1
|
Hartmann-Boyce J, Theodoulou A, Farley A, Hajek P, Lycett D, Jones LL, Kudlek L, Heath L, Hajizadeh A, Schenkels M, Aveyard P. Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 10:CD006219. [PMID: 34611902 PMCID: PMC8493442 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006219.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most people who stop smoking gain weight. This can discourage some people from making a quit attempt and risks offsetting some, but not all, of the health advantages of quitting. Interventions to prevent weight gain could improve health outcomes, but there is a concern that they may undermine quitting. OBJECTIVES To systematically review the effects of: (1) interventions targeting post-cessation weight gain on weight change and smoking cessation (referred to as 'Part 1') and (2) interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that plausibly affect post-cessation weight gain (referred to as 'Part 2'). SEARCH METHODS Part 1 - We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register and CENTRAL; latest search 16 October 2020. Part 2 - We searched included studies in the following 'parent' Cochrane reviews: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, e-cigarettes, and exercise interventions for smoking cessation published in Issue 10, 2020 of the Cochrane Library. We updated register searches for the review of nicotine receptor partial agonists. SELECTION CRITERIA Part 1 - trials of interventions that targeted post-cessation weight gain and had measured weight at any follow-up point or smoking cessation, or both, six or more months after quit day. Part 2 - trials included in the selected parent Cochrane reviews reporting weight change at any time point. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. Change in weight was expressed as difference in weight change from baseline to follow-up between trial arms and was reported only in people abstinent from smoking. Abstinence from smoking was expressed as a risk ratio (RR). Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the inverse variance method for weight, and Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking. MAIN RESULTS Part 1: We include 37 completed studies; 21 are new to this update. We judged five studies to be at low risk of bias, 17 to be at unclear risk and the remainder at high risk. An intermittent very low calorie diet (VLCD) comprising full meal replacement provided free of charge and accompanied by intensive dietitian support significantly reduced weight gain at end of treatment compared with education on how to avoid weight gain (mean difference (MD) -3.70 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.82 to -2.58; 1 study, 121 participants), but there was no evidence of benefit at 12 months (MD -1.30 kg, 95% CI -3.49 to 0.89; 1 study, 62 participants). The VLCD increased the chances of abstinence at 12 months (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.73; 1 study, 287 participants). However, a second study found that no-one completed the VLCD intervention or achieved abstinence. Interventions aimed at increasing acceptance of weight gain reported mixed effects at end of treatment, 6 months and 12 months with confidence intervals including both increases and decreases in weight gain compared with no advice or health education. Due to high heterogeneity, we did not combine the data. These interventions increased quit rates at 6 months (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.96; 4 studies, 619 participants; I2 = 21%), but there was no evidence at 12 months (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.06; 2 studies, 496 participants; I2 = 26%). Some pharmacological interventions tested for limiting post-cessation weight gain (PCWG) reduced weight gain at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine, phenylpropanolamine, naltrexone). The effects of ephedrine and caffeine combined, lorcaserin, and chromium were too imprecise to give useful estimates of treatment effects. There was very low-certainty evidence that personalized weight management support reduced weight gain at end of treatment (MD -1.11 kg, 95% CI -1.93 to -0.29; 3 studies, 121 participants; I2 = 0%), but no evidence in the longer-term 12 months (MD -0.44 kg, 95% CI -2.34 to 1.46; 4 studies, 530 participants; I2 = 41%). There was low to very low-certainty evidence that detailed weight management education without personalized assessment, planning and feedback did not reduce weight gain and may have reduced smoking cessation rates (12 months: MD -0.21 kg, 95% CI -2.28 to 1.86; 2 studies, 61 participants; I2 = 0%; RR for smoking cessation 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90; 2 studies, 522 participants; I2 = 0%). Part 2: We include 83 completed studies, 27 of which are new to this update. There was low certainty that exercise interventions led to minimal or no weight reduction compared with standard care at end of treatment (MD -0.25 kg, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.29; 4 studies, 404 participants; I2 = 0%). However, weight was reduced at 12 months (MD -2.07 kg, 95% CI -3.78 to -0.36; 3 studies, 182 participants; I2 = 0%). Both bupropion and fluoxetine limited weight gain at end of treatment (bupropion MD -1.01 kg, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.67; 10 studies, 1098 participants; I2 = 3%); (fluoxetine MD -1.01 kg, 95% CI -1.49 to -0.53; 2 studies, 144 participants; I2 = 38%; low- and very low-certainty evidence, respectively). There was no evidence of benefit at 12 months for bupropion, but estimates were imprecise (bupropion MD -0.26 kg, 95% CI -1.31 to 0.78; 7 studies, 471 participants; I2 = 0%). No studies of fluoxetine provided data at 12 months. There was moderate-certainty that NRT reduced weight at end of treatment (MD -0.52 kg, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.05; 21 studies, 2784 participants; I2 = 81%) and moderate-certainty that the effect may be similar at 12 months (MD -0.37 kg, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.11; 17 studies, 1463 participants; I2 = 0%), although the estimates are too imprecise to assess long-term benefit. There was mixed evidence of the effect of varenicline on weight, with high-certainty evidence that weight change was very modestly lower at the end of treatment (MD -0.23 kg, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.06; 14 studies, 2566 participants; I2 = 32%); a low-certainty estimate gave an imprecise estimate of higher weight at 12 months (MD 1.05 kg, 95% CI -0.58 to 2.69; 3 studies, 237 participants; I2 = 0%). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Overall, there is no intervention for which there is moderate certainty of a clinically useful effect on long-term weight gain. There is also no moderate- or high-certainty evidence that interventions designed to limit weight gain reduce the chances of people achieving abstinence from smoking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jamie Hartmann-Boyce
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Annika Theodoulou
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Amanda Farley
- Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Peter Hajek
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Deborah Lycett
- Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK
| | - Laura L Jones
- Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Laura Kudlek
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Laura Heath
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anisa Hajizadeh
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Willson C. Sympathomimetic amine compounds and hepatotoxicity: Not all are alike-Key distinctions noted in a short review. Toxicol Rep 2018; 6:26-33. [PMID: 30581759 PMCID: PMC6288410 DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2018.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2018] [Revised: 11/29/2018] [Accepted: 11/29/2018] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Sympathomimetic amine compounds are often pooled together and incorrectly assumed to be interchangeable with respect to potential adverse effects. A brief and specific review of sympathomimetic compounds and one instance (i.e., hepatotoxicity) where these compounds have been improperly grouped together is covered. A review of the proposed mechanisms through which known hepatotoxic sympathomimetic agents (e.g., 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine or MDMA, methamphetamine and amphetamine) cause liver injury, along with a corresponding review of in vitro data, interventional data, animal model studies and observational data allow for a comparison/contrast of different agents and reveals a lack of potential toxicity for some agents (e.g., pseudoephedrine, phenylephrine, ephedrine, 1,3-dimethylamylamine, phentermine) in this broad category. Data show that compounds within the broad group of sympathomimetics display divergent pharmacological and toxicological profiles and can be clearly distinguished with respect to liver injury. These data serve as a reminder to clinicians and others, that even small structural differences between molecules can lead to drastically different pharmacological/toxicological profiles and that one should not assume that all sympathomimetic agents are hepatotoxic. Such assumptions could lead to diagnostic errors and incorrect or insufficient treatment.
Collapse
|
3
|
Forey BA, Fry JS, Lee PN, Thornton AJ, Coombs KJ. The effect of quitting smoking on HDL-cholesterol - a review based on within-subject changes. Biomark Res 2013; 1:26. [PMID: 24252691 PMCID: PMC4177613 DOI: 10.1186/2050-7771-1-26] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2013] [Accepted: 08/22/2013] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
A higher concentration of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in ex-smokers than smokers has consistently been observed. Better evidence of quitting effects comes from within-subject changes. We extend an earlier meta-analysis to quantify the reduction, and investigate variation by time quit and other factors. We conducted Medline and Cochrane searches for studies measuring HDL-C in subjects while still smoking and later having quit. Using unweighted and inverse-variance weighted regression analysis, we related changes (in mmol/l) to intra-measurement period, and estimated time quit, and to study type, location and start year, age, sex, product smoked, validation of quitting, baseline HDL-C, baseline and change in weight/BMI, and any study constraints on diet or exercise. Forty-five studies were identified (17 Europe, 16 North America, 11 Asia, 1 Australia). Thirteen were observational, giving changes over at least 12 months, with most involving >1000 subjects. Others were smoking cessation trials, 12 randomized and 20 non-randomized. These were often small (18 of <100 subjects) and short (14 of <10 weeks, the longest a year). Thirty studies provided results for only one time interval. From 94 estimates of HDL-C change, the unweighted mean was 0.107 (95% CI 0.085-0.128). The weighted mean 0.060 (0.044 to 0.075) was lower, due to smaller estimates in longer term studies. Weighted means varied by time quit (0.083, 0.112, 0.111, 0.072, 0.058 and 0.040 for <3, 3 to <6, 6 to <13, 13 to <27, 27 to <52 and 52+ weeks, p=0.006). After adjustment for time quit, estimates varied by study constraint on diet/exercise (p=0.003), being higher in studies requiring subjects to maintain their pre-quitting habits, but no other clear differences were seen, with significant (p<0.05) increases following quitting being evident in all subgroups studied, except where data were very limited. For both continuing and never smokers, the data are (except for two large studies atypically showing significant HDL-C declines in both groups, and a smaller decline in quitters) consistent with no change, and contrast markedly with the data for quitters. We conclude that quitting smoking increases HDL-C, and that this increase occurs rapidly after quitting, with no clear pattern of change thereafter.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - John S Fry
- P.N. Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, Surrey, UK
| | - Peter N Lee
- P.N. Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, Surrey, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sherafat-Kazemzadeh R, Yanovski SZ, Yanovski JA. Pharmacotherapy for childhood obesity: present and future prospects. Int J Obes (Lond) 2013; 37:1-15. [PMID: 22929210 PMCID: PMC3522799 DOI: 10.1038/ijo.2012.144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Pediatric obesity is a serious medical condition associated with significant comorbidities during childhood and adulthood. Lifestyle modifications are essential for treating children with obesity, yet many have insufficient response to improve health with behavioral approaches alone. This review summarizes the relatively sparse data on pharmacotherapy for pediatric obesity and presents information on obesity medications in development. Most previously studied medications demonstrated, at best, modest effects on body weight and obesity-related conditions. It is to be hoped that the future will bring new drugs targeting specific obesity phenotypes that will allow clinicians to use etiology-specific, and therefore more effective, anti-obesity therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roya Sherafat-Kazemzadeh
- Section on Growth and Obesity, Program in Developmental Endocrinology and Genetics, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
| | - Susan Z. Yanovski
- Section on Growth and Obesity, Program in Developmental Endocrinology and Genetics, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health
| | - Jack A. Yanovski
- Section on Growth and Obesity, Program in Developmental Endocrinology and Genetics, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Aubin HJ, Farley A, Lycett D, Lahmek P, Aveyard P. Weight gain in smokers after quitting cigarettes: meta-analysis. BMJ 2012; 345:e4439. [PMID: 22782848 PMCID: PMC3393785 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e4439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 343] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/17/2012] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe weight gain and its variation in smokers who achieve prolonged abstinence for up to 12 months and who quit without treatment or use drugs to assist cessation. DESIGN Meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and trials listed in Cochrane reviews of smoking cessation interventions (nicotine replacement therapy, nicotinic partial agonists, antidepressants, and exercise) for randomised trials of first line treatments (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline) and exercise that reported weight change. We also searched CENTRAL for trials of interventions for weight gain after cessation. REVIEW METHODS Trials were included if they recorded weight change from baseline to follow-up in abstinent smokers. We used a random effects inverse variance model to calculate the mean and 95% confidence intervals and the mean of the standard deviation for weight change from baseline to one, two, three, six, and 12 months after quitting. We explored subgroup differences using random effects meta-regression. RESULTS 62 studies were included. In untreated quitters, mean weight gain was 1.12 kg (95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.47), 2.26 kg (1.98 to 2.54), 2.85 kg (2.42 to 3.28), 4.23 kg (3.69 to 4.77), and 4.67 kg (3.96 to 5.38) at one, two, three, six, and 12 months after quitting, respectively. Using the means and weighted standard deviations, we calculated that at 12 months after cessation, 16%, 37%, 34%, and 13% of untreated quitters lost weight, and gained less than 5 kg, gained 5-10 kg, and gained more than 10 kg, respectively. Estimates of weight gain were similar for people using different pharmacotherapies to support cessation. Estimates were also similar between people especially concerned about weight gain and those not concerned. CONCLUSION Smoking cessation is associated with a mean increase of 4-5 kg in body weight after 12 months of abstinence, and most weight gain occurs within three months of quitting. Variation in weight change is large, with about 16% of quitters losing weight and 13% gaining more than 10 kg.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henri-Jean Aubin
- Centre d'Enseignement, de Recherche et de Traitement des Addictions, Hôpital Paul Brousse, AP-HP, Univ Paris-Sud, INSERM U669, 94804 Villejuif, France.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Farley AC, Hajek P, Lycett D, Aveyard P. Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 1:CD006219. [PMID: 22258966 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006219.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 111] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most people who stop smoking gain weight. There are some interventions that have been designed to reduce weight gain when stopping smoking. Some smoking cessation interventions may also limit weight gain although their effect on weight has not been reviewed. OBJECTIVES To systematically review the effect of: (1) Interventions targeting post-cessation weight gain on weight change and smoking cessation.(2) Interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that may also plausibly affect weight on post-cessation weight change. SEARCH METHODS Part 1 - We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register and CENTRAL in September 2011.Part 2 - In addition we searched the included studies in the following "parent" Cochrane reviews: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists and exercise interventions for smoking cessation published in Issue 9, 2011 of the Cochrane Library. SELECTION CRITERIA Part 1 - We included trials of interventions that were targeted at post-cessation weight gain and had measured weight at any follow up point and/or smoking cessation six or more months after quit day.Part 2 - We included trials that had been included in the selected parent Cochrane reviews if they had reported weight gain at any time point. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data on baseline characteristics of the study population, intervention, outcome and study quality. Change in weight was expressed as difference in weight change from baseline to follow up between trial arms and was reported in abstinent smokers only. Abstinence from smoking was expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the inverse variance method for weight and Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS Part 1: Some pharmacological interventions tested for limiting post cessation weight gain (PCWG) resulted in a significant reduction in WG at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine (Mean difference (MD) -2.50 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.98 to -2.02, 1 study), phenylpropanolamine (MD -0.50 kg, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.20, N=3), naltrexone (MD -0.78 kg, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.05, N=2). There was no evidence that treatment reduced weight at 6 or 12 months (m). No pharmacological intervention significantly affected smoking cessation rates.Weight management education only was associated with no reduction in PCWG at end of treatment (6 or 12m). However these interventions significantly reduced abstinence at 12m (Risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90, N=2). Personalised weight management support reduced PCWG at 12m (MD -2.58 kg, 95% CI -5.11 to -0.05, N=2) and was not associated with a significant reduction of abstinence at 12m (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.43, N=2). A very low calorie diet (VLCD) significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -3.70 kg, 95% CI -4.82 to -2.58, N=1), but not significantly so at 12m (MD -1.30 kg, 95% CI -3.49 to 0.89, N=1). The VLCD increased chances of abstinence at 12m (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.73, N=1). There was no evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy to allay concern about weight gain (CBT) reduced PCWG, but there was some evidence of increased PCWG at 6m (MD 0.74, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.24). It was associated with improved abstinence at 6m (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.13, N=2) but not at 12m (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.86, N=2). However, there was significant statistical heterogeneity.Part 2: We found no evidence that exercise interventions significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.25 kg, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.29, N=4) however a significant reduction was found at 12m (MD -2.07 kg, 95% CI -3.78 to -0.36, N=3).Both bupropion and fluoxetine limited PCWG at the end of treatment (bupropion MD -1.12 kg, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.77, N=7) (fluoxetine MD -0.99 kg, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.61, N=2). There was no evidence that the effect persisted at 6m (bupropion MD -0.58 kg, 95% CI -2.16 to 1.00, N=4), (fluoxetine MD -0.01 kg, 95% CI -1.11 to 1.10, N=2) or 12m (bupropion MD -0.38 kg, 95% CI -2.00 to 1.24, N=4). There were no data on WG at 12m for fluoxetine.Overall, treatment with NRT attenuated PCWG at the end of treatment (MD -0.69 kg, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.51, N=19), with no strong evidence that the effect differed for the different forms of NRT. There was evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity caused by one study which reported a 4.3 kg reduction in PCWG due to NRT. With this study removed, the difference in weight change at end of treatment was -0.45 kg (95% CI -0.66 to -0.27, N=18). There was no evidence of an effect on PCWG at 12m (MD -0.42 kg, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.08, N=15).We found evidence that varenicline significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.41 kg, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.19, N=11), but this effect was not maintained at 6 or 12m. Three studies compared the effect of bupropion to varenicline. Participants taking bupropion gained significantly less weight at the end of treatment (-0.51 kg (95% CI -0.93 to -0.09 kg), N=3). Direct comparison showed no significant difference in PCWG between varenicline and NRT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Although some pharmacotherapies tested to limit PCWG show evidence of short-term success, other problems with them and the lack of data on long-term efficacy limits their use. Weight management education only, is not effective and may reduce abstinence. Personalised weight management support may be effective and not reduce abstinence, but there are too few data to be sure. One study showed a VLCD increased abstinence but did not prevent WG in the longer term. CBT to accept WG did not limit PCWG and may not promote abstinence in the long term. Exercise interventions significantly reduced weight in the long term, but not the short term. More studies are needed to clarify whether this is an effect of treatment or a chance finding. Bupropion, fluoxetine, NRT and varenicline reduce PCWG while using the medication. Although this effect was not maintained one year after stopping smoking, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a modest long-term effect. The data are not sufficient to make strong clinical recommendations for effective programmes to prevent weight gain after cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda C Farley
- Primary Care Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Parsons AC, Shraim M, Inglis J, Aveyard P, Hajek P. Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD006219. [PMID: 19160269 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006219.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most people who stop smoking gain weight, on average about 7 kg in the long term. There are some interventions that have been specifically designed to tackle smoking cessation whilst also limiting weight gain. Many smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and other interventions may also limit weight gain. OBJECTIVES This review is divided into two parts. (1) Interventions designed specifically to aid smoking cessation and limit post-cessation weight gain (2) Interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that may also plausibly have an effect on weight SEARCH STRATEGY Part 1: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register which includes trials indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciSearch and PsycINFO, and other reviews and conference abstracts. Part 2: We searched the included studies of Cochrane smoking cessation reviews of nicotine replacement therapy, antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists (rimonabant), and exercise interventions, published in Issue 4, 2008 of The Cochrane Library. SELECTION CRITERIA Part 1: We included trials of interventions designed specifically to address both smoking cessation and post-cessation weight gain that had measured weight at any follow-up point and/or smoking six months or more after quitting.Part 2: We included trials from the selected Cochrane reviews that could plausibly modify post-cessation weight gain if they had reported weight gain by trial arm at end of treatment or later. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data in duplicate on smoking and weight for part 1 trials, and on weight only for part 2. Abstinence from smoking is expressed as a risk ratio (RR), using the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. The outcome is expressed as the difference in weight change between trial arms from baseline. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking and inverse variance for weight using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS We found evidence that pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing post-cessation weight gain resulted in a significant reduction in weight gain at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine (-2.50kg [-2.98kg to -2.02kg], fluoxetine (-0.80kg [-1.27kg to -0.33kg], phenylpropanolamine (PPA) (-0.50kg [-0.80kg to -0.20kg], naltrexone (-0.76kg [-1.51kg to -0.01kg])). No evidence of maintenance of the treatment effect was found at six or 12 months.Among the behavioural interventions, only weight control advice was associated with no reduction in weight gain and with a possible reduction in abstinence. Individualized programmes were associated with reduced weight gain at end of treatment and at 12 months (-2.58kg [-5.11kg to -0.05kg]), and with no effect on abstinence (RR 0.74 [0.39 to 1.43]). Very low calorie diets (-1.30kg (-3.49kg to 0.89kg] at 12 months) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (-5.20kg (-9.28kg to -1.12kg] at 12 months) were both associated with improved abstinence and reduced weight gain at end of treatment and at long-term follow up.Both bupropion (300mg/day) and fluoxetine (30mg and 60mg/day combined) were found to limit post-cessation weight gain at the end of treatment (-0.76kg [-1.17kg to -0.35kg] I(2)=48%) and -1.30kg [-1.91kg to -0.69kg]) respectively. There was no evidence that the weight reducing effect of bupropion was dose-dependent. The effect of bupropion at one year was smaller and confidence intervals included no effect (-0.38kg [-2.001kg to 1.24kg]).We found no evidence that exercise interventions significantly reduced post-cessation weight gain at end of treatment but evidence for an effect at 12 months (-2.07kg [-3.78kg, -0.36kg]).Treatment with NRT resulted in attenuation of post-cessation weight gain (-0.45kg [-0.70kg, -0.20kg]) at the end of treatment, with no evidence that the effect differed for different forms of NRT. The estimated weight gain reduction was similar at 12 months (-0.42kg [-0.92kg, 0.08kg]) but the confidence intervals included no effect.There were no relevant data on the effect of rimonabant on weight gain.We found no evidence that varenicline significantly reduced post-cessation weight gain at end of treatment and no follow-up data are currently available. One study randomizing successful quitters to 12 more weeks of active treatment showed weight to be reduced by 0.71kg (-1.04kg to -0.38kg). In three studies, participants taking bupropion gained significantly less weight at the end of treatment than those on varenicline (-0.51kg [-0.93kg to -0.09kg]). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Behavioural interventions of general advice only are not effective and may reduce abstinence. Individualized interventions, very low calorie diets, and CBT may be effective and not reduce abstinence. Exercise interventions are not associated with reduced weight gain at end of treatment, but may be associated with worthwhile reductions in weight gain in the long term, Bupropion, fluoxetine, nicotine replacement therapy, and probably varenicline all reduced weight gain while being used. Although this effect was not maintained one year after quitting for bupropion, fluoxetine, and nicotine replacement, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a modest long-term effect. The data are not sufficient to make strong clinical recommendations for effective programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda C Parsons
- Department of Primary Care & General Practice, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, UK, B15 2TT.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Cigarette smoking is the single most important preventable cause of death and illness. Smoking cessation is associated with substantial health benefits. Weight gain is cited as a primary reason for not trying to quit smoking. There is a great variability in the amount of weight gain but younger ages, lower socio-economic status and heavier smoking are predictors of higher weight gain. Weight change after smoking cessation appears to be influenced by underlying genetic factors. Besides, weight gain after smoking cessation is largely because of increased body fat and some studies suggest that it mostly occurs in the subcutaneous region of the body. The mechanism of weight gain includes increased energy intake, decreased resting metabolic rate, decreased physical activity and increased lipoprotein lipase activity. Although there is convincing evidence for the association between smoking cessation and weight gain, the molecular mechanisms underlying this relationship are not well understood. This review summarizes current information of the effects of nicotine on peptides involved in feeding behaviour. Smoking was shown to impair glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity and cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that smokers are insulin-resistant and hyperinsulinaemic, as compared with non-smokers. Smoking cessation seems to improve insulin sensitivity in spite of the weight gain. Nicotine replacement - in particular nicotine gum - appears to be effective in delaying post-cessation weight gain. In a group of women who failed to quit smoking because of weight gain, a dietary intervention (intermittent very-low-calorie diet) plus nicotine gum showed to both increase success rate in terms of smoking cessation and prevent weight gain. On the other hand, body weight gain at the end of treatment was significantly lower in the patients receiving bupropion or bupropion plus nicotine patch, compared with placebo. Studies with new drugs available for the treatment of obesity - sibutramine and orlistat - are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Filozof
- Unidad de Tabaquismo, Area de Prevención y Rehabilitación Cardíaca, Instituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Affiliation(s)
- I Sampablo Lauro
- Servicio del Aparato Respiratorio, Instituto Universitario Dexeus, Barcelona, España.
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
|
11
|
Maeda K, Noguchi Y, Fukui T. The effects of cessation from cigarette smoking on the lipid and lipoprotein profiles: a meta-analysis. Prev Med 2003; 37:283-90. [PMID: 14507483 DOI: 10.1016/s0091-7435(03)00110-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 146] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cross-sectional studies revealed that cigarette smokers have lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels and higher levels of total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and triglycerides (TG) than nonsmokers. But prospective studies on the effects of cigarette smoking cessation on lipid profile have yielded inconclusive results. METHODS Relevant English articles were retrieved by keyword searches of MEDLINE (1966-October 2000), Cochrane Library (2000, Issue 2), and cited references. Twenty-seven studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) prospective cohort study including clinical trials, (2) measuring smoking status and lipid profile of HDL-C, TC, LDL-C, and TG, (3) reporting the changes of lipid concentrations in abstinent smokers, and (4) not using adjuvant antihyperlipidemic drugs. RESULTS Overall Q statistics for net change of HDL-C, TC, LDL-C, and TG showed heterogeneity. Using a random-effects model, HDL-C level increased significantly [0.100 (CI 0.074 to 0.127) mmol/L] after smoking cessation. However, levels of TC [+0.003 (CI -0.042 to 0.048)], LDL-C [-0.064 (CI -0.149 to 0.021)], and TG [+0.028 (CI -0.014 to 0.071)] did not change significantly after smoking cessation. CONCLUSIONS Cigarette smoking cessation increases serum levels of HDL-C but not of TC, LDL-C, and TG.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kenji Maeda
- Department of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jessen AB, Toubro S, Astrup A. Effect of chewing gum containing nicotine and caffeine on energy expenditure and substrate utilization in men. Am J Clin Nutr 2003; 77:1442-7. [PMID: 12791621 DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/77.6.1442] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nicotine replacement therapy limits weight gain after smoking cessation. This finding is partly attributable to the thermogenic effect of nicotine, which may be enhanced by caffeine. OBJECTIVE We assessed the acute thermogenic effects of chewing gum containing different doses of nicotine and caffeine. DESIGN This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study included 12 healthy, normal-weight men (aged 18-45 y). Energy expenditure was measured with indirect calorimetry before and 2.5 h after subjects chewed each of 7 different types of gum containing the following doses of nicotine/caffeine: 0/0, 1/0, 2/0, 1/50, 2/50, 1/100, and 2/100 mg/mg. RESULTS The thermogenic responses (increases over the response to placebo) were 3.7%, 4.9%, 7.9%, 6.3%, 8.5%, and 9.8%, respectively, for the gums containing 1/0, 2/0, 1/50, 2/50, 1/100, and 2/100 mg nicotine/mg caffeine (P < 0.05 for all). Adding caffeine to 1 and 2 mg nicotine significantly enhanced the thermogenic response, but changing the caffeine dose (from 50 to 100 mg) did not change the thermogenic effect. None of the combinations changed the respiratory quotient compared with placebo, which indicates that glucose and fat oxidation rates were increased to a similar extent. Side effects occurred only with 2 mg nicotine. CONCLUSIONS One milligram of nicotine has a pronounced thermogenic effect, which can be increased by approximately 100% by adding 100 mg caffeine. Increasing the nicotine dose to 2 mg does not increase the thermogenic effect but produces side effects in most subjects. Caffeine may be useful in preventing weight gain after smoking cessation if its thermogenic effect can be used to enhance nicotine's effect on long-term energy balance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna B Jessen
- Department of Human Nutrition, Centre for Advanced Food Studies, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Levine MD, Marcus MD, Perkins KA. Women, weight, and smoking: A cognitive behavioral approach to women's concerns about weight gain following smoking cessation. COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL PRACTICE 2003. [DOI: 10.1016/s1077-7229(03)80018-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
14
|
|
15
|
Kotlyar M, Golding M, Hatsukami DK, Jamerson BD. Effect of nonnicotine pharmacotherapy on smoking behavior. Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21:1530-48. [PMID: 11765304 DOI: 10.1592/phco.21.20.1530.34477] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Smoking-related disease is the single biggest preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, yet approximately 25% of Americans continue to smoke. Various dosage forms of nicotine replacement therapy increase smoking quit rates relative to placebo, but they generally do not result in 1-year quit rates of over 20%. To increase these rates, a number of nonnicotine agents have been investigated. Drugs that modulate noradrenergic neurotransmission (bupropion, nortriptyline, moclobemide) are more effective than those affecting serotonin (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, buspirone, ondansetron) or other neurotransmitters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Kotlyar
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota at Twin Cities, Minneapolis 55455, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Affiliation(s)
- J R Arch
- GlaxoSmithKline, New Frontiers Science Park North, Coldharbour Road, Harlow, Essex, CM19 5AD, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Since passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, the sale of herbal dietary supplements containing caffeine and ephedrine for weight loss has become widespread in the United States. Reports of adverse events associated with the use of these non-prescription supplements have raised concerns in the United States regulatory community. Restricting the use of these products is now being considered. Such restriction should be based upon controlled clinical trials. This review of the literature in Medline relative to the use of caffeine and ephedrine in the treatment of obesity concludes that caffeine and ephedrine are effective in causing weight loss. Caffeine and ephedrine give equivalent weight loss to Diethylpropion and superior weight loss compared to dexfenfluramine. Caffeine and ephedrine have a long history of safe, non-prescription use. The adverse events accompanying acute dosing are mild and transient. Adverse events with caffeine and ephedrine reach and remain at placebo levels after 4-12 weeks of continuous treatment, but data from randomized trials up to 6 months only are available. Obesity is chronic, requires chronic treatment, its incidence is increasing and it has few effective treatments. The benefits of caffeine and ephedrine in treating obesity appear to outweigh the small associated risks. Restriction of dietary herbal supplements containing caffeine and ephedrine, often with other ingredients, should be based on controlled clinical trials of these products.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F L Greenway
- Pennington Biomedical Research Center, 6400 Perkins Road, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Perkins KA, Marcus MD, Levine MD, D'Amico D, Miller A, Broge M, Ashcom J, Shiffman S. Cognitive–behavioral therapy to reduce weight concerns improves smoking cessation outcome in weight-concerned women. J Consult Clin Psychol 2001. [DOI: 10.1037/0022-006x.69.4.604] [Citation(s) in RCA: 159] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
19
|
|