Rates of Smoking Cessation at 6 and 12 Months after a Clinical Tobacco Smoking Cessation Intervention in Head and Neck Cancer Patients in Northern Ontario, Canada

Performance of 8 Smoking Metrics for Modeling Survival in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Importance

Cigarette smoking is a strong risk factor for mortality in patients diagnosed with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, little evidence supports which smoking metric best models the association between smoking and survival in HNSCC.

Objective

To determine which smoking metric best models a linear association between smoking exposure and overall survival (OS) in patients with HNSCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of 6 clinical epidemiological studies was performed. Five were part of the Human Papillomavirus, Oral and Oropharyngeal Cancer Genomic Research (VOYAGER) consortium. Participants included patients 18 years and older with pathologically confirmed HNSCC. Data were collected from January 2002 to December 2019, and data were analyzed between January 2022 to November 2024.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was OS. The performance of 8 smoking metrics, including pack-years, duration, and log cig-years (calculated as log10[cigarettes smoked per day + 1] × number of years smoked) for modeling OS were compared. Metric performance was measured by the strength of association in Cox proportional hazard models, linearity based on P for linear trend, Akaike information criterion (AIC; lower value indicates better model fit), and visual assessment of spline curves. Secondary outcomes included modeling OS in clinicodemographic subgroups and HNSCC anatomic subsites. Exploratory outcomes included cancer-specific survival and noncancer survival.

Results

In total, 8875 patients with HNSCC (2114 [24%] female; median [IQR] age, 61 [54-69] years) were included. Of 8 smoking metrics evaluated, smoking duration (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.11 [95% CI, 1.03-1.19]) and log cig-years (aHR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.04-1.18]) had the highest aHRs; both had a statistically significant linear association with OS. Log cig-years had the lowest AIC linear value and the most visually linear spline curve when modeling OS. Duration and log cig-years outperformed pack-years for modeling OS regardless of age, smoking status, and cancer stage. Both performed well in lip and oral cavity, laryngeal (only duration was significant), and human papillomavirus-negative oropharyngeal subsites. In an exploratory analysis, duration had the highest aHR (1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.29]), and log cig-years had the lowest AIC linear value when modeling noncancer survival.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, smoking duration and log cig-years best modeled a linear relationship with OS for patients with HNSCC. Both metrics maintained robust performance within specific clinicodemographic subgroups and anatomic subsites. Although most HNSCC survival models control for smoking exposure using smoking status or pack-years, duration and log cig-years may be superior metrics to account for the effects of smoking on survival.

Cost-effectiveness of point of care smoking cessation interventions in oncology clinics

BACKGROUND

We examined the cost-effectiveness of providing systematic smoking cessation interventions to oncology patients at point-of-care.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was completed from the healthcare payer's perspective and included all incident cancer cases involving patients who smoke in New Brunswick, Canada (n = 1040), cancer site stratifications, and risks of mortality, continued smoking, and cancer treatment failure over one year. Usual care (no cessation support) was compared to the standard Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation (OMSC) intervention, and to OMSC plus unlimited cost-free stop smoking medication (OMSC + SSM), including nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, or bupropion. Primary outcomes were incremental cost per quit (ICQ) and incremental cost per cancer treatment failure avoided (ICTFA).

RESULTS

The ICQ was $C143 and ICTFA $C1193 for standard OMSC. The ICQ was $C503 and ICTFA was $C5952 for OMSC + SSM. The number needed to treat (NNT) to produce one quit was 9 for standard OMSC and 4 for OMSC + SSM, and the NNT to avoid one first-line treatment failure was 78 for OMSC and 45 for OMSC + SSM. Both were cost-effective in 100% of 1000 simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high clinical benefits and low incremental costs, systematic smoking cessation interventions should be a standard component of first-line cancer treatment.

Smoking and alcohol habits in head and neck cancers: How many patients stop after diagnosis?

BACKGROUND

Smoking and alcohol are the main risk factors for head and neck cancer. Despite the significant psychological impact, many patients continue to smoke and drink alcohol after diagnosis of cancer. This study aims to analyze the patients' behavior post diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer.

METHODS

An observational retrospective study was conducted on patients suffering from head and neck cancer. Their smoking and alcohol habits before and after diagnosis of cancer were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were recruited: 80 % males, mean age 61.77±9.30 years. Among smokers, 35.80 % continued smoking post-diagnosis. A statistically significant correlation was found between smoking habit after diagnosis of cancer and type of treatment and tracheostomy. Among drinkers, 65.52 % continued to consume alcohol after diagnosis of cancer. A statistically significant correlation was found between alcohol consumption post-diagnosis and sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing more invasive treatments are more likely to quit smoking and/or drinking alcohol, suggesting the strong psychological impact of cancer and its therapy. Many patients continue smoking and consuming alcohol due to unawareness, depression, or addiction. However, most patients reduced cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption. Comprehensive care, including psychological support, is essential for these patients.

Association between Smoking Status and the Risk of Hip Fracture in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

BACKGRUOUND

Limited longitudinal evidence exists regarding the potential association between smoking status and hip fracture among individuals with type 2 diabetes. We investigated this association using large-scale, nationwide cohort data for the Korean population.

METHODS

This nationwide cohort study included 1,414,635 adults aged 40 and older who received Korean National Health Insurance Service health examinations between 2009 and 2012. Subjects with type 2 diabetes were categorized according to their smoking status, amount smoked (pack-years), number of cigarettes smoked per day, and duration of smoking. The results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between smoking status parameters and risk of hip fracture in multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with never-smokers, an increased adjusted HR (aHR) for hip fracture was observed in current smokers (1.681; 95% CI, 1.578 to 1.791), and a comparable aHR for hip fracture was found in former smokers (1.065; 95% CI, 0.999 to 1.136). For former smokers who had smoked 20 pack-years or more, the risk was slightly higher than that for never-smokers (aHR, 1.107; 95% CI, 1.024 to 1.196). The hip fracture risk of female former smokers was similar to that of female current smokers, but the hip fracture risk in male former smokers was similar to that of male never-smokers.

CONCLUSION

Smoking is associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in patients with type 2 diabetes. Current smokers with diabetes should be encouraged to quit smoking because the risk of hip fracture is greatly reduced in former smokers.

Addictions, Social Deprivation and Cessation Failure in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Survivors

AIM

To evaluate the evolution of addictions (tobacco and alcohol) and social precarity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma survivors when these factors are addressed from the time of diagnosis.

METHODS

Addictions and social precarity in patients with a new diagnosis of HNSCC were assessed through the EPICES score, the Fagerström score, and the CAGE questionnaire. When identified as precarious/dependent, patients were referred to relevant addiction/social services.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-two patients were included. At the time of diagnosis, an active tobacco consumption was associated with alcohol drinking (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001). Active smokers were more socially deprived (mean EPICES score = mES = 36.2 [±22.1]) than former smokers (mES = 22.8 [±17.8]) and never smokers (mES = 18.9 [±14.5]; Kruskal-Wallis, p < 0.001). The EPICES score was correlated to the Fagerström score (Kruskal-Wallis, p < 0.001). Active drinkers (mES = 34.1 [±21.9]) and former drinkers (mES = 32.7 [±21]) were more likely to be socially deprived than those who never drank (mES = 20.8 [±17.1]; Krukal-Wallis, p < 0.001). A Fagerström score improvement at one year was associated to a CAGE score improvement (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001). Tobacco and alcohol consumption were more than halved one year after treatment. Patients who continued to smoke one year after diagnosis were significantly more likely to continue to drink (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001) and had a significantly higher initial EPICES score (Kruskal-Wallis, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

At one year, addictions and social deprivation tend to improve when taken care of from the diagnosis. The most dependent patients and those with multiple frailties are at highest risk of cessation failure.

Systematic Review of Smoking Cessation Interventions for Smokers Diagnosed with Cancer

The detrimental impact of smoking on health and wellbeing are irrefutable. Additionally, smoking is associated with the development of cancer, a reduction treatment outcomes and poorer health outcomes. Nevertheless, a significant number of people continue to smoke following a cancer diagnosis. Little is understood of the smoking cessation services provided to smokers with cancer or their engagement with them. This systematic review aimed to identify existing smoking cessation interventions for this cohort diagnosed with breast, head and neck, lung and cervical cancers (linked to risk). Systematic searches of Pubmed, Embase, Psych Info and CINAHL from 1 January 2015 to 15 December 2020 were conducted. Included studies examined the characteristics of smoking cessation interventions and impact on referrals and quit attempts. The impact on healthcare professionals was included if reported. Included studies were restricted to adults with a cancer diagnosis and published in English. No restriction was placed on study designs, and narrative data synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity. A review protocol was registered on PROSPERO CRD 42020214204, and reporting adheres to PRISMA reporting guidelines. Data were screened, extracted in duplicate and an assessment of the quality of evidence undertaken using Mixed Methods Assessment Tool. 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing USA, Canada, England, Lebanon, Australia and including randomized controlled trials (9), observational studies (10), quality improvement (3), and one qualitative study. Hospital and cancer clinics [including a dental clinic] were the settings for all studies. 43% (10/23) of studies reported interventions for smokers diagnosed with head and neck cancer, 13% (3/23) for smokers diagnosed with lung cancer, one study provides evidence for breast cancer, and the remaining nine studies (39%) report on multiple cancers including the ones specified in this review. Methodological quality was variable. There were limited data to identify one optimal intervention for this cohort. Key elements included the timing and frequency of quit conversations, use of electronic records, pharmacotherapy including extended use of varenicline, increased counselling sessions and a service embedded in oncology departments. More studies are required to ensure tailored smoking cessation pathways are co-developed for smokers with a diagnosis of cancer to support this population.

Evolution of a Systematic Approach to Smoking Cessation in Ontario’s Regional Cancer Centres

Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis can significantly improve a person’s prognosis, treatment efficacy and safety, and quality of life. In 2012, Cancer Care Ontario (now part of Ontario Health) introduced a Framework for Smoking Cessation, to be implemented for new ambulatory cancer patients at the province’s 14 Regional Cancer Centres (RCCs). Over time, the program has evolved to become more efficient, use data for robust performance management, and broaden its focus to include new patient populations and additional data collection. In 2017, the framework was revised from a 5As to a 3As brief intervention model, along with an opt-out approach to referrals. The revised model was based on emerging evidence, feedback from stakeholders, and an interim program evaluation. Results showed an initial increase in referrals to cessation services. Two indicators (tobacco use screening and acceptance of a referral) are routinely monitored as part of Ontario Health’s system-wide performance management approach, which has been identified as a key driver of change among RCCs. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many RCCs reported a decrease in these indicators. RCCs that were able to maintain a high level of smoking cessation activities during the pandemic offer valuable lessons, including the opportunity to swiftly leverage virtual care. Future directions for the program include capturing data on cessation outcomes and expanding the intervention to new populations. A focus on system recovery from COVID-19 will be paramount. Smoking cessation must remain a core element of high-quality cancer care, so that patients achieve the best possible health benefits from their treatments.