Anxiety Sensitivity and Distress Tolerance in Smokers: Relations With Tobacco Dependence, Withdrawal, and Quitting Success†

Understanding the motivational mechanisms for smoking and vaping among dual users and exclusive smokers

BACKGROUND

Understanding the motivational processes that influence e-cigarette use in a laboratory setting may help elucidate mechanisms that support long-term ecigarette use, which could have significant clinical and public health consequences.

METHODS

Secondary analyses were conducted on data from exclusive smokers (N=47) and dual users (N=88) who underwent a laboratory ad lib use session. Participants were given 10minutes to smoke (exclusive smokers) or vape (dual users) as much as they wanted. Withdrawal was assessed pre- and post-use. Smoking and vaping behavior was coded from session videos. Person-level predictors included cigarette/ecigarette craving-relief expectancies, demographics, and cigarette/e-cigarette use and dependence. Smoking and vaping status was assessed at Year 1 using self-reported 30-day point prevalence. Data were analyzed using general linear models and logistic regressions.

RESULTS

Both groups reported reductions in withdrawal after product use, including cigarette craving. Baseline e-cigarette craving-relief expectancies, pre-session ecigarette craving, heaviness of e-cigarette use, and relative e-cigarette dependence were significant univariate predictors of continued vaping in dual users at Year 1 (ORs>1.04, ps<.05). Dual users and exclusive smokers did not differ on use behavior (i.e., average number of puffs, ps>.16).

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarette use alleviated withdrawal, including cigarette and e-cigarette craving, in dual users. Laboratory use behavior did not differ between dual users using e-cigarettes and exclusive smokers using cigarettes. Greater e-cigarette craving-relief expectancies, e-cigarette craving, heaviness of e-cigarette use, and morning product use pattern ('relative dependence') may reflect mechanisms that sustain e-cigarette use.

The Independent Contribution of Positive and Negative Metacognitions About Smoking to Urge to Smoke, Withdrawal Symptoms and Dependence in Smoking-Dependent Men

Previous research has indicated that various factors, such as psychological distress, distress intolerance, anhedonia, impulsivity and smoking metacognitions, have been individually linked to the urge to smoke, withdrawal symptoms and dependence. However, these factors have not been collectively examined to determine whether smoking metacognitions independently and significantly contribute to these outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of distress intolerance, anhedonia, impulsivity and smoking metacognitions on the urge to smoke, withdrawal symptoms and dependency in men who are dependent on smoking. A total of 300 smoking-dependent men completed psychological scales and smoking-related measures. The findings of the study indicated that positive metacognitions about emotion regulation significantly predicted the urge to smoke, even when accounting for other significant predictors such as the number of daily cigarettes smoked, psychological distress, anhedonia and impulsivity. Furthermore, positive metacognitions about cognitive regulation were found to be a significant predictor of withdrawal symptoms, independent of other significant predictors such as psychological distress and the urge to smoke. Smoking dependence was predicted by negative metacognitions about uncontrollability beyond other significant predictors, including the number of daily cigarettes smoked and distress intolerance. These results highlight the role of metacognitions about smoking in both short- and long-term clinical outcomes related to smoking. Consequently, addressing such beliefs during treatment for smoking dependence should be an important therapeutic goal.

AB-free kava enhances resilience against the adverse health effects of tobacco smoke in mice

Tobacco smoke remains a serious global issue, resulting in serious health complications, contributing to the onsets of numerous preventive diseases, and imposing significant financial burdens. Despite regulatory policies and cessation measures aimed at curbing its usage, novel interventions are urgently needed for effective damage reduction. Our preclinical and pilot clinical studies showed that AB-free kava has the potential to reduce tobacco smoke-induced lung cancer risk, mitigate tobacco dependence, and reduce tobacco use. To understand the scope of its benefits in damage reduction and potential limitations, this study evaluated the effects of AB-free kava on a panel of health indicators in mice exposed to 2 - 4 weeks of daily tobacco smoke exposure. Our comprehensive assessments included global transcriptional profiling of the lung and liver tissues, analysis of lung inflammation, evaluation of lung function, exploration of tobacco nicotine withdrawal, and characterization of the causal PKA signaling pathway. As expected, Tobacco smoke exposure perturbed a wide range of biological processes and compromised multiple functions in mice. Remarkably, AB-free kava demonstrated the ability to globally mitigate tobacco smoke-induced deficits at the molecular and functional levels with promising safety profiles, offering a unique promise to mitigate tobacco smoke-related health damages. Further pre-clinical evaluation and clinical translation are warranted to fully harness the potential of AB-free kava in combating tobacco smoke-related harms.

Anxiety Sensitivity and Distress Tolerance in Relation to Smoking Abstinence Expectancies Among Black Individuals Who Smoke

OBJECTIVE

Black individuals who smoke in the United States experience significant tobacco-related disparities. Although prior work has established that smoking abstinence expectancies play an important role in smoking-related outcomes, few studies have examined potential individual difference factors that may be relevant to smoking abstinence expectancies among Black individuals who smoke. The present study investigated anxiety sensitivity and distress tolerance in relation to smoking abstinence expectancies among a sample of Black individuals who smoke.

METHOD

Participants were 86 Black adults who smoke cigarettes daily (M age = 46.07 years, SD = 10.37; 26.7% female). Four separate linear regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the relation between anxiety sensitivity, distress tolerance, and their interaction with each of the four smoking abstinence expectancies (i.e., somatic symptoms, positive consequences, harmful consequences, and negative mood).

RESULTS

Results indicated that higher anxiety sensitivity was related to higher somatic symptoms, harmful consequences, and negative mood abstinence expectancies, whereas distress tolerance was related to higher positive consequences. Further, anxiety sensitivity and distress tolerance interacted to confer greater expectancies for the positive consequences of quitting.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings are among the first to document that anxiety sensitivity and distress tolerance are clinically relevant factors to consider when tailoring smoking cessation treatments for Black individuals who smoke. Future research is needed to examine distress tolerance and anxiety sensitivity as longitudinal predictors of smoking abstinence expectancies among Black individuals who smoke.

Current Pharmacotherapies for Smoking Cessation and Promising Emerging Drugs

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacotherapy is commonly used during quit attempts and has shown an increase in the likelihood of achieving abstinence. However, with established pharmacotherapies, abstinence rates following a quit attempt remain low, and relapse is common. This review aims to investigate the efficacy and harm profiles of current and emerging pharmacotherapies.

METHODS

Literature review of current and emerging pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation and tobacco use disorder.

RESULTS

Emerging pharmacotherapies include new formulations of existing therapies, drug repurposing and some new treatments. New treatments are welcome and may incorporate different mechanisms of action or different safety and tolerability profiles compared to existing treatments. However, emerging pharmacotherapies have yet to demonstrate greater efficacy compared to existing treatments. The emergence of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) or 'vaping' is a feature of the current debate around tobacco use disorder. ENDS appear to facilitate switching but not quitting and are controversial as a harm minimisation strategy.

LIMITATIONS

Studies included a broad range of therapies and trial designs that should be compared with their differences taken into consideration.

CONCLUSION

Strategies to successfully quit smoking vary between individuals and may extend beyond pharmacotherapy and involve complex psychosocial factors and pathways.

Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation

Background

Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2007.

Objectives

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

Search methods

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

Selection criteria

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

Data collection and analysis

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

Main results

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authors' conclusions

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

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

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

Key messages

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

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

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

What are 'nicotine receptor partial agonists'?

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

What did we want to find out?

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

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

· how many people had unwanted effects.

What did we do?

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

What did we find?

We found 75 studies that compared NRPAs with:

· placebo or no medicine;

· nicotine replacement therapy, such as patches or gum;

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

· another NRPA;

· e‐cigarettes.

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

Main results

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

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

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

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

What are the limitations of the evidence?

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

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

How up to date is the evidence?

The evidence is up to date to 29 April 2022.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Novel digital methods for gathering intensive time series data in mental health research: scoping review of a rapidly evolving field

Recent technological advances enable the collection of intensive longitudinal data. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of methods for collecting intensive time series data in mental health research as well as basic principles, current applications, target constructs, and statistical methods for this type of data.In January 2021, the database MEDLINE was searched. Original articles were identified that (1) used active or passive data collection methods to gather intensive longitudinal data in daily life, (2) had a minimum sample size of N ⩾ 100 participants, and (3) included individuals with subclinical or clinical mental health problems.In total, 3799 original articles were identified, of which 174 met inclusion criteria. The most widely used methods were diary techniques (e.g. Experience Sampling Methodology), various types of sensors (e.g. accelerometer), and app usage data. Target constructs included affect, various symptom domains, cognitive processes, sleep, dysfunctional behaviour, physical activity, and social media use. There was strong evidence on feasibility of, and high compliance with, active and passive data collection methods in diverse clinical settings and groups. Study designs, sampling schedules, and measures varied considerably across studies, limiting the generalisability of findings.Gathering intensive longitudinal data has significant potential to advance mental health research. However, more methodological research is required to establish and meet critical quality standards in this rapidly evolving field. Advanced approaches such as digital phenotyping, ecological momentary interventions, and machine-learning methods will be required to efficiently use intensive longitudinal data and deliver personalised digital interventions and services for improving public mental health.

TOBACCO USE DISORDER AND DUAL DISORDERS Joint statement by the Spanish Psychiatry Society and the Spanish Dual Disorders Society

Tobacco Use Disorder (TUD) is a health problem of the first order in the world population, affecting a vulnerable population, such as people with other mental disorders, whose morbidity and mortality are increased as a result.

Distress Tolerance is Indirectly Related to Nicotine Use through the Smoking Motives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Previous research has shown that low ability to tolerate distress is indirectly related to problematic substance use through the substance use motives. This topic has been previously researched in alcohol and cannabis use; however, it has not yet been explored in tobacco use. We studied whether distress tolerance is indirectly associated with nicotine dependence through motives of tension reduction and habitual smoking.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A total sample of 451 (230 of which were women) daily and occasional Polish smokers (aged from 18 to 60 years) reported distress tolerance, motives for smoking, and nicotine dependence. We then conducted a mediation analysis with bootstrapping using PROCESS macro.

RESULTS

Distress tolerance was indirectly related to nicotine dependence through both motives independently. In terms of the sequential model, there was a significant indirect effect of distress tolerance on nicotine dependence through smoking motives: tension reduction and habit. The total effect of distress tolerance on nicotine dependence was insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that individuals with low distress tolerance are especially prone to nicotine dependence if they use smoking as a coping mechanism and it becomes habitual. The current study highlights the importance of a multidimensional approach in dealing with nicotine dependence.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

IMPLICATIONS

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

Anxiety sensitivity, pain severity and co-use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes among adults with chronic pain

Anxiety sensitivity (fear of potential negative consequences of anxiety-related symptoms/sensations) has been identified as a transdiagnostic factor in comorbid pain and nicotine dependence and evidence suggests that anxiety sensitivity may be indirectly associated with nicotine use via greater pain severity. Therefore, this study tested the hypothesis that anxiety sensitivity is associated with cigarette and e-cigarette use/co-use directly and indirectly via greater pain severity. Participants included 273 online survey respondents with chronic musculoskeletal pain (34% female; Mage = 32.9). Anxiety sensitivity was positively associated with cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use and cigarette/e-cigarette co-use (ps < .05). Furthermore, anxiety sensitivity was indirectly and positively associated with cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use and co-use via greater chronic pain severity. Pain severity may play an important role in associations between anxiety sensitivity and nicotine dependence and prospective research should examine temporal/causal effects of anxiety sensitivity in relation to pain severity and nicotine/tobacco use.

Effect of 4-Fluoro-N-(4-sulfamoylbenzyl) Benzene Sulfonamide on cognitive deficits and hippocampal plasticity during nicotine withdrawal in rats

Withdrawal from chronic nicotine has damaging effects on a variety of learning and memory tasks. Various Sulfonamides that act as carbonic anhydrase inhibitors have documented role in modulation of various cognitive, learning, and memory processing. We investigated the effects of 4-Fluoro-N-(4-sulfamoylbenzyl) Benzene Sulfonamide (4-FBS) on nicotine withdrawal impairments in rats using Morris water maze (MWM), Novel object recognition, Passive avoidance, and open field tasks. Also, Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) profiling and in vivo field potential recording were assessed. Rats were exposed to saline or chronic nicotine 3.8 mg/kg subcutaneously for 14 days in four divided doses, spontaneous nicotine withdrawal was induced by quitting nicotine for 72 h (hrs). Animals received 4-FBS at 20, 40, and 60 mg/kg after 72 h of withdrawal in various behavioral and electrophysiological paradigms. Nicotine withdrawal causes a deficit in learning and long-term memory in the MWM task. No significant difference was found in novel object recognition tasks among all groups while in passive avoidance task nicotine withdrawal resulted in a deficit of hippocampus-dependent fear learning. Anxiety like behavior was observed during nicotine withdrawal. Plasma BDNF level was reduced during nicotine withdrawal as compared to the saline group reflecting mild cognitive impairment, stress, and depression. Withdrawal from chronic nicotine altered hippocampal plasticity, caused suppression of long-term potentiation (LTP) in the CA1 area of the hippocampus. Our results showed that 4-FBS at 40 and 60 mg/kg significantly prevented nicotine withdrawal-induced cognitive deficits in behavioral as well as electrophysiological studies. 4-FBS at 60 mg/kg upsurge nicotine withdrawal-induced decrease in plasma BDNF. We conclude that 4-FBS at 40 and 60 mg /kg effectively prevented chronic nicotine withdrawal-induced impairment in long term potentiation and cognitive performance.

Enhancing panic and smoking reduction treatment with D-Cycloserine: A pilot randomized clinical trial

In this placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial, we examined the efficacy of 250 mg d-cycloserine (DCS) for enhancing the effects of cognitive behavior therapy targeting anxiety sensitivity reduction in the context of smoking cessation treatment among adults with a history of panic attacks. We hypothesized that DCS would enhance treatment of our mechanistic targets-anxiety sensitivity and panic and related symptoms-and result in greater smoking abstinence. A total of 53 smokers were randomized to a 7-week integrated treatment and received study medication (DCS or placebo) prior to sessions 3-5; these sessions emphasized interoceptive exposure practice. Nicotine replacement therapy was initiated at session 5 (quit date). We found that DCS augmentation led to greater reductions of one (anxiety sensitivity) of two of our mechanistic targets at early but not late assessments, and that engaging that target predicted better smoking outcomes. However, there was no evidence of group (DCS vs. placebo) differences in smoking cessation success at treatment endpoint or follow-up evaluations. Hence, although we found that DCS can enhance treatment targeting a smoking maintaining factor, additional strategies appear to be needed to significantly affect smoking outcomes.