Effects of Nicotine Patch vs Varenicline vs Combination Nicotine Replacement Therapy on Smoking Cessation at 26 Weeks: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Enabling tobacco treatment for gastroenterology patients via a novel low-burden point-of-care model

BACKGROUND & AIM

Smoking is a major risk factor for multiple gastrointestinal cancers, and adversely affects peptic ulcer disease, gastroesophageal reflux, pancreatitis and Crohn's disease. Despite key recommendations for diagnosing and treating tobacco use disorder in healthcare settings, the degree to which this is implemented in Gastroenterology (GI) clinics is unknown. We aimed to assess our providers' practices, identify barriers for implementing evidence-based smoking cessation treatments, and address these barriers by implementing a novel low-burden point of care Electronic health record-enabled evidence-based tobacco treatment (ELEVATE), in GI clinics.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to clinic gastroenterologists. ELEVATE module training was implemented in 1/2021. Data were evaluated during pre (7/2020-12/2020) and post (1/2021-12/2021) implementation periods to evaluate the reach and effectiveness of ELEVATE. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to generate rate ratios (RR) to evaluate the intervention.

RESULTS

91% (20/22) of GI physicians responded to our survey, and only 20% often assisted patients who smoke with counseling. Lack of a systematic program to offer help to patients was reported by 80% of providers as an extremely/very important barrier limiting their smoking cessation practices. The proportion of current patients who smoke receiving cessation treatment increased from pre-ELEVATE to post-ELEVATE (14.36-27.47%, RR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.60-2.26, p < .001). Post-ELEVATE, 14.4% (38/264) of patients with treatment quit smoking, compared to 7.9% (55/697) of patients without treatment (RR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.26-2.82, p = .0021).

CONCLUSION

Smoking practices are frequently assessed in GI clinics but barriers limiting cessation treatment exist. The use of a low burden point of care EHR enabled smoking cessation treatment module has led to a significant improvement in the treatment of smoking and subsequent cessation in our clinics. This study sheds light on an often under-recognized source of morbidity in GI patients and identifies an efficient, effective, and scalable strategy to combat tobacco use and improve clinical outcomes in our patients.

Smoking Cessation After Initial Treatment Failure With Varenicline or Nicotine Replacement: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Most people who smoke do not quit on their initial attempt.

Objective

To determine the best subsequent strategy for nonabstinence following initial treatment with varenicline or combined nicotine replacement therapy (CNRT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

Using a double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, 490 volunteers were randomized to receive 6 weeks of varenicline or CNRT. After 6 weeks, nonabstainers were rerandomized to continue, switch, or increase medication dosage for 6 additional weeks. The study was conducted from June 2015 through October 2019 in a Texas tobacco treatment clinic.

Interventions

The initial treatment was 2 mg/d of varenicline or the combined replacement therapy of a 21-mg patch plus 2-mg lozenge. The rerandomized participants either continued with their initial therapies, switched between varenicline and CNRT, or increased dosages either to 3-mg or more of varenicline or to a 42-mg patch and lozenges. All received weekly brief counseling.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of treatment at 12 weeks.

Results

The 490 randomized participants (210 female [43%], 287 non-Hispanic White [58%], mean age, 48.1 years) smoked an average of 20 cigarettes per day. After the first phase, 54 participants in the CNRT group were abstinent and continued their therapy; of the 191 who were not abstinent, 151 were rerandomized, and the 40 who did not return for rerandomization were assigned to continue their initial CNRT condition in phase 2. The end-of-treatment abstinence rate for the 191 phase 1 nonabstainers was 8% (95% credible interval [CrI], 6% to 10%) for the 90 (47%) who continued at the dosage condition, 14% (CrI, 10% to 18%) for the 50 (33%) who increased their dosage, and 14% (95% CrI, 10% to 18%) for the 51 (34%) who switched to varenicline (absolute risk difference [RD], 6%; 95% CrI, 6% to 11%) with more than 99% posterior probability that either strategy conferred benefit over continuing the initial dosage. After the first phase, 88 participants in the varenicline group were abstinent and continued their therapy; of the 157 who were not abstinent, 122 were rerandomized and 35 who did not return for rerandomization were assigned to continue with the varenicline condition. The end-of-treatment abstinence rate for the 157 phase 1 nonabstainers was 20% (95% CrI, 16% to 26%) for the 39 (32%) who increased their varenicline dosage, 0 (95% CrI, 0 to 0) for the 41 (34%) who switched CNRT, and 3% (95% CrI, 1% to 4%) for the 77 (49%) who were assigned to the continued varenicline condition (absolute RD, -3%; 95% CrI, -4% to -1%) with more than 99% posterior probability that continuing varenicline at the initial dosage was worse than switching to a higher dosage. Furthermore, increasing the varenicline dosage had an absolute RD of 18% (95% CrI, 13% to 24%) and a more than 99% posterior probability of conferring benefit. The secondary outcome of continuous abstinence at 6 months indicated that only increased dosages of the CNRT and varenicline provided benefit over continuation of the initial treatment dosages.

Conclusions and Relevance

For individuals who smoked but did not achieve abstinence after treatment with varenicline, increasing the dosage enhanced abstinence vs continuing, whereas for nonabstainers initially treated with CNRT, a dosage increase or switch to varenicline enhanced abstinence and may be viable rescue strategies.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02271919.

The efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological monotherapies and e-cigarette on smoking cessation: a systemic review and network meta-analysis

Background and aims

Several pharmacological interventions, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, and bupropion, have been approved for clinical use of smoking cessation. E-cigarettes (EC) are increasingly explored by many RCTs for their potentiality in smoking cessation. In addition, some RCTs are attempting to explore new drugs for smoking cessation, such as cytisine. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to investigate how these drugs and e-cigarettes compare regarding their efficacy and acceptability.

Materials and methods

This systematic review and NMA searched all clinical studies on smoking cessation using pharmacological monotherapies or e-cigarettes published from January 2011 to May 2022 using MEDLINE, COCHRANE Library, and PsychINFO databases. NRTs were divided into transdermal (TDN) and oronasal nicotine (ONN) by administrative routes, thus 7 network nodes were set up for direct and indirect comparison. Two different indicators measured the efficacy: prevalent and continuous smoking abstinence. The drop-out rates measured the acceptability.

Results

The final 40 clinical studies included in this study comprised 77 study cohorts and 25,889 participants. Varenicline is more effective intervention to assist in smoking cessation during 16-32 weeks follow-up, and is very likely to prompt dropout. Cytisine shows more effectiveness in continuous smoking cessation but may also lead to dropout. E-cigarettes and oronasal nicotine are more effective than no treatment in encouraging prevalent abstinence, but least likely to prompt dropout. Finally, transdermal nicotine delivery is more effective than no treatment in continuous abstinence, with neither significant effect on prevalent abstinence nor dropout rate.

Conclusion

This review suggested and agreed that Varenicline, Cytisine and transdermal nicotine delivery, as smoking cessation intervention, have advantages and disadvantages. However, we had to have reservations about e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking in adolescents.

Insomnia and parasomnia induced by validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and electronic cigarettes: a network meta-analysis

We aim to assess the relationship between validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and insomnia and parasomnia using a systematic review and a network meta-analysis. A systematic search was performed until August 2022 in the following databases: PUBMED, COCHRANE, CLINICALTRIAL. Randomized controlled studies against placebo or validated therapeutic smoking cessation methods and e-cigarettes in adult smokers without unstable or psychiatric comorbidity were included. The primary outcome was the presence of "insomnia" and "parasomnia." A total of 1261 studies were selected. Thirty-seven studies were included in the quantitative analysis (34 for insomnia and 23 for parasomnia). The reported interventions were varenicline (23 studies), nicotine replacement therapy (NRT, 10 studies), bupropion (15 studies). No studies on e-cigarettes were included. Bayesian analyses found that insomnia and parasomnia are more frequent with smoking cessation therapies than placebo except for bupropion. Insomnia was less frequent with nicotine substitutes but more frequent with bupropion than the over pharmacotherapies. Parasomnia are less frequent with bupropion but more frequent with varenicline than the over pharmacotherapies. Validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies can induce sleep disturbances with different degrees of frequency. Our network meta-analysis shows a more favorable profile of nicotine substitutes for insomnia and bupropion for parasomnia. It seems essential to systematize the assessment of sleep disturbances in the initiation of smoking cessation treatment. This could help professionals to personalize the choice of treatment according to sleep parameters of each patient. Considering co-addictions, broadening the populations studied and standardizing the measurement are additional avenues for future research.

Economic Evaluation of Enhanced vs Standard Varenicline Treatment for Tobacco Cessation

Importance

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and illness in the US. Identifying cost-effective smoking cessation treatment may increase the likelihood that health systems deliver such treatment to their patients who smoke.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of standard vs enhanced varenicline use (extended varenicline treatment or varenicline in combination with nicotine replacement therapy) among individuals trying to quit smoking.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation assesses the Quitting Using Intensive Treatments Study (QUITS), which randomized 1251 study participants who smoked into 4 conditions: (1) 12-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 315); (2) 24-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 311); (3) 12-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 314); or (4) 24-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 311). Study enrollment occurred in Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, between November 11, 2017, and July 2, 2020. Statistical analysis took place from May to October 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence (biochemically confirmed with exhaled carbon monoxide level ≤5 ppm) at 52 weeks. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), or cost per additional person who quit smoking, was calculated using decision tree analysis based on abstinence and cost for each arm of the trial.

Results

Of the 1251 participants, mean (SD) age was 49.1 (11.9) years, 675 (54.0%) were women, and 881 (70.4%) completed the 52-week follow-up. Tobacco cessation at 52 weeks was 25.1% (79 of 315) for 12-week monotherapy, 24.4% (76 of 311) for 24-week monotherapy, 23.6% (74 of 314) for 12-week combination therapy, and 25.1% (78 of 311) for 24-week combination therapy, respectively. The total mean (SD) cost was $1175 ($365) for 12-week monotherapy, $1374 ($412) for 12-week combination therapy, $2022 ($813) for 24-week monotherapy, and $2118 ($1058) for 24-week combination therapy. The ICER for 12-week varenicline monotherapy was $4681 per individual who quit smoking and $4579 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) added. The ICER for 24-week varenicline combination therapy relative to 12-week monotherapy was $92 000 000 per additional individual who quit smoking and $90 000 000 (95% CI, $15 703 to dominated or more costly and less efficacious) per additional QALY.

Conclusions and Relevance

This economic evaluation of standard vs enhanced varenicline treatment for smoking cessation suggests that 12-week varenicline monotherapy was the most cost-effective treatment option at the commonly cited threshold of $100 000/QALY. This study provides patients, health care professionals, and other stakeholders with increased understanding of the health and economic impact of more intensive varenicline treatment options.

Integrated Care for Pregnant and Parenting People With Substance Use

Caring for pregnant people with substance use requires knowledge about specific substances used, treatment options, and an integrated, trauma-informed care team. This chapter will discuss crucial information for clinicians regarding evidence-based practice for screening, intervention, and ongoing support for pregnant people and their families impacted by substance use.

Evidence-Based Guideline for the Treatment of Smoking Cessation Provided by the National Health Insurance Service in Korea

Although major countries, such as South Korea, have developed and disseminated national smoking cessation guidelines, these efforts have been limited to developing individual societies or specialized institution-based recommendations. Therefore, evidence-based clinical guidelines are essential for developing smoking cessation interventions and promoting effective smoking cessation treatments. This guideline targets frontline clinical practitioners involved in a smoking cessation treatment support program implemented in 2015 with the support of the National Health Insurance Service. The Guideline Development Group of 10 multidisciplinary smoking cessation experts employed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT approach to review recent domestic and international research and guidelines and to determine evidence levels using the GRADE methodology. The guideline panel formulated six strong recommendations and one conditional recommendation regarding pharmacotherapy choices among general and special populations (mental disorders and chronic obstructive lung disease [COPD]). Strong recommendations favor varenicline rather than a nicotine patch or bupropion, using varenicline even if they are not ready to quit, using extended pharmacotherapy (>12 weeks) rather than standard treatment (8-12 weeks), or using pharmacotherapy for individuals with mental disorders or COPD. The conditional recommendation suggests combining varenicline with a nicotine patch instead of using varenicline alone. Aligned with the Korean Society of Medicine's clinical guideline development process, this is South Korea's first domestic smoking cessation treatment guideline that follows standardized guidelines. Primarily focusing on pharmacotherapy, it can serve as a foundation for comprehensive future smoking cessation clinical guidelines, encompassing broader treatment topics beyond medications.

Implementing a Metabolism-Informed Approach for Smoking Cessation in an Alaska Tribal Health System: Study Protocol for a Single-Arm Implementation Pilot Trial

Background

Individualized treatment for commercial tobacco smoking cessation, such as through the utilization of the nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR), offers substantial clinical benefit. NMR is a metabolism-informed biomarker that can be used to guide medication selection. NMR testing is particularly promising for tobacco cessation efforts in populations with high rates of smoking, such as some Alaska Native and American Indian (AN/AI) communities. To date, no prior study has evaluated the implementation of NMR-guided tobacco cessation with AN/AI populations.

Methods

The present "QUIT" protocol is a two-phase study that will occur at Southcentral Foundation (SCF), an Alaska Native-owned health system, serving 70,000 AN/AI people, based in Anchorage, Alaska. In Phase one, qualitative interviews with customer-owners (patients), providers and administrators (n = 36) and a 10-participant beta-test will be used to refine a strategy to implement NMR testing in the health system. Phase two will involve a single-arm pilot trial (n = 50) and qualitative interviews throughout data collection (n = 48) to evaluate the implementation strategy and explore the real-world acceptability and feasibility of NMR testing to guide tobacco cessation with AN/AI populations.

Discussion

This study utilizes a community-based participatory approach to refine and implement a nicotine metabolism-informed smoking cessation program in a Tribal healthcare setting. The process and findings from this study will reflect the importance of customer-owner choice and honor the lived experience involved in quitting commercial tobacco. Pilot study data will inform the effect and sample sizes required for a future pragmatic trial of NMR-guided smoking cessation.

Association of racial discrimination in health care settings and use of electronic cigarettes to quit smoking among Black adults

INTRODUCTION

Black people are disproportionately burdened by tobacco-related diseases and are less successful at cigarette cessation with current treatments. We know little about the effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation method compared to currently approved methods in Black adults who smoke. Many Black adults report experiencing racial discrimination in health care, but if discrimination is related to utilization of smoking cessation aids including e-cigarettes and success with smoking cessation in this population is unclear. Therefore, this exploratory study aimed to understand how negative experiences and racial discrimination in health care influence use of e-cigarettes for cigarette cessation and success with cigarette cessation among Black adults.

METHODS

The study interviewed 201 Black adults who used cigarettes and tried to quit in their lifetime from the Family and Community Health Study in 2016. The study asked if they had tried and successfully quit cigarettes with e-cigarettes vs. other methods (support groups, medications, nicotine replacement therapies, call-in help lines, cold turkey [quit on their own], counseling) and asked about their negative experiences and racial discrimination in health care. We performed separate logistic regressions that evaluated the association of negative experiences and racial discrimination in health care with 1) use of e-cigarettes for cigarette cessation vs. other quitting methods and 2) success with cigarette cessation using any method among Black adults while controlling for age, sex, socioeconomic status, health insurance status, and age of onset of cigarette use.

RESULTS

More reported negative experiences and racial discrimination in health care were associated with ever trying to quit with e-cigarettes compared to other methods (OR:1.75, 95 % CI [1.05-2.91]), but negative experiences and racial discrimination in health care were not associated with cigarette quitting success. Interestingly, trying e-cigarettes was associated with being less successful at quitting compared to using other methods to quit smoking (OR: 0.40, 95 % CI [0.20, 0.81]).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that educating health care professionals that anticipated discrimination in health care settings may be driving Black adults who smoke to engage in non-evidence-based smoking cessation practices, such as e-cigarettes instead of those that are evidence-based, and may be more effective in this population.

Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #21: Breastfeeding in the Setting of Substance Use and Substance Use Disorder (Revised 2023)

Background: The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine (ABM) revised the 2015 version of the substance use disorder (SUD) clinical protocol to review the evidence and provide updated literature-based recommendations related to breastfeeding in the setting of substance use and SUD treatments. Key Information: Decisions around breastfeeding are an important aspect of care during the peripartum period, and there are specific benefits and risks for substance-exposed mother-infant dyads. Recommendations: This protocol provides breastfeeding recommendations in the setting of nonprescribed opioid, stimulant, sedative-hypnotic, alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis use, and SUD treatments. Additionally, we offer guidance on the utility of toxicology testing in breastfeeding recommendations. Individual programs and institutions should establish consistent breastfeeding approaches that mitigate bias, facilitate consistency, and empower mothers with SUD. For specific breastfeeding recommendations, given the complexity of breastfeeding in mothers with SUD, individualized care plans should be created in partnership with the patient and multidisciplinary team with appropriate clinical support and follow-up. In general, breastfeeding is recommended among mothers who stop nonprescribed substance use by the time of delivery, and they should continue to receive ongoing postpartum care, such as lactation support and SUD treatment. Overall, enhancing breastfeeding education regarding substance use in pregnancy and lactation is essential to allow for patient-centered guidance.

Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Responses to Acute Use of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Combustible Cigarettes in Long-Term Users

BACKGROUND

The acute cardiovascular and pulmonary effects of contemporary electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) in long-term users are not known.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the cardiovascular and pulmonary responses to an acute 15-min product use challenge with ENDS and combustible cigarettes in regular nicotine-containing product users compared with control participants who do not use tobacco or vape?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Observational challenge study before and after nicotine-containing product use of 395 individuals who used ENDS exclusively (n = 164; exhaled carbon monoxide level, < 5 parts per million [ppm]; positive urine NicCheck I [Mossman Associates] results, 82%; fourth-generation ENDS), participants who smoked cigarettes exclusively (n = 117; carbon monoxide level, > 5 ppm; positive urine NicCheck I results), and control participants (n = 114; carbon monoxide level, < 5 ppm; negative urine NicCheck I results).

RESULTS

During the 15-min product challenge, cigarette users took a median of 14.0 puffs (interquartile range [IQR], 9.3 puffs); ENDS users took 9.0 puffs (IQR, 7.5 puffs; P < .001). After product challenge, compared with control participants, ENDS users showed greater increases in adjusted mean differences in systolic BP (5.6 mm Hg [95% CI, 4.4-6.8 mm Hg] vs 2.3 mm Hg [95% CI, 0.8-3.8 mm Hg]; P = .001), diastolic BP (4.2 mm Hg [95% CI, 3.3-5.0 mm Hg] vs 2.0 mm Hg [95% CI, 1.1-3.0 mm Hg; P = .003), and heart rate (4.8 beats/min [95% CI, 4.0-5.6 beats/min] vs -1.3 beats/min [95% CI, -2.2 to -0.3 beats/min]; P < .001) and greater reductions in brachial artery diameter (-0.011 cm [95% CI, -0.013 to 0.009 cm] vs -0.006 cm [95% CI, -0.004 to -0.009 cm]; P = .003), time-domain heart rate variability (-7.2 ms [95% CI, -10.5 to -3.7 ms] vs 3.6 ms [95% CI, 1.6-9.3 ms]; P = .001), and FEV1 (ENDS: -4.1 [95% CI, -5.4 to -2.8] vs control participants: -1.1 [95% CI, -2.7 to 0.6]; P = .005) with values similar to those of cigarette users. ENDS users performed worse than control participants on all exercise parameters, notably metabolic equivalents (METs; adjusted mean difference, 1.28 METs [95% CI, 0.73-1.83 METs]; P < .001) and 60-s heart rate recovery (adjusted mean difference, 2.9 beats/min [95% CI, 0.7-5.0 beats/min]; P = .008).

INTERPRETATION

ENDS users had acute worsening of blood pressure, heart rate, and heart rate variability, as well as vasoconstriction, impaired exercise tolerance, and increased airflow obstruction after vaping, compared to control participants.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03863509; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

A Causal Approach to Functional Mediation Analysis with Application to a Smoking Cessation Intervention

The increase in the use of mobile and wearable devices now allows dense assessment of mediating processes over time. For example, a pharmacological intervention may have an effect on smoking cessation via reductions in momentary withdrawal symptoms. We define and identify the causal direct and indirect effects in terms of potential outcomes on the mean difference and odds ratio scales, and present a method for estimating and testing the indirect effect of a randomized treatment on a distal binary variable as mediated by the nonparametric trajectory of an intensively measured longitudinal variable (e.g., from ecological momentary assessment). Coverage of a bootstrap test for the indirect effect is demonstrated via simulation. An empirical example is presented based on estimating later smoking abstinence from patterns of craving during smoking cessation treatment. We provide an R package, funmediation, available on CRAN at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/funmediation/index.html, to conveniently apply this technique. We conclude by discussing possible extensions to multiple mediators and directions for future research.

Smoking cessation through nicotine replacement therapy for patients visiting the Dental College, Pune - A quasi-experimental study

Background and Aim

Smoking leads to a very unhealthy lifestyle and has many deleterious effects on the body and surroundings. Studies have indicated that aiding contemplating smokers using behavior counseling and nicotine replacement therapy has shown positive results for abstaining from the habit. We aimed to assess and carry out smoking cessation for smokers using behavioral counseling, motivational interviewing, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and assess their carbon monoxide (CO) cutoff level, Fagerstrom nicotine dependence test (FTND) scoring, and transtheoretical model (TTM) of change at baseline and 6 months, along with abstinence from the habit.

Materials and Methods

CO cutoff, FTND scoring, and TTM of change were assessed at baseline and 6 months for smokers. Behavioral counseling with motivational interviewing was provided to the participants on the day of recruitment, and baseline data were recorded. All smokers included in the study were in the precontemplation and contemplation stages to quit smoking. Based on the frequency of smoking, NRT was prescribed to them in the form of a patch (21, 14, or 7 mg), only gums (2 mg), or a combination of both. Counseling was provided telephonically every month for 6 months. Urine cotinine assessment was carried out to verify the self-reported smoking status of the participants at the sixth month.

Results

The CO cutoff, FTND scoring, and TTM of change showed statistically significant difference from baseline to the sixth month. Also, 20% (confidence interval [CI] 0.10-0.33) of participants who abstained from the habit were in the action and maintenance stages of change. Among 20% of participants, 16% (CI 0.10-0.36) of participants self-reported quitting within 6 months using combination therapy. Two percent (CI 0.00-0.40) each abstained by using nicotine gums and combination therapy of patch and gums, which was validated through urine cotinine.

Conclusion

The cotinine test provided negative results, confirming the self-reported abstinence of 20% of participants, who were mostly male students and professionals in the age group of 20-40 years and those who used NRT. Nicotine patches provided the highest point prevalence of abstinence compared to gums and combination therapy.

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). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2007.

Objectives

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

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register in April 2022 for trials, using relevant terms in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. 

Selection criteria

We included randomised controlled trials that compared the treatment drug with placebo, another smoking cessation drug, e‐cigarettes, or no medication. We excluded trials that did not report a minimum follow‐up period of six months from baseline.

Data collection and analysis

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcome was abstinence from smoking at longest follow‐up using the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically validated rates where reported. We pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel‐Haenszel fixed‐effect model. We also reported the number of people reporting serious adverse events (SAEs).

Main results

We included 75 trials of 45,049 people; 45 were new for this update. We rated 22 at low risk of bias, 18 at high risk, and 35 at unclear risk.

We found moderate‐certainty evidence (limited by heterogeneity) that cytisine helps more people to quit smoking than placebo (RR 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.47; I2 = 83%; 4 studies, 4623 participants), and no evidence of a difference in the number reporting SAEs (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 3781 participants; low‐certainty evidence). SAE evidence was limited by imprecision. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs.

We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than placebo (RR 2.32, 95% CI 2.15 to 2.51; I2 = 60%, 41 studies, 17,395 participants), and moderate‐certainty evidence that people taking varenicline are more likely to report SAEs than those not taking it (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 26 studies, 14,356 participants). While point estimates suggested increased risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.84; I2 = 0%; 18 studies, 7151 participants; low‐certainty evidence), and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.29; I2 = 0%; 22 studies, 7846 participants; low‐certainty evidence), in both cases evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals were compatible with both benefit and harm.

Pooled results from studies that randomised people to receive cytisine or varenicline found no clear evidence of difference in quit rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.26; I2 = 65%; 2 studies, 2131 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and reported SAEs (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.03; I2 = 45%; 2 studies, 2017 participants; low‐certainty evidence). However, the evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals incorporated the potential for benefit from either cytisine or varenicline. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs.

We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than bupropion (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 7560 participants), and no clear evidence of difference in rates of SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 5317 participants), neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.04; I2 = 10%; 2 studies, 866 participants), or cardiac SAEs (RR 3.17, 95% CI 0.33 to 30.18; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 866 participants). Evidence of harms was of low certainty, limited by imprecision.

We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than a single form of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; I2 = 28%; 11 studies, 7572 participants), and low‐certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, of fewer reported SAEs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99; I2 = 24%; 6 studies, 6535 participants). We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs.

We found no clear evidence of a difference in quit rates between varenicline and dual‐form NRT (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2344 participants; low‐certainty evidence, downgraded because of imprecision). While pooled point estimates suggested increased risk of SAEs (RR 2.15, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.46; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1852 participants) and neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 4.69, 95% CI 0.23 to 96.50; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 764 participants), and reduced risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.88; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 819 participants), in all three cases evidence was of low certainty and confidence intervals were very wide, encompassing both substantial harm and benefit.

Authors' conclusions

Cytisine and varenicline both help more people to quit smoking than placebo or no medication. Varenicline is more effective at helping people to quit smoking than bupropion, or a single form of NRT, and may be as or more effective than dual‐form NRT. People taking varenicline are probably more likely to experience SAEs than those not taking it, and while there may be increased risk of cardiac SAEs and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs, evidence was compatible with both benefit and harm. Cytisine may lead to fewer people reporting SAEs than varenicline. Based on studies that directly compared cytisine and varenicline, there may be no difference or a benefit from either medication for quitting smoking.

Future trials should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other pharmacotherapies, and should also test variations in dose and duration. There is limited benefit to be gained from more trials testing the effect of standard‐dose varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation. Further trials on varenicline should test variations in dose and duration, and compare varenicline with e‐cigarettes for smoking cessation.

Can medications like varenicline and cytisine (nicotine receptor partial agonists) help people to stop smoking and do they cause unwanted effects?

Key messages

· Varenicline can help people to stop smoking for at least 6 months. Evidence shows it works better than bupropion and using only one type of nicotine replacement therapy (e.g. only patches). Quit rates might be similar to using more than one type of nicotine replacement therapy at the same time (e.g. patches and gum together).

· Cytisine can help people to stop smoking for at least 6 months. It may work as well as varenicline, but future evidence may show that while it helps, it is not quite as helpful as varenicline.

· Future studies should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other stop‐smoking medications, and should also  investigate giving cytisine or varenicline at different doses and for different lengths of time.

What are 'nicotine receptor partial agonists'?

Smoking tobacco is extremely bad for people’s health. For people who smoke, quitting is the best thing they can do to improve their health. Many people find it difficult to quit smoking. Nicotine receptor partial agonists (NRPAs) are a type of medication used to help people to stop smoking. They help to reduce the withdrawal symptoms people experience when they stop smoking, like cravings and unpleasant mood changes. They also reduce the pleasure people usually experience when they smoke. The most widely‐available treatment in this drug type is varenicline. Cytisine is another, similar medication. They may cause unwanted effects such as feeling sick (nausea) and other stomach problems, difficulties sleeping, abnormal dreams, and headache. They may also lead to potentially serious unwanted effects, such as suicidal thoughts, heart problems and raised blood pressure.

What did we want to find out?

We wanted to find out if using NRPAs can help people to quit smoking, and if they cause unwanted effects. We wanted to know:

· how many people stopped smoking for at least 6 months; and

· how many people had unwanted effects.

What did we do?

We searched for studies that investigated NRPAs used to help people quit smoking. People in the studies had to be chosen at random to receive an NRPA, or another NRPA, placebo (medication like the NRPA but with no active ingredients) or no treatment. They had to be adult tobacco smokers who wanted to stop smoking.

What did we find?

We found 75 studies that compared NRPAs with:

· placebo or no medicine;

· nicotine replacement therapy, such as patches or gum;

· bupropion (another medicine to help people stop smoking);

· another NRPA;

· e‐cigarettes.

The USA hosted the most studies (28 studies). Other studies took place in a range of countries across the world, some in several countries.

Main results

People are more likely to stop smoking for at least six months using varenicline than using placebo (41 studies, 17,395 people), bupropion (9 studies, 7560 people), or just one type of nicotine replacement therapy, like patches alone (11 studies, 7572 people). They may be just as likely to quit as people using two or more kinds of nicotine replacement therapy, like patches and gum together (5 studies, 2344 people).

Cytisine probably helps more people to stop smoking than placebo (4 studies, 4623 people) and may be just as effective as varenicline (2 studies, 2131 people).

For every 100 people using varenicline to stop smoking, 21 to 25 might successfully stop, compared with only 18 of 100 people using bupropion, 18 of 100 people using a single form of nicotine‐replacement therapy, and 20 of 100 using two or more kinds of nicotine‐replacement therapy. For every 100 people using cytisine to stop smoking, 18 to 23 might successfully stop.

The most common unwanted effect of varenicline is nausea, but this is mostly at mild or moderate levels and usually clears over time. People taking varenicline likely have an increased chance of a more serious unwanted effect that could result in going to hospital, however these are still rare (2.7% to 4% of people on varenicline, compared with 2.7% of people without) and may include many that are unrelated to varenicline. People taking cytisine may also have a slightly increased chance of serious unwanted effects compared with people not taking it, but this may be less likely compared with varenicline.

What are the limitations of the evidence?

The evidence for some of our results is very reliable. We’re very confident that varenicline helps people to quit smoking better than many alternatives. We’re less sure of some other results because fewer or smaller studies provided evidence.

Several results suggest one treatment is better or less harmful than another, but the opposite could still be true.

How up to date is the evidence?

The evidence is up to date to 29 April 2022.

Different doses, durations and modes of delivery of nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) aims to replace nicotine from cigarettes. This helps to reduce cravings and withdrawal symptoms, and ease the transition from cigarette smoking to complete abstinence. Although there is high-certainty evidence that NRT is effective for achieving long-term smoking abstinence, it is unclear whether different forms, doses, durations of treatment or timing of use impacts its effects.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of different forms, deliveries, doses, durations and schedules of NRT, for achieving long-term smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for papers mentioning NRT in the title, abstract or keywords, most recently in April 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials in people motivated to quit, comparing one type of NRT use with another. We excluded studies that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up of fewer than six months, and with additional intervention components not matched between arms. Separate reviews cover studies comparing NRT to control, or to other pharmacotherapies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. We measured smoking abstinence after at least six months, using the most rigorous definition available. We extracted data on cardiac adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and study withdrawals due to treatment.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 68 completed studies with 43,327 participants, five of which are new to this update. Most completed studies recruited adults either from the community or from healthcare clinics. We judged 28 of the 68 studies to be at high risk of bias. Restricting the analysis only to those studies at low or unclear risk of bias did not significantly alter results for any comparisons apart from the preloading comparison, which tested the effect of using NRT prior to quit day whilst still smoking.  There is high-certainty evidence that combination NRT (fast-acting form plus patch) results in higher long-term quit rates than single form (risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.37; I2 = 12%; 16 studies, 12,169 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, indicates that 42/44 mg patches are as effective as 21/22 mg (24-hour) patches (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.29; I2 = 38%; 5 studies, 1655 participants), and that 21 mg patches are more effective than 14 mg (24-hour) patches (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.08; 1 study, 537 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, also suggests a benefit of 25 mg over 15 mg (16-hour) patches, but the lower limit of the CI encompassed no difference (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.41; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 3446 participants). Nine studies tested the effect of using NRT prior to quit day (preloading) in comparison to using it from quit day onward. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, of a favourable effect of preloading on abstinence (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.44; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 4395 participants). High-certainty evidence from eight studies suggests that using either a form of fast-acting NRT or a nicotine patch results in similar long-term quit rates (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.05; I2 = 0%; 8 studies, 3319 participants). We found no clear evidence of an effect of duration of nicotine patch use (low-certainty evidence); duration of combination NRT use (low- and very low-certainty evidence); or fast-acting NRT type (very low-certainty evidence). Cardiac AEs, SAEs and withdrawals due to treatment were all measured variably and infrequently across studies, resulting in low- or very low-certainty evidence for all comparisons. Most comparisons found no clear evidence of an effect on these outcomes, and rates were low overall. More withdrawals due to treatment were reported in people using nasal spray compared to patches in one study (RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.15 to 10.46; 1 study, 922 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and in people using 42/44 mg patches in comparison to 21/22 mg patches across two studies (RR 4.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 15.50; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 544 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that using combination NRT versus single-form NRT and 4 mg versus 2 mg nicotine gum can result in an increase in the chances of successfully stopping smoking. Due to imprecision, evidence was of moderate certainty for patch dose comparisons. There is some indication that the lower-dose nicotine patches and gum may be less effective than higher-dose products. Using a fast-acting form of NRT, such as gum or lozenge, resulted in similar quit rates to nicotine patches. There is moderate-certainty evidence that using NRT before quitting may improve quit rates versus using it from quit date only; however, further research is needed to ensure the robustness of this finding. Evidence for the comparative safety and tolerability of different types of NRT use is limited. New studies should ensure that AEs, SAEs and withdrawals due to treatment are reported.

Exenatide as an adjunct to nicotine patch for smoking cessation and prevention of postcessation weight gain among treatment-seeking smokers with pre-diabetes and/or overweight: study protocol for a randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Obesity and smoking are the two leading causes of preventable death in the USA. Unfortunately, most smokers gain weight after quitting. Postcessation weight gain (PCWG) is frequently cited as one of the primary barriers to a quit attempt and a common cause of relapse. Further, excessive PCWG may contribute to the onset or progression of metabolic conditions, such as hyperglycaemia and obesity. The efficacy of the current treatments for smoking cessation is modest, and these treatments have no clinically meaningful impact on mitigating PCWG. Here, we outline a novel approach using glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), which have demonstrated efficacy in reducing both food and nicotine intake. This report describes the design of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial that evaluates the effects of the GLP-1RA exenatide as an adjunct to nicotine patches on smoking abstinence and PCWG.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will be conducted at two university-affiliated research sites in Houston, Texas, the UTHealth Center for Neurobehavioral Research on Addiction and Baylor College of Medicine Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Centre. The sample will consist of 216 treatment-seeking smokers with pre-diabetes (haemoglobin A1c of 5.7%-6.4%) and/or overweight (body mass index of 25 kg/m² or above). Participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo or 2 mg exenatide, once weekly for 14 weeks. All participants will receive transdermal nicotine replacement therapy and brief smoking cessation counselling for 14 weeks. The primary outcomes are 4-week continuous abstinence and changes in body weight at the end of treatment. The secondary outcomes are (1) abstinence and changes in body weight at 12 weeks post end of treatment and (2) changes in neuroaffective responses to cigarette-related and food-related cues as measured by electroencephalogram.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the UTHealth Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (HSC-MS-21-0639) and Baylor College of Medicine Institutional Review Board (H-50543). All participants will sign informed consent. The study results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05610800.

Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of nicotine chewing gum and nicotine patches as nicotine replacement therapy using salivary cotinine levels as a biochemical validation measure

Background

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and habit cessation counseling are considered the mainstay treatment for high nicotine dependence smokers. However, adherence to NRT is very poor. Among the NRTs, nicotine gums and nicotine patches are the most widely available. This study mainly evaluates the efficacy of nicotine gum and nicotine patches as NRT using salivary cotinine levels as a biochemical validation measure.

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on 72 known smokers who were willing to receive nicotine replacement therapy for cessation of smoking habits. The sample was divided into two groups: Group 1 tobacco smokers were offered nicotine chewing gum, and group 2 tobacco smokers were offered nicotine patches. Both groups received treatment for 12 weeks. At baseline and at the end of the trial period, the saliva samples were analyzed for cotinine levels using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The severity of smoking was assessed using the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND).

Results

The quit rate was higher in the nicotine patch group compared with the nicotine gum group. On comparison of week one vs week twelve in the nicotine group nicotine gum group showed (CI: 18.10 to 13.83) and in the patch group (CI: 7.754 to 6.56) with P < 0.001. The pre- and post-cotinine estimation was significantly reduced for nicotine patches compared with nicotine gums, and patient compliance also yielded better results for nicotine patches.

Conclusion

This study depicts that nicotine patches were better adhered to in comparison with nicotine gums, and salivary cotinine level is an effective biochemical validation measure.

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). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register in April 2022 for trials, using relevant terms in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared the treatment drug with placebo, another smoking cessation drug, e-cigarettes, or no medication. We excluded trials that did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from baseline.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcome was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up using the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically validated rates where reported. We pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. We also reported the number of people reporting serious adverse events (SAEs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 trials of 45,049 people; 45 were new for this update. We rated 22 at low risk of bias, 18 at high risk, and 35 at unclear risk. We found moderate-certainty evidence (limited by heterogeneity) that cytisine helps more people to quit smoking than placebo (RR 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.47; I² = 83%; 4 studies, 4623 participants), and no evidence of a difference in the number reporting SAEs (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.37; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 3781 participants; low-certainty evidence). SAE evidence was limited by imprecision. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than placebo (RR 2.32, 95% CI 2.15 to 2.51; I² = 60%, 41 studies, 17,395 participants), and moderate-certainty evidence that people taking varenicline are more likely to report SAEs than those not taking it (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; I² = 0%; 26 studies, 14,356 participants). While point estimates suggested increased risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.84; I² = 0%; 18 studies, 7151 participants; low-certainty evidence), and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.29; I² = 0%; 22 studies, 7846 participants; low-certainty evidence), in both cases evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals were compatible with both benefit and harm. Pooled results from studies that randomised people to receive cytisine or varenicline showed that more people in the varenicline arm quit smoking (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 2131 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and reported SAEs (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.03; I² = 45%; 2 studies, 2017 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals incorporated the potential for benefit from either cytisine or varenicline. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than bupropion (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.49; I² = 0%; 9 studies, 7560 participants), and no clear evidence of difference in rates of SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.31; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 5317 participants), neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.04; I² = 10%; 2 studies, 866 participants), or cardiac SAEs (RR 3.17, 95% CI 0.33 to 30.18; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 866 participants). Evidence of harms was of low certainty, limited by imprecision. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than a single form of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; I² = 28%; 11 studies, 7572 participants), and low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, of fewer reported SAEs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99; I² = 24%; 6 studies, 6535 participants). We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found no clear evidence of a difference in quit rates between varenicline and dual-form NRT (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 2344 participants; low-certainty evidence, downgraded because of imprecision). While pooled point estimates suggested increased risk of SAEs (RR 2.15, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.46; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 1852 participants) and neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 4.69, 95% CI 0.23 to 96.50; I² not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 764 participants), and reduced risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.88; I² not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 819 participants), in all three cases evidence was of low certainty and confidence intervals were very wide, encompassing both substantial harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cytisine and varenicline both help more people to quit smoking than placebo or no medication. Varenicline is more effective at helping people to quit smoking than bupropion, or a single form of NRT, and may be as or more effective than dual-form NRT. People taking varenicline are probably more likely to experience SAEs than those not taking it, and while there may be increased risk of cardiac SAEs and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs, evidence was compatible with both benefit and harm. Cytisine may lead to fewer people reporting SAEs than varenicline. Based on studies that directly compared cytisine and varenicline, there may be a benefit from varenicline for quitting smoking, however further evidence could strengthen this finding or demonstrate a benefit from cytisine. Future trials should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other pharmacotherapies, and should also test variations in dose and duration. There is limited benefit to be gained from more trials testing the effect of standard-dose varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation. Further trials on varenicline should test variations in dose and duration, and compare varenicline with e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.

A randomized controlled trial of varenicline and brief behavioral counseling delivered by lay counselors for adolescent vaping cessation: Study protocol

Background

Approximately one-fifth of high-school seniors and college students currently vape nicotine. Adolescents express a desire to quit vaping, and case reports have shown promise for e-cigarette tapering with dual behavioral and pharmacologic therapies. However, there are no published clinical trials to date that test these intervention approaches for adolescent nicotine vaping cessation. In this three-arm randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, we aim to assess the efficacy of varenicline in combination with brief behavioral counseling and texting support on vaping cessation in adolescents dependent on vaped nicotine.

Methods

The study will enroll 300 individuals between the ages of 16–25 with daily or near-daily nicotine vaping who reside in the Greater Boston area. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio in blocks of six to one of the three arms: (1) a 12-week course of varenicline titrated to 1 mg bid, brief behavioral counseling delivered by a lay counselor, and an introduction to This is Quitting (TIQ) texting support created by the Truth Initiative; (2) a 12-week course of placebo, brief behavioral counseling, and TIQ; and (3) 12 weeks of enhanced usual care, consisting of advice to quit and an introduction to TIQ. The primary outcome will be biochemically verified continuous vaping abstinence at the end of the treatment (week 12). Secondary outcomes include continuous abstinence at follow-up (week 24), 7-day point prevalence abstinence at weeks 12 and 24, safety and tolerability of varenicline in an adolescent vaping population, as well as change in mood and nicotine withdrawal symptoms across the intervention period. Exploratory outcomes include change in comorbid substance use behaviors and nicotine dependence. Analysis will be intent-to-treat, with multiple imputation sensitivity analyses for participants with missing or incomplete outcome data.

Discussion

This is the first study to evaluate varenicline in combination with a novel, brief, lay counselor delivered vaping cessation program for adolescents who vape nicotine. Results will inform clinicians on the effectiveness and acceptability of this promising, but not yet tested intervention.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05367492.

Receipt of Smoking Cessation Medications Among People With and Without Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (2003-2018)

Background

Nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline are smoking cessation medications (SCMs) shown to be similarly effective in people with and without human immunodeficiency virus (PWH and PWoH, respectively), although rates of receipt of these medications are unknown.

Methods

We identified patients in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study with electronic health record-documented current smoking using clinical reminder data for tobacco use (2003-2018). We measured receipt of SCMs using Veterans Affairs pharmacy data for outpatient prescriptions filled 0-365 days after current smoking documentation. We used log-linear, Poisson-modified regression models to evaluate the relative risk (RR) for receiving SCM by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, the annual rate of receipt, and rate difference among PWH relative to PWoH.

Results

The sample included 92 632 patients (29 086 PWH), reflecting 381 637 documentations of current smoking. From 2003 to 2018, the proportion receiving SCMs increased from 15% to 34% for PWH and from 17% to 32% among PWoH. There was no statistical difference in likelihood of receiving SCM by HIV status (RR, 1.010; 95% confidence interval [CI], .994-1.026). Annual rates of receiving SCM increased for PWH by 4.3% per year (RR, 1.043; 95% CI, 1.040-1.047) and for PWoH by 3.7% per year (RR, 1.037; 95% CI, 1.036-1.038; rate difference +0.6% [RR, 1.006; 95% CI, 1.004-1.009]).

Conclusions

In a national sample of current smokers, receipt of SCM doubled over the 16-year period, and differences by HIV status were modest. However, fewer than 35% of current smokers receive SCM annually. Efforts to improve SCM receipt should continue for both groups given the known dangers of smoking.

The Use of Biomarkers to Guide Precision Treatment for Tobacco Use

This review summarizes the evidence to date on the development of biomarkers for personalizing the pharmacological treatment of combustible tobacco use. First, the latest evidence on FDA-approved medications is considered, demonstrating that, while these medications offer real benefits, they do not contribute to smoking cessation in approximately two-thirds of cases. Second, the case for using biomarkers to guide tobacco treatment is made based on the potential to increase medication effectiveness and uptake and reduce side effects. Next, the FDA framework of biomarker development is presented along with the state of science on biomarkers for tobacco treatment, including a review of the nicotine metabolite ratio, electroencephalographic event-related potentials, and other biomarkers utilized for risk feedback. We conclude with a discussion of the challenges and opportunities for the translation of biomarkers to guide tobacco treatment and propose priorities for future research.

Varenicline and related interventions on smoking cessation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Based on randomized controlled trials, a network meta-analysis was conducted to compare treatment effects across varenicline and related smoking interventions.

METHODS

English databases were screened for randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of varenicline as treatment for smoking. The risk of bias in included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis, and the GRADE approach was used to assess the evidence credibility on the tobacco treatment effects of different interventions.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies involving 26,130 smokers were included in the network meta-analysis. Varenicline and 11 other interventions were reported, yielding 66 pairs of comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline monotherapy or its combination with other interventions were superior in achieving smoking cessation compared to bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo. Furthermore, compared to the varenicline, evident abstinence superiority was found in varenicline + bupropion (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [1.02, 2.18]). Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that varenicline + bupropion has the highest probability to become the best intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Varenicline monotherapy increased the odds of smoking cessation further than bupropion monotherapy, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo, while varenicline combined with other interventions may even achieve a better abstinence effect. More credible evidence has been reported indicating that the combination of varenicline and bupropion is a superior treatment for smoking.

Electronic Cigarettes: A Pro-Con Review of the Current Literature

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes, e-cigs, or electronic nicotine delivery systems) are battery-operated devices typically containing glycerol and/or propylene glycol-based solutions with varying nicotine content, known as e-liquids. Although e-cigarettes were originally developed as a potentially less harmful alternative to traditional combustible tobacco cigarette smokers, several factors have driven their popularity among smokers and nonsmokers alike, including their sleek product designs, innumerable appealing flavors, lack of combustible smoke and odor, and high potential nicotine concentrations. Furthermore, many advocates have promoted the idea that e-cigarettes are safe to use, or at least safer than conventional tobacco, despite limited longitudinal data to support these claims. Here, we examine what is known about the impacts of e-cigarette use on traditional cigarette smoking cessation, lung health, and youth and young adult tobacco product exposure. Upon review of the currently available literature, the negative effects of e-cigarette use seem to outweigh any potential benefit, because the available evidence does not confirm the use of e-cigarettes as an effective strategy for supporting traditional combustible tobacco cigarette smoking cessation, particularly given the emerging adverse effects on lung health and the potential future public health effects of e-cigarette adoption among a burgeoning new generation of tobacco product users.

Time-Varying Mediation of Pharmacological Smoking Cessation Treatments on Smoking Lapse via Craving, Cessation Fatigue, and Negative Mood

INTRODUCTION

The addictive nature of nicotine makes smoking cessation an extremely challenging process. With prolonged exposure, tobacco smoking transforms from being a positive reinforcer to a negative one, as smoking is used to mitigate aversive withdrawal symptoms. Studying the variations in withdrawal symptoms, especially during their peak in the first week of a quit attempt, could help improve cessation treatment for the future. The time-varying mediation model effectively studies whether altering withdrawal symptoms act as mediators in the pathway between treatment and cessation.

AIMS AND METHODS

This secondary data analysis of a randomized clinical smoking cessation trial of three pharmacotherapy regimens (nicotine patch, varenicline, and nicotine patch + mini-lozenge) analyzes ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data from the first 4 weeks post-target quit day (TQD). We assess whether withdrawal symptoms (eg, negative mood, cessation fatigue, and craving) mediate the pathway between pharmacotherapy and daily smoking status and whether this effect varies over time.

RESULTS

We found a statistically significant time-varying mediation effect of varenicline on smoking status through craving, which shows decreasing risk of lapse via reduction in craving. We did not find significant time-varying mediation effects through negative mood and cessation fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the importance of craving suppression in the smoking cessation process. It also helped identify specific timepoints when withdrawal symptoms increased that would likely benefit from targeted cessation intervention strategies.

IMPLICATIONS

This study aimed to understand the underlying dynamic mechanisms of the smoking cessation process using a new analytical approach that capitalizes on the intensive longitudinal data collected via EMAs. The findings from this study further elucidate the smoking cessation process and provide insight into behavioral intervention targets and the timing of such interventions through the estimation of time-varying mediation effects.

The effect of Varenicline and Bupropion on smoking cessation: A network meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to investigate the effect of varenicline (VAR), bupropion (BUP), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) on smoking cessation.

METHODS

Eight databases were searched in May 2021, and only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using varenicline, bupropion, or NRT (single or combined) for smoking cessation were included. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform NMA, and the quality of the evidence was evaluated using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA).

FINDINGS

Twenty RCTs involving 16,702 smokers were included. The risk of bias results showed that 10 RCTs were rated as high, three were low, and seven were unclear. A total of 21 pairs were compared based on seven interventions. The NMA showed that, compared to the placebo (PLA), the other six interventions had significant efficacy in smoking cessation, where VAR + BUP showed the best effect of all treatments (odds ratio (OR) = 6.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.47, 10.66]). Moreover, VAR + BUP was superior to VAR + NRT (OR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.07, 2.59]) and the three monotherapies (VAR, BUP, and NRT). In the monotherapies, the results of pairwise comparisons of VAR, BUP, and NRT did not show significant differences. Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value indicated that VAR + BUP had the greatest probability of becoming the best intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of VAR, BUP, and NRT alone increased the odds of smoking abstinence better than the placebo, combined interventions were superior to monotherapy, and VAR combined with other interventions had a better smoking cessation effect.

Effectiveness of Varenicline and Cytisine for Alcohol Use Reduction Among People With HIV and Substance Use: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Cigarette smoking and risky alcohol consumption co-occur and are undertreated. Nicotine receptor partial agonists and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) treat smoking but are unproven for alcohol, and clinical trials rarely include individuals with HIV, substance use, and mental health conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects on drinking and smoking of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonists varenicline and cytisine with those of NRT.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 4-group randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted from July 2017 to December 2020 in St Petersburg, Russia. Included participants were 400 individuals with HIV who engaged in risky drinking (≥5 prior-month heavy-drinking days [HDDs]) and daily smoking; they were followed up for 12 months after enrollment. Data were analyzed from May 2021 through June 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received alcohol and tobacco counseling, 1 active medication, and 1 placebo in 1 of 4 groups: active varenicline and placebo NRT (group 1), placebo varenicline and active NRT (group 2), active cytisine and placebo NRT (group 3), or placebo cytisine and active NRT (group 4).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was number of prior-month HDDs at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included biochemically validated abstinence from alcohol at 3 months and smoking at 6 months.

RESULTS

Among 400 participants (263 [65.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 39 [6] years), 97 individuals (24.3%) used opioids and 156 individuals (39.1%) had depressive symptoms. These individuals had a mean (SD) CD4 count of 391 (257) cells/mm3, smoked a mean (SD) of 21 [8] cigarettes/d, and reported a mean (SD) of 9.3 (5.8) HDDs in the prior 30 days. At 3 months, the mean (SD) number of HDDs was decreased vs baseline across all groups (group 1: 2.0 [3.8] HDDs vs. 9.5 [6.1] HDDs; group 2: 2.1 [4.3] HDDs vs 9.3 [5.7] HDDs; group 3: 1.5 [3.3] HDDs vs 8.9 [5.0] HDDs; group 4: 2.4 [5.2] HDDs vs 9.6 [6.3] HDDs). There were no significant differences at 3 months between groups in mean (SD) HDDs, including group 1 vs 2 (incident rate ratio [IRR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.49-1.79), 3 vs 4 (IRR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.30-1.18), and 1 vs 3 (IRR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.65-2.55). There were no significant differences at 6 months between groups in smoking abstinence, including group 1 vs 2 (15 of 100 individuals [15.0%] vs 17 of 99 individuals [17.2%]; odds ratio [OR],0.89; 95% CI, 0.38-2.08), 3 vs 4 (19 of 100 individuals [19.0%] vs 19 of 101 individuals [18.8%]; OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.46-2.17), and 1 vs 3 (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.35-1.78). Post hoc analyses suggested lower mean (SD) HDDs (eg, at 3 months: 0.7 [1.8] HDDs vs 2.3 [4.6] HDDs) and higher alcohol abstinence (eg, at 3 months: 30 of 85 individuals [35.3%] vs 54 of 315 individuals [17.1%]) among those who quit vs continued smoking.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that among individuals with HIV who engaged in risky drinking and smoking, varenicline and cytisine were not more efficacious than NRT to treat risky drinking and smoking but that behavior change rates were high in all groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02797587.

Vaccination and modern management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) carries a tremendous societal and individual burden, posing significant challenges for public health systems worldwide due to its high morbidity and mortality. Due to aging and multimorbidity but also in the wake of important progress in deciphering the heterogeneous disease endotypes, an individualized approach to the prevention and management of COPD is necessary.

AREAS COVERED

This article tackles relevant immunization strategies that are available or still under development with a focus on the latest evidence but also controversies around different regional immunization approaches. Further, we present the crossover between chronic lung inflammation and lung microbiome disturbance as well as its role in delineating COPD endotypes. Moreover, the article attempts to underline endotype-specific treatment approaches. Lastly, we highlight non-pharmacologic prevention and management programs in view of the challenges and opportunities of the COVID-19 era.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the remaining challenges, personalized medicine has the potential to offer tailored approaches to prevention and therapy and promises to improve the care of patients living with COPD.

The effect of area-level disadvantage and race on smoking abstinence in a clinical trial

Reasons for Black-White disparities in smoking abstinence are not well understood. This study examined area-level socioeconomic disadvantage as a contributor to lower quit rates for Blacks who smoke among 223 Black and 221 White low-income individuals who smoke enrolled in a smoking cessation trial. Outcome was cotinine-verified abstinence at week 26. Census tract-level disadvantage was measured using 5-year estimates linked to participants' home address and included percentage of: female headed households; public assistance; unemployed; < 100% of the federal poverty level; and whether there was > 25% having less than a high school education. A neighborhood disadvantage index score (DIS) was calculated as the sum of z scores for each variable. Black participants lived in more disadvantaged areas than White participants [DIS mean (SD): 3.2 (4.3), -1.0 (3.2), p < .001]. Similar rates of abstinence were observed at the same level of disadvantage [DIS ≥ 50th percentile (less disadvantage): 21.9% Blacks, 26.2% Whites, p = .50; DIS < 50th percentile (more disadvantage): 10.7% Blacks, 15.8% Whites, p = .31]. Only DIS but neither race nor the interaction was retained in the final model predicting abstinence; each unit increase in DIS was associated with 9% reduced odds of abstinence, OR: 0.91, 95% CI [0.87,0.96]. Findings point to the importance of examining factors associated with race that contribute to health inequities and underscore the need to consider how consequences of systemic racism, such as neighborhood context and other consequences not captured by the DIS, can constrain or facilitate smoking cessation when developing interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Understanding contexts of smoking and vaping among dual users: analysis of ecological momentary assessment data

AIMS

To understand dual users' cigarette and e-cigarette use patterns, including the contexts in which they vape versus smoke and to understand how environmental and internal contexts and smoking patterns differ between dual users and exclusive smokers.

DESIGN

Longitudinal observational trial.

SETTING

Research center in Wisconsin, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult dual users (n = 162) and adults who exclusively smoked (n = 143), with no plans to quit smoking or vaping in the next 30 days.

MEASUREMENTS

Participants carried smartphones for 2 weeks at baseline to record each use event for the two products and report on the context of their product use. The percentage of mornings where participants vaped first versus smoked were used to compute e-cigarette dependence.

FINDINGS

Hierarchical linear regression models with random slopes and intercepts examined the within- and between-subject effects of context on the likelihood of vaping (versus smoking); significant fixed effects were tested for moderation by e-cigarette dependence. Dual users reported significantly more puffs/cigarette [mean = 13.1, standard deviation (SD) = 10.2] than puffs/vape event (mean = 11.7, SD = 11.5; P = 0.01). E-cigarette dependence moderated the influence of social cues (t-ratio = 2.4, P = 0.02) and smoking restrictions (t-ratio = 3.1, P = 0.003) on the likelihood of vaping versus smoking [odds ratio (OR) = 2.30, P = 0.02]. Context was more related to which product was used in those of low versus higher e-cigarette dependence. Reports of strong cravings to smoke and positive expectancies for cigarettes were associated with a reduced likelihood of vaping, whereas strong cravings to vape and positive vaping expectancies were related to increased likelihood of vaping.

CONCLUSIONS

Among dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes with no motivation to quit, vaping appears to be related to internal cues and more highly linked with social contexts and smoking restrictions (i.e. under stronger external stimulus control) among those with low to moderate e-cigarette dependence compared with high e-cigarette dependence. These findings illustrate the importance of contextual factors in tobacco product use among dual users with the influence of context being reduced at high levels of e-cigarette dependence.

Dual Orexin Receptor Antagonists (DORAs) as an Adjunct Treatment for Smoking Cessation

Smoking is recognized as the most avoidable cause for multiplicity of chronic diseases. However, smoking cessation rates remain low, in part due to the limited target engagement of the currently approved medications for smoking cessation. Sleep is a promising focus for increasing smoking cessation rates because smokers' sleep problems are exacerbated during the first week of smoking abstinence and are associated with poor smoking cessation outcomes. Furthermore, the currently approved smoking cessation pharmacological agents varenicline and nicotine replacement treatment exacerbate sleep problems beyond what would be observed as a consequence of natural nicotine withdrawal. Addressing sleep problems with dual orexin receptor antagonists (DORAs) is positioned to remedy the shortcoming of overlooking sleep as a viable smoking cessation intervention target. Based on previous animal literature, DORA agents suvorexant and lemborexant may accomplish this by diminishing withdrawal difficulty and reducing nicotine cravings. The pharmacologic focus is the orexin system, not only because orexin peptides mediate the sleep-wake cycle, but also because DORA agents have a milder adverse event profile over previous treatments for insomnia. A novel adjunct DORA treatment to a currently approved smoking cessation pharmacotherapy holds a potential to reduce morbidity and mortality caused by smoking.

Estimation and inference for the mediation effect in a time-varying mediation model

Background

Traditional mediation analysis typically examines the relations among an intervention, a time-invariant mediator, and a time-invariant outcome variable. Although there may be a total effect of the intervention on the outcome, there is a need to understand the process by which the intervention affects the outcome (i.e., the indirect effect through the mediator). This indirect effect is frequently assumed to be time-invariant. With improvements in data collection technology, it is possible to obtain repeated assessments over time resulting in intensive longitudinal data. This calls for an extension of traditional mediation analysis to incorporate time-varying variables as well as time-varying effects.

Methods

We focus on estimation and inference for the time-varying mediation model, which allows mediation effects to vary as a function of time. We propose a two-step approach to estimate the time-varying mediation effect. Moreover, we use a simulation-based approach to derive the corresponding point-wise confidence band for the time-varying mediation effect.

Results

Simulation studies show that the proposed procedures perform well when comparing the confidence band and the true underlying model. We further apply the proposed model and the statistical inference procedure to data collected from a smoking cessation study.

Conclusions

We present a model for estimating time-varying mediation effects that allows both time-varying outcomes and mediators. Simulation-based inference is also proposed and implemented in a user-friendly R package.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at (10.1186/s12874-022-01585-x).

Treatment of Tobacco Smoking: A Review

IMPORTANCE

More deaths in the US are attributed to cigarette smoking each year than to any other preventable cause. Approximately 34 million people and an estimated 14% of adults in the US smoke cigarettes. If they stopped smoking, they could reduce their risk of tobacco-related morbidity and mortality and potentially gain up to 10 years of life.

OBSERVATIONS

Tobacco smoking is a chronic disorder maintained by physical nicotine dependence and learned behaviors. Approximately 70% of people who smoke cigarettes want to quit smoking. However, individuals who attempt to quit smoking make an average of approximately 6 quit attempts before achieving long-term abstinence. Both behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy while using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, varenicline, or bupropion are effective treatments when used individually, but they are most effective when combined. In a meta-analysis including 19 488 people who smoked cigarettes, the combination of medication and behavioral counseling was associated with a quit rate of 15.2% over 6 months compared with a quit rate of 8.6% with brief advice or usual care. The EAGLES trial, a randomized double-blind clinical trial of 8144 people who smoked, directly compared the efficacy and safety of varenicline, bupropion, nicotine patch, and placebo and found a significantly higher 6-month quit rate for varenicline (21.8%) than for bupropion (16.2%) and the nicotine patch (15.7%). Each therapy was more effective than placebo (9.4%). Combining a nicotine patch with other NRT products is more effective than use of a single NRT product. Combining drugs with different mechanisms of action, such as varenicline and NRT, has increased quit rates in some studies compared with use of a single product. Brief or intensive behavioral support can be delivered effectively in person or by telephone, text messages, or the internet. The combination of a clinician's brief advice to quit and assistance to obtain tobacco cessation treatment is effective when routinely administered to tobacco users in virtually all health care settings.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Approximately 34 million people in the US smoke cigarettes and could potentially gain up to a decade of life expectancy by stopping smoking. First-line therapy should include both pharmacotherapy and behavioral support, with varenicline or combination NRT as preferred initial interventions.

GSK3β Activity in Reward Circuit Functioning and Addiction

Glycogen synthase kinase-3β (GSK3β), primarily described as a regulator of glycogen metabolism, is a molecular hub linking numerous signaling pathways and regulates many cellular processes like cytoskeletal rearrangement, cell migration, apoptosis, and proliferation. In neurons, the kinase is engaged in molecular events related to the strengthening and weakening of synapses, which is a subcellular manifestation of neuroplasticity. Dysregulation of GSK3β activity has been reported in many neuropsychiatric conditions, like schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and Alzheimer’s disease. In this review, we describe the kinase action in reward circuit-related structures in health and disease. The effect of pharmaceuticals used in the treatment of addiction in the context of GSK3β activity is also discussed.

The effect of varenicline on smoking and drinking outcomes among Black and White adults with alcohol use disorder and co-occurring cigarette smoking: A secondary analysis of two clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Varenicline is an FDA-approved medication for smoking cessation and has demonstrated promise in reducing alcohol use. This study sought to compare the efficacy of varenicline in reducing smoking and drinking among Black and White people seeking alcohol treatment.

METHODS

Linear mixed modeling was conducted using data from two multi-site placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials examining the effects of varenicline for treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD; O'Malley et al., 2018; Litten et al., 2013) among Black and White adults with AUD and co-occurring cigarette smoking. The primary analyses were conducted in a sample of 117 adults (O'Malley trial: 29.1% female, 55.2% Black), and replicated in an independent sample of 73 adults (Litten trial: 23.3% female, 45.2% Black).

RESULTS

Black participants smoked fewer cigarettes per day compared to White participants (O'Malley trial: F_1,116 = 8.95, p = .003; Litten trial: F_1,68.9 = 4.74p = .03). Linear mixed models revealed a marginal effect of varenicline on reducing cigarettes smoked per day regardless of race in the O'Malley trial (F_1,109 = 3.34, p = .07), which was replicated in the Litten trial (F_1,67.1 = 20.77p < .0001). Participants reduced the number of drinks consumed regardless of treatment condition or race in both trials (O'Malley trial: F_1,98 = 131.69, p < .0001; Litten trial:F_1,69 = 60.36, p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our adjusted model findings suggest varenicline reduced smoking among Black and White people with AUD and co-occurring cigarette smoking. However, these findings should be replicated in a larger sample.

Smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is one of the leading causes of early death. Varenicline [Champix (UK), Pfizer Europe MA EEIG, Brussels, Belgium; or Chantix (USA), Pfizer Inc., Mission, KS, USA], bupropion (Zyban; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK) and nicotine replacement therapy are licensed aids for quitting smoking in the UK. Although not licensed, e-cigarettes may also be used in English smoking cessation services. Concerns have been raised about the safety of these medicines and e-cigarettes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes.

DESIGN

Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness analysis informed by the network meta-analysis results.

SETTING

Primary care practices, hospitals, clinics, universities, workplaces, nursing or residential homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Smokers aged ≥ 18 years of all ethnicities using UK-licensed smoking cessation therapies and/or e-cigarettes.

INTERVENTIONS

Varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy as monotherapies and in combination treatments at standard, low or high dose, combination nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarette monotherapies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effectiveness - continuous or sustained abstinence. Safety - serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events and major adverse neuropsychiatric events.

DATA SOURCES

Ten databases, reference lists of relevant research articles and previous reviews. Searches were performed from inception until 16 March 2017 and updated on 19 February 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Three reviewers screened the search results. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and checked by the other reviewers. Network meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and safety outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an amended version of the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes model.

RESULTS

Most monotherapies and combination treatments were more effective than placebo at achieving sustained abstinence. Varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard (odds ratio 5.75, 95% credible interval 2.27 to 14.90) was ranked first for sustained abstinence, followed by e-cigarette low (odds ratio 3.22, 95% credible interval 0.97 to 12.60), although these estimates have high uncertainty. We found effect modification for counselling and dependence, with a higher proportion of smokers who received counselling achieving sustained abstinence than those who did not receive counselling, and higher odds of sustained abstinence among participants with higher average dependence scores. We found that bupropion standard increased odds of serious adverse events compared with placebo (odds ratio 1.27, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.58). There were no differences between interventions in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. There was evidence of increased odds of major adverse neuropsychiatric events for smokers randomised to varenicline standard compared with those randomised to bupropion standard (odds ratio 1.43, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 2.09). There was a high level of uncertainty about the most cost-effective intervention, although all were cost-effective compared with nicotine replacement therapy low at the £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold. E-cigarette low appeared to be most cost-effective in the base case, followed by varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When the impact of major adverse neuropsychiatric events was excluded, varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline low plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When limited to licensed interventions in the UK, nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline standard.

LIMITATIONS

Comparisons between active interventions were informed almost exclusively by indirect evidence. Findings were imprecise because of the small numbers of adverse events identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapies of medicines are among the most clinically effective, safe and cost-effective treatment options for smokers. Although the combined therapy of nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline at standard doses was the most effective treatment, this is currently unlicensed for use in the UK.

FUTURE WORK

Researchers should examine the use of these treatments alongside counselling and continue investigating the long-term effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation compared with active interventions such as nicotine replacement therapy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041302.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effects of Combined Varenicline With Nicotine Patch and of Extended Treatment Duration on Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Smoking cessation medications are routinely used in health care. Research suggests that combining varenicline with the nicotine patch, extending the duration of varenicline treatment, or both, may increase cessation effectiveness.

Objective

To compare combinations of varenicline plus the nicotine or placebo patch vs combinations used for either 12 weeks (standard duration) or 24 weeks (extended duration).

Design, Settings, and Participants

Double-blind, 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial conducted from November 11, 2017, to July 9, 2020, at 1 research clinic in Madison, Wisconsin, and at 1 clinic in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Of the 5836 adults asked to participate in the study, 1251 who smoked 5 cigarettes/d or more were randomized.

Interventions

All participants received cessation counseling and were randomized to 1 of 4 medication groups: varenicline monotherapy for 12 weeks (n = 315), varenicline plus nicotine patch for 12 weeks (n = 314), varenicline monotherapy for 24 weeks (n = 311), or varenicline plus nicotine patch for 24 weeks (n = 311).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was carbon monoxide-confirmed self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 52 weeks.

Results

Among 1251 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 49.1 [11.9] years; 675 [54.0%] women), 751 (60.0%) completed treatment and 881 (70.4%) provided final follow-up. For the primary outcome, there was no significant interaction between the 2 treatment factors of medication type and medication duration (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.17]; P = .66). For patients randomized to 24-week vs 12-week treatment duration, the primary outcome occurred in 24.8% (154/622) vs 24.3% (153/629), respectively (risk difference, -0.4% [95% CI, -5.2% to 4.3%]; OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.15]). For patients randomized to varenicline combination therapy vs varenicline monotherapy, the primary outcome occurred in 24.3% (152/625) vs 24.8% (155/626), respectively (risk difference, 0.4% [95% CI, -4.3% to 5.2%]; OR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.12]). Nausea occurrence ranged from 24.0% to 30.9% and insomnia occurrence ranged from 24.4% to 30.5% across the 4 groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among adults smoking 5 cigarettes/d or more, there were no significant differences in 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 52 weeks among those treated with combined varenicline plus nicotine patch therapy vs varenicline monotherapy, or among those treated for 24 weeks vs 12 weeks. These findings do not support the use of combined therapy or of extended treatment duration.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03176784.

Efficacy of Combining Varenicline and Naltrexone for Smoking Cessation and Drinking Reduction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacological treatments that can concomitantly address cigarette smoking and heavy drinking stand to improve health care delivery for these highly prevalent co-occurring conditions. This superiority trial compared the combination of varenicline and naltrexone against varenicline alone for smoking cessation and drinking reduction among heavy-drinking smokers.

METHODS

This was a phase 2 randomized double-blind clinical trial. Participants (N=165) who were daily smokers and drank heavily received either 2 mg/day of varenicline plus 50 mg/day of naltrexone or 2 mg/day of varenicline plus matched placebo pills for 12 weeks. Primary outcomes were 7-day point prevalence of nicotine abstinence (bioverified by a breath CO reading ≤5 ppm) at the 26-week follow-up and number of drinks per drinking day during the 12-week treatment phase.

RESULTS

Smoking abstinence at week 26 was significantly higher in the varenicline plus placebo condition than in the varenicline plus naltrexone condition (N=37 [45.1%] compared with N=22 [26.5%]). For drinks per drinking day, there was a medication effect favoring the combination of varenicline and naltrexone over varenicline alone across the 12-week treatment phase, although it did not meet the significance threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that smoking cessation and drinking reduction can be concomitantly targeted with pharmacotherapy and that while varenicline alone may be sufficient as a smoking cessation aid in heavy-drinking smokers, the combination of varenicline and naltrexone may confer benefits with regard to drinking outcomes, particularly during the 12-week period of active medication treatment.

Smoking Addiction and Strategies for Cessation

Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) worldwide. Smoking cessation is thus integral to the treatment of COPD. Nicotine addiction is a disease dependent on the complex interactions of neurotransmitter pathways, conditioned behaviors, environmental cues, genetic predisposition, and personal life circumstances, which render some more susceptible to tobacco abuse than others. The most successful smoking cessation programs are individualized, comprehensive, and utilize combinations of clinician counseling, behavioral reinforcement, community resources, advanced technology support (eg, smartphone apps, and Internet Web sites), and pharmacotherapy (both nicotine-based and nonnicotine medications). E-cigarettes were introduced to the US market in 2006 and touted as a safer alternative to tobacco cigarette smoking. Unfortunately, over the last 5 to 10 years, recreational e-cigarette use, or "vaping," has increased in popularity, especially among adolescents. This has introduced nicotine addiction to an entire generation of nonsmokers and resulted in numerous cases of acute lung disease, now known as e-cigarette or vape product use-associated lung injury (EVALI). In light of these adverse events, e-cigarettes and vape products are not currently recommended as a smoking cessation aid.

Smoking Cessation Initiatives in Total Joint Arthroplasty: An Evidence-Based Review

»

As smoking increases the risk of adverse events and leads to increased hospital costs following total joint arthroplasty (TJA), many institutions have introduced perioperative smoking cessation initiatives. Although such programs have been demonstrated to improve outcomes for smokers undergoing TJA, the optimal approach, duration, and timing of smoking cessation models have not been well-defined.

»

Overall, initiating a smoking cessation program 4 weeks preoperatively is likely adequate to provide clinically meaningful reductions in postoperative complications for smokers following TJA, although longer periods of cessation should be encouraged if feasible.

»

Patients brought in for emergency surgical treatment who cannot participate in a preoperative intervention may still benefit from an intervention instituted in the immediate postoperative period.

»

Cotinine testing may provide some benefit for encouraging successful smoking cessation and validating self-reported smoking status, although its utility is limited by its short half-life. Further study is needed to determine the value of other measures of cessation such as carbon monoxide breath testing.

»

Smoking cessation programs instituted prior to TJA have been demonstrated to be cost-effective over both the short and long term.

Data Missing Not at Random in Mobile Health Research: Assessment of the Problem and a Case for Sensitivity Analyses

Background

Missing data are common in mobile health (mHealth) research. There has been little systematic investigation of how missingness is handled statistically in mHealth randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although some missing data patterns (ie, missing at random [MAR]) may be adequately addressed using modern missing data methods such as multiple imputation and maximum likelihood techniques, these methods do not address bias when data are missing not at random (MNAR). It is typically not possible to determine whether the missing data are MAR. However, higher attrition in active (ie, intervention) versus passive (ie, waitlist or no treatment) conditions in mHealth RCTs raise a strong likelihood of MNAR, such as if active participants who benefit less from the intervention are more likely to drop out.

Objective

This study aims to systematically evaluate differential attrition and methods used for handling missingness in a sample of mHealth RCTs comparing active and passive control conditions. We also aim to illustrate a modern model-based sensitivity analysis and a simpler fixed-value replacement approach that can be used to evaluate the influence of MNAR.

Methods

We reanalyzed attrition rates and predictors of differential attrition in a sample of 36 mHealth RCTs drawn from a recent meta-analysis of smartphone-based mental health interventions. We systematically evaluated the design features related to missingness and its handling. Data from a recent mHealth RCT were used to illustrate 2 sensitivity analysis approaches (pattern-mixture model and fixed-value replacement approach).

Results

Attrition in active conditions was, on average, roughly twice that of passive controls. Differential attrition was higher in larger studies and was associated with the use of MAR-based multiple imputation or maximum likelihood methods. Half of the studies (18/36, 50%) used these modern missing data techniques. None of the 36 mHealth RCTs reviewed conducted a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the possible consequences of data MNAR. A pattern-mixture model and fixed-value replacement sensitivity analysis approaches were introduced. Results from a recent mHealth RCT were shown to be robust to missing data, reflecting worse outcomes in missing versus nonmissing scores in some but not all scenarios. A review of such scenarios helps to qualify the observations of significant treatment effects.

Conclusions

MNAR data because of differential attrition are likely in mHealth RCTs using passive controls. Sensitivity analyses are recommended to allow researchers to assess the potential impact of MNAR on trial results.

Effectiveness of Varenicline Versus Combination Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smoking Cessation: One-Year Outcomes in a Smoking Cessation Clinic in Taiwan

INTRODUCTION

Varenicline and combination nicotine replacement treatment (cNRT) have been recommended as the most effective pharmacotherapies, with equal abstinence rate for smoking cessation in a network meta-analysis of randomized trials, but data from real-world long-term follow-up studies are rare. This study aimed to compare the 12-month sustained abstinence rates of smokers using varenicline versus cNRT in their quit attempt.

METHODS

A total of 3569 smokers were recruited via the Department of Family Medicine outpatient department at Kaohsiung Veteran General Hospital between June 2013 and March 2019. Participants received counseling from a physician and chose either varenicline (N = 2870) or cNRT (N = 699) for smoking cessation. Both varenicline and cNRT users could receive a free 8-week supply and eight clinic visits over 90 days. Participants were followed-up by telephone at 12, 24, and 52 weeks from first visit. The primary outcome measure of the study was self-reported sustained abstinence up to 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Varenicline users had a significantly higher sustained abstinence rate at weeks 12-52, adjusted for baseline variables (15.2% vs 10.3%, p = .001; adjusted odds ratio = 1.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-2.05). Other significant predictors of 52 weeks sustained abstinence were being male, having a higher income, attending more clinical visits, and have lower nicotine dependence.

CONCLUSION

Varenicline appears to have higher sustained abstinence rates to 52 weeks compared with cNRT, in a smoking cessation clinic where smokers can choose their medication option.

IMPLICATIONS

Network meta-analysis of randomized trials suggests that varenicline and cNRT are similarly effective for smoking cessation. This study shows that 1-year sustained abstinence rates were significantly higher among smokers using varenicline, compared with smokers using cNRT, when used as part of a structured smoking cessation program. These findings are highly relevant to policy makers and service providers to help determine provision of smoking cessation treatment.

Nicotine Patch Prescription Fulfillment Rates for Emergency Department Patients

Introduction

Smoking cessation has significant health benefits, and the emergency department (ED) can be an important venue for smoking cessation counseling. Nicotine replacement therapy with transdermal patches has been shown to be associated with smoking cessation in a variety of studies. This study evaluated fulfillment rates for prescriptions for nicotine replacement transdermal patches (NRT-P) from the ED.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of all patients receiving a prescription for a NRT-P product from January 2018–October 2019. Charts were reviewed to gather data including age, gender, presence of chronic heart or lung problems, and health insurance. We assessed the fulfillment rate of prescriptions using the Surescripts system, which is a functionality within our electronic health record system that queries participating pharmacies. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine associations between fill rates and the other variables collected from charts.

Results

We had follow-up on 500 patients prescribed nicotine patches. Of those patients, 44% filled their prescriptions. Those who filled their prescriptions were more likely to be female and have a history of chronic lung disease. Self-pay patients were least likely to fill their prescriptions. Overall, we had evidence of smoking cessation in 13% of patients.

Conclusion

This study found that a substantial proportion of patients fail to fill their NRT-P prescriptions. Further work on means of enhancing fulfillment rates is warranted.

Longitudinal evaluation of clinical, spectral and tissue degradation biomarkers in progression of periodontitis among cigarette and electronic cigarette smokers

OBJECTIVES

To longitudinally evaluate the periodontal parameters and MMP-8 and CTX (C-terminal crosslinked telopeptide of type I collagen) levels from diseased and healthy sites from cigarette and electronic cigarette (e-cig) smokers and characterize the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) samples using Raman spectroscopy In addition, to longitudinally determine if MMP-8 and CTX are predictive factors for attachment loss in periodontitis sites.

METHODS

Sixty periodontally healthy and 60 periodontitis/diseased sites from 30 e-cig and 30 cigarette smokers were monitored at baseline, 3 months, and 6-months. GCF was sampled to study the MMP-8 and CTX concentrations using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Infra-red absorption spectra of GCF were acquired at all time points and processed to identify key functional groups.

RESULTS

A significantly increased attachment loss was observed at 6 months for both smokers when compared with baseline (p < 0.01). This difference was significantly high for cigarette smokers compared with e-cig users (p < 0.01). MMP-8, CTX, smoking pack-years were significantly correlated with probing depth and clinical attachment loss among both e-cig and cigarette smokers. For MMP-8 and CTX, the periodontitis sites showed a statistically significant difference between e-cig and cigarette smokers at both 3- and 6 months follow-up. From baseline to 6 months follow-up, periodontitis sites from both groups showed higher spectral band intensities with deconvulations and Raman shifts for Amide I and Amide II peaks.

CONCLUSION

Cigarette smokers showed higher periodontal worsening than e-cig smokers. Smoking, MMP-8, CTX are prognostic factors for clinical attachment loss in cigarette and e-cig smokers.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Data for Raman scattering and spectral information identifying collagen degradation among e-cig and cigarette smokers have been analyzed. This type of analysis proves a robust diagnostic and prognostic tool for periodontal diseases. Smoking, MMP-8, and CTX are prognostic factors for clinical attachment loss in cigarette and e-cig smokers.

Identification of CYP 2A6 inhibitors in an effort to mitigate the harmful effects of the phytochemical nicotine

AIM

In this study, our goal was to study the inhibition of nicotine metabolism by P450 2A6, as a means for reduction in tobacco use and consequently the prevention of smoking-related cancers. Nicotine, a phytochemical, is an addictive stimulant, responsible for the tobacco-dependence in smokers. Many of the other phytochemicals in tobacco, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, N-nitrosamines, and aromatic amines, are potent systemic carcinogens. Tobacco smoking causes about one of every five deaths in the United States annually. Nicotine plasma concentration is maintained by the smokers' smoking behavior within a small range. Nicotine is metabolized by cytochrome P450s 2A6 and 2A13 to cotinine. This metabolism causes a decrease in nicotine plasma levels, which in turn leads to increased tobacco smoking, and increased exposure to the tobacco carcinogens.

METHODS

Using the phytochemical nicotine as a lead structure, and taking its interactions with the P450 2A6 binding pocket into consideration, new pyridine derivatives were designed and synthesized as potential selective mechanism-based inhibitors for this enzyme.

RESULTS

The design and synthesis of two series of novel pyridine-based compounds, with varying substituents and substitution locations on the pyridine ring, as well as their inhibitory activities on cytochrome P450 2A6 and their interactions with its active site are discussed here. Substitutions at position 3 of the pyridine ring with an imidazole or propargyl ether containing group showed the most optimal interactions with the P4502A6 active site.

CONCLUSION

The pyridine compounds with an imidazole or propargyl ether containing substituent on position 3 were found to be promising lead compounds for further development. Hydrogen-bonding interactions were determined to be crucial for effective binding of these molecules within the P450 2A6 active site.

Comparative effects of varenicline or combination nicotine replacement therapy versus patch monotherapy on candidate mediators of early abstinence in a smoking cessation attempt

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The phase-based model of smoking cessation treatment suggests that treatment needs may vary across phases (e.g. pre-cessation, cessation). This study tested the comparative effects of varenicline and combination nicotine replacement therapy (C-NRT) relative to nicotine patch monotherapy on pre-cessation and cessation phase candidate withdrawal, expectancy and motivation mediators; relations between mediators and abstinence; and indirect effects of enhanced treatments on abstinence via candidate mediators.

DESIGN

Secondary mediation analysis of data from the open-label, randomized Wisconsin Smokers' Health Study 2, a comparative effectiveness trial of varenicline or C-NRT, versus patch monotherapy, in adults who smoked, recruited via media and community outreach.

SETTING

Research clinics in Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1051 daily smokers motivated to quit smoking (52.5% female; mean age = 48.1, standard deviation = 11.6).

INTERVENTIONS

Twelve weeks of varenicline (n = 407) or 12 weeks of combination nicotine patch and nicotine lozenge therapy (n = 421), both compared with 12 weeks of patch control condition (n = 230), with individual smoking cessation counseling.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary abstinence outcome was biochemically verified 7-day point-prevalence abstinence 4 weeks post-target quit day (TQD). Candidate mediators (craving, positive smoking expectancies, withdrawal symptoms, and quitting motivation) were assessed via ecological momentary assessment from 1 week prior (pre-cessation phase) to 4 weeks after (cessation phase) the TQD.

FINDINGS

Pre-cessation and cessation mean levels and slopes of craving [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.34-0.79], smoking expectancies (aOR = 0.46-0.79) and quitting motivation (aOR = 1.35-7.21) significantly predicted 4-week post-TQD abstinence (P < 0.05). Significant varenicline mediation occurred via greater suppression in pre-cessation craving [mediated effect (ab) = 0.09, standard error (SE) = 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.04-0.14] and smoking expectancies (ab = 0.06, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.02-0.12). C-NRT mediation occurred via greater reduction in pre-post-TQD changes in craving (ab = 0.04, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.01-0.08) and expectancies (ab = 0.03, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.001-0.07), relative to patch monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Among adult smokers seeking to quit, varenicline seems to work through its effects on suppression of craving and smoking expectancies pre-cessation while combination nicotine replacement therapy mediation seems to work through cessation-related reduction in craving and smoking expectancies changes.

Cessation classification likelihood increases with higher expired-air carbon monoxide cutoffs: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) is commonly used to biochemically verify smoking status. The CO cutoff and CO monitor brand may affect the probability of classifying smokers as abstinent, thus influencing conclusions about the efficacy of cessation trials. No systematic reviews have tested this hypothesis. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis examining whether the likelihood of smoking cessation classification varied due to CO cutoff and monitor brand.

METHODS

Eligible studies (k = 122) longitudinally assessed CO-verified cessation in adult smokers in randomized trials. Primary meta-regressions separately assessed differences in quit classification likelihood due to continuous and categorical CO cutoffs (Low, 3-4 parts per million [ppm]; [SRNT] Recommended, 5-6 ppm; Moderate, 7-8 ppm; and High, 9-10 ppm); exploratory analyses compared likelihood outcomes between monitor brands: Bedfont and Vitalograph.

RESULTS

The likelihood of quit classification increased 18% with each 1 ppm increase above the lowest cutoff (3 ppm). Odds of classification as quit significantly increased between each cutoff category and High: 261% increase from Low; 162% increase from Recommended; and 150% increase from Moderate. There were no differences in cessation classification between monitor brands.

CONCLUSIONS

As expected, higher CO cutoffs were associated with greater likelihood of cessation classification. The lack of CO monitor brand differences may have been due to model-level variance not able to be followed up in the present dataset. Researchers are advised to report outcomes using a range of cutoffs-including the recommended range (5-6 ppm)-and the CO monitor brand/model used. Using higher CO cutoffs significantly increases likelihood of quit classification, possibly artificially elevating treatment strategies.

Evaluating level of adherence to nicotine replacement therapy and its impact on smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has proven effect in assisting smoking cessation. However, its effectiveness varies across studies and population groups. This may be due to differences in the rate of adherence. Hence, this review aims to examine the level of adherence to NRT and to assess if the level of adherence to NRT affects success of smoking cessation.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using studies retrieved from five electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of science, and PsycINFO) and grey literature. Pooled analysis was conducted using Stata version 16 software. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool. Analyses were done among those studies that used similar measurements to assess level of adherence and successful smoking cessation. Heterogeneity of studies was assessed using the Higgins’ I² statistical test. Funnel plots and Egger’s regression asymmetry test were used to affirm presence of significant publication bias.

Results

A total of 7521 adult participants of 18 years old and above from 16 studies were included in the analysis. Level of adherence to NRT among participants of randomised controlled trials were found to be 61% (95% CI, 54–68%), p-value of < 0.001 and I² = 85.5%. Whereas 26% of participants were adherent among participants of population-based studies with 95% CI, 20–32%, p-value of < 0.001 and I² = 94.5%. Level of adherence was the lowest among pregnant women (22%) with 95% CI, 18–25%, p-value of 0.31 and I² = 15.8%. Being adherent to NRT doubles the rate of successful quitting (OR = 2.17, 95% CI, 1.34–3.51), p-value of < 0.001 and I² = 77.6%.

Conclusions

This review highlights a low level of adherence to NRT among participants of population-based studies and pregnant women as compared to clinical trials. Moreover, the review illustrated a strong association between adherence and successful smoking cessation. Hence, it is recommended to implement and assess large scale interventions to improve adherence. Health programs and policies are recommended to integrate the issue of adherence to NRT as a core component of smoking cessation interventions.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020176749. Registered on 28 April 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13690-021-00550-2.

Psychological features of adult patients with langerhans cell histiocytosis

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of psychological symptoms and the co-occurrence of substance abuse disorders in adult patients with Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) has not been previously explored. We aimed to use validated scales to evaluate depression and anxiety symptoms experienced by adult LCH patients.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, all consecutive adult LCH patients seen at our national reference center between January 2012 and January 2013 were asked to complete the following instruments: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS); Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Version 10 (BIS-10); and Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test (CUDIT). Self-reported scores on these scales were used to determine the point prevalence of clinically significant psychological symptoms and substance use disorders in LCH patients. Patient profiles in terms of psychological features were assessed by principal component analysis including the HADS and BIS-10 instruments values, followed by hierarchical clustering. Fisher exact tests and Wilcoxon tests were used to examine the associations between disease-related parameters and high levels of anxiety and impulsivity.

RESULTS

Seventy-one adult LCH patients, mainly with pulmonary LCH (PLCH), completed the evaluations. Clinically significant anxiety and depression symptoms were reported by 22 (31%) and 4 (6%) subjects, respectively. Impulsivity was detected in 14% (10/71) of the patients. Seventeen percent (12/71) of the patients used cannabis on a regular basis, with 50% of these individuals (6/12) exhibiting scores consistent with cannabis use disorder. Three derived clusters of patients were identified in the principal component analysis; these patient clusters differed in successful weaning from tobacco at the time of evaluation (p = 0.03). In univariate analyses, isolated PLCH and the use of psychotropic treatments were statistically associated with clinically significant anxiety symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of anxiety and impulsivity are common in adult patients with LCH. The consequences of these symptoms for the management of LCH patients warrant further evaluation.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in healthy adults: A network meta-analysis

Smoking is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in different non-communicable diseases, and cessation leads to immense health benefits. The present network meta-analysis has been conducted to evaluate and compare the effects of available pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in adults. A standard meta-analysis protocol was developed and after performing a comprehensive literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane databases, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, reviewers extracted data from 97 randomized controlled trials. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction, analysis and reporting of findings. Random effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was done to pool the effects across the interventions. Network graph was built, and for closed triangles in the network graph, node splitting analysis was performed. The primary outcome measure was self-reported biochemically verified smoking abstinence at six months. The number of participants achieving continuous abstinence was reported. Data for the number of participants reporting at least one adverse event was also extracted, if available. Combination of nicotine receptor agonist and nicotine replacement therapy had a significant odd of 4.4 (95%CrI:2.2-8.7), bupropion and nicotine receptor agonist 4.0 (95%CrI:2.1-7.7), bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy 3.8 (95%CrI:2.3-6.2), combination nicotine replacement therapy has an odd of 2.6 (95%CrI:1.8-3.8), and nicotine receptor agonist had a significant odd of 2.7 (95%CrI:2.3-3.2) when compared to placebo (moderate quality of evidence) for continuous abstinence at 6 months. When compared with behavioural therapy, the odds ratio of interventions was not statistically significant. Combination of nicotine receptor agonist and nicotine replacement therapy has the highest probability of being the best treatment for abstinence from smoking.