Dietary intake after smoking cessation among weight-concerned women smokers

Antidepressants for smoking cessation

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.

Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Most people who stop smoking gain weight. This can discourage some people from making a quit attempt and risks offsetting some, but not all, of the health advantages of quitting. Interventions to prevent weight gain could improve health outcomes, but there is a concern that they may undermine quitting.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effects of: (1) interventions targeting post-cessation weight gain on weight change and smoking cessation (referred to as 'Part 1') and (2) interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that plausibly affect post-cessation weight gain (referred to as 'Part 2').

SEARCH METHODS

Part 1 - We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register and CENTRAL; latest search 16 October 2020. Part 2 - We searched included studies in the following 'parent' Cochrane reviews: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, e-cigarettes, and exercise interventions for smoking cessation published in Issue 10, 2020 of the Cochrane Library. We updated register searches for the review of nicotine receptor partial agonists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Part 1 - trials of interventions that targeted post-cessation weight gain and had measured weight at any follow-up point or smoking cessation, or both, six or more months after quit day. Part 2 - trials included in the selected parent Cochrane reviews reporting weight change at any time point.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. Change in weight was expressed as difference in weight change from baseline to follow-up between trial arms and was reported only in people abstinent from smoking. Abstinence from smoking was expressed as a risk ratio (RR). Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the inverse variance method for weight, and Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking.

MAIN RESULTS

Part 1: We include 37 completed studies; 21 are new to this update. We judged five studies to be at low risk of bias, 17 to be at unclear risk and the remainder at high risk.  An intermittent very low calorie diet (VLCD) comprising full meal replacement provided free of charge and accompanied by intensive dietitian support significantly reduced weight gain at end of treatment compared with education on how to avoid weight gain (mean difference (MD) -3.70 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.82 to -2.58; 1 study, 121 participants), but there was no evidence of benefit at 12 months (MD -1.30 kg, 95% CI -3.49 to 0.89; 1 study, 62 participants). The VLCD increased the chances of abstinence at 12 months (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.73; 1 study, 287 participants). However, a second study  found that no-one completed the VLCD intervention or achieved abstinence. Interventions aimed at increasing acceptance of weight gain reported mixed effects at end of treatment, 6 months and 12 months with confidence intervals including both increases and decreases in weight gain compared with no advice or health education. Due to high heterogeneity, we did not combine the data. These interventions increased quit rates at 6 months (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.96; 4 studies, 619 participants; I2 = 21%), but there was no evidence at 12 months (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.06; 2 studies, 496 participants; I2 = 26%). Some pharmacological interventions tested for limiting post-cessation weight gain (PCWG) reduced weight gain at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine, phenylpropanolamine, naltrexone). The effects of ephedrine and caffeine combined, lorcaserin, and chromium were too imprecise to give useful estimates of treatment effects. There was very low-certainty evidence that personalized weight management support reduced weight gain at end of treatment (MD -1.11 kg, 95% CI -1.93 to -0.29; 3 studies, 121 participants; I2 = 0%), but no evidence in the longer-term 12 months (MD -0.44 kg, 95% CI -2.34 to 1.46; 4 studies, 530 participants; I2 = 41%). There was low to very low-certainty evidence that detailed weight management education without personalized assessment, planning and feedback did not reduce weight gain and may have reduced smoking cessation rates (12 months: MD -0.21 kg, 95% CI -2.28 to 1.86; 2 studies, 61 participants; I2 = 0%; RR for smoking cessation 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90; 2 studies, 522 participants; I2 = 0%). Part 2: We include 83 completed studies, 27 of which are new to this update. There was low certainty that exercise interventions led to minimal or no weight reduction compared with standard care at end of treatment (MD -0.25 kg, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.29; 4 studies, 404 participants; I2 = 0%). However, weight was reduced at 12 months (MD -2.07 kg, 95% CI -3.78 to -0.36; 3 studies, 182 participants; I2 = 0%). Both bupropion and fluoxetine limited weight gain at end of treatment (bupropion MD -1.01 kg, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.67; 10 studies, 1098 participants; I2 = 3%); (fluoxetine MD -1.01 kg, 95% CI -1.49 to -0.53; 2 studies, 144 participants; I2 = 38%; low- and very low-certainty evidence, respectively). There was no evidence of benefit at 12 months for bupropion, but estimates were imprecise (bupropion MD -0.26 kg, 95% CI -1.31 to 0.78; 7 studies, 471 participants; I2 = 0%). No studies of fluoxetine provided data at 12 months. There was moderate-certainty that NRT reduced weight at end of treatment (MD -0.52 kg, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.05; 21 studies, 2784 participants; I2 = 81%) and moderate-certainty that the effect may be similar at 12 months (MD -0.37 kg, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.11; 17 studies, 1463 participants; I2 = 0%), although the estimates are too imprecise to assess long-term benefit. There was mixed evidence of the effect of varenicline on weight, with high-certainty evidence that weight change was very modestly lower at the end of treatment (MD -0.23 kg, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.06; 14 studies, 2566 participants; I2 = 32%); a low-certainty estimate gave an imprecise estimate of higher weight at 12 months (MD 1.05 kg, 95% CI -0.58 to 2.69; 3 studies, 237 participants; I2 = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is no intervention for which there is moderate certainty of a clinically useful effect on long-term weight gain. There is also no moderate- or high-certainty evidence that interventions designed to limit weight gain reduce the chances of people achieving abstinence from smoking.

No changes in dietary intake after quitting smoking; a prospective study in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

After quitting smoking, quitters frequently increase their weight and change their dietary intake. Still, most studies on the topic are over 20 years old and focused on few dietary markers. We analysed the changes in weight and dietary intake after quitting smoking using a large panel of dietary markers.

METHODS

Prospective study including 5064 participants, 169 of whom (3.3%) quitted during a median follow-up of 5 years. Dietary intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire. Participants were excluded if they lacked dietary data or reported extreme total energy intakes (TEI) < 850 or > 4000 kcal/day.

RESULTS

Data from 128 participants (43.8% women, aged 56.0 ± 10.0 years) were used. After quitting smoking, mean weight increased 2.1 ± 0.7 kg; the majority (58%) of the participants gained over 1 kg, and only 7.1% were on a diet to reduce their weight. Total protein intake increased from (median [interquartile range]) 14.4 [12.9-16.4] to 15.1 [13.4-17.9] % of total energy intake (TEI), p = 0.008, while animal protein intake increased from 9.7 [8.0-12.1] to 10.8 [8.5-13.5] %TEI, p = 0.011. Fish intake increased from 27 [17-45] to 37 [19-55] g/day, p = 0.016 and dairy intake decreased from 177 [94-288] to 150 [77-243] g/day, p = 0.009. No other changes were found. Among the 68 (53%) participants who reported time since quitting, quitting for <=1 year led to a decreased consumption of fruits, while the opposite was found for participants who quit for longer than one year. No associations were found between weight or dietary changes and time since quitting.

CONCLUSIONS

People who quit smoking tend to gain weight, do not significantly change their dietary intake, and seem to make little effort to prevent weight gain. Systematic dietary support should be provided to all smokers wishing to quit.

Antidepressants for smoking cessation

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.

Circulating orexin changes during withdrawal are associated with nicotine craving and risk for smoking relapse

We examined the extent to which orexin measured during smoking and the early phase of abstinence was related to craving, withdrawal, stress hormones, and risk for smoking relapse in men and women. Considering its role in modulating nicotine-related reward, we predicted that a reduction in circulating orexin during withdrawal would be associated with increased craving and risk for smoking relapse. Two hundred and eighty five participants provided biological samples and self-report information to identify predictors of smoking relapse. All participants attended two laboratory sessions, which were before and after a period of required abstinence from smoking. After quitting, participants also attended four weekly sessions to track smoking relapse. Only smokers who relapsed within the follow-up period exhibited reduced orexin levels during the initial withdrawal period; ACTH, but not craving nor cortisol, increased across the abstinence period for successful abstainers but not for relapsers. Sex differences in orexin and craving or withdrawal associations also emerged. Adding sex, HPA hormones, and self-reported measures of craving and withdrawal as potential mediators had minimal effects on the above abstinence and orexin effects. These results provide the first evidence that circulating orexin may be a useful marker of risk for relapse; and sex, adrenal hormones, and self-reported craving and withdrawal were not mediators of this effect. The results point to a promising pathway to investigate objective biological markers for craving and smoking relapse and highlight the complexity of the neurobiology of relapse.

Postcessation weight gain concern as a barrier to smoking cessation: Assessment considerations and future directions

PURPOSE

Concern about postcessation weight gain may be one potential barrier to quitting smoking. In this 'mini-review' of recent literature, we summarize findings on the relationship between postcessation weight gain concern and smoking cessation, and evaluate varied use of postcessation weight gain concern assessments and potential moderators of the postcessation weight gain concern-cessation association.

METHODS

We conducted a search using the terms "smoking" OR "smoking cessation" AND "weight concern" for articles published between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016. We identified 17 studies assessing postcessation weight gain concern, seven of which evaluated the postcessation weight gain concern-cessation association.

RESULTS

The relationship between postcessation weight gain concern and smoking cessation was mixed. Recent studies varied in their assessments of postcessation weight gain concern, many of which were not validated and assessed correlates of this construct. Studies varied in their adjustment of demographic (e.g., sex), smoking-specific (e.g., smoking level), and weight-specific (e.g., body mass index) variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of non-validated assessments and variability in testing covariates/moderators may contribute to conflicting results regarding the postcessation weight gain concern-cessation relationship. We recommend validating an assessment of postcessation weight gain concern, maintaining vigilance in testing and reporting covariates/moderators, and investigating trajectories of this construct over time and by smoking status to inform future assessment and intervention efforts.

Smoking Cessation and Changes in Body Mass Index: Findings From the First Randomized Cessation Trial in a Low-Income Country Setting

Background

In high-income countries, quitting cigarette smoking is associated with weight gain, which can reduce motivation to abstain. Whether smoking cessation is associated with weight gain in a low-income country context has never been investigated. We aimed to determine the post-cessation changes in body mass index (BMI) and its predictors among smokers who received a smoking cessation intervention in a low-income country setting.

Methods

We performed post hoc analyses of data from 269 smokers who participated in a two-group, parallel-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of combined nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and behavioral counseling in primary care clinics in Aleppo, Syria. We used generalized estimating equation modeling to identify predictors of changes in BMI at 6 weeks and 6- and 12-month follow-ups after quit date.

Results

The mean pre-cessation BMI of the sample was 27.9kg/m2 (SD = 5.2). Over 12 months of follow-up, BMI of smoking abstainers averaged 1.8 BMI units (approximately 4.8kg) greater than non-abstainers (p = .012). Throughout the study, greater BMI was associated with being female (p = .048), reporting smoking to control weight (p < .001) and having previously failed to quit due to weight gain (p = .036).

Conclusion

Similar to findings from high-income countries, smoking cessation in Syria is associated with weight gain, particularly among women and those who have weight concerns prior to quitting. This group of smokers may benefit from tailored cessation interventions with integrated body weight management elements that take into consideration the prevailing local and cultural influences on diet and levels of physical activity.

Implications

This study provides the first evidence regarding post-cessation changes in BMI among smokers who attempt to quit in a low-income country setting. Our findings advance knowledge regarding post-cessation weight gain and offers insight for researchers and clinicians to identify smokers at higher risk of post-cessation weight gain. This information will help in delivering interventions that take into account the prevailing cultural influence on diet and physical activity and will ultimately help in designing future tailored cessation programs in Syria and other low-income countries with similar cultural background and level of development.

Change in potato consumption among Norwegian women 1998-2005-The Norwegian Women and Cancer study (NOWAC)

Studies have shown that potato consumption in Norway have been on the decline in recent years. Increase in income and the association of potato consumption with weight gain and chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes have been identified as some of the factors responsible for the change. The aim of this study was to describe the change in potato consumption within persons and how non-dietary variables influenced that change among participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study (NOWAC). A prospective analysis was performed in the NOWAC cohort using linear regression. Data on dietary, lifestyle, socioeconomic and health-related factors were collected by mailed questionnaires. The change in potato consumption among 38,820 women aged 41–70 years was investigated using two measurements taken at intervals of 4–6 years. At baseline, mean intake was 112g per day; this had decreased to 94.5g per day at the second measurement. Results showed that the percentage of women who reported that they ate less than 1 potato a day increased from 24.6% at baseline to 35.5% at the second measurement. Those who reported that they ate more than 3 potatoes a day had decreased from 20.2% of the participants at baseline to 12.1% at the second measurement. Multivariable adjusted results show that geography was an important predictor of potato consumption at second measurement. Living in the north compared to Oslo (the capital) was associated with higher intake of potato at second measurement (B: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.55–0.65). Compared to women living with a partner, living alone was associated with lower potato intake at second measurement (B: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.17 –-0.09) while living with children tended to be associated with higher potato intake at second measurement (B: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.02–0.04). Younger age, more years of education, higher income or BMI was associated with a lower potato intake at second measurement. Smoking was associated with a higher intake of potato at second measurement (B: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.00–0.06 for smokers compared to non-smokers). Having diabetes at baseline was associated with lower intake of potato at second measurement (B: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.14 –-0.06 for non-diabetics compared to diabetics). Potato consumption among women in the NOWAC study showed a decline over the period studied. Change in the consumption was found to be influenced by age, education, income, household structure, region of residence as well as health-related factors like smoking and diabetes. The use of repeated measures is necessary to continue the monitoring and also to understand the stability and direction of the possible change in diet of a population.

Tobacco cessation and household spending on non-tobacco goods: results from the US Consumer Expenditure Surveys

Objectives

To estimate the impact of tobacco cessation on household spending on non-tobacco goods in the USA.

Methods

Using 2006–2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey data, 9130 tobacco-consuming households were followed for four quarters. Households were categorised during the fourth quarter as having: (1) recent tobacco cessation, (2) long-term cessation, (3) relapsed cessation or (4) no cessation. Generalised linear models were used to compare fourth quarter expenditures on alcohol, food at home, food away from home, housing, healthcare, transportation, entertainment and other goods between the no-cessation households and those with recent, long-term or relapsed cessation. The full sample was analysed, and then analysed by income quartile.

Results

In the full sample, households with long-term and recent cessation had lower spending on alcohol, food, entertainment and transportation (p<0.001). Recent cessation was further associated with reduced spending on food at home (p<0.001), whereas relapsed cessation was associated with higher spending on healthcare and food away from home (p<0.001). In the highest income quartile, long-term and recent cessations were associated with reduced alcohol spending only (p<0.001), whereas in the lowest income quartile, long-term and recent cessations were associated with lower spending on alcohol, food at home, transportation and entertainment (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Households that quit tobacco spend less in areas that enable or complement their tobacco cessation, most of which may be motivated by financial strain. The most robust association between tobacco cessation and spending was the significantly lower spending on alcohol.

Can We Selectively Reduce Appetite for Energy-Dense Foods? An Overview of Pharmacological Strategies for Modification of Food Preference Behavior

Excessive intake of food, especially palatable and energy-dense carbohydrates and fats, is largely responsible for the growing incidence of obesity worldwide. Although there are a number of candidate antiobesity drugs, only a few of them have been proven able to inhibit appetite for palatable foods without the concurrent reduction in regular food consumption. In this review, we discuss the interrelationships between homeostatic and hedonic food intake control mechanisms in promoting overeating with palatable foods and assess the potential usefulness of systemically administered pharmaceuticals that impinge on the endogenous cannabinoid, opioid, aminergic, cholinergic, and peptidergic systems in the modification of food preference behavior. Also, certain dietary supplements with the potency to reduce specifically palatable food intake are presented. Based on human and animal studies, we indicate the most promising therapies and agents that influence the effectiveness of appetite-modifying drugs. It should be stressed, however, that most of the data included in our review come from preclinical studies; therefore, further investigations aimed at confirming the effectiveness and safety of the aforementioned medications in the treatment of obese humans are necessary.

Effect of smoking reduction and cessation on the plasma levels of the oxidative stress biomarker glutathione--Post-hoc analysis of data from a smoking cessation trial

Cigarette smoke contains high concentrations of free radical components that induce oxidative stress. Smoking-induced oxidative stress is thought to contribute to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease and lung cancer through degenerative processes in the lung and other tissues. It is uncertain however whether smoking cessation lowers the burden of oxidative stress. We used data from a randomized controlled cessation trial of 434 current smokers for a post-hoc examination of the effects of smoking cessation on blood plasma levels of total glutathione (tGSH), the most abundant endogenous antioxidant in cells, and total cysteine (tCys), an amino acid and constituent of glutathione. Smoking status was validated based on serum cotinine levels. Multivariate linear mixed models were fitted to examine the association of smoking cessation and change in cigarette consumption with tGSH and tCys. After 12 months follow-up, quitters (n=55) had significantly increased levels of tGSH compared to subjects who continued to smoke (P<0.01). No significant change in tGSH was found for subjects who continued to smoke but reduced their intensity of smoking. No significant effect of smoking cessation or reduction was observed on levels of tCys. These results suggest that smoking cessation but not smoking reduction reduces levels of oxidative stress.

The association between quitting smoking and weight gain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify weight gain after smoking cessation and the difference in weight gain between quitters and continuing smokers. Five electronic databases were searched before January 2015. Population-based prospective cohort studies were included if they recorded the weight change of adult smokers from baseline (before smoking cessation) to follow-up (at least 3 months after cessation). Thirty-five cohort studies were identified, including 63,403 quitters and 388,432 continuing smokers. The mean weight gain was 4.10 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.69, 5.51) and body mass index (BMI) gain was 1.14 kg m(-2) (95% CI: 0.50, 1.79) among quitters. Compared with continuing smoking, quitting smoking was significantly associated with absolute weight (adjusted mean difference [MD]: 2.61 kg; 95% CI: 1.61, 3.60) and BMI gain (adjusted MD: 0.63 kg m(-2) ; 95% CI: 0.46, 0.80). Subgroup analyses using geographic region found that the difference in weight gain was considerably greater in studies from North America than from Asia. Follow-up length was identified as a source of heterogeneity, such that studies with longer follow-up showed greater difference in weight gain. Effective strategies are needed to encourage smokers to quit irrespective of potential weight gain and to help quitters avoid excess weight gain.