Randomized trial of nicotine lozenges and phone counseling for smokeless tobacco cessation

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.

A real-world evaluation of a smokeless tobacco cessation text message program for veterans: Outcomes and comparison to cigarette smokers

INTRODUCTION

Smokeless tobacco (ST) use and cessation rates have remained unchanged while cigarette smoking has declined, and cessation rates have increased. Text message programs have proved effective for cigarette smokers but have not been evaluated for ST users. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) created a ST-specific arm of its SmokefreeVET automated text message program to help veteran ST users quit.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation was conducted on a real-world sample of veteran ST users (n=1,139) who subscribed to SmokefreeVET between 2017 and 2020. Time in program, abstinence, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use were evaluated and compared to 9,764 cigarette smokers who subscribed to SmokefreeVET.

RESULTS

Younger subscribers were more likely to opt out early; 54% of ST users and 60% of cigarette smokers completed the 6-week program. ST users were more likely to report abstinence than cigarette smokers at all time points: the primary outcome, 30-day abstinence at 6 months, was 3.9% in ST users and 2.6% in cigarette smokers (p=.05) and the secondary outcome, abstinence at 3 months, was 5.3% in ST users and 3.4% in cigarette smokers (p=.03). NRT was used by 17% of ST users and was associated with a trend toward higher abstinence compared to ST users who did not use NRT.

CONCLUSION

A real-world sample of ST users were more likely to report abstinence after using the SmokefreeVET text program than cigarette smokers. Automated text message programs may be effective for increasing cessation among ST users and warrant further investigation.

IMPLICATIONS

Smokeless tobacco (ST) cessation is an important public health priority and of importance for veteran and military populations that have higher rates of ST use. There have been relatively few studies conducted investigating the effectiveness of text message interventions for ST cessation, despite the proven efficacy for cigarette smokers. This study provides evidence from a large, real-world sample that text message programs may be effective for ST users and suggests that further research into this treatment modality for ST users is needed.

Engaging Smokeless Tobacco Users in Population-Based Cessation Services: Findings From an Observational Study

Although telephone quitlines are effective for helping smokeless tobacco (ST) users quit, ST users are underrepresented among quitline participants. After ClearWay MinnesotaSM implemented multiple changes to its quitline service (QUITPLAN® Services), utilization increased dramatically, including by ST users. We examined data from Minnesota and Wisconsin to determine whether these changes were unique to Minnesota. Four years of quitline registration data were analyzed for both states. A significant increase in enrollees reporting any ST use was seen in Minnesota after changes were made to services; no change was seen in Wisconsin. A 2-week starter kit of nicotine replacement therapy and the ability to register for services online were popular among Minnesotans reporting ST use. This study suggests that quitline services can be designed to increase participation by ST users.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation increase the likelihood of achieving abstinence in a quit attempt. It is plausible that providing support, or, if support is offered, offering more intensive support or support including particular components may increase abstinence further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of adding or increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition. We also looked at studies which directly compare behavioural interventions matched for contact time, where pharmacotherapy is provided to both groups (e.g. tests of different components or approaches to behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in June 2018 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount or type of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact (defined as face-to-face or telephone). The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, a different type of personal contact, written information, or no behavioural support at all. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women and trials which did not set out to assess smoking cessation at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates, if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I² = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this effect was not different when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This effect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I² = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that differed in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant effect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking increases quit rates. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 20%, based on a pooled estimate from 65 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of specific components that comprise behavioural support.

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.

Review of the role of cigarette smoking in diabetic foot

Diabetic foot ulceration has been a serious issue over the past decades in Asia, causing economic and social problems. Therefore, it is important to identify and reduce the risk factors of diabetic foot. Cigarette smoking has been reported to be associated with diabetes and its macrovascular complications, but the relationship between smoking and diabetic foot ulcers is still unclear. In the present review, we summarize the effects of cigarette smoking on diabetic foot ulcers with respect to peripheral neuropathy, vascular alterations and wound healing. One underlying mechanism of these impacts might be the smoking-induced oxidative stress inside the cells. At the end of this review, the current mainstream therapies for smoking cessation are also outlined. We believe that it is urgent for all diabetic patients to quit smoking so as to reduce their chances of developing foot ulcers and to improve the prognosis of diabetic foot ulcers.

Cardiovascular Health Promotion in Children: Challenges and Opportunities for 2020 and Beyond: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

This document provides a pediatric-focused companion to "Defining and Setting National Goals for Cardiovascular Health Promotion and Disease Reduction: The American Heart Association's Strategic Impact Goal Through 2020 and Beyond," focused on cardiovascular health promotion and disease reduction in adults and children. The principles detailed in the document reflect the American Heart Association's new dynamic and proactive goal to promote cardiovascular health throughout the life course. The primary focus is on adult cardiovascular health and disease prevention, but critical to achievement of this goal is maintenance of ideal cardiovascular health from birth through childhood to young adulthood and beyond. Emphasis is placed on the fundamental principles and metrics that define cardiovascular health in children for the clinical or research setting, and a balanced and critical appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the cardiovascular health construct in children and adolescents is provided. Specifically, this document discusses 2 important factors: the promotion of ideal cardiovascular health in all children and the improvement of cardiovascular health metric scores in children currently classified as having poor or intermediate cardiovascular health. Other topics include the current status of cardiovascular health in US children, opportunities for the refinement of health metrics, improvement of health metric scores, and possibilities for promoting ideal cardiovascular health. Importantly, concerns about the suitability of using single thresholds to identify elevated cardiovascular risk throughout the childhood years and the limits of our current knowledge are noted, and suggestions for future directions and research are provided.

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.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Effective pharmacotherapies are available to help people who are trying to stop smoking, but quitting can still be difficult and providing higher levels of behavioural support may increase success rates further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in May 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact. The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, or just written information. We did not include studies that used a contact-matched control to evaluate differences between types or components of support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author prescreened search results and two authors agreed inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials. One author extracted data and another checked them.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria with over 18,000 participants in the relevant arms. There was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 18%) so we pooled all studies in the main analysis. There was evidence of a small but statistically significant benefit from more intensive support (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.24) for abstinence at longest follow-up. All but four of the included studies provided four or more sessions of support to the intervention group. Most trials used NRT. We did not detect significant effects for studies where the pharmacotherapy was nortriptyline (two trials) or varenicline (one trial), but this reflects the absence of evidence.In subgroup analyses, studies that provided at least four sessions of personal contact for the intervention and no personal contact for the control had slightly larger estimated effects (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45; 6 trials, 3762 participants), although a formal test for subgroup differences was not significant. Studies where all intervention counselling was via telephone (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41; 6 trials, 5311 participants) also had slightly larger effects, and the test for subgroup differences was significant, but this subgroup analysis was not prespecified. In this update, the benefit of providing additional behavioural support was similar for the subgroup of trials in which all participants, including controls, had at least 30 minutes of personal contact (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.32; 21 trials, 5166 participants); previously the evidence of benefit in this subgroup had been weaker. This subgroup was not prespecified and a test for subgroup differences was not significant. We judged the quality of the evidence to be high, using the GRADE approach. We judged a small number of trials to be at high risk of bias on one or more domains, but findings were not sensitive to their exclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking has a small but important effect. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 25%, based on a pooled estimate from 47 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support.

Quit_line treatment protocols for users of non-cigarette tobacco and nicotine containing products

INTRODUCTION

Use of non-cigarette tobacco and nicotine containing products (TNCPs) is increasing in the US. Telephone tobacco quit lines (QLs) are one of the most widely disseminated tools for providing cessation services to cigarette smokers, but the range of QL treatment services offered to non-cigarette TNCP users needs to be determined.

METHODS

We surveyed QLs across 50 US states, Washington D.C., and Guam for the number of treatment protocols offered, products they were intended to treat, and how telephone counselors triaged patients reporting the use of non-cigarette TNCPs.

RESULTS

Thirteen organizations provided US QL interventions of which eleven agreed to be interviewed regarding their treatment services (84.6%). Seven of the eleven QL providers (63.6%) used a single intervention protocol adapted to the type of non-cigarette TNCP used. Two of the eleven QLs (18.2%) referred hookah users to another provider and one QL (9.1%) referred electronic cigarette users to third party resources for cessation support; otherwise a single intervention protocol was used for all other TNCP users. Only one QL (9.1%) had a specialized protocol for smokeless tobacco users in addition to a standard protocol for all other callers.

CONCLUSIONS

QL providers do not have access to tailored protocols for non-cigarette TNCP users, and it remains uncertain whether a common tobacco protocol will be efficacious for these users. Future research should both validate potential common protocols for non-cigarette TNCP users and address the need for and the development of specialized QL interventions for TNCP users to help them quit.

Nicotine Metabolite Ratio Is Associated With Lozenge Use But Not Quitting in Smokeless Tobacco Users

INTRODUCTION

The nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR) of 3'-hydroxycotinine to cotinine is a noninvasive marker of the rate of nicotine metabolism. Fast metabolism (ie, a high NMR) is associated with lower cigarette smoking abstinence rates using transdermal nicotine replacement. We evaluated whether the NMR can be used to predict self-reported nicotine lozenge use and tobacco abstinence among smokeless tobacco users treated for tobacco dependence.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of data from one arm of a large trial. Participants received quitting support materials and 4-mg nicotine lozenges by mail plus three coaching phone calls. Saliva kits were mailed for collection of saliva samples, which were analyzed for cotinine and 3'-hydroxycotinine. Self-reported tobacco and lozenge use were assessed at 3 months. Analyses were performed using Spearman rank correlation and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 160 saliva collection kits mailed, 152 were returned. The NMR was not significantly correlated with the baseline amount of smokeless tobacco used, the number of years of tobacco use, or the level of tobacco dependence as measured by the Severson Smokeless Tobacco Dependency Scale. The NMR was positively correlated with lozenge use (r = 0.21, P = .015), but it did not predict self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Fast metabolizers may need to self-administer more nicotine replacement in the form of nicotine lozenges to achieve the same clinical response achieved by slower metabolizers using fewer lozenges.