weight gain on weight change and smoking cessation.(2) Interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that may also plausibly affect weight on post-cessation weight change.

SEARCH METHODS

Part 1 - We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register and CENTRAL in September 2011.Part 2 - In addition we searched the included studies in the following "parent" Cochrane reviews: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists and exercise interventions for smoking cessation published in Issue 9, 2011 of the Cochrane Library.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Part 1 - We included trials of interventions that were targeted at post-cessation weight gain and had measured weight at any follow up point and/or smoking cessation six or more months after quit day.Part 2 - We included trials that had been included in the selected parent Cochrane reviews if they had reported weight gain at any time point.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on baseline characteristics of the study population, intervention, outcome and study quality. Change in weight was expressed as difference in weight change from baseline to follow up between trial arms and was reported in abstinent smokers only. Abstinence from smoking was expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the inverse variance method for weight and Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Part 1: Some pharmacological interventions tested for limiting post cessation weight gain (PCWG) resulted in a significant reduction in WG at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine (Mean difference (MD) -2.50 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.98 to -2.02, 1 study), phenylpropanolamine (MD -0.50 kg, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.20, N=3), naltrexone (MD -0.78 kg, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.05, N=2). There was no evidence that treatment reduced weight at 6 or 12 months (m). No pharmacological intervention significantly affected smoking cessation rates.Weight management education only was associated with no reduction in PCWG at end of treatment (6 or 12m). However these interventions significantly reduced abstinence at 12m (Risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90, N=2). Personalised weight management support reduced PCWG at 12m (MD -2.58 kg, 95% CI -5.11 to -0.05, N=2) and was not associated with a significant reduction of abstinence at 12m (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.43, N=2). A very low calorie diet (VLCD) significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -3.70 kg, 95% CI -4.82 to -2.58, N=1), but not significantly so at 12m (MD -1.30 kg, 95% CI -3.49 to 0.89, N=1). The VLCD increased chances of abstinence at 12m (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.73, N=1). There was no evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy to allay concern about weight gain (CBT) reduced PCWG, but there was some evidence of increased PCWG at 6m (MD 0.74, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.24). It was associated with improved abstinence at 6m (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.13, N=2) but not at 12m (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.86, N=2). However, there was significant statistical heterogeneity.Part 2: We found no evidence that exercise interventions significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.25 kg, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.29, N=4) however a significant reduction was found at 12m (MD -2.07 kg, 95% CI -3.78 to -0.36, N=3).Both bupropion and fluoxetine limited PCWG at the end of treatment (bupropion MD -1.12 kg, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.77, N=7) (fluoxetine MD -0.99 kg, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.61, N=2). There was no evidence that the effect persisted at 6m (bupropion MD -0.58 kg, 95% CI -2.16 to 1.00, N=4), (fluoxetine MD -0.01 kg, 95% CI -1.11 to 1.10, N=2) or 12m (bupropion MD -0.38 kg, 95% CI -2.00 to 1.24, N=4). There were no data on WG at 12m for fluoxetine.Overall, treatment with NRT attenuated PCWG at the end of treatment (MD -0.69 kg, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.51, N=19), with no strong evidence that the effect differed for the different forms of NRT. There was evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity caused by one study which reported a 4.3 kg reduction in PCWG due to NRT. With this study removed, the difference in weight change at end of treatment was -0.45 kg (95% CI -0.66 to -0.27, N=18). There was no evidence of an effect on PCWG at 12m (MD -0.42 kg, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.08, N=15).We found evidence that varenicline significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.41 kg, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.19, N=11), but this effect was not maintained at 6 or 12m. Three studies compared the effect of bupropion to varenicline. Participants taking bupropion gained significantly less weight at the end of treatment (-0.51 kg (95% CI -0.93 to -0.09 kg), N=3). Direct comparison showed no significant difference in PCWG between varenicline and NRT.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although some pharmacotherapies tested to limit PCWG show evidence of short-term success, other problems with them and the lack of data on long-term efficacy limits their use. Weight management education only, is not effective and may reduce abstinence. Personalised weight management support may be effective and not reduce abstinence, but there are too few data to be sure. One study showed a VLCD increased abstinence but did not prevent WG in the longer term. CBT to accept WG did not limit PCWG and may not promote abstinence in the long term. Exercise interventions significantly reduced weight in the long term, but not the short term. More studies are needed to clarify whether this is an effect of treatment or a chance finding. Bupropion, fluoxetine, NRT and varenicline reduce PCWG while using the medication. Although this effect was not maintained one year after stopping smoking, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a modest long-term effect. The data are not sufficient to make strong clinical recommendations for effective programmes to prevent weight gain after cessation.

Neurophysiology of Nicotine Addiction

Tobacco use is a major health problem, and nicotine is the main addictive component. Nicotine binds to nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) to produce its initial effects. The nAChRs subtypes are composed of five subunits that can form in numerous combinations with varied functional and pharmacological characteristics. Diverse psychopharmacological effects contribute to the overall process of nicotine addiction, but two general neural systems are emerging as critical for the initiation and maintenance of tobacco use. Mesocorticolimbic circuitry that includes the dopaminergic pathway originating in the ventral tegmental area and projecting to the nucleus accumbens is recognized as vital for reinforcing behaviors during the initiation of nicotine addiction. In this neural system β2, α4, and α6 are the most important nAChR subunits underlying the rewarding aspects of nicotine and nicotine self-administration. On the other hand, the epithalamic habenular complex and the interpeduncular nucleus, which are connected via the fasciculus retroflexus, are critical contributors regulating nicotine dosing and withdrawal symptoms. In this case, the α5 and β4 nAChR subunits have critical roles in combination with other subunits. In both of these neural systems, particular nAChR subtypes have roles that contribute to the overall nicotine addiction process.

Incremental efficacy of adding bupropion to the nicotine patch for smoking cessation in smokers with a recent history of alcohol dependence: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

AIMS

The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of smoking cessation treatment using a combination of nicotine patch and bupropion vs. nicotine patch and placebo bupropion. A secondary aim was to investigate whether the efficacy of bupropion is moderated by belief about whether one is receiving active or placebo medication.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from a residential substance abuse treatment program and the community. We randomly assigned 148 smokers with between 2 and 12 months of alcohol abstinence to nicotine patch plus bupropion or nicotine patch plus placebo. All participants also received seven counseling sessions.

RESULTS

At follow up, differences between medication conditions were not significant. Seven-day point prevalence quit rates in the patch plus bupropion vs. patch plus placebo conditions at week 24 were 6% and 11%, respectively. Differences between groups on prolonged abstinence and time to first smoking lapse were also not significant. However, among participants who received bupropion, those who accurately "guessed" that they were receiving bupropion were more likely to remain abstinent than those who incorrectly believed they were receiving placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings do not support combining nicotine patch and bupropion for smoking cessation in this population. However, findings support previous studies suggesting the importance of assessing the blind in smoking cessation studies and its possible moderating effect on medication efficacy. Future directions for enhancing smoking cessation outcome in these smokers include investigations of intensive behavioral and pharmacological interventions, including studies of potential interactions between individual genetic differences and medication efficacy.

Mechanistic insights into nicotine withdrawal

Smoking is responsible for over 400,000 premature deaths in the United States every year, making it the leading cause of preventable death. In addition, smoking-related illness leads to billions of dollars in healthcare expenditures and lost productivity annually. The public is increasingly aware that successfully abstaining from smoking at any age can add years to one's life and reduce many of the harmful effects of smoking. Although the majority of smokers desire to quit, only a small fraction of attempts to quit are actually successful. The symptoms associated with nicotine withdrawal are a primary deterrent to cessation and they need to be quelled to avoid early relapse. This review will focus on the neuroadaptations caused by chronic nicotine exposure and discuss how those changes lead to a withdrawal syndrome upon smoking cessation. Besides examining how nicotine usurps the endogenous reward system, we will discuss how the habenula is part of a circuit that plays a critical role in the aversive effects of high nicotine doses and nicotine withdrawal. We will also provide an updated summary of the role of various nicotinic receptor subtypes in the mechanisms of withdrawal. This growing knowledge provides mechanistic insights into current and future smoking cessation therapies.

Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e-Cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6-month pilot study

Background

Cigarette smoking is a tough addiction to break. Therefore, improved approaches to smoking cessation are necessary. The electronic-cigarette (e-Cigarette), a battery-powered electronic nicotine delivery device (ENDD) resembling a cigarette, may help smokers to remain abstinent during their quit attempt or to reduce cigarette consumption. Efficacy and safety of these devices in long-term smoking cessation and/or smoking reduction studies have never been investigated.

Methods

In this prospective proof-of-concept study we monitored possible modifications in smoking habits of 40 regular smokers (unwilling to quit) experimenting the 'Categoria' e-Cigarette with a focus on smoking reduction and smoking abstinence. Study participants were invited to attend a total of five study visits: at baseline, week-4, week-8, week-12 and week-24. Product use, number of cigarettes smoked, and exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) levels were measured at each visit. Smoking reduction and abstinence rates were calculated. Adverse events and product preferences were also reviewed.

Results

Sustained 50% reduction in the number of cig/day at week-24 was shown in 13/40(32.5%) participants; their median of 25 cigs/day decreasing to 6 cigs/day (p < 0.001). Sustained 80% reduction was shown in 5/40(12.5%) participants; their median of 30 cigs/day decreasing to 3 cigs/day (p = 0.043). Sustained smoking abstinence at week-24 was observed in 9/40(22.5%) participants, with 6/9 still using the e-Cigarette by the end of the study. Combined sustained 50% reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 22/40 (55%) participants, with an overall 88% fall in cigs/day. Mouth (20.6%) and throat (32.4%) irritation, and dry cough (32.4%) were common, but diminished substantially by week-24. Overall, 2 to 3 cartridges/day were used throughout the study. Participants' perception and acceptance of the product was good.

Conclusion

The use of e-Cigarette substantially decreased cigarette consumption without causing significant side effects in smokers not intending to quit (http://ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01195597).

Clinical practice. Treating smokers in the health care setting

A 45 year-old overweight woman with a history of asthma and depression presents to her primary care physician with her third episode of acute bronchitis in the last 24 months. She began smoking at age 15 and now smokes 10 to 15 cigarettes per day, but every day she starts smoking immediately upon awakening, an indication of severe nicotine dependence1 . She has made multiple unsuccessful attempts to quit, once briefly using the nicotine patch, but relapsed due to strong urges to smoke and weight gain. She has not used cessation counseling or other medications. She is bothered by the cost of cigarettes, and is worried about smoking’s health effects on her two children and on herself. Importantly, she is reluctant to make a quit attempt now, in part, because she fears she won’t succeed. What would you advise?

[Abstinence rates with varenicline compared to bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy for quitting smoking in primary care]

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate the continuous abstinence rates of varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in smoking cessation in 2 Primary Care (PC) External Support Units.

DESIGN

Observational, multicentre, longitudinal study using a retrospective review of medical records.

SETTING

Six Primary Care Centres.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients > 18 years, who began smoking cessation treatment between 1/01/2006 and 1/12/2008 with varenicline, bupropion or NRT were included in the analysis. CONTINUATION: Patient follow-up was conducted from time-baseline (day 1) and assessed at 6 and 12 months.

MAIN VARIABLES

comorbidities, effectiveness (continuous abstinence) and pharmacological tolerability.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

logistic regression models and Kaplan-Maier survival curves; P<.05.

RESULTS

A total of 957 smokers treated with NRT (53.0%), bupropion (25.1%) and varenicline (21.9%) were included in the analysis. Mean age: 47.6 (11.3) years; 58.6% men. 32.0% of smokers attended due to physical dependence. Average duration of smoking: 19.5 (6.7) years. At 6 months, 61.2% (95% CI: 54.6-67.8%) of participants in the varenicline group continuously abstained from smoking compared with 56.9% (95% CI: 50.6-63.2%) in the bupropion group, and 52.3% (95% CI: 48.0-56.6%) in the NRT group; P=.003. At 12 months, the rate of continuous abstinence was 57.4% (95% CI: 50.7-64.1%) in the varenicline group compared with 52.9% (95% CI: 46.6-59.2%) in the bupropion group and 47.1% (95% CI: 42.8-51.4%) in the NRT group; P=.002.

CONCLUSION

One year-follow up results suggest that varenicline is an appropriate alternative compared with bupropion and NRT on smoking cessation in the PC setting.

Nicotine replacement therapies: patient safety and persistence

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has become a central part of the treatment of nicotine dependence. However, NRT’s potential efficacy is limited to some extent by patient adherence and persistence. Here we review the relationship between NRT compliance and adherence, and overall treatment outcome. We then examine the factors that likely impact on treatment compliance and persistence, with a special focus on users’ perceptions of treatment safety and efficacy as possible mediators. Potential clinical strategies for improving suboptimal medication use are also discussed.

Pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation: current advances and research topics

Promoting smoking cessation is among the key medical interventions aimed at reducing worldwide morbidity and mortality in this century. Both behavioural counselling and pharmacotherapy have been shown to significantly increase long-term abstinence rates, and combining the two treatment modalities is recommended. This article provides an update on pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation in the general population. Current first-line agents used to support quit attempts are nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline. Research suggests that abstinence rates can be increased by combining different forms of NRT or simultaneously administering NRT and non-nicotine medications. New treatments targeting the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor as well as other pathophysiological pathways involved in nicotine addiction are being developed, with nicotine vaccines now being tested in phase III clinical trials. Among the numerous research topics currently addressed, pharmacogenetics and tailoring therapy to specific groups of smokers look most promising. However, substantial progress is unlikely to be made unless social gradients impeding effective treatment of all smokers are overcome. In addition, public smoking bans and reimbursement of medication costs are crucial in reducing the future burden of disease caused by smoking on a global level.

Evaluation of a student-run smoking cessation clinic for a medically underserved population

Background

Smoking is common among medically underserved populations. Accessible resources to encourage and support smoking cessation among these patients are limited. Volunteer medical student-run free smoking cessation clinics may provide an effective option to help these individuals achieve smoking abstinence. In order to demonstrate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of a student-run clinic, we analyzed a case series of patients receiving care in a medical student-run Smoking Cessation Clinic (SCC) at the Rochester, Minnesota Salvation Army Good Samaritan Health Clinic (GSHC).

Findings

Between January 2005 and March 2009, 282 cigarette smokers seeking care at the SCC were analyzed. Student providers at the SCC conducted 1652 weekly individual counseling sessions averaging 18 minutes per encounter. Patients were offered a choice of pharmacotherapies including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, and varenicline for up to 12 weeks. Smoking abstinence was confirmed with exhaled carbon monoxide (CO). Thirty-two patients completed the entire 12-week program (11.3%). At last contact, 94 patients (33.3%) abstained from smoking for ≥ 7 days and 39 patients (13.8%) were continuously abstinent for ≥ 4 weeks. The 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates at last contact were 58.6% for varenicline, 41.2% for bupropion, 33.9% for NRT, and 23.5% for bupropion and NRT. Analyzing missing patients as smoking, the 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates were 7.1%, 8.9%, and 8.2%, at 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months after program enrollment, respectively. No serious adverse drug reactions were recorded.

Conclusions

Our medical student-run smoking cessation clinic provided an effective and safe experience for medically underserved patients who might not otherwise have access to conventional smoking cessation programs because of high cost, lack of insurance, or other disparities. Similar medical student initiatives focusing on healthy lifestyles may be feasible and beneficial for individuals with limited access to healthcare resources.

Supporting implementation of evidence-based behavioral interventions: the role of data liquidity in facilitating translational behavioral medicine

The advancement of translational behavioral medicine will require that we discover new methods of managing large volumes of data from disparate sources such as disease surveillance systems, public health systems, and health information systems containing patient-centered data informed by behavioral and social sciences. The term "liquidity," when applied to data, refers to its availability and free flow throughout human/computer interactions. In seeking to achieve liquidity, the focus is not on creating a single, comprehensive database or set of coordinated datasets, nor is it solely on developing the electronic health record as the "one-stop shopping" source of health-related data. Rather, attention is on ensuring the availability of secure data through the various methods of collecting and storing data currently existent or under development-so that these components of the health information infrastructure together support a liquid data system. The value of accessible, interoperable, high-volume, reliable, secure, and contextually appropriate data is becoming apparent in many areas of the healthcare system, and health information liquidity is currently viewed as an important component of a patient-centered healthcare system. The translation from research interventions to behavioral and psychosocial indicators challenges the designers of healthcare systems to include this new set of data in the correct context. With the intention of advancing translational behavioral medicine at the local level, "on the ground" in the clinical office and research institution, this commentary discusses data liquidity from the patient's and clinician's perspective, requirements for a liquid healthcare data system, and the ways in which data liquidity can support translational behavioral medicine.

The new era of comparative effectiveness: will public health end up left behind?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act created the nation's first comprehensive comparative effectiveness research (CER) program. According to some optimistic accounts, CER will revolutionize clinical practice and transform the health care delivery system. But what about public health? There are reasons for concern that it could end up left behind in the new era of comparative effectiveness. This article analyzes the considerable promise and serious limitations of applying CER to public health. It also highlights important issues that will likely emerge for public health law and policy as the health care system transitions to greater reliance on CER.

The co-occurrence of cigarette smoking and bipolar disorder: phenomenology and treatment considerations

OBJECTIVES

  Despite recent advances in understanding the causes and treatment of nicotine dependence among individuals with psychiatric disorders, smoking among individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) has received little attention. The goal of this review is to synthesize the literature on the epidemiology, consequences, and treatment of smoking and nicotine dependence among individuals with BD and to delineate a future research agenda.

METHODS

  We conducted a PubMed search of English-language articles using the search terms bipolar disorder, mania, tobacco, nicotine, and smoking, followed by a manual search of the literature cited in the identified articles. Articles were chosen by the authors on the basis of their relevance to the topic areas covered in this selective review.

RESULTS

  Adults with BD are two to three times more likely to have started smoking and, on the basis of epidemiological data, may be less likely to initiate and/or maintain smoking abstinence than individuals without psychiatric disorders. Smoking cessation is achievable for individuals with BD, but challenges such as chronic mood dysregulation, high prevalence of alcohol and drug use, more severe nicotine dependence, and limited social support can make quitting more difficult. Effective treatments for tobacco cessation are available, but no controlled trials in smokers with BD have been conducted.

CONCLUSIONS

  Cigarette smoking is a prevalent and devastating addiction among individuals with BD and should be addressed by mental health providers. Additional research on the mechanisms of, and optimal treatment for, smoking and nicotine dependence in this population is desperately needed.

Combination pharmacotherapy for stopping smoking: what advantages does it offer?

Globally, tobacco kills almost 5 million people around the world annually. Seven first-line pharmacotherapies are currently available and recommended by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) clinical practice guideline for treating tobacco dependence, all of which have been proven to be effective for increasing tobacco abstinence rates when used as monotherapy. However, not all smokers are able to quit with single-drug therapy. Some smokers may benefit from combination therapy that includes the simultaneous use of different nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) or medications with different mechanisms of action (e.g. NRT and bupropion). Combination therapy with different types of NRT may provide a therapeutic advantage by increasing serum nicotine concentrations, and combination therapy with different drugs may capitalize on synergy obtained from two different mechanisms of action. However, controversy exists regarding this approach. Available data suggests that combination therapy may increase abstinence rates compared with monotherapy. However, the cost effectiveness of this approach has not been clearly demonstrated.

Treatment of medical, psychiatric, and substance-use comorbidities in people infected with HIV who use drugs

HIV-infected drug users have increased age-matched morbidity and mortality compared with HIV-infected people who do not use drugs. Substance-use disorders negatively affect the health of HIV-infected drug users, who also have frequent medical and psychiatric comorbidities that complicate HIV treatment and prevention. Evidence-based treatments are available for the management of substance-use disorders, mental illness, HIV and other infectious complications such as viral hepatitis and tuberculosis, and many non-HIV-associated comorbidities. Tuberculosis co-infection in HIV-infected drug users, including disease caused by drug-resistant strains, is acquired and transmitted as a consequence of inadequate prescription of antiretroviral therapy, poor adherence, and repeated interfaces with congregate settings such as prisons. Medication-assisted therapies provide the strongest evidence for HIV treatment and prevention efforts, yet are often not available where they are needed most. Antiretroviral therapy, when prescribed and adherence is at an optimum, improves health-related outcomes for HIV infection and many of its comorbidities, including tuberculosis, viral hepatitis, and renal and cardiovascular disease. Simultaneous clinical management of multiple comorbidities in HIV-infected drug users might result in complex pharmacokinetic drug interactions that must be adequately addressed. Moreover, interventions to improve adherence to treatment, including integration of health services delivery, are needed. Multifaceted, interdisciplinary approaches are urgently needed to achieve parity in health outcomes in HIV-infected drug users.

Gender, race, and education differences in abstinence rates among participants in two randomized smoking cessation trials

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, but this burden is not distributed equally among smokers. Women, Blacks, and people with low socioeconomic status are especially vulnerable to the health risks of smoking and are less likely to quit.

METHODS

This research examined cessation rates and treatment response among 2,850 participants (57.2% women, 11.7% Blacks, and 9.0% with less than a high school education) from two large cessation trials evaluating: nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge, bupropion, bupropion + lozenge, and nicotine patch + lozenge.

RESULTS

Results revealed that women, Blacks, and smokers with less education were less likely to quit smoking successfully than men, Whites, and smokers with more education, respectively. Women did not appear to benefit more from bupropion than from nicotine replacement therapy, but women and smokers with less education benefited more from combination pharmacotherapy than from monotherapy.

DISCUSSION

Women, Blacks, and smokers with less education are at elevated risk for cessation failure, and research is needed to understand this risk and develop pharmacological and psychosocial interventions to improve their long-term cessation rates.

Therapeutic advances in the treatment of nicotine addiction: present and future

While the proportion of the adult population that smokes has declined steadily in several westernized societies, the rate of successful quit attempts is still low. This is because smokers develop nicotine dependence, a powerful addiction that may require multiple attempts and long-term treatment to achieve enduring abstinence. Currently available first-line agents for smoking cessation therapy include nicotine replacement therapy (available in several formulations, including transdermal patch, gum, nasal spray, inhaler, and lozenge), bupropion (an atypical antidepressant), and varenicline (a partial agonist of the α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor that was recently developed and approved specifically for smoking cessation therapy). Second-line agents are nortriptyline (a tricyclic antidepressant agent) and the antihypertensive agent clonidine. With the exception of varenicline, which has been shown to offer significant improvement in abstinence rates over bupropion, all of the available treatments appear similarly effective. The adverse event profiles of nortriptyline and clonidine make them more appropriate for second-line therapy, when first-line treatments have failed or are not tolerated. However, the currently marketed smoking cessation drugs reportedly lack high levels of efficacy, particularly in real-life settings. New medications and vaccines with significant clinical advantage are now in the advanced stage of development and offer promise. These include nicotine vaccines and monoamine type B inhibitors. In this review article we discuss current and emerging pharmacotherapies for tobacco dependence focusing on their mechanisms of action, efficacy and adverse event profiles.

Pharmacologic agents for smoking cessation: a clinical review

Tobacco use has been clearly demonstrated to have negative health consequences. Smoking cigarettes is the predominant method of tobacco use. The tar contained within cigarettes and other similar products is also harmful. Other tarless tobacco containing products do exist but carry no significantly decreased risk. While nicotine is considered to be principally responsible for tobacco addiction, other chemicals in the cigarette smoke including acetaldehyde may contribute to the addictive properties of tobacco products. The adverse health consequences of tobacco use have been well documented. Studies have shown that a combined behavioral and pharmacological approach is more effective in smoking cessation than either approach alone. Pharmacotherapy can achieve 50% reduction in smoking. With pharmacotherapy the estimated 6-month abstinence rate is about 20%, whereas it is about 10% without pharmacotherapy. The first-line of drugs for smoking cessation are varenicline, bupropion sustained release, and nicotine replacement drugs, which are approved for use in adults. Data are insufficient to recommend their use in adolescents. This article reviews the use of pharmacological agents used for smoking cessation. A brief overview of epidemiology, chemistry, and adverse health effects of smoking is provided.