1
|
Deng X, Shang X, Guo K, Zhou L, Wang Y, Wu Y, Liang S, E F, Liu W, Wang Z, Li X, Yang K. Efficacy and safety of antidepressants for smoking cessation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Addict Biol 2023; 28:e13303. [PMID: 37500482 DOI: 10.1111/adb.13303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Revised: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTS ) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xinxin Deng
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Xue Shang
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Kangle Guo
- Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China
| | - Liying Zhou
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Yongsheng Wang
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Yanan Wu
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Shanshan Liang
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Fenfen E
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Wendi Liu
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Ziyi Wang
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Xiuxia Li
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| | - Kehu Yang
- Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hajizadeh A, Howes S, Theodoulou A, Klemperer E, Hartmann-Boyce J, Livingstone-Banks J, Lindson N. Antidepressants for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 5:CD000031. [PMID: 37230961 PMCID: PMC10207863 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd000031.pub6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied. However, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco: nicotine withdrawal can produce short-term low mood that antidepressants may relieve; and some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction. OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy, harms, and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, most recently on 29 April 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people who smoked, comparing antidepressant medications with placebo or no pharmacological treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used differently. We excluded trials with fewer than six months of follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length for our analyses of harms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months' follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Our secondary outcomes were harms and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropouts due to treatment. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS We included a total of 124 studies (48,832 participants) in this review, with 10 new studies added to this update version. Most studies recruited adults from the community or from smoking cessation clinics; four studies focused on adolescents (with participants between 12 and 21 years old). We judged 34 studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk of bias did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased smoking cessation rates when compared to placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.49 to 1.72; I2 = 16%; 50 studies, 18,577 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that a combination of bupropion and varenicline may have resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I2 = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence to establish whether a combination of bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.44; I2 = 43%; 15 studies, 4117 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was moderate-certainty evidence that participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs than those taking placebo or no pharmacological treatment. However, results were imprecise and the CI also encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 23 studies, 10,958 participants). Results were also imprecise when comparing SAEs between people randomised to a combination of bupropion and NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.26 to 8.89; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 657 participants) and randomised to bupropion plus varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.42; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1268 participants). In both cases, we judged evidence to be of low certainty. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to AEs than placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.65; I2 = 2%; 25 studies, 12,346 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence that bupropion combined with NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.92; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 737 participants) or bupropion combined with varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.45; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1230 participants) had an impact on the number of dropouts due to treatment. In both cases, imprecision was substantial (we judged the evidence to be of low certainty for both comparisons). Bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 7564 participants), and to combination NRT (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; 2 studies; 720 participants). However, there was no clear evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and single-form NRT (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 7613 participants). We also found evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I2 = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), and some evidence that bupropion resulted in superior quit rates to nortriptyline (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants), although this result was subject to imprecision. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion may increase SAEs (moderate-certainty evidence when compared to placebo/no pharmacological treatment). There is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with people receiving placebo or no pharmacological treatment. Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo, although bupropion may be more effective. Evidence also suggests that bupropion may be as successful as single-form NRT in helping people to quit smoking, but less effective than combination NRT and varenicline. In most cases, a paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions regarding harms and tolerability. Further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over other licensed smoking cessation treatments; namely, NRT and varenicline. However, it is important that future studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation measure and report on harms and tolerability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anisa Hajizadeh
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Seth Howes
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Annika Theodoulou
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Elias Klemperer
- Departments of Psychological Sciences & Psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA
| | - Jamie Hartmann-Boyce
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Nicola Lindson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whilst the pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms and antidepressants may relieve these. Additionally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction. OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy, safety and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Specialized Register, which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov, the ICTRP, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in May 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited smokers, and compared antidepressant medications with placebo or no treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used in a different way. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length in safety analyses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. We also used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months follow-up, expressed as a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. Similarly, we presented incidence of safety and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropout due to drug, as RRs (95% CIs). MAIN RESULTS We included 115 studies (33 new to this update) in this review; most recruited adult participants from the community or from smoking cessation clinics. We judged 28 of the studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.77; I2 = 15%; 45 studies, 17,866 participants). There was insufficient evidence to establish whether participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs compared to those taking placebo. Results were imprecise and CIs encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 21 studies, 10,625 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded one level due to imprecision). We found high-certainty evidence that use of bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to adverse events of the drug than placebo (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; I2 = 19%; 25 studies, 12,340 participants). Participants randomized to bupropion were also more likely to report psychiatric AEs compared with those randomized to placebo (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.37; I2 = 15%; 6 studies, 4439 participants). We also looked at the safety and efficacy of bupropion when combined with other non-antidepressant smoking cessation therapies. There was insufficient evidence to establish whether combination bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51; I2 = 52%; 12 studies, 3487 participants), or whether combination bupropion and varenicline resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I2 = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low and moderate, respectively; in both cases due to imprecision, and also due to inconsistency in the former. Safety data were sparse for these comparisons, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. A meta-analysis of six studies provided evidence that bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 6286 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and NRT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; I2 = 18%; 10 studies, 8230 participants). We also found some evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I2 = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), whilst there was insufficient evidence to determine whether bupropion or nortriptyline were more effective when compared with one another (RR 1.30 (favouring bupropion), 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants). There was no evidence that any of the other antidepressants tested (including St John's Wort, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)) had a beneficial effect on smoking cessation. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion also increases the number of adverse events, including psychiatric AEs, and there is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with placebo. However, there is no clear evidence to suggest whether people taking bupropion experience more or fewer SAEs than those taking placebo (moderate certainty). Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo. Evidence suggests that bupropion may be as successful as NRT and nortriptyline in helping people to quit smoking, but that it is less effective than varenicline. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the other antidepressants tested, such as SSRIs, aid smoking cessation, and when looking at safety and tolerance outcomes, in most cases, paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions. Due to the high-certainty evidence, further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over front-line smoking cessation aids already available. However, it is important that where studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation are carried out they measure and report safety and tolerability clearly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seth Howes
- University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, UK
| | - Jamie Hartmann-Boyce
- University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Bosun Hong
- Birmingham Dental Hospital, Oral Surgery Department, 5 Mill Pool Way, Birmingham, UK, B5 7EG
| | - Nicola Lindson
- University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Siddiqui F, Huque R, Dogar O. Updated evidence-based guide to smoking cessation therapies. Br J Community Nurs 2016; 21:607-611. [PMID: 27922783 DOI: 10.12968/bjcn.2016.21.12.607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Faraz Siddiqui
- Research Instructor, Department of Medicine, The Aga Khan University, Pakistan
| | | | - Omara Dogar
- Research Fellow, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
There is a high prevalence of comorbid tobacco use and alcohol use disorder (AUD), affecting more than 6 million people in the US. Globally, tobacco and alcohol use rank fourth and fifth, respectively, for disability-adjusted life-years lost. Levels of alcohol use are higher in smokers than nonsmokers, and the prevalence of smoking is higher in heavy drinkers compared with nondrinkers. This relationship is driven by many different factors, including genetics, neurobiological mechanisms, conditioning processes, and psychosocial influences. Although this unique population tends to experience more negative health consequences, more severe AUD, and poorer response to treatment than those with either AUD or tobacco use disorder alone, there are currently no available treatment protocols tailored to this comorbid condition. In this review, we provide a comprehensive review of ongoing clinical research into smoking cessation options for heavy-drinking smokers (HDS) through an evaluation of the effect of promising novel pharmacotherapies as well as combination therapies, including varenicline, naltrexone, the combination of varenicline and naltrexone, and the combination of naltrexone and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). These treatments are considered in light of the standard of care for smoking cessation, and seek to improve upon the available guidelines for this sizeable subgroup of smokers, namely those smokers who drink heavily.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan M Yardley
- Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, 1285 Franz Hall, Box 951563, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1563, USA
| | - Michael M Mirbaba
- Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lara A Ray
- Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, 1285 Franz Hall, Box 951563, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1563, USA.
- Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are at least three reasons to believe antidepressants might help in smoking cessation. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms or precipitate a major depressive episode and antidepressants may relieve these. Secondly, nicotine may have antidepressant effects that maintain smoking, and antidepressants may substitute for this effect. Finally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways (e.g. inhibiting monoamine oxidase) or receptors (e.g. blockade of nicotinic-cholinergic receptors) underlying nicotine addiction. OBJECTIVES The aim of this review is to assess the effect and safety of antidepressant medications to aid long-term smoking cessation. The medications include bupropion; doxepin; fluoxetine; imipramine; lazabemide; moclobemide; nortriptyline; paroxetine; S-Adenosyl-L-Methionine (SAMe); selegiline; sertraline; St. John's wort; tryptophan; venlafaxine; and zimeledine. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in July 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered randomized trials comparing antidepressant medications to placebo or an alternative pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation or to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in patients smoking at baseline, expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS Twenty-four new trials were identified since the 2009 update, bringing the total number of included trials to 90. There were 65 trials of bupropion and ten trials of nortriptyline, with the majority at low or unclear risk of bias. There was high quality evidence that, when used as the sole pharmacotherapy, bupropion significantly increased long-term cessation (44 trials, N = 13,728, risk ratio [RR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49 to 1.76). There was moderate quality evidence, limited by a relatively small number of trials and participants, that nortriptyline also significantly increased long-term cessation when used as the sole pharmacotherapy (six trials, N = 975, RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78). There is insufficient evidence that adding bupropion (12 trials, N = 3487, RR 1.9, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51) or nortriptyline (4 trials, N = 1644, RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.55) to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) provides an additional long-term benefit. Based on a limited amount of data from direct comparisons, bupropion and nortriptyline appear to be equally effective and of similar efficacy to NRT (bupropion versus nortriptyline 3 trials, N = 417, RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; bupropion versus NRT 8 trials, N = 4096, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; no direct comparisons between nortriptyline and NRT). Pooled results from four trials comparing bupropion to varenicline showed significantly lower quitting with bupropion than with varenicline (N = 1810, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.83). Meta-analyses did not detect a significant increase in the rate of serious adverse events amongst participants taking bupropion, though the confidence interval only narrowly missed statistical significance (33 trials, N = 9631, RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.69). There is a risk of about 1 in 1000 of seizures associated with bupropion use. Bupropion has been associated with suicide risk, but whether this is causal is unclear. Nortriptyline has the potential for serious side-effects, but none have been seen in the few small trials for smoking cessation.There was no evidence of a significant effect for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on their own (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.22, N = 1594; 2 trials fluoxetine, 1 paroxetine, 1 sertraline) or as an adjunct to NRT (3 trials of fluoxetine, N = 466, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.82). Significant effects were also not detected for monoamine oxidase inhibitors (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.79, N = 827; 1 trial moclobemide, 5 selegiline), the atypical antidepressant venlafaxine (1 trial, N = 147, RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.32), the herbal therapy St John's wort (hypericum) (2 trials, N = 261, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.53), or the dietary supplement SAMe (1 trial, N = 120, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.07). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The antidepressants bupropion and nortriptyline aid long-term smoking cessation. Adverse events with either medication appear to rarely be serious or lead to stopping medication. Evidence suggests that the mode of action of bupropion and nortriptyline is independent of their antidepressant effect and that they are of similar efficacy to nicotine replacement. Evidence also suggests that bupropion is less effective than varenicline, but further research is needed to confirm this finding. Evidence suggests that neither selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluoxetine) nor monoamine oxidase inhibitors aid cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John R Hughes
- University of VermontDept of PsychiatryUHC Campus, OH3 Stop # 4821 South Prospect StreetBurlingtonVermontUSA05401
| | - Lindsay F Stead
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Jamie Hartmann‐Boyce
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Kate Cahill
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Tim Lancaster
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Bupropion and Bupropion Analogs as Treatments for CNS Disorders. ADVANCES IN PHARMACOLOGY 2014; 69:177-216. [DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-420118-7.00005-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
8
|
Vasic N, Wolf RC, Wolf N, Connemann BJ, Sosic-Vasic Z. [Pharmacotherapeutic treatment strategies for smoking cessation]. DER NERVENARZT 2011; 82:1449-1459. [PMID: 21207000 DOI: 10.1007/s00115-010-3203-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Regular tobacco smoking occurs in about 35% of the male and 25% of the female German population. Individual attempts to independently quit smoking and to remain abstinent for 1 year have been shown to be successful in less than 5% of cases. This rate can be doubled by means of individual consulting and cognitive-behavioral interventions and additional pharmacological treatment might increase abstinence rates up to 25%. Apart from nicotine substitution (e.g. transdermal, oral and inhalative applications) and bupropion, recent studies have shown beneficial effects of varenicline for smoking cessation and abstinence. Varenicline, a selective partial nicotinergic agonist, has been specifically developed for the purpose of smoking cessation. Currently available data suggest that varenicline is more effective compared to nicotine substitution therapy and bupropion, increasing the abstinence likelihood by a factor of 2.3 compared to a placebo. Recent data regarding anti-nicotine vaccines suggest that this approach might yield a comparable treatment outcome and probably even better relapse-preventing effects than conventional psychopharmacological strategies. The first anti-nicotine vaccines are expected to be approved by national authorities within the forthcoming 1-2 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Vasic
- Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie III, Universitätsklinikum, Ulm, Deutschland.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Buchhalter AR, Fant RV, Henningfield JE. Novel pharmacological approaches for treating tobacco dependence and withdrawal: current status. Drugs 2008; 68:1067-88. [PMID: 18484799 DOI: 10.2165/00003495-200868080-00005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
Increasing the diversity and availability of medications for the treatment of tobacco dependence and/or withdrawal, to aid in the achievement of smoking cessation, is crucial to meet the diverse needs of tobacco users. Despite a general awareness that smoking is harmful and widespread interest in smoking cessation, nearly 50 million adults in the US and 1.3 billion worldwide continue to smoke. Nicotine replacement therapies are effective in the treatment of tobacco dependence and withdrawal, but do not meet the needs of all tobacco users. Improvement of tobacco dependence and/or withdrawal treatments is likely to rely on novel pharmacological approaches that include new chemical entities and new formulations of current drugs. In addition, new indications for treating tobacco dependence and withdrawal show promise for reducing tobacco use and associated disease. This article focuses on a range of novel pharmacological approaches for the treatment of tobacco dependence and/or withdrawal, including oral and pulmonary nicotine delivery and the following non-nicotinic medications: antidepressants, an alpha4beta2 nicotine partial agonist, an alpha2-noradrenergic agonist, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2A6 inhibitors, opioid antagonists and GABAergic medications. In addition to existing medications, this article addresses novel medications in the clinical development stage and those that have been evaluated previously. Novel medications in the clinical development stage include at least three nicotine vaccines and the cannabinoid receptor acting drug rimonabant. Medications evaluated previously include lobeline, mecamylamine and an anticholinergic drug regimen comprising atropine, scopolamine and chlorpromazine. Having not been approved by major drug regulatory authorities for the treatment of tobacco dependence and/or withdrawal, these medications have been evaluated in an experimental capacity.
Collapse
|
10
|
Picciotto MR, Addy NA, Mineur YS, Brunzell DH. It is not "either/or": activation and desensitization of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors both contribute to behaviors related to nicotine addiction and mood. Prog Neurobiol 2007; 84:329-42. [PMID: 18242816 DOI: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2007.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 303] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2007] [Revised: 11/19/2007] [Accepted: 12/18/2007] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
Nicotine can both activate and desensitize/inactivate nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs). An ongoing controversy in the field is to what extent the behavioral effects of nicotine result from activation of nAChRs, and to what extent receptor desensitization is involved in these behavioral processes. Recent electrophysiological studies have shown that both nAChR activation and desensitization contribute to the effects of nicotine in the brain, and these experiments have provided cellular mechanisms that could underlie the contribution of both these processes to nicotine-mediated behaviors. For instance, desensitization of nAChRs may contribute to the salience of environmental cues associated with smoking behavior and activation and desensitization of nAChRs may contribute to both primary and conditioned drug reward. Similarly, studies of the antidepressant-like effects of nicotinic agents have revealed a balance between activation and desensitization of nAChRs. This review will examine the evidence for the contribution of these two very different consequences of nicotine administration to behaviors related to nicotine addiction, including processes related to drug reinforcement and affective modulation. We conclude that there are effects of nAChR activation and desensitization on drug reinforcement and affective behavior, and that both processes are important in the behavioral consequences of nicotine in tobacco smoking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marina R Picciotto
- Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06508, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Stack NM. Smoking Cessation: An Overview of Treatment Options with a Focus on Varenicline. Pharmacotherapy 2007; 27:1550-7. [DOI: 10.1592/phco.27.11.1550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
12
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are at least two theoretical reasons to believe antidepressants might help in smoking cessation. Nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms or precipitate a major depressive episode and antidepressants may relieve these. Nicotine may have antidepressant effects that maintain smoking, and antidepressants may substitute for this effect. Alternatively, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways underlying nicotine addiction, (e.g. blocking nicotine receptors) independent of their antidepressant effects. OBJECTIVES The aim of this review is to assess the effect of antidepressant medications in aiding long-term smoking cessation. The medications include bupropion; doxepin; fluoxetine; imipramine; moclobemide; nortriptyline; paroxetine; sertraline, tryptophan and venlafaxine. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register which includes trials indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciSearch and PsycINFO, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in September 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered randomized trials comparing antidepressant medications to placebo or an alternative pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation or to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption. We excluded trials with less than six months follow up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data in duplicate on the type of study population, the nature of the pharmacotherapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow up in patients smoking at baseline, expressed as an odds ratio (OR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS Seventeen new trials were identified since the last update in 2004 bringing the total number of included trials to 53. There were 40 trials of bupropion and eight trials of nortriptyline. When used as the sole pharmacotherapy, bupropion (31 trials, odds ratio [OR] 1.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72 to 2.19) and nortriptyline (four trials, OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.61 to 3.41) both doubled the odds of cessation. There is insufficient evidence that adding bupropion or nortriptyline to nicotine replacement therapy provides an additional long-term benefit. Three trials of extended therapy with bupropion to prevent relapse after initial cessation did not find evidence of a significant long-term benefit. From the available data bupropion and nortriptyline appear to be equally effective and of similar efficacy to nicotine replacement therapy. Pooling three trials comparing bupropion to varenicline showed a lower odds of quitting with bupropion (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.78). There is a risk of about 1 in 1000 of seizures associated with bupropion use. Concerns that bupropion may increase suicide risk are currently unproven. Nortriptyline has the potential for serious side-effects, but none have been seen in the few small trials for smoking cessation. There were six trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; four of fluoxetine, one of sertraline and one of paroxetine. None of these detected significant long-term effects, and there was no evidence of a significant benefit when results were pooled. There was one trial of the monoamine oxidase inhibitor moclobemide, and one of the atypical antidepressant venlafaxine. Neither of these detected a significant long-term benefit. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The antidepressants bupropion and nortriptyline aid long-term smoking cessation but selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluoxetine) do not. Evidence suggests that the mode of action of bupropion and nortriptyline is independent of their antidepressant effect and that they are of similar efficacy to nicotine replacement. Adverse events with both medications are rarely serious or lead to stopping medication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J R Hughes
- University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 38 Fletcher Place, Burlington, Vermont 05401-1419, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Malin DH, Lake JR, Smith TD, Khambati HN, Meyers-Paal RL, Montellano AL, Jennings RE, Erwin DS, Presley SE, Perales BA. Bupropion attenuates nicotine abstinence syndrome in the rat. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2006; 184:494-503. [PMID: 16163521 DOI: 10.1007/s00213-005-0135-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2005] [Accepted: 07/18/2005] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE Bupropion reduces discomfort and craving associated with smoking cessation. This study determined whether a rat model of nicotine dependence could detect such nicotine abstinence-alleviating effects. OBJECTIVES Experiments determined whether the abstinence-alleviating effects of bupropion were detectable by (1) behavioral abstinence signs precipitated by the nicotinic antagonist mecamylamine, (2) place aversion conditioned to mecamylamine-precipitated nicotine abstinence, and (3) spontaneous behavioral abstinence signs after abrupt nicotine withdrawal. METHODS In experiments 1 and 2, nicotine-dependent rats were coinfused for 7 days with 3.15 mg/kg/day nicotine and 20 mg/kg/day bupropion or with nicotine alone. They were then challenged with 1 mg/kg mecamylamine and observed for behavioral abstinence signs (experiment 1) or place aversion conditioned to precipitated abstinence (experiment 2). In experiment 3, rats were nicotine-infused for 7 days as above. A day after termination of nicotine infusion, rats were observed for spontaneous nicotine abstinence signs before and after injection with saline or bupropion. RESULTS In experiment 1, rats coinfused with nicotine and bupropion had significantly fewer mecamylamine-precipitated abstinence signs than rats infused with nicotine alone but similar numbers to rats infused with saline alone. In experiment 2, bupropion pretreatment significantly reduced the aversiveness of mecamylamine-precipitated nicotine abstinence. In experiment 3, a single bupropion injection dose-dependently alleviated spontaneous nicotine abstinence syndrome. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that these rat models of nicotine dependence and abstinence syndrome may be useful in detecting nicotine abstinence-alleviating effects of potential medications for smoking cessation. The effects of acute bupropion administration raise interesting questions regarding bupropion's mechanism of action.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David H Malin
- University of Houston-Clear Lake, P.O. Box 237, 2700 Bay Area Blvd., Houston, TX 77058, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
This article reviews the efficacy of nortriptyline for smoking cessation based on a meta-analysis of the Cochrane Library. Six placebo-controlled trials have shown nortriptyline (75-100 mg) doubles quit rates (OR = 2.1). Between 4% and 12% of smokers dropped out because of adverse events, but no serious adverse events occurred. The efficacy of nortriptyline did not appear to be related to its antidepressant actions. Nortriptyline is an efficacious aid to smoking cessation with a magnitude of effect similar to that for bupropion and nicotine replacement therapies. Whether nortriptyline produces serious side effects at these doses in healthy, nondepressed smokers remains unclear because it has been tested in only 500 smokers. The finding that nortriptyline and bupropion are effective for smoking cessation but that selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors are not suggests that dopaminergic or adrenergic, but not serotonergic, activity is important for cessation efficacy. Until further studies can verify a low incidence of significant adverse events, nortriptyline should be a second-line treatment for smoking cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John R Hughes
- Departments of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Family Practice, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05401, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Niederhofer H, Huber M. Bupropion may support psychosocial treatment of nicotine-dependent adolescents: preliminary results. Pharmacotherapy 2004; 24:1524-8. [PMID: 15537557 DOI: 10.1592/phco.24.16.1524.50953] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of long-term bupropion therapy for nicotine dependence in adolescents. DESIGN Prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING Outpatient clinic in Innsbruck, Austria. SUBJECTS Twenty-two adolescents, aged 16-19 years, with nicotine dependence. INTERVENTION Participants were randomly assigned to receive bupropion 150 mg/day or placebo for 90 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Patients were classified as abstinent or relapsed on day 0 (when study drug was started) and again on days 30 and 90, according to their self-reports. Treatment failure was defined as relapse or nonattendance. Time to first treatment failure was the primary outcome measure. Mean cumulative abstinence duration was significantly greater in the bupropion group than in the placebo group (78.4 +/- 39.6 vs 30.2 +/- 19.2 days. p=0.0042). CONCLUSION Bupropion seems to be an effective and well-tolerated pharmacologic adjunct to psychosocial and behavioral treatment programs for some adolescent nicotine-dependent patients. However, experienced clinicians should continuously monitor patients for adverse effects.
Collapse
|
16
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are at least two theoretical reasons to believe antidepressants might help in smoking cessation. Nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms or precipitate a major depressive episode and antidepressants may relieve these. Nicotine may have antidepressant effects that maintain smoking, and antidepressants may substitute for this effect. Alternatively, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways underlying nicotine addiction, independent of their antidepressant effects. OBJECTIVES The aim of this review is to assess the effect of antidepressant medications in aiding long-term smoking cessation. The medications include bupropion; doxepin; fluoxetine; imipramine; moclobemide; nortriptyline; paroxetine; sertraline, tryptophan and venlafaxine. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register which includes trials indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciSearch and PsycINFO, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in March 2004. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered randomized trials comparing antidepressant medications to placebo or an alternative therapy for smoking cessation. We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation and using pharmacotherapy to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption. We excluded trials with less than six months follow up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data in duplicate on the type of study population, the nature of the pharmacotherapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow up in patients smoking at baseline, expressed as an odds ratio (OR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed effect model. MAIN RESULTS There was one trial of the monoamine oxidase inhibitor moclobemide, and one of the atypical antidepressant venlafaxine. Neither of these detected a significant long-term benefit. There were five trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; three of fluoxetine, one of sertraline and one of paroxetine. None of these detected significant effects, and there was no evidence of a significant benefit when results were pooled. There were 24 trials of bupropion and six trials of nortriptyline. When used as the sole pharmacotherapy, bupropion (19 trials, OR 2.06, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.77 to 2.40) and nortriptyline (four trials, OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.70 to 4.59) both doubled the odds of cessation. In one trial the combination of bupropion and nicotine patch produced slightly higher quit rates than patch alone, but this was not replicated in a second study. Two trials of extended therapy with bupropion to prevent relapse after initial cessation did not show a significant long-term benefit. There is a risk of about 1 in 1000 of seizures associated with bupropion use. Concerns that bupropion may increase suicide risk are currently unproven. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS The antidepressants bupropion and nortriptyline aid long term smoking cessation but selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. fluoxetine) do not. The fact that only some forms of antidepressants aid cessation and that they do so regardless of depressive symptoms strongly suggests that their mode of action is independent of their antidepressant effect.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Hughes
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, 38 Fletcher Place, Burlington, Vermont 05401-1419, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Faulkner MA, Hilleman DE. Pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: past, present, and future. Pharmacotherapy 2004; 23:1300-15. [PMID: 14594347 DOI: 10.1592/phco.23.12.1300.32699] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has evolved considerably during the past several decades. Initial treatment of the disease was accomplished primarily through antibiotics, mucolytic agents, and nonselective sympathomimetic agents. Up-to-date treatment guidelines stratified according to strength of evidence are published in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-World Health Organization workshop report on the Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Current drug therapy for stable COPD focuses primarily on bronchodilation through inhaled beta2-agonists and anticholinergic agents, immunization, and elimination of smoking as a risk factor. Although many pharmacologic agents are available to treat COPD, no drug has demonstrated effectiveness in halting progression of the disease. Rather, the goal of drug therapy at this time is to maintain control of symptoms and prevent COPD exacerbations. Compared with asthma, research into treatment for COPD has been minimal. However, a long-acting anticholinergic agent, tiotropium, has received approval status by the United States Food and Drug Administration. The drug has been shown to improve spirometric parameters, quality of life, and utilization of health care resources. In addition, several new targets for the treatment of COPD are being studied, and a few agents, including some that theoretically may slow functional decline in patients with COPD, are in development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michele A Faulkner
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Creighton University School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, NE 68178, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Cryan JF, Gasparini F, van Heeke G, Markou A. Non-nicotinic neuropharmacological strategies for nicotine dependence: beyond bupropion. Drug Discov Today 2003; 8:1025-34. [PMID: 14690633 DOI: 10.1016/s1359-6446(03)02890-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Smoking is a major health problem and is propelled, at least in part, by the addictive properties of nicotine. Two types of pharmacological therapies have been approved for smoking cessation by the US Food and Drug Administration. The first therapy consists of nicotine replacement, substituting the nicotine from cigarettes with safer nicotine formulations. The second therapy is bupropion (Zyban), an atypical antidepressant, whose use has raised much debate as to how a non-nicotine-based agent can aid in smoking cessation. This review focuses on recent advances that could lead to the development of improved novel pharmacological treatments. These strategies focus on altering reward processes in the brain by modulating various neurotransmitter systems: the most promising include dopamine D(3) receptor antagonists, noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, GABA(B) receptor agonists, metabotropic glutamate 5 (mGluR5) receptor antagonists, cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonists, and corticotropin releasing factor (CRF) 1 receptor antagonists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John F Cryan
- Neuroscience Disease Area,The Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, WSJ 386.344Novartis Pharma AG. CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Anczak JD, Nogler RA. Tobacco cessation in primary care: maximizing intervention strategies. Clin Med Res 2003; 1:201-16. [PMID: 15931310 PMCID: PMC1069046 DOI: 10.3121/cmr.1.3.201] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2003] [Accepted: 06/11/2003] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
The most effective preventive intervention that a clinician can provide for tobacco-using patients against heart disease, cancer, cerebrovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is an empathic, personalized smoking cessation intervention program with extended assistance and follow-up. The goal of the intervention must be complete smoking cessation. Reduction provides no direct health benefits to the individual smoker. Interventions are readily available, but underutilized, in part due to lack of clinician training and organizational support. The present article summarizes the current guidelines for smoking cessation interventions as a framework from which to start. The guidelines incorporate the Transtheoretical Model of patient behavioral change and the "Five A's": Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist and Arrange. Pharmacotherapeutic tools, including nicotine replacement therapies (nicotine gums, patches, nasal sprays, inhalers and new therapies) and non-nicotine therapies (bupropion, clonidine, nortriptyline and other antidepressants and anxiolytics) are considered. Adherence validation methods, new approaches to tobacco and addiction treatment that appear in the recent research literature are reviewed. Beyond this framework, specific categories of tobacco users (including smokeless tobacco users), cultural and ethnic minorities, adolescents using snuff and bidis, women, Medicaid recipients, and users of multiple forms of tobacco require special consideration. With this framework and the modifications that may be required for specific categories of patients, practicing clinicians can incorporate into daily practice a successful tobacco cessation intervention program with quit rates approaching 20%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John D Anczak
- Orthopaedics, Marshfield Clinic-Eau Claire Center, Eau Claire, Wisconsin 54701, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Huss M, Lehmkuhl U. Methylphenidate and substance abuse: a review of pharmacology, animal, and clinical studies. J Atten Disord 2003; 6 Suppl 1:S65-71. [PMID: 12685521 DOI: 10.1177/070674370200601s09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
This article reviews pharmacological, animal, and human evidence regarding the abuse liability of methylphenidate (MPH). Findings are not always consistent, but evidence converges to suggest that although intravenous methylphenidate has some abuse potential, there is very little potential for oral MPH abuse. Furthermore, the available data suggests that children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) who are treated with MPH are at lower risk for substance use disorder later in life. More longitudinal, prospective studies are needed to assess the long term effects of MPH treatment in ADHD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Huss
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Charité Virchow-Hospital, Humboldt-University of Berlin, Germany.
| | | |
Collapse
|