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

Behavioural support and nicotine replacement therapy for smokeless tobacco cessation in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan: A pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Smokeless tobacco (ST) use in South Asia is high, yet interventions to support its cessation are lacking. We tested the feasibility of delivering interventions for ST cessation in South Asia.

DESIGN

We used a 2 × 2 factorial design, pilot randomized controlled trial with a duration of 26 weeks, including baseline and follow-up (6, 12 and 26 weeks) assessments.

SETTING

Two primary health-care facilities each in Dhaka (Bangladesh) and Karachi (Pakistan) and a walk-in cancer screening clinic in Noida (India) took part.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult daily ST users willing to make a quit attempt within 30 days. Of 392 screened, 264 participants [mean age: 35 years, standard deviation = 12.5, 140 (53%) male] were recruited between December 2020 and December 2021; 132 from Bangladesh, 44 from India and 88 from Pakistan.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to one of three treatment options [8-week support through nicotine replacement therapy (NRT, n = 66), a behavioural intervention for smokeless tobacco cessation in adults (BISCA, n = 66) or their combination (n = 66)] or the control condition of very brief advice (VBA) to quit (n = 66).

MEASUREMENTS

Recruitment and retention, data completeness and feasibility of intervention delivery were evaluated. Biochemically verified abstinence from tobacco, using salivary cotinine, was measured at 26 weeks.

FINDINGS

Retention rates were 94.7% at 6 weeks, dropping to 89.4% at 26 weeks. Attendance in BISCA pre-quit (100%) and quit sessions (86.3%) was high, but lower in post-quit sessions (65.9%), with variability among countries. Adherence to NRT also varied (45.5% Bangladesh, 90% India). Data completion for key variables exceeded 93% among time-points, except at 26 weeks for questions on nicotine dependence (90%), urges (89%) and saliva samples (62.7%). Among follow-up time-points, self-reported abstinence was generally higher among participants receiving BISCA and/or NRT. At 26 weeks, biochemically verified abstinence was observed among 16 (12.1%) participants receiving BISCA and 13 (9.8%) participants receiving NRT.

CONCLUSIONS

This multi-country pilot randomized controlled trial of tobacco cessation among adult smokeless tobacco users in South Asia demonstrated the ability to recruit and retain participants and report abstinence, suggesting that a future definitive smokeless tobacco cessation trial is viable.

Impact of Flaxseed Oil Supplementation on Tobacco Dependence, Craving, and Haematological Parameters in Tobacco-Dependent Subjects

Background Tobacco is prevalently used in smoking or smokeless forms and remains a major public health concern worldwide, with its adverse effects on overall health. Omega-3 fatty acid (FA) has shown its promising effects in various health conditions. Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of flaxseed oil (omega-3 supplementation) on tobacco dependence, craving, withdrawal symptoms, and haematological parameters in tobacco users. Methods In this randomised, single-blind, placebo-controlled study, 104 tobacco users (54 in the omega-3 group and 50 in the placebo group) were supplemented with 10 ml of food-grade flaxseed oil and 10 ml of placebo for six months, respectively. Their demographics, frequency of daily tobacco use, tobacco dependence, tobacco craving, tobacco withdrawal symptoms, and complete blood count (CBC) were assessed at baseline (before intervention) and after a six-month intervention. Results The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar except for gender at baseline. There were 50 males and four females in the omega-3 group, while there were 42 males and eight females in the placebo group. After a six-month flaxseed oil intervention, BMI values showed a significant reduction (p = 0.0081) in the omega-3 group when compared to baseline; however, CBC parameters did not show any significant changes when comparing baseline to follow-up values. On the contrary, haemoglobin and red blood cells (RBCs) showed significant changes when comparing the follow-ups of the omega-3 group with the placebo group, indicating p = 0.0016 and p = 0.0163, respectively. Also, omega-3 effectively decreased daily tobacco use frequency (p<0.0001), tobacco dependence (p<0.0001), and craving (p<0.0001). Conclusion Supplementation of 10 ml of flaxseed oil per day (omega-3 FA) for six months significantly reduced tobacco dependence and cravings. Additionally, the flaxseed oil supplementation effectively reduced the frequency of daily tobacco intake and modulated tobacco withdrawal symptoms. Thus, our results suggest that flaxseed oil supplementation is a useful adjunct for tobacco users who intend to quit tobacco use.

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.

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.

Bayesian regularization to predict neuropsychiatric adverse events in smoking cessation with pharmacotherapy

BACKGROUND

Research on risk factors for neuropsychiatric adverse events (NAEs) in smoking cessation with pharmacotherapy is scarce. We aimed to identify predictors and develop a prediction model for risk of NAEs in smoking cessation with medications using Bayesian regularization.

METHODS

Bayesian regularization was implemented by applying two shrinkage priors, Horseshoe and Laplace, to generalized linear mixed models on data from 1203 patients treated with nicotine patch, varenicline or placebo. Two predictor models were considered to separate summary scores and item scores in the psychosocial instruments. The summary score model had 19 predictors or 26 dummy variables and the item score model 51 predictors or 58 dummy variables. A total of 18 models were investigated.

RESULTS

An item score model with Horseshoe prior and 7 degrees of freedom was selected as the final model upon model comparison and assessment. At baseline, smokers reporting more abnormal dreams or nightmares had 16% greater odds of experiencing NAEs during treatment (regularized odds ratio (rOR) = 1.16, 95% credible interval (CrI) = 0.95 - 1.56, posterior probability P(rOR > 1) = 0.90) while those with more severe sleep problems had 9% greater odds (rOR = 1.09, 95% CrI = 0.95 - 1.37, P(rOR > 1) = 0.85). The prouder a person felt one week before baseline resulted in 13% smaller odds of having NAEs (rOR = 0.87, 95% CrI = 0.71 - 1.02, P(rOR < 1) = 0.94). Odds of NAEs were comparable across treatment groups. The final model did not perform well in the test set.

CONCLUSIONS

Worse sleep-related symptoms reported at baseline resulted in 85%-90% probability of being more likely to experience NAEs during smoking cessation with pharmacotherapy. Treatment for sleep disturbance should be incorporated in smoking cessation program for smokers with sleep disturbance at baseline. Bayesian regularization with Horseshoe prior permits including more predictors in a regression model when there is a low number of events per variable.

Social desirability and under-reporting of smokeless tobacco use among reproductive age women: Evidence from National Family Health Survey

Introduction

This study hypothesises that the presence of a third person during the interaction between the survey investigator and the woman respondent leads to underreporting of smokeless tobacco (SLT) use by Indian women, including pregnant and breastfeeding women.

Methods

Cross-sectional data from the National Family Health Survey conducted in 2015-16 was analysed for SLT use among women aged 15-49. Multivariate logistic regression examined the odds of SLT use reporting by women respondents in the presence of their husbands and other male or female adults.

Results

SLT use reporting by women significantly varied by the presence of someone during the interview. The analysis shows that the odds of reporting SLT use among women who were neither pregnant nor lactating was 20.6% lower when they were interviewed in the presence of their husbands than when they were interviewed alone. Similarly, compared to those interviewed alone, the odds of women reporting SLT use was 16.5% lower among pregnant and breastfeeding women interviewed in the presence of any adult female. The odds of women under-reporting SLT use were higher in Central and Western India.

Conclusions

This study argues that the current survey estimates misconstrue the authentic prevalence of tobacco use among women in India, including pregnant and lactating women. Due to social desirability or the presence of a third person during the survey interview, those respondents who do not report their tobacco use status are also more likely to forego essential support for successful tobacco cessation. Survey methodology must be strengthened to avert the presence of a third person during the interview to ensure better reporting and population health estimates.

Behavioural support and nicotine replacement therapy for smokeless tobacco cessation: protocol for a pilot randomised-controlled multi-country trial

BACKGROUND

Smokeless tobacco (ST) is consumed globally by more than 350 million people, with approximately 85% of all users based in South and Southeast Asia. In this region, ST products are cheap and easily accessible. Evidence-based interventions to people quit ST use are lacking. This study aims to test the feasibility of conducting a future definitive trial of ST cessation, using a culturally adapted behavioural intervention, and/or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in three South Asian countries.

METHODS

We will conduct a factorial design, randomised-controlled pilot trial in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan. Daily ST users will be recruited from primary health care settings in Dhaka, Noida and Karachi. Participants will be individually randomised to receive intervention A (4 or 6 mg NRT chewing gum for 8-weeks), intervention B (BISCA: face-to-face behavioural support for ST cessation), a combination of interventions A and B or usual care (Very Brief Advice - VBA). The participants will provide demographic and ST use related data at baseline, and at 6, 12 and 26 weeks of follow-up. Salivary cotinine samples will be collected at baseline and 26 weeks. The analyses will undertake an assessment of the feasibility of recruitment, randomisation, data collection and participant retention, as well as the feasibility of intervention delivery. We will also identify potential cessation outcomes to inform the main trial, understand the implementation, context and mechanisms of impact through a process evaluation and, thirdly, establish health resource use and impact on the quality of life through health economic data.

DISCUSSION

The widespread and continued use of ST products in South Asia is consistent with a high rate of associated diseases and negative impact on the quality of life. The identification of feasible, effective and cost-effective interventions for ST is necessary to inform national and regional efforts to reduce ST use at the population level. The findings of this pilot trial will inform the development of larger trials for ST cessation among South Asian users, with relevance to wider regions and populations having high rates of ST use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN identifier 65109397.

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.

Smokeless tobacco cessation interventions: A systematic review

Background & objectives:

Smokeless tobacco (SLT) consumption is a global health issue with about 350 million users and numerous adverse health consequences like oral cancer and myocardial disorders. Hence, cessation of SLT use is as essential as smoking cessation. An update on the available literature on SLT cessation intervention studies is provided here.

Methods:

Through an extensive literature search on SLT cessation intervention studies, using keywords such as smokeless tobacco, cessation, interventions, quitlines, brief advice, nicotine replacement therapy, nicotine gum, nicotine lozenge, nicotine patch, bupropion, varenicline, mHealth, etc., 59 eligible studies were selected. Furthermore, efficacy of the interventions was assessed from the reported risk ratios (RRs) [confidence intervals (CIs)] and quit rates.

Results:

Studies were conducted in Scandinavia, India, United Kingdom, Pakistan and the United States of America, with variable follow up periods of one month to 10 years. Behavioural interventions alone showed high efficacy in SLT cessation; most studies were conducted among adults and showed positive effects, i.e. RR [CI] 0.87 [0.7, 1.09] to 3.84 [2.33, 6.33], quit rate between 9-51.5 per cent, at six months. Regular telephone support/quitlines also proved beneficial. Among pharmacological modalities, nicotine lozenges and varenicline proved efficacious in SLT cessation.

Interpretation & conclusions:

Globally, there is limited information available on SLT cessation intervention trials, research on which must be encouraged, especially in the low-resource, high SLT burden countries; behavioural interventions are most suitable for such settings. Appropriate training/sensitization of healthcare professionals, and school-based SLT use prevention and cessation programmes need to be encouraged.

Challenges in Indian Women’s Readiness to Quit Smokeless Tobacco Use

Introduction: In India, there are few cessation programs for women smokeless tobacco (SLT) users who want to quit. This paper uses Fishbein’s IM model to identify women SLT users’ challenges to quitting and multilevel correlates of “readiness to quit”. Methods: A survey of SLT use among women of reproductive age was conducted in 2010-13 in an urban slum community of Mumbai with a representative sample of 409 married women aged 18 to 40 years using at least one type of SLT daily. Data were analyzed using frequencies, bivariate statistics and logistic regression. Results: Social influences to continue SLT use included husband’s use (71%), family influence and positive beliefs and norms about use. Pressure to quit from significant others influenced past quit attempts but media had no effect on reported behavior. Four groups represented different readiness to quit statues based on intention to quit and past quit/reduce attempts. Seventeen percent had no intention of quitting or reducing; their husbands were more likely to be tobacco users. Half of (52%) the sample had attempted to quit/reduce tobacco and intended to do so in the future. These women were depressed. Fifteen percent had tried to quit but did not intend to again. Correlates were positive beliefs and norms about SLT and withdrawal symptoms. Conclusions: Cessation programs should be made available to women, addressing correlates of women’s readiness to quit statuses. Results suggest the need for more complex social/contextual approaches to sustained cessation of SLT use including addressing depression and withdrawal, improved media messages and campaigns tailored to women, and support from family members.

A Policy Perspective on the Global Use of Smokeless Tobacco

Background

Globally, over 300 million people consume diverse smokeless tobacco (ST) products. They are addictive, cause cancer, increased cardiovascular mortality risks and poor pregnancy outcomes.

Purpose of Review

To identify gaps in implementing key ST demand-reduction measures, focused literature reviews were conducted and findings synthesized according to relevant WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) Articles.

Recent Findings

The literature supports implementation of ST demand-reduction measures. For taxation, labelling and packaging, most administrations have weaker policies for ST than cigarettes. Capacity to regulate ST contents and offer cessation support is lacking. There is poor compliance with bans on ST advertising, promotion and sponsorship.

Summary

The literature on implementation of WHO FCTC for ST is limited. Although strengths of ST demand-control activities are currently identifiable from available literature, full implementation of FCTC is lacking. A wider evidence-based response to WHO FCTC is proposed, particularly for countries facing the greatest disease burdens.

Tobacco Cessation Treatment Pathways for Patients With Cancer: 10 Years in the Making

Tobacco use is the most common cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States; it accounts for one-third of all cancer deaths and is thought to account for half of preventable cancer deaths. This article describes the Tobacco Treatment Program at a major academic cancer center. Patients and employees may access these services in a number of ways. All current smokers and recent quitters are proactively contacted and invited to participate. Services provided are tailored to the motivational level of individual patients and their immediate medical needs. The treatment pathways we present are based on our experience from the last 10 years in treating more than 5,000 unique patients with around 60,000 patient visits. These pathways include behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy, including first-line, second-line, and off-label medication use. This article describes the program with the goal of providing guidance and ideas to others who are developing treatment programs and providing treatment to tobacco users.

Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery Model for Low-Resource Settings: An International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation Consensus Statement

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a global epidemic, which is largely preventable. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is demonstrated to be efficacious and cost-effective for secondary prevention in high-income countries. Given its affordability, CR should be more broadly implemented in middle-income countries as well. Hence, the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (ICCPR) convened a writing panel to recommend strategies to deliver all core CR components in low-resource settings, namely: (1) initial assessment, (2) lifestyle risk factor management (i.e., diet, tobacco, mental health), (3) medical risk factor management (lipids, blood pressure), (4) education for self-management; (5) return to work; and (6) outcome evaluation. Approaches to delivering these components in alternative, arguably lower-cost settings, such as the home, community and primary care, are provided. Recommendations on delivering each of these components where the most-responsible CR provider is a non-physician, such as an allied healthcare professional or community health care worker, are also provided.

Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

Background

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

Methods and Results

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

Conclusions

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

Interventions for smokeless tobacco use cessation

BACKGROUND

Use of smokeless tobacco (ST) can lead to tobacco dependence and long-term use can lead to health problems including periodontal disease, cancer, and cerebrovascular and cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of behavioural and pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of ST use.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialised register in June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of behavioural or pharmacological interventions to help users of ST to quit with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. We summarised outcomes as risk ratios (RRs). For subgroups of trials with similar types of intervention and without substantial statistical heterogeneity, we estimated pooled effects using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 34 trials that met the inclusion criteria, of which nine were new for this update, representing over 16,000 participants. There was moderate quality evidence from two studies suggesting that varenicline increases ST abstinence rates (risk ratio [RR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.68, 507 participants). Pooled results from two trials of bupropion did not detect a benefit of treatment at six months or longer (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.44, 293 participants) but the confidence interval was wide. Neither nicotine patch (five trials, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.37, 1083 participants) nor nicotine gum (two trials, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.43, 310 participants) increased abstinence. Pooling five studies of nicotine lozenges did increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.59, 1529 participants) but confidence in this estimate is low as the result is sensitive to the exclusion of three trials which did not use a placebo control.Statistical heterogeneity was evident among the 17 trials of behavioural interventions: eight of them reported statistically and clinically significant benefits; six suggested benefit but with wide CIs and no statistical significance; and three had similar intervention and control quit rates and relatively narrow CIs. Heterogeneity was not explained by study design (individual or cluster randomization), whether participants were selected for interest in quitting, or specific intervention components. In a post hoc subgroup analysis, trials of behavioural interventions incorporating telephone support, with or without oral examination and feedback, were associated with larger effect sizes, but oral examination and feedback alone were not associated with benefit.In one trial an interactive website increased abstinence more than a static website. One trial comparing immediate cessation using nicotine patch versus a reduction approach using either nicotine lozenge or brand switching showed greater success for the abrupt cessation group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Varenicline, nicotine lozenges and behavioural interventions may help ST users to quit. Confidence in results for nicotine lozenges is limited. Confidence in the size of effect from behavioural interventions is limited because the components of behavioural interventions that contribute to their impact are not clear.

Evaluating the Effects of Varenicline on Craving, Withdrawal, and Affect in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Varenicline for Smokeless Tobacco Dependence in India

This study examined changes in tobacco craving, withdrawal, and affect as correlates of efficacy in a phase-2 clinical trial of varenicline for smokeless tobacco dependence in India. Smokeless tobacco users (N = 237) at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences were randomized to placebo or varenicline. Abstinence was defined as cotinine-verified seven-day point prevalence cessation at end of treatment (EOT). General Linear Model repeated measures assessed the effects of treatment condition, time, abstinence state, and interaction effects on changes in craving, withdrawal, positive (PA) and negative affect (NA) from baseline to EOT. All participants showed a significant reduction in withdrawal (p < .001), total craving (p < .001), positive reinforcement (PR) craving (p < .001), and NA (p = .02), and an increase in PA (p = .04) from baseline to EOT. However, there were no differences between placebo and varenicline participants in measures of withdrawal, craving, or affect from baseline to week 3 or at EOT. Significant interactions between time and abstinence state were found for total craving (p = .008), PR craving (p < .001), and withdrawal (p = .001), indicating reductions in these processes among those abstinent vs. those still chewing smokeless tobacco. Additional research is needed concerning the effects of varenicline on craving, withdrawal, and affect among smokeless tobacco users.

Biochemical Validation of Self-Reported Smokeless Tobacco Abstinence among Smokeless Tobacco Users: Results from a Clinical Trial of Varenicline in India

The validity of self-reported tobacco use is often questioned given the potential for underestimation of use. This study used data from a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of varenicline for smokeless tobacco dependence in India to evaluate the accuracy of self-reported smokeless tobacco cessation using biochemical validation procedures and to evaluate correlates of reporting inaccuracy. Smokeless tobacco users attending a dental clinic at AIIMS were randomized to placebo or varenicline; all participants received counseling. Detailed smokeless tobacco use was recorded and abstinence was defined as cotinine-verified 7-day point prevalence cessation (cotinine < 50 ng/ml) and breath CO > 10 ppm at the end of 12 weeks of treatment. One-half of study completers (82/165) self-reported abstinence. Biochemical verification confirmed that (65.9%) subjects provided accurate self-reports while (34.1%) participants underreported tobacco use. These data indicate poor agreement between self-reported and biochemically confirmed abstinence (κ = -0.191). Underreporters of tobacco use had significantly higher baseline cotinine (p < 0.05), total craving (p < 0.012), and negative reinforcement craving (p < 0.001) vs. those whose self-reports were correctly verified. These findings provide evidence to support the need for biochemical validation of self-reported abstinence outcomes among smokeless tobacco users in cessation programs in India and identify high levels of pretreatment cotinine and craving levels as potential correlates of false reporting.

Smoking cessation in Asians: focus on varenicline

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

Dental Procedures, Oral Practices, and Associated Anxiety: A Study on Late-teenagers

Objectives

The study aims to determine the degree of anxiety pertaining to dental procedures and various oral hygiene practices among college teenagers.

Methods

Corah's Modified Dental Anxiety Scale was administered on a randomly chosen sample of 100 Indian college students (50 males and 50 females) of Delhi University, belonging to the age group of 17–20 years.

Results

Descriptive statistical computations revealed 12.14 years as the mean age of first dental visit, with moderately high levels of anxiety (60.75%) for various dental procedures among the Indian teenagers and 5% lying in the “phobic or extremely anxious” category. With merely 4.16% people going for regular consultations, general check-ups evoked 78.3% anxiety and having an injection or a tooth removed was perceived as the most threatening. The sample subgroup not using mouthwash and mouthspray, smokers, and alcohol drinkers with improper oral hygiene practices experienced much higher anxiety towards routine dental procedures.

Conclusion

The majority of the Indian youngsters had an evasive attitude of delaying dental treatment. The core problems lay in deficient health care knowledge, lack of patient-sensitive pedagogy to train dental professionals, inaccessibility of services, and a dismissive attitude towards medical help. The feelings of fear and anxiety prevalent among the Indian youth offer significant insights into causes and preventive measures for future research and practice. Methods of education and motivation could be developed to dissipate the anxiety amongst Indian teenagers that prevent routine dental visits and maintenance of adequate oral hygiene.

Role of nicotine receptor partial agonists in tobacco cessation

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