Risk of cardiovascular serious adverse events associated with varenicline use for tobacco cessation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Flexible, dual-form nicotine replacement therapy or varenicline in comparison with nicotine patch for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Extended use of combined pharmacotherapies to treat tobacco dependence may increase smoking abstinence; few studies have examined their effectiveness. The objective of this study was to evaluate smoking abstinence with standard nicotine patch (NRT), extended use of combined formulations of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT+), or varenicline (VR).

METHODS

A total of 737 smokers, including those with medical and psychiatric comorbidities, were randomly assigned to one of the above three treatment conditions. The NRT group received 10 weeks of patches (21 mg daily maximum); the NRT+ group received patches (35 mg daily maximum) and gum or inhaler for up to 22 weeks; and the VR group received 1 mg twice daily for up to 24 weeks (22 weeks post target quit date). All participants also received six standardized 15-minute smoking cessation counseling sessions by nurses experienced in tobacco dependence treatment. The primary outcome was carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rates (CAR) from weeks 5-52. Secondary outcomes were: CAR from weeks 5-10 and 5-22, and carbon monoxide-confirmed 7-day point prevalence (7PP) at weeks 10, 22, and 52. Adjusted and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat procedures.

RESULTS

The CARs for weeks 5-52 were 10.0 %, 12.4 %, and 15.3 % in the NRT, NRT+, and VR groups, respectively; no group differences were observed. Results with 7PP showed that VR was superior to NRT at week 52 (odds ratio (OR), 1.84; 97.5 % Confidence Interval (CI), 1.04-3.26) in the adjusted intention-to-treat analysis. Those in the VR group had higher CAR at weeks 5-22 (OR, 2.01; CI, 1.20-3.36) than those in the NRT group. Results with 7PP revealed that both NRT+ (OR, 1.72; CI, 1.04-2.85) and VR (OR, 1.96; CI, 1.20-3.23) were more effective than NRT at 22 weeks. As compared to NRT monotherapy, NRT+ and VR produced significant increases in CAR for weeks 5-10 (OR, 1.52; CI, 1.00-2.30 and OR, 1.58; CI, 1.04-2.39, respectively); results were similar, but somewhat stronger, when 7PP was used at 10 weeks (OR, 1.57; CI, 1.03-2.41 and OR, 1.79; CI, 1.17-2.73, respectively). All medications were well tolerated, but participants in the VR group experienced more fatigue, digestive symptoms (e.g., nausea, diarrhea), and sleep-related concerns (e.g., abnormal dreams, insomnia), but less dermatologic symptoms than those in the NRT or NRT+ groups. The frequency of serious adverse events did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Flexible and combination NRT and varenicline enhance success in the early phases of quitting. Varenicline improves abstinence in the medium term; however, there is no clear evidence that either varenicline or flexible, dual-form NRT increase quit rates in the long-term when compared to NRT monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01623505 ; Retrospectively registered on July 13, 2011.

Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist).

OBJECTIVES

To review the efficacy of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('cytisine' or 'Tabex' or 'dianicline' or 'varenicline' or 'nicotine receptor partial agonist') in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO using MeSH terms and free text to identify controlled trials of interventions for smoking cessation and prevention. We contacted authors of trial reports for additional information where necessary. The latest update of the specialised register was in May 2015, although we have included a few key trials published after this date. We also searched online clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials which compared the treatment drug with placebo. We also included comparisons with bupropion and nicotine patches where available. We excluded trials which did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from start of treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on the type of participants, the dose and duration of treatment, the outcome measures, the randomisation procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measured was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where they were reported. Where appropriate we pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials of cytisine (937 people) found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at longest follow-up, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 3.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.01 to 7.87; low-quality evidence). One recent trial comparing cytisine with NRT in 1310 people found a benefit for cytisine at six months (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80).One trial of dianicline (602 people) failed to find evidence that it was effective (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.75). This drug is no longer in development.We identified 39 trials that tested varenicline, 27 of which contributed to the primary analysis (varenicline versus placebo). Five of these trials also included a bupropion treatment arm. Eight trials compared varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Nine studies tested variations in varenicline dosage, and 13 tested usage in disease-specific subgroups of patients. The included studies covered 25,290 participants, 11,801 of whom used varenicline.The pooled RR for continuous or sustained abstinence at six months or longer for varenicline at standard dosage versus placebo was 2.24 (95% CI 2.06 to 2.43; 27 trials, 12,625 people; high-quality evidence). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.08 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1266 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at six months was 1.39 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.54; 5 trials, 5877 people; high-quality evidence). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.25 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; 8 trials, 6264 people; moderate-quality evidence). Four trials which tested the use of varenicline beyond the 12-week standard regimen found the drug to be well-tolerated during long-term use. The number needed to treat with varenicline for an additional beneficial outcome, based on the weighted mean control rate, is 11 (95% CI 9 to 13). The most commonly reported adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. Our analysis of reported serious adverse events occurring during or after active treatment suggests there may be a 25% increase in the chance of SAEs among people using varenicline (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.49; 29 trials, 15,370 people; high-quality evidence). These events include comorbidities such as infections, cancers and injuries, and most were considered by the trialists to be unrelated to the treatments. There is also evidence of higher losses to follow-up in the control groups compared with the intervention groups, leading to a likely underascertainment of the true rate of SAEs among the controls. Early concerns about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation led to the addition of a boxed warning to the labelling in 2008. However, subsequent observational cohort studies and meta-analyses have not confirmed these fears, and the findings of the EAGLES trial do not support a causal link between varenicline and neuropsychiatric disorders, including suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour. The evidence is not conclusive, however, in people with past or current psychiatric disorders. Concerns have also been raised that varenicline may slightly increase cardiovascular events in people already at increased risk of those illnesses. Current evidence neither supports nor refutes such an association, but we await the findings of the CATS trial, which should establish whether or not this is a valid concern.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cytisine increases the chances of quitting, although absolute quit rates were modest in two recent trials. Varenicline at standard dose increased the chances of successful long-term smoking cessation between two- and three-fold compared with pharmacologically unassisted quit attempts. Lower dose regimens also conferred benefits for cessation, while reducing the incidence of adverse events. More participants quit successfully with varenicline than with bupropion or with NRT. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The most frequently recorded adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Early reports of possible links to suicidal ideation and behaviour have not been confirmed by current research.Future trials of cytisine may test extended regimens and more intensive behavioural support.

Are Smoking Cessation Treatments Associated with Suicidality Risk? An Overview

Risk of suicidality during smoking cessation treatment is an important, but often overlooked, aspect of nicotine addiction research and treatment. We explore the relationship between smoking cessation interventions and suicidality and explore common treatments, their associated risks, and effectiveness in promoting smoking reduction and abstinence. Although active smokers have been reported to have twofold to threefold increased risk of suicidality when compared to nonsmokers,1–4 research regarding the safest way to stop smoking does not always provide clear guidelines for practitioners wishing to advise their patients regarding smoking cessation strategies. In this article, we review pharmacological and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) options that are available for people seeking to quit smoking, focusing on the relationship between the ability of these therapies to reduce smoking behavior and promote abstinence and suicidality risks as assessed by reported suicidality on validated measures, reports of suicidal ideation, behaviors, actual attempts, or completed suicides. Pharmacotherapies such as varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine replacement, and CBTs, including contextual CBT interventions, have been found to help reduce smoking rates and promote and maintain abstinence. Suicidality risks, while present when trying to quit smoking, do not appear to demonstrate a consistent or significant rise associated with use of any particular smoking cessation pharmacotherapy or CBT/contextual CBT intervention reviewed.

Varenicline for smoking cessation: a narrative review of efficacy, adverse effects, use in at-risk populations, and adherence

Treating tobacco dependence is the most effective way to reduce tobacco-related death and disability. Counseling and pharmacotherapy have been shown to increase tobacco abstinence rates among smokers. Varenicline is the most effective monotherapy treatment for tobacco dependence; however, it is prescribed less often than indicated, and adherence is less than optimal. We conducted a literature review of the development, efficacy, safety, contraindications, and adverse effects of varenicline; including reviewing data regarding combination therapy, extended duration, and patient adherence. Varenicline was developed to work specifically on the factors that underlie nicotine addiction. Phase II and Phase III trials established dosing, safety profiles, and efficacy. Postmarketing research raised concerns about neuropsychiatric and cardiac effects, resulting in warning labels being added and modified to encourage discussions with patients weighing the risks and benefits. While more research is needed, evidence is strong that varenicline is safe and effective in treating tobacco dependence among people who are at higher risk for neuropsychiatric symptoms and cardiovascular disease. The effectiveness of varenicline can be improved by taking it in combination with other medications, enhancing patient adherence and extending the duration of treatment.

Varenicline and Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Varenicline is an efficacious smoking‐cessation drug. However, previous meta‐analyses provide conflicting results regarding its cardiovascular safety. The publication of several new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provides an opportunity to reassess this potential adverse drug reaction.

Methods and Results

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs that compare varenicline with placebo for smoking cessation. RCTs reporting cardiovascular serious adverse events and/or all‐cause mortality during the treatment period or within 30 days of treatment discontinuation were eligible for inclusion. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs were generated by using DerSimonian–Laird random‐effects models. Thirty‐eight RCTs met our inclusion criteria (N=12 706). Events were rare in both varenicline (57/7213) and placebo (43/5493) arms. No difference was observed for cardiovascular serious adverse events when comparing varenicline with placebo (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.72–1.49). Similar findings were obtained when examining cardiovascular (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.57–1.89) and noncardiovascular patients (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.64–1.64). Deaths were rare in both varenicline (11/7213) and placebo (9/5493) arms. Although 95% CIs were wide, pooling of all‐cause mortality found no difference between groups (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.50–1.52), including when stratified by participants with (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.40–3.83) and without (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.40–1.48) cardiovascular disease.

Conclusions

We found no evidence that varenicline increases the rate of cardiovascular serious adverse events. Results were similar among those with and without cardiovascular disease. Given varenicline's efficacy as a smoking cessation drug and the long‐term cardiovascular benefits of cessation, it should continue to be prescribed for smoking cessation.

Exploring Issues of Comorbid Conditions in People Who Smoke

Smoking affects comorbid disease outcomes, and patients with comorbid conditions may have unique characteristics that are important to consider when treating tobacco use. However, addressing tobacco in patients being treated for comorbid conditions is not a consistent practice. Recognizing the need for a "call-to-action" to address tobacco use in people with comorbid conditions, the Tobacco Treatment Network within the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) convened a Comorbidities Workgroup to explore the relationship between smoking and comorbid disease to identify common themes including: the harms associated with continued tobacco use, the frequency of comorbid disease and tobacco use, the potential effect of comorbid disease on the ability to quit tobacco use, the association between tobacco use and suboptimal disease-specific treatment response, and evidence regarding potential approaches to improve addressing tobacco use in patients with comorbid disease. Five candidate conditions (psychiatric, cancer, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and human immunodeficiency virus infected patients) were explored. Across comorbid conditions, smoking adversely affects treatment efficacy and promotes other adverse health conditions. People with comorbid conditions who smoke are motivated to quit and respond to evidence-based smoking cessation treatments. However, tobacco cessation is not regularly incorporated into the clinical care of many individuals with comorbidities. Optimal strategies for addressing tobacco use within each comorbid disease are also not well defined. Further work is needed to disseminate evidence-based care into clinical practice for smokers with comorbid disease and addiction research should consider comorbid conditions as an important construct to explore.

IMPLICATIONS

This article explores how physical and psychiatric conditions may interact in the treatment of tobacco dependence, and discusses the need for smoking cessation as a critical component of comorbid condition management. Five common comorbid domains-psychiatric, cancer, pulmonary, cardiovascular, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-are highlighted to illustrate how these different conditions might interact with smoking with respect to prevalence and harm, motivation to quit, and cessation treatment utilization and success.

Varenicline for Smoking Cessation in Hospitalized Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background—

Less than one-third of smokers hospitalized with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain abstinent following discharge. We assessed whether varenicline, begun in-hospital, is efficacious for smoking cessation following ACS.

Methods and Results—

We conducted a multi-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in which smokers hospitalized with an ACS were randomized to varenicline or placebo for 12 weeks. All patients received low-intensity counseling. The primary end point was point-prevalence smoking abstinence assessed at 24 weeks by 7-day recall and biochemical validation using expired carbon monoxide. A total of 302 patients were randomized (mean age 55±9 years; 75% male; 56% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 38% non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 6% unstable angina). Patients smoked a mean of 21±11 cigarettes/d at the time of hospitalization and had been smoking for a mean of 36±12 years. At 24 weeks, patients randomized to varenicline had significantly higher rates of smoking abstinence and reduction than patients randomized to placebo. Point-prevalence abstinence rates were 47.3% in the varenicline group and 32.5% in the placebo group ( P =0.012; number needed to treat=6.8). Continuous abstinence rates were 35.8% and 25.8%, respectively ( P =0.081; number needed to treat=10.0), and rates of reduction ≥50% in daily cigarette consumption were 67.4% and 55.6%, respectively ( P =0.05; number needed to treat=8.5). Adverse event rates within 30 days of study drug discontinuation were similar between groups (serious adverse events: varenicline 11.9%, placebo 11.3%; major adverse cardiovascular events: varenicline 4.0%, placebo 4.6%).

Conclusions—

Varenicline, initiated in-hospital following ACS, is efficacious for smoking cessation. Future studies are needed to establish safety in these patients.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00794573.

Influence of smoking cessation drugs on blood pressure and heart rate in patients with cardiovascular disease or high risk score: real life setting

Background

Smoking is the most important reversible cardiovascular risk factor. It is well established that quitting smoking reduces coronary events. However, on several occasions, the cardiovascular safety of smoking cessation drugs has been questioned. Our goal is to evaluate the effects of smoking cessation drugs on blood pressure and heart rate in patients from a smoking cessation service in a cardiology hospital.

Methods

We examined the PAF database (Smoking Cessation Assistance Program database) between January 2008 and March 2014. We analyzed data from 900 patients who were compliant with the treatment (50.5 % male, average age 53 ± 17 years). The most frequent clinical diagnoses were coronary artery disease (25.2 %), hypertension (57.2 %), and diabetes (13.4 %). Blood pressure, heart rate, and carbon monoxide (CO) concentration in exhaled air were analyzed at consecutive visits during the first 45 days of treatment (mean visits - 3). Analysis of repeated measures was used for the statistical analysis (p < 0.05).

Results

Two hundred seventy one patients used nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) alone, 81 used bupropion alone, 154 used varenicline alone, 283 used NRT plus bupropion and 111 used bupropion plus varenicline. For all smoking cessation drugs, used alone or in combination, no increase occurred in the average value of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR). Significant reductions in CO concentrations occurred in all smoking cessation drug groups.

Conclusion

Smoking cessation drugs used in monotherapy or in combined regimens did not influence systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR) in this group of patients during the observation period.

What are the effects of varenicline compared with nicotine replacement therapy on long-term smoking cessation and clinically important outcomes? Protocol for a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is a major avoidable cause of ill-health and premature death. Treatments that help patients successfully quit smoking have an important effect on health and life expectancy. Varenicline is a medication that can help smokers successfully quit smoking. However, there are concerns that it may cause adverse effects, such as increase in the occurrence of depression, self-harm and suicide and cardiovascular disease. In this study we aim to examine the effects of varenicline versus other smoking cessation pharmacotherapies on smoking cessation, health service use, all-cause and cause-specific mortality and physical and mental health conditions.

METHODS

In this project we will investigate the effects of varenicline compared to nicotine replacement therapies on: (1) long-term smoking cessation and whether these effects differ by area level deprivation; and (2) the following clinically-important outcomes: rate of general practice and hospital attendance; all-cause mortality and death due to diseases of the respiratory system and cardiovascular disease; and a primary care diagnosis of respiratory illness, myocardial infarction or depression and anxiety. The study is based on a cohort of patients prescribed these smoking cessation medications from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). We will use three methods to overcome confounding: multivariable adjusted Cox regression, propensity score matched Cox regression, and instrumental variable regression. The total expected sample size for analysis will be at least 180,000. Follow-up will end with the earliest of either an 'event' or censoring due to the end of registration or death.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was not required for this study. This project has been approved by the CPRD's Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC). We will disseminate our findings via publications in international peer-reviewed journals and presentations at international conferences.

Development of interspecific Solanum lycopersicum and screening for Tospovirus resistance

Tospovirus has emerged as a serious viral pathogen for several crops including tomato. The tomato production is being severely affected worldwide by Tospovirus. Some reports have been published about the association of plant virus and development of human disease either by direct or indirect consumption. Resistance to this virus has been identified as good source in wild tomato species (Lycopersicum peruvianum). But the introgression of resistance genes into cultivated tomato lines and the development of interspecific hybrid are hampered due to incompatibility, fertilization barriers and embryo abortion. But this barrier has been broken by applying the embryo rescue methods. This study describes the development of interspecific hybrid tomato plants by highly efficient embryo rescue method and screening for Tospovirus resistance. The interspecific hybrid tomato plants were developed by making a cross between wild tomato species (L. peruvianum) and cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). The immature embryos were cultured in standardized medium and interspecific hybrids were developed from embryogenic callus. The immature embryos excised from 7 to 35 days old fruits were used for embryo rescue and 31 days old embryos showed very good germination capabilities and produced the highest number of plants. Developed plants were hardened enough and shifted to green house. The hybrid nature of interspecific plants was further confirmed by comparing the morphological characters from their parents. The F1, F2 and F3 plants were found to have varying characters especially for leaf type, color of stem, fruits, size, shapes and they were further screened for virus resistance both in lab and open field followed by Enzyme linked Immunosorbant Assay confirmation. Finally, a total of 11 resistant plants were selected bearing red color fruits with desired shape and size.

Evaluation of the cardiovascular effects of varenicline in rats

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is an important cause of morbidity and mortality among tobacco users. Varenicline is widely used worldwide to help smoking cessation, but some published studies have reported associated cardiovascular events.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cardiovascular toxicity induced by varenicline in rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We randomly separated 34 rats into two groups: 1) the control group (given only distilled water orally, n=10) and the varenicline group (given 9 μg/kg/day varenicline on days 1-3, 9 μg/kg twice daily on days 4-7, and 18 μg/kg twice daily on days 8-90 [total 83 days], n=24). Each group was then subdivided equally into acute and chronic subgroups, and all rats in these groups were euthanized with anesthesia overdose on days 45 and 90, respectively. Body and heart weights, hemodynamic (mean oxygen saturation, mean blood pressure, and heart rate, electrocardiographic (PR, QRS, and QT intervals) biochemical (oxidants and antioxidants), and histopathological analyses (including immunostaining) were performed.

RESULTS

Acute varenicline exposure resulted in loss of body weight, while chronic varenicline exposure caused heart weight loss and decreased mean blood pressure, induced lipid peroxidation, and reduced antioxidant activity. Both acute and chronic varenicline exposure caused impairment of mean oxygen saturation. QT interval was prolonged in the chronic varenicline group, while PR interval prolongation was statistically significant in both the control and acute varenicline groups. Caspase-9 activity was also significantly increased by chronic exposure. Moreover, histopathological observations revealed severe morphological heart damage in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Adverse effects of chronic varenicline exposure on cardiovascular tissue were confirmed by our electrocardiographic, biochemical, and histopathological analyses. This issue needs to be investigated with new experimental and clinical studies to evaluate the exact mechanism(s) of the detrimental effects of varenicline. Physicians should bear in mind the toxic effects of varenicline on the cardiovascular system when prescribing it for smoking cessation.

Behavioral Counseling and Pharmacotherapy Interventions for Tobacco Cessation in Adults, Including Pregnant Women: A Review of Reviews for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States.

PURPOSE

To review the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy and behavioral interventions for tobacco cessation.

DATA SOURCES

5 databases and 8 organizational Web sites were searched through 1 August 2014 for systematic reviews, and PubMed was searched through 1 March 2015 for trials on electronic nicotine delivery systems.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers examined 114 articles to identify English-language reviews that reported health, cessation, or adverse outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

One reviewer abstracted data from good- and fair-quality reviews, and a second checked for accuracy.

DATA SYNTHESIS

54 reviews were included. Behavioral interventions increased smoking cessation at 6 months or more (physician advice had a pooled risk ratio [RR] of 1.76 [95% CI, 1.58 to 1.96]). Nicotine replacement therapy (RR, 1.60 [CI, 1.53 to 1.68]), bupropion (RR, 1.62 [CI, 1.49 to 1.76]), and varenicline (RR, 2.27 [CI, 2.02 to 2.55]) were also effective for smoking cessation. Combined behavioral and pharmacotherapy interventions increased cessation by 82% compared with minimal intervention or usual care (RR, 1.82 [CI, 1.66 to 2.00]). None of the drugs were associated with major cardiovascular adverse events. Only 2 trials addressed efficacy of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation and found no benefit. Among pregnant women, behavioral interventions benefited cessation and perinatal health; effects of nicotine replacement therapy were not significant.

LIMITATION

Evidence published after each review's last search date was not included.

CONCLUSION

Behavioral and pharmacotherapy interventions improve rates of smoking cessation among the general adult population, alone or in combination. Data on the effectiveness and safety of electronic nicotine delivery systems are limited.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

A randomized controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation after acute coronary syndrome: design and methods of the Evaluation of Varenicline in Smoking Cessation for Patients Post-Acute Coronary Syndrome trial

Patients who continue to smoke after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have a significantly increased risk of reinfarction and death compared with those who quit. Varenicline is a first-line smoking cessation therapy with proven efficacy in the general population. However, its efficacy and safety immediately after an ACS are unknown.

METHODS

The EVITA trial is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (NCT00794573). The primary objective is to evaluate the efficacy of varenicline after ACS in achieving biochemically validated smoking abstinence at 24 weeks. The secondary objectives are to examine the efficacy of varenicline for smoking abstinence and reduction in daily cigarette consumption at 52 weeks and to describe the occurrence of adverse events. Three hundred and two patients motivated to quit smoking were enrolled in the United States and Canada from November 2009 to December 2014 while hospitalized with an ACS. These participants were randomized (1:1) to either varenicline (1.0 mg twice daily) or placebo for 12 weeks. The trial includes follow-ups by telephone at weeks 1, 2, and 8 and clinic visits at weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52. Data collected include demographic and clinical characteristics, self-reported smoking, exhaled carbon monoxide (an indicator of current smoking), and adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The EVITA trial will provide novel information concerning the efficacy and safety of varenicline immediately after ACS. If varenicline is efficacious in this population, it will have a major impact on secondary prevention of recurrent clinical events in patients post-ACS.

Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric risks of varenicline: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Varenicline is an effective pharmacotherapy to aid smoking cessation. However, its use is limited by continuing concerns about possible associated risks of serious adverse cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events. The aim of this study was to investigate whether use of varenicline is associated with such events.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from patients included in the validated QResearch database, which holds data from 753 National Health Service general practices across England. We identified patients aged 18–100 years (registered for longer than 12 months before data extraction) who received a prescription of nicotine replacement treatment (NRT; reference group), bupropion, or varenicline. We excluded patients if they had used one of the drugs during the 12 months before the start date of the study, had received a prescription of a combination of these drugs during the follow-up period, or were temporary residents. We followed patients up for 6 months to compare incident cardiovascular (ischaemic heart disease, cerebral infarction, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and cardiac arrhythmia) and neuropsychiatric (depression and self-harm) events using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for potential confounders (primary outcomes).

Findings

We identified 164 766 patients who received a prescription (106 759 for nicotine replacement treatment; 6557 for bupropion; 51 450 for varenicline) between Jan 1, 2007, and June 30, 2012. Neither bupropion nor varenicline showed an increased risk of any cardiovascular or neuropsychiatric event compared with NRT (all hazard ratios [HRs] less than 1. Varenicline was associated with a significantly reduced risk of ischaemic heart disease (HR 0·80 [95%CI 0·72–0·87]), cerebral infarction (0·62 [0·52–0·73]), heart failure (0·61 [0·45–0·83]), arrhythmia (0·73 [0·60–0·88]), depression (0·66 [0·63–0·69]), and self-harm (0·56 [0·46–0·68]).

Interpretation

Varenicline does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of documented cardiovascular events, depression, or self-harm when compared with NRT. Adverse events that do not come to attention of general practitioners cannot be excluded. These findings suggest an opportunity for physicians to prescribe varenicline more broadly, even for patients with comorbidities, thereby helping more smokers to quit successfully than do at present.

Funding

Egton Medical Information Systems, University of Nottingham, Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the German Federal State of North Rhine-Westphalia, Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Commonwealth Fund.

Health-care interventions to promote and assist tobacco cessation: a review of efficacy, effectiveness and affordability for use in national guideline development

AIMS

This paper provides a concise review of the efficacy, effectiveness and affordability of health-care interventions to promote and assist tobacco cessation, in order to inform national guideline development and assist countries in planning their provision of tobacco cessation support.

METHODS

Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of major health-care tobacco cessation interventions were used to derive efficacy estimates in terms of percentage-point increases relative to comparison conditions in 6-12-month continuous abstinence rates. This was combined with analysis and evidence from 'real world' studies to form a judgement on the probable effectiveness of each intervention in different settings. The affordability of each intervention was assessed for exemplar countries in each World Bank income category (low, lower middle, upper middle, high). Based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, an intervention was judged as affordable for a given income category if the estimated extra cost of saving a life-year was less than or equal to the per-capita gross domestic product for that category of country.

RESULTS

Brief advice from a health-care worker given opportunistically to smokers attending health-care services can promote smoking cessation, and is affordable for countries in all World Bank income categories (i.e. globally). Proactive telephone support, automated text messaging programmes and printed self-help materials can assist smokers wanting help with a quit attempt and are affordable globally. Multi-session, face-to-face behavioural support can increase quit success for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco and is affordable in middle- and high-income countries. Nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, nortriptyline, varenicline and cytisine can all aid quitting smoking when given with at least some behavioural support; of these, cytisine and nortriptyline are affordable globally.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief advice from a health-care worker, telephone helplines, automated text messaging, printed self-help materials, cytisine and nortriptyline are globally affordable health-care interventions to promote and assist smoking cessation. Evidence on smokeless tobacco cessation suggests that face-to-face behavioural support and varenicline can promote cessation.

The Past, Present, and Future of Nicotine Addiction Therapy

The tobacco addiction treatment field is progressing through innovations in medication development, a focus on precision medicine, and application of new technologies for delivering support in real time and over time. This article reviews the evidence for combined and extended cessation pharmacotherapy and behavioral strategies including provider advice, individual counseling, group programs, the national quitline, websites and social media, and incentives. Healthcare policies are changing to offer cessation treatment to the broad population of smokers. With knowledge of the past and present, this review anticipates what is likely on the horizon in the clinical and public health effort to address tobacco addiction.

Big biomedical data and cardiovascular disease research: opportunities and challenges

Electronic health records (EHRs), data generated and collected during normal clinical care, are increasingly being linked and used for translational cardiovascular disease research. Electronic health record data can be structured (e.g. coded diagnoses) or unstructured (e.g. clinical notes) and increasingly encapsulate medical imaging, genomic and patient-generated information. Large-scale EHR linkages enable researchers to conduct high-resolution observational and interventional clinical research at an unprecedented scale. A significant amount of preparatory work and research, however, is required to identify, obtain, and transform raw EHR data into research-ready variables that can be statistically analysed. This study critically reviews the opportunities and challenges that EHR data present in the field of cardiovascular disease clinical research and provides a series of recommendations for advancing and facilitating EHR research.

Smoking cessation in Asians: focus on varenicline

Smoking is a modifiable risk factor for morbidity and mortality caused by cancer, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, and many other diseases. Given the large population size and high prevalence of smoking in Asia, successful smoking cessation could potentially prevent the large number of premature deaths in Asians. However, most dependent smokers cannot successfully quit smoking due to nicotine addiction, and they need professional help and smoking cessation therapies. Varenicline is a highly selective partial agonist for the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor α4β2 subtype, which is believed to be responsible for mediating the reinforcing properties of nicotine. This article is a narrative review, which summarizes the smoking cessation efficacy, side effects, and cost utilities of varenicline in Asians. From this review, we conclude that varenicline is an effective medication that could assist smoking cessation in the Asian populations. The adverse events of varenicline are tolerable, and the most common events were nausea and abnormal dreams. Both the efficacy and tolerance of varenicline in Asians are similar to that in Western populations. Considering the cost utilities, varenicline should be recommended for use in smoking cessation and be covered by medical insurance in most Asian countries.

Selection of optimal tobacco cessation medication treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is responsible for almost half a million deaths per year in the United States, and it accounts for one-third of all cancer deaths. Limited data concerning tobacco treatment among patients with cancer are available. In addition, these patients often have complicated medical histories and are taking multiple medications. No clear, published procedures exist to help the healthcare provider select the proper medication for tobacco cessation in that context.

OBJECTIVES

This article describes the screening process established within the Tobacco Treatment Program (TTP) at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center to minimize the risk of prescribing a contraindicated tobacco cessation medication to patients with cancer. The screening process developed and used by the TTP is presented as a viable model for selecting appropriate tobacco cessation medications for patients with cancer.

METHODS

The electronic medical record of each patient who uses tobacco is carefully reviewed once he or she is scheduled for a consultation. A summary is produced with a standardized template and used later as a template for the medical provider evaluation. Precautions are put in place with consideration of the characteristics of each of the tobacco cessation medications (e.g., mechanism of action, route of administration, interactions with other medications, possible side effects, contraindications). Since 2006, the TTP has had more than 4,000 new patients and more than 39,000 follow-up visits.

FINDINGS

Because each patient with cancer has unique medical, psychological, and social circumstances, the process of selecting the optimal tobacco cessation medication needs to be individualized. Oncology healthcare providers should follow some form of screening to tailor a medication plan to each patient.

Cardiovascular Safety Outcome Trials: A meeting report from the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium

This White Paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions at a Cardiovascular Safety Outcome Trials Think Tank cosponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the American College of Cardiology, held at American College of Cardiology's Heart House, Washington, DC, on February 19, 2014. Studies to assess cardiovascular (CV) risk of a new drug are sometimes requested by regulators to resolve ambiguous safety signals seen during its development or among other members of its class. Think Tank participants thought that important considerations in undertaking such studies were as follows: (1) plausibility-how likely it is that a possible signal indicating risk is real, based on strength of evidence, and/or whether a plausible mechanism of action for potential CV harm has been identified; (2) relevance-what relative and absolute CV risk would need to be excluded to determine that the drug had an acceptable benefit-to-risk balance for its use in the intended patient population; and (3) how plausibility and relevance influence the timing and approach to further safety assessment.

Risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with varenicline: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with use of varenicline compared with placebo in randomised controlled trials.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing study effects using two summary estimates in fixed effects models, risk differences, and Peto odds ratios.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and clinicaltrials.gov.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials with a placebo comparison group that reported on neuropsychiatric adverse events (depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempt, suicide, insomnia, sleep disorders, abnormal dreams, somnolence, fatigue, anxiety) and death. Studies that did not involve human participants, did not use the maximum recommended dose of varenicline (1 mg twice daily), and were cross over trials were excluded.

RESULTS

In the 39 randomised controlled trials (10,761 participants), there was no evidence of an increased risk of suicide or attempted suicide (odds ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 8.57), suicidal ideation (0.58, 0.28 to 1.20), depression (0.96, 0.75 to 1.22), irritability (0.98, 0.81 to 1.17), aggression (0.91, 0.52 to 1.59), or death (1.05, 0.47 to 2.38) in the varenicline users compared with placebo users. Varenicline was associated with an increased risk of sleep disorders (1.63, 1.29 to 2.07), insomnia (1.56, 1.36 to 1.78), abnormal dreams (2.38, 2.05 to 2.77), and fatigue (1.28, 1.06 to 1.55) but a reduced risk of anxiety (0.75, 0.61 to 0.93). Similar findings were observed when risk differences were reported. There was no evidence for a variation in depression and suicidal ideation by age group, sex, ethnicity, smoking status, presence or absence of psychiatric illness, and type of study sponsor (that is, pharmaceutical industry or other).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found no evidence of an increased risk of suicide or attempted suicide, suicidal ideation, depression, or death with varenicline. These findings provide some reassurance for users and prescribers regarding the neuropsychiatric safety of varenicline. There was evidence that varenicline was associated with a higher risk of sleep problems such as insomnia and abnormal dreams. These side effects, however, are already well recognised.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014009224.

Extended varenicline treatment in a severe cardiopathic cigarette smoker: a case report

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and quitting tobacco use should be fundamental for cardiovascular patients. Varenicline is a smoking cessation pharmacological therapy able to improve the possibilities to successfully achieve this result. In 2011 the US Food and Drug Administration issued a safety announcement that varenicline may be associated with an increased risk of certain cardiovascular adverse events in patients who have cardiovascular disease. Following studies found no significant increase in cardiovascular serious adverse events associated with varenicline. For the first time in the literature, we describe the case of a cardiopathic hard smoker who received varenicline for 9 months without any side effect. By describing this case we want to underline the safety of varenicline, to illustrate the setting and the method that we used to support him and to underline the importance of promoting smoking cessation in heart patients.

CASE PRESENTATION

Varenicline was used to promote smoking cessation in a 52-year-old Caucasian man who smoked 40 cigarettes per day, despite two ischemic cardiovascular events. He asked for a consultation in a pharmacy's smoking cessation service and after the assessment phase varenicline was prescribed. Due to his difficulty to quit smoking and given his good tolerance of the drug, we extended the treatment with varenicline to 9 months in order to achieve and maintain a complete smoking abstinence; intensive behavioural counselling was combined with the pharmacological therapy. By using exhaled carbon monoxide measurement we assessed smoking abstinence up to 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of varenicline for a period longer than 6 months has not been described in the literature, particularly in heart patients. The extended varenicline therapy was clinically monitored and allowed the patient to consolidate his abstinence; the intensive behavioural counselling helped him to overcome his strong psychological dependence. Promoting smoking cessation in people who have cardiovascular disease is crucial. Currently available medications, such as varenicline, increase the chances of success and the risk of possible side effects is outweighed by the lifetime benefits and we hope that clinicians use them more frequently and confidently.

Figure-associated text summarization and evaluation

Biomedical literature incorporates millions of figures, which are a rich and important knowledge resource for biomedical researchers. Scientists need access to the figures and the knowledge they represent in order to validate research findings and to generate new hypotheses. By themselves, these figures are nearly always incomprehensible to both humans and machines and their associated texts are therefore essential for full comprehension. The associated text of a figure, however, is scattered throughout its full-text article and contains redundant information content. In this paper, we report the continued development and evaluation of several figure summarization systems, the FigSum+ systems, that automatically identify associated texts, remove redundant information, and generate a text summary for every figure in an article. Using a set of 94 annotated figures selected from 19 different journals, we conducted an intrinsic evaluation of FigSum+. We evaluate the performance by precision, recall, F1, and ROUGE scores. The best FigSum+ system is based on an unsupervised method, achieving F1 score of 0.66 and ROUGE-1 score of 0.97. The annotated data is available at figshare.com (http://figshare.com/articles/Figure_Associated_Text_Summarization_and_Evaluation/858903).

Use of stop-smoking medications in the United States before and after the introduction of varenicline

AIMS

To evaluate trends in use of stop-smoking medications (SSMs) before and after varenicline (Chantix™) was introduced to the market-place in the United States, and to determine whether varenicline reached segments of the population unlikely to use other SSMs.

DESIGN

Cohort survey.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A nationally representative sample of adult smokers in the United States interviewed as part of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey between 2004 and 2011. Primary analyses used cross-sectional data from 1737 smokers who attempted to quit (∼450 per wave).

MEASUREMENTS

Reporting an attempt to quit smoking; use of each of the following types of SSMs for the purpose of quitting smoking: nicotine gum, nicotine patch, other nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion and varenicline.

FINDINGS

There was a significant increase in the rate of use of any SSM among quit attempters across the study period [odds ratio (OR) = 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.10-1.21 per year]. This increase was largest after varenicline was introduced (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.07-1.26 per year); however, there was a decline in nicotine patch use during this time (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76-0.99 per year). Varenicline users were generally similar to users of other SSMs but differed from those who did not use any SSMs, in that they tended to be older (OR = 5.46, P = 0.024), to be white (OR = 2.33, P = 0.002), to have high incomes (OR = 1.85, P = 0.005), to have high nicotine dependence prior to quitting (OR = 2.40, P = 0.001) and to have used medication in the past (OR = 3.29, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of varenicline in the United States coincided with a net increase in attempts to quit smoking and, among these, a net increase in use of stop-smoking medications. The demographic profile of varenicline users is similar to the profile of those who use other stop-smoking medications and different from the profile of those who attempt to quit without any medication.

Methodological issues in observational studies and non-randomized controlled trials in oncology in the era of big data

Non-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and database studies are appealing study designs when there are urgent needs for safety data, outcomes of interest are rare, generalizability is a matter of concern, or randomization is not feasible. This paper reviews four typical case studies from methodological viewpoints and clarifies how to minimize bias in observational studies in oncology. In summary, researchers planning observational studies should be cautious of selection of appropriate databases, validity of algorithms for identifying outcomes, comparison with incident users or self-control, rigorous collection of information on potential confounders and reporting details of subject selection. Further, a careful study protocol and statistical analysis plan are also necessary.

Cardiovascular adverse events associated with smoking-cessation pharmacotherapies

Smoking continues to be the leading cause of preventable deaths in the USA, accounting for one in every five deaths every year, and cardiovascular (CV) disease remains the leading cause of those deaths. Hence, there is increasing awareness to quit smoking among the public and counseling plays an important role in smoking cessation. There are different pharmacological methods to help quit smoking that includes nicotine replacement products available over the counter, including patch, gum, and lozenges, to prescription medications, such as bupropion and varenicline. There have been reports of both nonserious and serious adverse CV events associated with the use of these different pharmacological methods, especially varenicline, which has been gaining media attention recently. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the various pharmacotherapies used in smoking cessation and analyzed the evidence behind these CV events reported with these therapeutic agents.

"Tobacco dependence treatment makes no sense because"…: rebuttal of commonly-heard arguments against providing tobacco dependence treatment in the hospital setting

BACKGROUND

The provision of tobacco dependence treatment in health care settings, particularly in countries lacking a history of strong tobacco control policy implementation, is limited by continued misconceptions on the part of health professionals and decision-makers regarding its worth and efficacy. In this paper, we rebut 9 arguments against the provision of tobacco dependence treatment that we have encountered in our experiences implementing and maintaining a dedicated smoking cessation service at a large university hospital in southern Germany.

DISCUSSION

Broadly, the arguments relate to the nature of addiction, the efficacy and safety of stop-smoking medication and behavioural support, and the benefits and challenges of quitting. They include: (a) If smokers really want to quit, they will be able to do it alone (without help); (b) You can't forbid patients from doing what they want; (c) Patients will be upset if you talk to them about their smoking; (d) Stop-smoking medication has side effects that are more dangerous than smoking; (e) You have to be well trained to help smokers to quit (otherwise you can do more harm than good); (f) If you smoke yourself, you lack credibility; (g) If you have cancer, it is too late to quit; (h) Nicotine withdrawal is dangerous for heavy smokers; and (i) Smokers die earlier, thus reducing costs to the health system.

SUMMARY

It is hoped that the counter-arguments presented here arm tobacco control advocates and practitioners working in health care settings, particularly in countries which have not prioritised tobacco control, to respond appropriately and convincingly to those opposed to the provision of tobacco dependence treatment.

Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric safety of varenicline and bupropion compared with nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: study protocol of a retrospective cohort study using the QResearch general practice database

INTRODUCTION

Cigarette smoking continues to be the leading cause of preventable death and is the main risk factor of major diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The best treatment to help smokers quit is a combination of behavioural support with pharmacotherapy. Varenicline is the newest drug on the market and has been shown to be effective in the general smoking population and in smokers with COPD. The safety profile of varenicline was initially established using standard approaches to pharmacovigilance, but postmarketing reports have raised concerns about a possible association between the use of varenicline and cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events. Although recent studies have not confirmed such an association, further research is needed given the large number of smokers who are being prescribed varenicline, including important subgroups such as smokers with COPD who may be particularly vulnerable to side effects of drugs. The aim of this study is to assess the cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric safety of varenicline using data from the QResearch general practice (GP) database.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a retrospective cohort study in the QResearch GP database. Patients will be categorised into three exposure groups: prescription of (1) varenicline, (2) bupropion or (3) nicotine replacement therapy (NRT Rx; =reference group). We will separately consider major incident neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular outcomes that occur during 6 months of follow-up using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for confounders. Furthermore, propensity score analysis will be used as an analytical approach to account for potential confounding by indication.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This work involves analysis of anonymised, routinely collected data. The protocol has been independently peer-reviewed by the QResearch Scientific Board and meets the requirements of the Trent research ethics committee. We plan to disseminate the results from this study via articles in international peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant national and international health conferences.

Varenicline and cardiovascular adverse events: a perspective review

Smoking is a leading preventable cause of mortality and morbidity. Varenicline, a first-line smoking cessation aid, is used widely to achieve successful quit rates in smokers. A number of studies and systematic reviews have evaluated the safety profile of the drug. To date, three systematic reviews by Singh and colleagues, Prochaska and Hilton, and Ware and colleagues, published between 2011 and 2013, have evaluated serious cardiovascular adverse events with varenicline use. Even though all three reviews demonstrated that serious cardiovascular adverse events were nominally more frequent in varenicline-treated patients when compared with placebo, a significantly increased event rate was found only in the review by Singh and colleagues. The three reviews included similar trials but differed in the evaluation of outcomes and performance of summary statistic computation. Though the evidence from the two most recent systematic reviews demonstrated that risk of serious cardiovascular events might not be increased with varenicline use, the US Food and Drug Administration has advised prescription with caution combined with close monitoring and education of patients until more conclusive evidence is available. Results of these reviews cannot be generalized to patients with unstable cardiac conditions.

Safety of varenicline tartrate and counseling versus counseling alone for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial for inpatients (STOP study)

INTRODUCTION

Inpatient medical settings offer an opportunistic environment for initiating smoking cessation interventions to patients reflecting on their health. Current evidence has shown the superior efficacy of varenicline tartrate (VT) for smoking cessation compared with other tobacco cessation therapies; however, recent evidence also has highlighted concerns about the safety and tolerability of VT. Given these apprehensions, we aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of VT plus quitline-counseling compared to quitline-counseling alone in the inpatient medical setting.

METHODS

Adult patients (n = 392, 20-75 years) admitted with a smoking-related illnesses to 3 hospitals were randomized to receive either 12 weeks of varenicline tartrate (titrated from 0.5mg daily to 1mg twice daily) plus quitline-counseling (VT+C), (n = 196) or quitline-counseling alone (n = 196).

RESULTS

VT was well tolerated in the inpatient setting among subjects admitted with acute smoking-related illnesses (mean age 52.8±2.89 and 53.7±2.77 years in the VT+C and counseling alone groups, respectively). The most common self-reported adverse event during the 12-week treatment phase was nausea (16.3% in the VT+C group compared with 1.5% in the counseling alone group). Thirteen deaths occurred during the study period (n = 6 were in the VT+C arm compared with n = 7 in the counseling alone arm). All of these subjects had known comorbidities or developed underlying comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

VT appears to be a safe and well-tolerated opportunistic treatment for inpatient smokers who have related chronic disease. Based on the proven efficacy of varenicline from outpatient studies and our recent inpatient evidence, we suggest it be considered as part of standard care in the hospital setting.

Flexible and extended dosing of nicotine replacement therapy or varenicline in comparison to fixed dose nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: rationale, methods and participant characteristics of the FLEX trial

Quitting smoking is the single most effective strategy to reduce morbidity and premature mortality in smokers. Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy in smoking cessation, but few studies have directly compared varenicline and monotherapy nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and none have examined varenicline and combinations of NRT products. The majority of smoking cessation trials involve carefully circumscribed populations, making their results less generalizable to those with severe medical conditions or psychiatric comorbidities. This paper reports on the rationale, methodology and participant characteristics of a randomized controlled trial designed to: (1) determine which pharmacotherapy - NRT, long term combinations of NRT, or varenicline - is most effective in achieving abstinence; (2) investigate the incidence of neuropsychiatric symptoms among participants over the course of their quit attempt; and (3) assess whether there is a significant difference in the incidence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in those receiving differing pharmacotherapies, and between those with and without psychiatric illnesses. The primary outcome was carbon monoxide confirmed abstinence from weeks 5-52 following a target quit date. Secondary outcomes included neuropsychiatric (i.e., depression, suicidal ideation, anxiety, anger) and withdrawal symptoms. Smokers (N=737) were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions, and were scheduled to attend 8 follow-up appointments over 12 months. All participants received 6-15 minute practical counseling sessions with nurse counselors experienced in treating tobacco dependence. We expect that the results will lead to an enhanced understanding of the efficacy of these pharmacotherapies, including those with a history of psychiatric illness.

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.

Pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation: pharmacological principles and clinical practice

Strategies for assisting smoking cessation include behavioural counselling to enhance motivation and to support attempts to quit and pharmacological intervention to reduce nicotine reinforcement and withdrawal from nicotine. Three drugs are currently used as first line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion and varenicline. Compared with placebo, the drug effect varies from 2.27 (95% CI 2.02, 2.55) for varenicline, 1.69 (95% CI 1.53, 1.85) for bupropion and 1.60 (95% CI 1.53, 1.68) for any form of nicotine replacement therapy. Despite some controversy regarding the safety of bupropion and varenicline, regulatory agencies consider these drugs as having a favourable benefit/risk profile. However, given the high rate of psychiatric comorbidity in dependent smokers, practitioners should closely monitor patients for neuropsychiatric symptoms. Second-line pharmacotherapies include nortriptyline and clonidine. This review also offers an overview of pipeline developments and issues related to smoking cessation in special populations such as persons with psychiatric comorbidity and pregnant and adolescent smokers.

EPA Guidance on Tobacco Dependence and Strategies for Smoking Cessation in People with Mental Illness

Tobacco dependence is the most common substance use disorder in adults with mental illness. The prevalence rates for tobacco dependence are two to four times higher in these patients than in the general population. Smoking has a strong, negative influence on the life expectancy and quality of life of mental health patients, and remains the leading preventable cause of death in this group. Despite these statistics, in some countries smokers with mental illness are disadvantaged in receiving intervention and support for their tobacco dependence, which is often overlooked or even tolerated. This statement from the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) systematically reviews the current evidence on tobacco dependence and withdrawal in patients with mental illness and their treatment. It provides seven recommendations for the core components of diagnostics and treatment in this patient group. These recommendations concern: (1) the recording process, (2) the timing of the intervention, (3) counselling specificities, (4) proposed treatments, (5) frequency of contact after stopping, (6) follow-up visits and (7) relapse prevention. They aim to help clinicians improve the care, health and well-being of patients suffering from mental illness.

Functional interactions of varenicline and nicotine with nAChR subtypes implicated in cardiovascular control

INTRODUCTION

It has been suggested that varenicline-induced activation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) could play a role in the cardiovascular (CV) safety of varenicline. However, since preclinical studies showed that therapeutic varenicline concentrations have no effect in models of CV function, this study examined in vitro profiles of varenicline and nicotine at nAChR subtypes possibly involved in CV control.

METHODS

Concentration-dependent functional effects of varenicline and nicotine at human α3β4, α3α5β4, α7, and α4β2 nAChRs expressed in oocytes were determined by electrophysiology. The proportion of nAChRs predicted to be activated and inhibited by concentrations of varenicline (1mg b.i.d.) and of nicotine in smokers was derived from activation-inhibition curves for each nAChR subtype.

RESULTS

Human varenicline and nicotine concentrations can desensitize and inhibit nAChRs but cause only low-level activation of α3β4, α4β2 (<2%), α7 (<0.05%), and α3α5β4 (<0.01%) nAChRs, which is consistent with literature data. Nicotine concentrations in smokers are predicted to inhibit larger fractions of α3β4 (48%) and α3α5β4 (10%) nAChRs than therapeutic varenicline concentrations (11% and 0.6%, respectively) and to inhibit comparable fractions of α4β2 nAChRs (42%-56%) and α7 nAChRs (16%) as varenicline.

CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine and varenicline concentrations in patients and smokers are predicted to cause minimal activation of ganglionic α3β4* nAChRs, while their functional profiles at α3β4, α3α5β4, α7, and α4β2 nAChRs cannot explain that substituting nicotine from tobacco with varenicline would cause CV adverse events in smokers who try to quit. Other pharmacological properties that could mediate varenicline-induced CV effects have not been identified.

Cardiovascular events associated with smoking cessation pharmacotherapies: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Stopping smoking is associated with many important improvements in health and quality of life. The use of cessation medications is recommended to increase the likelihood of quitting. However, there is historical and renewed concern that smoking cessation therapies may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease events associated within the quitting period. We aimed to examine whether the 3 licensed smoking cessation therapies-nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline-were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease events using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched 10 electronic databases, were in communication with authors of published randomized, clinical trials (RCTs), and accessed internal US Food and Drug Administration reports. We included any RCT of the 3 treatments that reported cardiovascular disease outcomes. Among 63 eligible RCTs involving 21 nicotine replacement therapy RCTs, 28 bupropion RCTs, and 18 varenicline RCTs, we found no increase in the risk of all cardiovascular disease events with bupropion (relative risk [RR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.73) or varenicline (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.79-2.23). There was an elevated risk associated with nicotine replacement therapy that was driven predominantly by less serious events (RR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.39-3.82). When we examined major adverse cardiovascular events, we found a protective effect with bupropion (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.21-0.85) and no clear evidence of harm with varenicline (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.66-2.66) or nicotine replacement therapy (RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.26-4.30).

CONCLUSION

Smoking cessation therapies do not appear to raise the risk of serious cardiovascular disease events.

Role of nicotine receptor partial agonists in tobacco cessation

One in three adults in India uses tobacco, a highly addictive substance in one or other form. In addition to prevention of tobacco use, offering evidence-based cessation services to dependent tobacco users constitutes an important approach in addressing this serious public health problem. A combination of behavioral methods and pharmacotherapy has shown the most optimal results in tobacco dependence treatment. Among currently available pharmacological agents, drugs that preferentially act on the α4 β2-nicotinic acetyl choline receptor like varenicline and cytisine appear to have relatively better cessation outcomes. These drugs are in general well tolerated and have minimal drug interactions. The odds of quitting tobacco use are at the very least doubled with the use of partial agonists compared with placebo and the outcomes are also superior when compared to nicotine replacement therapy and bupropion. The poor availability of partial agonists and specifically the cost of varenicline, as well as the lack of safety data for cytisine has limited their use world over, particularly in developing countries. Evidence for the benefit of partial agonists is more robust for smoking rather than smokeless forms of tobacco. Although more studies are needed to demonstrate their effectiveness in different populations of tobacco users, present literature supports the use of partial agonists in addition to behavioral methods for optimal outcome in tobacco dependence.

A double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial of varenicline for smokeless tobacco dependence in India

INTRODUCTION

The rate of smokeless tobacco use in India is 20%; its use causes serious health problems, and no trial has assessed behavioral or pharmacological treatments for this public health concern. This trial evaluated varenicline for treating smokeless tobacco dependence in India.

METHODS

This was a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial of varenicline (12 weeks, 1mg, twice per day) with 237 smokeless tobacco users in India. All participants received behavioral counseling. Outcomes included self-reported and biochemically verified abstinence at the end of treatment (EOT), lapse and recovery events, safety, and medication adherence.

RESULTS

Self-reported EOT abstinence was significantly greater for varenicline (43%) versus placebo (31%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.2-4.2, p = .009). Biochemically confirmed EOT abstinence was greater for varenicline versus placebo (25.2% vs. 19.5%), but this was not statistically different (AOR = 1.6, 95% CI = 0.84-3.1, p = .15). Compared with placebo, varenicline did not reduce the risk for a lapse (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.69-1.1, p = .14), but it did increase the likelihood of recovery to abstinence (HR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.02-1.4, p = .02). Greater adherence increased EOT cessation rates for varenicline (39% vs. 18%, p = .003) but not for placebo (28% vs. 14%, p = .06). There were no significant differences between varenicline and placebo in rate of side effects, serious adverse events, hypertension, or stopping or reducing medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Varenicline is safe for treating smokeless tobacco dependence in India, and further examination of this medication for this important public health problem is warranted.

Evidence behind FDA alerts for drugs with adverse cardiovascular effects: implications for clinical practice

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) periodically publishes Drug Safety Communications and Drug Alerts notifying health care practitioners and the general public of important information regarding drug therapies following FDA approval. These alerts can result in both positive and negative effects on patient care. Most clinical trials are not designed to detect long-term safety end points, and postmarketing surveillance along with patient reported events are often instrumental in signaling the potential harmful effect of a drug. Recently, many cardiovascular (CV) safety announcements have been released for FDA-approved drugs. Because a premature warning could discourage a much needed treatment or prompt a sudden discontinuation, it is essential to evaluate the evidence supporting these FDA alerts to provide effective patient care and to avoid unwarranted changes in therapy. Conversely, paying attention to these warnings in cases involving high-risk patients can prevent adverse effects and litigation. This article reviews the evidence behind recent FDA alerts for drugs with adverse CV effects and discusses the clinical practice implications.