Varenicline and risk of psychiatric conditions, suicidal behaviour, criminal offending, and transport accidents and offences: population based cohort study

First Episode of Psychosis in the Context of Varenicline Treatment for Smoking Cessation

Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death worldwide. Several pharmacological therapies have been established over the years to aid in smoking cessation, including Varenicline, a partial nicotine agonist. Neuropsychiatric adverse events have been reported in patients treated with Varenicline. Here, we present a case of first-episode psychosis in the context of Varenicline therapy. The patient's chart was retrospectively reviewed for relevant medical and psychiatric history, in addition to the use of current or past medications. Routine laboratory investigations and brain imaging were performed. The Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale was also done independently by two physicians involved in the patient's treatment. He was admitted for psychotic symptoms elicited in the context of a probable adverse reaction to Varenicline. The current evidence linking Varenicline to psychosis remains controversial. Speculatively, there could be a link between Varenicline, which supposedly increases dopamine levels in the prefrontal cortex through the mesolimbic pathways, and psychotic symptoms. It is therefore beneficial to be cognizant, in a clinical setting, of the possibility of the emergence of these symptoms with Varenicline therapy.

Interaction of Varenicline with Classic Antiseizure Medications in the Mouse Maximal Electroshock-Induced Seizure Model

Varenicline (VAR) is a partial agonist of brain α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors recommended as a first line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. The aim of this study was to examine whether VAR affects the protective activity of four classic antiseizure medications, i.e., carbamazepine (CBZ), phenobarbital (PB), phenytoin (PHT), and valproate (VPA) on maximal electroshock (MES)-induced seizures, which may serve as an experimental model of human-generalized tonic-clonic seizures in mice. VAR administered intraperitoneally (i.p.) at a subthreshold dose of 0.5 mg/kg decreased the protective activity of CBZ against MES-induced convulsions, increasing its median effective dose (ED50) from 10.92 ± 1.0 to 18.15 ± 1.73 mg/kg (p < 0.01). The effect of VAR was dose-dependent because a lower dose of VAR (0.25 mg/kg) failed to antagonize the protective activity of CBZ. VAR administered at the subthreshold dose of 0.5 mg/kg had no impact on the protective activity of PB, PHT, and VPA in the mouse MES model. The inhibitory effect of VAR on the protective activity of CBZ against tonic-clonic convulsions most likely resulted from the pharmacodynamic mechanism(s) and was not associated with the changes in total brain concentrations of CBZ. VAR-evoked alterations in the anticonvulsive activity of CBZ may be of serious concern for epileptic tobacco smokers.

Signals of Muscle Relaxant Drug Interactions Associated with Unintentional Traumatic Injury: A Population-Based Screening Study

BACKGROUND

Use of muscle relaxants is rapidly increasing in the USA. Little is understood about the role of drug interactions in the known association between muscle relaxants and unintentional traumatic injury, a clinically important endpoint causing substantial morbidity, disability, and death.

OBJECTIVE

We examined potential associations between concomitant drugs (i.e., precipitants) taken with muscle relaxants (affected drugs, i.e., objects) and hospital presentation for unintentional traumatic injury.

METHODS

In a series of self-controlled case series studies, we screened to identify drug interaction signals for muscle relaxant + precipitant pairs and unintentional traumatic injury. We used Optum's de-identified Clinformatics^® Data Mart Database, 2000-2019. We included new users of a muscle relaxant, aged 16-90 years, who were dispensed at least one precipitant drug and experienced an unintentional traumatic injury during the observation period. We classified each observation day as precipitant exposed or precipitant unexposed. The outcome was an emergency department or inpatient discharge diagnosis for unintentional traumatic injury. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate rate ratios adjusting for time-varying confounders and then accounted for multiple estimation via semi-Bayes shrinkage.

RESULTS

We identified 74,657 people who initiated muscle relaxants and experienced an unintentional traumatic injury, in whom we studied concomitant use of 2543 muscle relaxant + precipitant pairs. After adjusting for time-varying confounders, 16 (0.6%) pairs were statistically significantly and positively associated with injury, and therefore deemed signals of a potential drug interaction. Among signals, semi-Bayes shrunk, confounder-adjusted rate ratios ranged from 1.29 (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.62) for baclofen + sertraline to 2.28 (95% confidence interval 1.14-4.55) for methocarbamol + lamotrigine.

CONCLUSIONS

Using real-world data, we identified several new signals of potential muscle relaxant drug interactions associated with unintentional traumatic injury. Only one among 16 signals is currently reported in a major drug interaction knowledge base. Future studies should seek to confirm or refute these signals.

Smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is one of the leading causes of early death. Varenicline [Champix (UK), Pfizer Europe MA EEIG, Brussels, Belgium; or Chantix (USA), Pfizer Inc., Mission, KS, USA], bupropion (Zyban; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK) and nicotine replacement therapy are licensed aids for quitting smoking in the UK. Although not licensed, e-cigarettes may also be used in English smoking cessation services. Concerns have been raised about the safety of these medicines and e-cigarettes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes.

DESIGN

Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness analysis informed by the network meta-analysis results.

SETTING

Primary care practices, hospitals, clinics, universities, workplaces, nursing or residential homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Smokers aged ≥ 18 years of all ethnicities using UK-licensed smoking cessation therapies and/or e-cigarettes.

INTERVENTIONS

Varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy as monotherapies and in combination treatments at standard, low or high dose, combination nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarette monotherapies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effectiveness - continuous or sustained abstinence. Safety - serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events and major adverse neuropsychiatric events.

DATA SOURCES

Ten databases, reference lists of relevant research articles and previous reviews. Searches were performed from inception until 16 March 2017 and updated on 19 February 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Three reviewers screened the search results. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and checked by the other reviewers. Network meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and safety outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an amended version of the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes model.

RESULTS

Most monotherapies and combination treatments were more effective than placebo at achieving sustained abstinence. Varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard (odds ratio 5.75, 95% credible interval 2.27 to 14.90) was ranked first for sustained abstinence, followed by e-cigarette low (odds ratio 3.22, 95% credible interval 0.97 to 12.60), although these estimates have high uncertainty. We found effect modification for counselling and dependence, with a higher proportion of smokers who received counselling achieving sustained abstinence than those who did not receive counselling, and higher odds of sustained abstinence among participants with higher average dependence scores. We found that bupropion standard increased odds of serious adverse events compared with placebo (odds ratio 1.27, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.58). There were no differences between interventions in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. There was evidence of increased odds of major adverse neuropsychiatric events for smokers randomised to varenicline standard compared with those randomised to bupropion standard (odds ratio 1.43, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 2.09). There was a high level of uncertainty about the most cost-effective intervention, although all were cost-effective compared with nicotine replacement therapy low at the £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold. E-cigarette low appeared to be most cost-effective in the base case, followed by varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When the impact of major adverse neuropsychiatric events was excluded, varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline low plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When limited to licensed interventions in the UK, nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline standard.

LIMITATIONS

Comparisons between active interventions were informed almost exclusively by indirect evidence. Findings were imprecise because of the small numbers of adverse events identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapies of medicines are among the most clinically effective, safe and cost-effective treatment options for smokers. Although the combined therapy of nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline at standard doses was the most effective treatment, this is currently unlicensed for use in the UK.

FUTURE WORK

Researchers should examine the use of these treatments alongside counselling and continue investigating the long-term effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation compared with active interventions such as nicotine replacement therapy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041302.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with varenicline treatment for smoking cessation among Dutch population: A sequence symmetry analysis

Purpose

Varenicline is an effective treatment for smoking cessation. While clinical trials did not confirm a causal role, case reports suggested a possible link of varenicline with neuropsychiatric adverse drug events (NPAEs). This study aims to investigate the risk of NPAEs associated with varenicline initiation among the general population in a real‐world setting.

Methods

We conducted a sequence symmetry analysis (SSA) based on the University of Groningen IADB.nl prescription database. We selected incident users of both varenicline and marker drugs for NPAEs, including depression, anxiety and sleep disorder within different time‐intervals. Adjusted sequence ratios (aSR) were calculated for each time‐interval.

Results

Within 365‐days' time‐interval 1066 patients were incident users of both varenicline and NPAE marker drugs. In total, 505 patients were prescribed varenicline before NPAE marker drugs and 561 vice versa (crude sequence ratio [cSR] 0.90, 95% CI: 0.80–1.02). After adjustments for trends in prescriptions, overall a null association was found (aSR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.89–1.13). Regarding specific NPAEs, no increased risks were found for depression nor anxiety within any time‐interval. A small transient increased risk was found for sleep disorders, particularly in earlier time‐intervals 3 and 6 months (aSRs 1.52, 95% CI: 1.10–2.11 and 1.45, 95% CI: 1.15–1.83, respectively). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings.

Conclusions

Varenicline initiation was unlikely to be associated with an increased risk of taking anti‐depressants nor anti‐anxiety drugs. Yet a small, but statistically significant, transient association with drugs for sleep disorders was noticed, possibly associated with withdrawal symptoms caused by smoking cessation.

Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a prevalent condition in the UK, associated with high morbidity and mortality. Hospital physicians manage a significant portion of acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions to hospital and readmissions after discharge. Optimal management of exacerbations requires controlled oxygen therapy and ventilatory support where necessary, and careful administration of bronchodilators, steroids and antibiotics. Holistic care for these patients includes nutritional supplementation and palliative support for those with advanced disease. To reduce the chance of readmission, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care bundles can be used, along with a review of inhaled and oral therapies. Where available, hospital-at-home discharge schemes can safely facilitate early discharge. Most importantly, high quality evidence-based smoking cessation support must be offered to smokers. Exercise improves the physiological and psychological condition of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and should be encouraged, with referral to a pulmonary rehabilitation service if available.

Risk of neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular adverse events following treatment with varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink: a case-cross-over study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) are the most commonly used medications to quit smoking. Given their widespread use, monitoring adverse risks remains important. This study aimed to estimate the neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular risks associated with varenicline and NRT as used in routine UK care.

DESIGN

Case-cross-over study.

SETTING

UK-based electronic primary care records in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink from 2006 to 2015 linked to hospital and mortality data sets.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult smokers (n =282,429) observed during periods when exposed and not exposed to either varenicline or NRT.

MEASUREMENTS

Main outcomes included suicide, self-harm, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause death and cause-specific death [MI, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)]. In primary analyses, conditional logistic regression was used to compare the chance of varenicline or NRT exposure during the risk period (90 days prior to the event) with the chance of exposure during an earlier single reference period (91-180 days prior to the event) or multiple 90-day reference periods to increase statistical power.

FINDINGS

In the primary analyses, findings were inconclusive for the associations between varenicline and the main outcomes using a single reference period, while NRT was associated with MI [odds ratio (OR) = 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.18-1.67]. Using multiple reference periods, varenicline was associated with an increased risk of self-harm (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.12-1.56) and suicide (OR = 3.56, 95% CI = 1.32-9.60) but a reduction in all-cause death (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.61-0.93). NRT was associated with MI (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.36-1.74), self-harm (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.18-1.44) and deaths from MI (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.11-2.10), COPD (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.14-1.56) and all causes (OR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.18-1.40) when using multiple reference periods.

CONCLUSIONS

There appear to be positive associations between (1) nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and myocardial infarction, death and risk of self-harm and (2) varenicline and increased risk of self-harm and suicide, as well as a negative association between varenicline and all-cause death. The associations may not be causal. They may reflect health changes at the time of smoking cessation (nicotine replacement therapy is prescribed for people with cardiac problems) or be associated with quit attempts (exposure to both medicines was associated with self-harm).

Neuropsychiatric safety of varenicline in the general and COPD population with and without psychiatric disorders: a retrospective cohort study in a real-world setting

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the real-world association between varenicline and neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPAEs) in general and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) population with and without psychiatric disorders compared with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to strengthen the knowledge of varenicline safety.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Prescription database IADB.nl, the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

New users of varenicline or NRT among general (≥18 years) and COPD (≥40 years) population. Psychiatric subcohort was defined as people prescribed psychotropic medications (≥2) within 6 months before the index date.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The incidence of NPAEs including depression, anxiety and insomnia, defined by new or naive prescriptions of related medications in IADB.nl within 24 weeks after the first treatment initiation of varenicline or NRT.

RESULTS

For the general population in non-psychiatric cohort, the incidence of total NPAEs in varenicline (4480) and NRT (1970) groups was 10.5% and 12.6%, respectively (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00). For the general population in psychiatric cohort, the incidence of total NPAEs was much higher, 75.3% and 78.5% for varenicline (1427) and NRT (1200) groups, respectively (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99). For the COPD population (1598), there were no differences in the incidence of NPAEs between comparison groups in both the psychiatric cohort (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.44) and non-psychiatric cohort (aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.20). Results from subgroup or sensitivity analyses also did not reveal increased risks of NPAEs but showed decreased risk of some subgroup NPAEs associated with varenicline.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the concerns of a possible increased risk of NPAEs among varenicline users, we found a relative decreased risk of total NPAEs in varenicline users of the general population in psychiatric or non-psychiatric cohorts compared with NRT and no difference for NPAEs between varenicline and NRT users in smaller population with COPD.

Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies in non-depressed adults: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation are widely prescribed, despite substantial concerns being raised regarding the potential increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) and neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with these treatments. This study aimed to assess the relative CV and neuropsychiatric safety between varenicline and bupropion compared with nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) in adults without a recent history of depression.

DESIGN

Retrospective new-user cohort study.

SETTING

US administrative data from 2006 to 2016 covering more than 100 million individuals.

PARTICIPANTS

Three study cohorts of new users, aged 18 years or older, limited to patients with no diagnosis or treatment for depression in the prior 12 months.

MEASUREMENTS

Propensity score adjusted log-binomial regression models. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalized CV events. Secondary outcomes included a composite of hospitalized neuropsychiatric events and individual components of the primary outcome.

FINDINGS

A total of 618 497 participants were included in our study cohorts. Compared with NRT (n = 32 237), varenicline (n = 454 698) was associated with a 20% lower 1-year CV risk [adjusted relative risk (RR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-0.85], and bupropion (n = 131 562) was associated with a 25% lower 1-year CV risk (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.69-0.81). Varenicline was associated with a 35% lower 1-year risk of neuropsychiatric hospitalization versus NRT (RR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.59-0.72), and bupropion was associated with a 21% increase in 1-year risk of neuropsychiatric hospitalization (RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.09-1.35).

CONCLUSION

Varenicline compared with nicotine replacement therapy does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular or neuropsychiatric hospitalizations. Bupropion appears to be associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular hospitalization and a higher risk of neuropsychiatric hospitalization, compared with nicotine replacement therapy.

Pharmacological Approach to Smoking Cessation: An Updated Review for Daily Clinical Practice

Tobacco use is one of the major public health concerns and it is the most preventable cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Smoking cessation reduces subsequent cardiovascular events and mortality. Smoking is a real chronic disorder characterized by the development of an addiction status mainly due to nicotine. This condition makes the smokers generally unable to quit smoking without help. Different strategies are available to treat smoking dependence that include both non-pharmacological (behavioral counselling) and pharmacological therapies. Currently, it is well accepted that smoking cessation drugs are effective and safe in real-world settings. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, bupropion and cytisine are the main pharmacological strategies available for smoking cessation. Their efficacy and safety have been proved even in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease. Each of these drugs has peculiar characteristics and the clinician should customize the smoking cessation strategy based on currently available scientific evidence and patient's preference, paying particular attention to those patients having specific cardiovascular and psychiatric comorbidities. The present document aims to summarize the current viable pharmacological strategies for smoking cessation, also discussing the controversial issue regarding the use of alternative tobacco products, in order to provide useful practical indications to all physicians, mainly to those involved in cardiovascular prevention.

Varenicline: mode of action, efficacy, safety and accumulated experience salient for clinical populations

Objective: Varenicline, a selective partial agonist of the α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, is a smoking cessation pharmacotherapy that more than doubles the chance of quitting smoking at 6 months compared with placebo. This article reviews salient knowledge of the discovery, pharmacological characteristics, and the efficacy and safety of varenicline in general and in specific populations of smokers and provides recommendations to support use in clinical practice.Methods: Literature searches for varenicline were conducted using PubMed, with date limitations of 2000-2018 inclusive, using search terms covering the discovery, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety in different populations of smokers, alternative quit approaches and combination therapy. Selection of safety and efficacy data was limited to clinical trials, meta-analyses and observational studies.Results: Standard administration of varenicline is efficacious in helping smokers to quit, including smokers with cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Furthermore, varenicline efficacy may be improved with pre-loading, a gradual quitting approach for smokers unwilling or unable to quit abruptly, and extended treatment in smokers who have recently quit to help maintain abstinence. Initial concerns regarding the association of varenicline with increased risk of neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular adverse events have been disproven after extensive clinical evaluations, and the benefit-risk profile of varenicline is considered favorable.Conclusions: Varenicline is efficacious and safe for all adult smokers with a range of clinical characteristics. Evidence suggests that approaches offering greater flexibility in timing and duration of treatment may further extend treatment efficacy and clinical reach.

Prescribing Prevalence, Effectiveness, and Mental Health Safety of Smoking Cessation Medicines in Patients With Mental Disorders

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a prospective cohort study of the Clinical Practice Research Database to estimate rates of varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) prescribing and the relative effects on smoking cessation, and mental health.

METHODS

We used multivariable logistic regression, propensity score matched regression, and instrumental variable analysis. Exposure was varenicline or NRT prescription. Mental disorders were bipolar, depression, neurotic disorder, schizophrenia, or prescriptions of antidepressants, antipsychotics, hypnotics/anxiolytics, mood stabilizers. Outcomes were smoking cessation, and incidence of neurotic disorder, depression, prescription of antidepressants, or hypnotics/anxiolytics. Follow-ups were 3, 6, and 9 months, and at 1, 2, and 4 years.

RESULTS

In all patients, NRT and varenicline prescribing declined during the study period. Seventy-eight thousand four hundred fifty-seven smokers with mental disorders aged ≥18 years were prescribed NRT (N = 59 340) or varenicline (N = 19 117) from September 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015. Compared with smokers without mental disorders, smokers with mental disorders had 31% (95% CI: 29% to 33%) lower odds of being prescribed varenicline relative to NRT, but had 19% (95% CI: 15% to 24%) greater odds of quitting at 2 years when prescribed varenicline relative to NRT. Overall, varenicline was associated with decreased or similar odds of worse mental health outcomes than NRT in patients both with and without mental disorders, although there was some variation when analyses were stratified by mental disorder subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation medication prescribing may be declining in primary care. Varenicline was more effective than NRT for smoking cessation in patients with mental disorders and there is not clear consistent evidence that varenicline is adversely associated with poorer mental health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS

Patients with mental disorders were less likely to be prescribed varenicline than NRT. We triangulated results from three analytical techniques. We found that varenicline was more effective than NRT for smoking cessation in patients with mental disorders. Varenicline was generally associated with similar or decreased odds of poorer mental health outcomes (ie, improvements in mental health) when compared with NRT. We report these findings cautiously as our data are observational and are at risk of confounding.

Treatment With Bupropion and Varenicline for Smoking Cessation and the Risk of Acute Cardiovascular Events and Injuries: a Swedish Case-Crossover Study

Introduction

Bupropion and varenicline are non-nicotine medications used for smoking cessation that mitigate craving and withdrawal symptoms. We aim to investigate whether these drugs increase the risk of selected acute adverse outcomes when used in medical practice.

Methods

Population-based case-crossover design using data from Swedish health and administrative registers. Adult individuals diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction, stroke, suicide, suicide attempt, fall injury, or that suffered a road traffic crash from 01.10.2006 for bupropion, or from 01.03.2008 for varenicline, until 31.12.2013 were included. Different lengths of exposure periods were analyzed within the 12-week hazard period prior to the adverse outcome (1-14, 15-28, and 29-84 days). The control period was matched using the interval preceding the hazard period (85-168 days), and breaking it up into equivalent periods (85-98, 99-112, and 113-168 days). Conditional logistic regression with each case considered as one stratum was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR) and confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Neither medication was associated with consistent higher risks for any of the adverse outcomes. For bupropion and varenicline, respectively, in the 1-14 days hazard period, OR (95% CI) were: myocardial infarction 1.14 (0.55 to 2.34) and 1.06 (0.70 to 1.62); stroke 1.16 (0.39 to 3.47) and 1.26 (0.72 to 2.17), and traffic crashes 0.85 (0.39 to 1.85) and 1.48 (0.90 to 2.41). In the other periods, ORs were similar or even lower. For falls and suicidal events ORs were generally below one for both drugs.

Conclusion

The available evidence suggests that if prescription guidelines are properly followed regarding potential contraindications both of these medications could be considered relatively safe.

Implications

The reliable exposure and diagnosis assessment used in this nationwide register-based study, along with the number of cases gathered makes this sample one of the largest of its type to assess potential side effects associated with the use of these drugs. Neither medication was associated with consistent higher risks for any of the adverse outcomes studied.

The relation between the age at diagnosis of problem behaviors related to aggression and distal outcomes in Swedish children

Severe childhood aggressive behaviors are known to predict negative outcomes later in life; however, little is known about the effect of when in childhood aggression problems are diagnosed. While an earlier first diagnosis of problematic aggressive behavior might be associated with increased severity and, thus, worse outcomes, it is also possible that an earlier diagnosis affords an earlier start of treatment programs or indicates that greater attention is being paid to behavioral problems, thus resulting in attenuation of the severity of childhood aggression's impact on distal outcomes. The current study analyzed data from the population-based Swedish Data Registries, which include data on all children formally diagnosed by the Swedish medical system with a wide range of aggression problems between ages 8 and 18 (N = 5816) during the years 1987-2013, along with a matched control. Time-to-event analyses investigated whether the age at time of diagnosis affects later life outcomes while controlling for relevant confounders. Results show that for both boys and girls, those with a later diagnosis had lower average incomes (regression coefficient b = - 0.055, p < 0.005) and a higher probability of having a criminal record (odds ratio 1.126, p < 0.005) than children with earlier diagnoses. The effect on suicide attempts was not significant after correcting for multiple testing (odds ratio 1.264, p = 0.016). Grade score was not significantly affected. The results warrant further research concerning the potential advantage of earlier diagnoses, especially concerning generalizability beyond the Swedish population.

Associations between gabapentinoids and suicidal behaviour, unintentional overdoses, injuries, road traffic incidents, and violent crime: population based cohort study in Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To examine associations between gabapentinoids and adverse outcomes related to coordination disturbances (head or body injuries, or both and road traffic incidents or offences), mental health (suicidal behaviour, unintentional overdoses), and criminality.

DESIGN

Population based cohort study.

SETTING

High quality prescription, patient, death, and crime registers, Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

191 973 people from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register who collected prescriptions for gabapentinoids (pregabalin or gabapentin) during 2006 to 2013.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were suicidal behaviour, unintentional overdoses, head/body injuries, road traffic incidents and offences, and arrests for violent crime. Stratified Cox proportional hazards regression was conducted comparing treatment periods with non-treatment periods within an individual. Participants served as their own control, thus accounting for time invariant factors (eg, genetic and historical factors), and reducing confounding by indication. Additional adjustments were made by age, sex, comorbidities, substance use, and use of other antiepileptics.

RESULTS

During the study period, 10 026 (5.2%) participants were treated for suicidal behaviour or died from suicide, 17 144 (8.9%) experienced an unintentional overdose, 12 070 (6.3%) had a road traffic incident or offence, 70 522 (36.7%) presented with head/body injuries, and 7984 (4.1%) were arrested for a violent crime. In within-individual analyses, gabapentinoid treatment was associated with increased hazards of suicidal behaviour and deaths from suicide (age adjusted hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.20 to 1.32), unintentional overdoses (1.24, 1.19 to 1.28), head/body injuries (1.22, 1.19 to 1.25), and road traffic incidents and offences (1.13, 1.06 to 1.20). Associations with arrests for violent crime were less clear (1.04, 0.98 to 1.11). When the drugs were examined separately, pregabalin was associated with increased hazards of all outcomes, whereas gabapentin was associated with decreased or no statistically significant hazards. When stratifying on age, increased hazards of all outcomes were associated with participants aged 15 to 24 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that gabapentinoids are associated with an increased risk of suicidal behaviour, unintentional overdoses, head/body injuries, and road traffic incidents and offences. Pregabalin was associated with higher hazards of these outcomes than gabapentin.

Parental nicotine replacement therapy and offspring bronchitis/bronchiolitis and asthma - a nationwide population-based cohort study

Background

Prior evidence shows that environmental tobacco smoke is a risk factor for respiratory tract infections, wheeze, and asthma. Nicotine replacement therapy has been shown to increase smoking cessation. However, no prior studies have explored if parental use decreases the risk of bronchitis/bronchiolitis and asthma in the offspring.

Objective

To examine whether nicotine replacement therapy varenicline, given to parents, was associated with a reduction in bronchitis/bronchiolitis and/or asthma in their children.

Methods

This study is a population-based cohort study, linking data from nationwide registers, and using a within-individual design that minimizes selection effects and controls for time-invariant confounding factors. Participants included 37,420 parents with a collected prescription of varenicline with 72,392 offspring <18 years of age. Exposure was defined as collected prescriptions of varenicline among the parents. Primary outcomes were offspring hospital visits for bronchitis/bronchiolitis (ICD10: J20 or J21) and offspring hospital visits for asthma (ICD10: J45).

Results

Parental varenicline treatment was associated with a lower rate of visits for bronchitis/bronchiolitis in their children (incidence rate ratio [IRR]=0.67; 95% CI=0.50–0.91), but no association was found for asthma (IRR=1.08; 95% CI=0.97–1.19). The rate reduction of bronchitis/bronchiolitis was similar when we restricted data to children aged 0–3 years (IRR=0.71; 95% CI=0.52–0.97) and to maternal varenicline treatment (IRR=0.64; 95% CI=0.43–0.96). When restricting the outcomes to unplanned visits only (ie, excluding booked appointments, followups, and referrals), no associations were found (IRR=0.72, 95% CI=0.51–1.02).

Conclusion

In this cohort study, nicotine replacement treatment in parents was associated with reduced hospital visits for bronchitis/bronchiolitis in their children.

[Interventions for smoking cessation in 2018]

Smoking cessation treatments have been proved effective to stop smoking. For pharmacological treatments, nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) as well as bupropion allow to increase 6 month-abstinence rates by more than 80% in comparison with placebo while varenicline prescription doubles success rates in the same conditions. These results mean that for 10 smokers who quit with placebo, 18 are expected to quit with NRT or bupropion and 28 are expected to quit with varenicline. Varenicline is 50% more effective than nicotine patch and 70% more effective than nicotine gum. Nevertheless, a combination including NRT patch and oral nicotine forms is as effective as varenicline, thus leading to encourage the prescription of a combination NRT when NRT are chosen. For these three pharmacological treatments, cardiovascular as well as neuropsychiatric tolerance were not found statistically different from placebo in randomized controlled trials. Yet, bupropion prescription leads to an increasing risk of seizure (1/1000 to 1/1500). For behavioral treatment, motivational interviewing as well as cognitive behavior therapies are been proven to be effective to stop smoking but few smokers have access to this treatment. Smoking cessation mobile application and smartphone application seem to be promising in terms of effectiveness and might be useful to reach more smokers.

Animal models to improve our understanding and treatment of suicidal behavior

Worldwide, suicide is a leading cause of death. Although a sizable proportion of deaths by suicide may be preventable, it is well documented that despite major governmental and international investments in research, education and clinical practice suicide rates have not diminished and are even increasing among several at-risk populations. Although nonhuman animals do not engage in suicidal behavior amenable to translational studies, we argue that animal model systems are necessary to investigate candidate endophenotypes of suicidal behavior and the neurobiology underlying these endophenotypes. Animal models are similarly a critical resource to help delineate treatment targets and pharmacological means to improve our ability to manage the risk of suicide. In particular, certain pathophysiological pathways to suicidal behavior, including stress and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis dysfunction, neurotransmitter system abnormalities, endocrine and neuroimmune changes, aggression, impulsivity and decision-making deficits, as well as the role of critical interactions between genetic and epigenetic factors, development and environmental risk factors can be modeled in laboratory animals. We broadly describe human biological findings, as well as protective effects of medications such as lithium, clozapine, and ketamine associated with modifying risk of engaging in suicidal behavior that are readily translatable to animal models. Endophenotypes of suicidal behavior, studied in animal models, are further useful for moving observed associations with harmful environmental factors (for example, childhood adversity, mechanical trauma aeroallergens, pathogens, inflammation triggers) from association to causation, and developing preventative strategies. Further study in animals will contribute to a more informed, comprehensive, accelerated and ultimately impactful suicide research portfolio.

Substance Abuse Prevention, Assessment, and Treatment for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth

Knowing how to manage substance abuse in all youth is an important aspect of pediatric care, including providing clinically appropriate anticipatory guidance, monitoring, assessment, and treatment. Although most lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth do not abuse substances, as a group they experience unique challenges in self-identity development that put them at an increased risk for substance abuse. This article addresses prevention and management of substance use in LGBT youth relevant to pediatrics and allied professions as an aspect of their overall health care. It reviews basic information about substance abuse in youth and special considerations for LGBT youth.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2015

Identifying new practice-changing articles is challenging. To determine the 2015 practice-changing articles most relevant to outpatient general internal medicine, 3 internists independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of original articles, synopses of single studies and syntheses, and databases of syntheses. For original articles, internal medicine journals with the 7 highest impact factors were reviewed: New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), British Medical Journal, Public Library of Science Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and JAMA Internal Medicine. For synopses of single studies and syntheses, collections in American College of Physicians Journal Club, Journal Watch, and Evidence-Based Medicine were reviewed. For databases of synthesis, Evidence Updates and the Cochrane Library were reviewed. More than 100 articles were identified. Criteria for inclusion were as follows: clinical relevance, potential for practice change, and strength of evidence. Clusters of important articles around one topic were considered as a single-candidate series. The 5 authors used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on inclusion of 7 topics for in-depth appraisal.

A comparison of neuropsychiatric adverse events during early treatment with varenicline or a nicotine patch

AIMS

We compared the risk of mental health episodes requiring hospitalization (primary aim) or out-patient clinic visits (secondary aim) associated with varenicline versus the nicotine patch (NP) in an era prior to psychiatric boxed warnings.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), USA.

PARTICIPANTS

VA patients with or without psychiatric comorbidities and a new prescription for varenicline (15 255) were propensity score-matched (1 : 2) to new users of NP (123 054) between 1 May 2006 and 30 September 2007, resulting in 11 774 and 23 548 patients in the varenicline and NP groups, respectively.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were hospitalizations with a primary discharge diagnosis of a range of mental health disorders: depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, suicide attempt, post-traumatic stress disorder, other psychosis and drug-induced mental disorders. Secondary outcomes were out-patient clinic visits with a primary diagnosis of the above list of mental health disorders.

FINDINGS

Background characteristics of the treatment groups were similar after matching. There was no statistically significant difference in risk of hospitalization for any of the studied mental health disorders with varenicline compared with NP. Among secondary outcomes there was an increased risk of out-patient clinic visits for schizophrenia among patients who received varenicline [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07, 1.51], this increase being evident only in those with a pre-existing mental health disorder.

CONCLUSION

In US VA patients studied prior to the boxed warning being implemented, use of varenicline for smoking cessation was not associated with a detectable increase compared with nicotine patches in hospitalization for any mental health outcomes. There was an increased rate of out-patient attendances with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia amounting to five per 100 person years of treatment. This increase was found only in patients with a pre-existing mental health disorder.

Neuropsychiatric safety and efficacy of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine patch in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders (EAGLES): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Substantial concerns have been raised about the neuropsychiatric safety of the smoking cessation medications varenicline and bupropion. Their efficacy relative to nicotine patch largely relies on indirect comparisons, and there is limited information on safety and efficacy in smokers with psychiatric disorders. We compared the relative neuropsychiatric safety risk and efficacy of varenicline and bupropion with nicotine patch and placebo in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders.

METHODS

We did a randomised, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo-controlled and active-controlled (nicotine patch; 21 mg per day with taper) trial of varenicline (1 mg twice a day) and bupropion (150 mg twice a day) for 12 weeks with 12-week non-treatment follow-up done at 140 centres (clinical trial centres, academic centres, and outpatient clinics) in 16 countries between Nov 30, 2011, and Jan 13, 2015. Participants were motivated-to-quit smokers with and without psychiatric disorders who received brief cessation counselling at each visit. Randomisation was computer generated (1:1:1:1 ratio). Participants, investigators, and research personnel were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events. The main efficacy endpoint was biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence for weeks 9-12. All participants randomly assigned were included in the efficacy analysis and those who received treatment were included in the safety analysis. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01456936) and is now closed.

FINDINGS

8144 participants were randomly assigned, 4116 to the psychiatric cohort (4074 included in the safety analysis) and 4028 to the non-psychiatric cohort (3984 included in the safety analysis). In the non-psychiatric cohort, 13 (1·3%) of 990 participants reported moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events in the varenicline group, 22 (2·2%) of 989 in the bupropion group, 25 (2·5%) of 1006 in the nicotine patch group, and 24 (2·4%) of 999 in the placebo group. The varenicline-placebo and bupropion-placebo risk differences (RDs) for moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events were -1·28 (95% CI -2·40 to -0·15) and -0·08 (-1·37 to 1·21), respectively; the RDs for comparisons with nicotine patch were -1·07 (-2·21 to 0·08) and 0·13 (-1·19 to 1·45), respectively. In the psychiatric cohort, moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events were reported in 67 (6·5%) of 1026 participants in the varenicline group, 68 (6·7%) of 1017 in the bupropion group, 53 (5·2%) of 1016 in the nicotine patch group, and 50 (4·9%) of 1015 in the placebo group. The varenicline-placebo and bupropion-placebo RDs were 1·59 (95% CI -0·42 to 3·59) and 1·78 (-0·24 to 3·81), respectively; the RDs versus nicotine patch were 1·22 (-0·81 to 3·25) and 1·42 (-0·63 to 3·46), respectively. Varenicline-treated participants achieved higher abstinence rates than those on placebo (odds ratio [OR] 3·61, 95% CI 3·07 to 4·24), nicotine patch (1·68, 1·46 to 1·93), and bupropion (1·75, 1·52 to 2·01). Those on bupropion and nicotine patch achieved higher abstinence rates than those on placebo (OR 2·07 [1·75 to 2·45] and 2·15 [1·82 to 2·54], respectively). Across cohorts, the most frequent adverse events by treatment group were nausea (varenicline, 25% [511 of 2016 participants]), insomnia (bupropion, 12% [245 of 2006 participants]), abnormal dreams (nicotine patch, 12% [251 of 2022 participants]), and headache (placebo, 10% [199 of 2014 participants]). Efficacy treatment comparison did not differ by cohort.

INTERPRETATION

The study did not show a significant increase in neuropsychiatric adverse events attributable to varenicline or bupropion relative to nicotine patch or placebo. Varenicline was more effective than placebo, nicotine patch, and bupropion in helping smokers achieve abstinence, whereas bupropion and nicotine patch were more effective than placebo.

FUNDING

Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline.

Faster drug approval: challenges for safety

INTRODUCTION

More rapid drug premarketing procedures pose a challenge for regulatory agencies in terms of innovation and improving real-world safety and effectiveness Areas covered: This review considers the blockbuster drugs used over the previous fifteen years with adverse reactions after marketing, the elements and time span of risk identification and the measures implemented or considered, based on the existing literature and reports from the agencies Expert opinion: Risk prediction is founded on several factors: randomization, sample size, a well-established endpoint for safety, use of a comparator rather than placebo and a longer Phase-III period, in which a serious illness may be identified by early signs of alteration in the primary parenchyma with the latest biochemical, instrumental and imaging techniques. In comparative non-inferiority evaluations, increased safety should be preferred, with the exception of drugs that may be useful in serious or life-threatening diseases for which there are few or no effective existing therapies. A period of restricted use may be required to test and dispense new drugs, as well as to implement specific methods for the early detection of adverse events. It is important not to regard a new medicine axiomatically as the best treatment before it comes into wide use.

Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist).

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('cytisine' or 'Tabex' or 'dianicline' or 'varenicline' or 'nicotine receptor partial agonist') in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO using MeSH terms and free text to identify controlled trials of interventions for smoking cessation and prevention. We contacted authors of trial reports for additional information where necessary. The latest update of the specialised register was in May 2015, although we have included a few key trials published after this date. We also searched online clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials which compared the treatment drug with placebo. We also included comparisons with bupropion and nicotine patches where available. We excluded trials which did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from start of treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on the type of participants, the dose and duration of treatment, the outcome measures, the randomisation procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measured was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where they were reported. Where appropriate we pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials of cytisine (937 people) found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at longest follow-up, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 3.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.01 to 7.87; low-quality evidence). One recent trial comparing cytisine with NRT in 1310 people found a benefit for cytisine at six months (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80).One trial of dianicline (602 people) failed to find evidence that it was effective (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.75). This drug is no longer in development.We identified 39 trials that tested varenicline, 27 of which contributed to the primary analysis (varenicline versus placebo). Five of these trials also included a bupropion treatment arm. Eight trials compared varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Nine studies tested variations in varenicline dosage, and 13 tested usage in disease-specific subgroups of patients. The included studies covered 25,290 participants, 11,801 of whom used varenicline.The pooled RR for continuous or sustained abstinence at six months or longer for varenicline at standard dosage versus placebo was 2.24 (95% CI 2.06 to 2.43; 27 trials, 12,625 people; high-quality evidence). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.08 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1266 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at six months was 1.39 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.54; 5 trials, 5877 people; high-quality evidence). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.25 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; 8 trials, 6264 people; moderate-quality evidence). Four trials which tested the use of varenicline beyond the 12-week standard regimen found the drug to be well-tolerated during long-term use. The number needed to treat with varenicline for an additional beneficial outcome, based on the weighted mean control rate, is 11 (95% CI 9 to 13). The most commonly reported adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. Our analysis of reported serious adverse events occurring during or after active treatment suggests there may be a 25% increase in the chance of SAEs among people using varenicline (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.49; 29 trials, 15,370 people; high-quality evidence). These events include comorbidities such as infections, cancers and injuries, and most were considered by the trialists to be unrelated to the treatments. There is also evidence of higher losses to follow-up in the control groups compared with the intervention groups, leading to a likely underascertainment of the true rate of SAEs among the controls. Early concerns about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation led to the addition of a boxed warning to the labelling in 2008. However, subsequent observational cohort studies and meta-analyses have not confirmed these fears, and the findings of the EAGLES trial do not support a causal link between varenicline and neuropsychiatric disorders, including suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour. The evidence is not conclusive, however, in people with past or current psychiatric disorders. Concerns have also been raised that varenicline may slightly increase cardiovascular events in people already at increased risk of those illnesses. Current evidence neither supports nor refutes such an association, but we await the findings of the CATS trial, which should establish whether or not this is a valid concern.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cytisine increases the chances of quitting, although absolute quit rates were modest in two recent trials. Varenicline at standard dose increased the chances of successful long-term smoking cessation between two- and three-fold compared with pharmacologically unassisted quit attempts. Lower dose regimens also conferred benefits for cessation, while reducing the incidence of adverse events. More participants quit successfully with varenicline than with bupropion or with NRT. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The most frequently recorded adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Early reports of possible links to suicidal ideation and behaviour have not been confirmed by current research.Future trials of cytisine may test extended regimens and more intensive behavioural support.

Effects of varenicline on alpha4-containing nicotinic acetylcholine receptor expression and cognitive performance in mice

Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) subtypes containing the α4 subunit, particularly α4β2 nAChRs, play an important role in cognitive functioning. The impact of the smoking cessation aid varenicline, a selective partial α4β2 nAChR agonist, on (1) changes of central protein and mRNA expression of this receptor and (2) on memory deficits in a mouse model of cognitive impairment was investigated. Protein and mRNA expression of both the α4 and β2 receptor subunits in mouse brain endothelial and hippocampal cells as well as hippocampus and neocortex tissues were determined by western blot and realtime PCR, respectively. The β2 antibody showed low specificity, though. Tissues were examined following a 2-week oral treatment with various doses of varenicline (0.01, 0.1, 1, 3 mg/kg/day) or vehicle. In addition, episodic memory of mice was assessed following this treatment with an object recognition task using (1) normal mice and (2) animals with anticholinergic-induced memory impairment (i.p. injection of 0.5 mg/kg scopolamine). Varenicline dose-dependently increased protein expression of both the α4 and β2 subunit in cell cultures and brain tissues, respectively, but had no effect on mRNA expression of both subunits. Scopolamine injection induced a significant reduction of object memory in vehicle-treated mice. By contrast, cognitive performance was not altered by scopolamine in varenicline-treated mice. In conclusion, a 2-week oral treatment with varenicline prevented memory impairment in the scopolamine mouse model. In parallel, protein, but not mRNA expression was upregulated, suggesting a posttranscriptional mechanism. Our findings suggest a beneficial effect of varenicline on cognitive dysfunction.

Quitting smoking before and after varenicline: a population study based on two representative samples of US smokers

BACKGROUND

Varenicline is known to have greater efficacy than other pharmacotherapy for treating nicotine dependence and has gained popularity since its introduction in 2006. This study examines if adding varenicline to existing pharmacotherapies increased the population cessation rate.

METHODS

Data are from two cross-sectional US Current Population Surveys-Tobacco Use Supplements (2003 and 2010-2011). Smokers and recent quitters 18 or older (N=34 869 in 2003, N=27 751 in 2010-2011) were asked if they had used varenicline, bupropion or nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) in their most recent quit attempt. The annual cessation rate, as well as the per cent of smokers who had quit for ≥3 months, was compared between surveys.

RESULTS

Varenicline use increased from 0% in 2003 to 10.9% in 2010-2011, while use of bupropion decreased from 9.1% to 3.5%, and NRT from 24.5% to 22.4%. Use of any pharmacotherapy increased by 2.4 percentage points. Varenicline users stayed on cessation aids longer and were less likely to relapse than users of other pharmacotherapies in the first 3 months of a quit attempt, after which the difference was no longer significant. The change in annual cessation rate was negligible, from 4.5% in 2003 to 4.7% in 2010-2011 (p=0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of varenicline to the list of approved cessation aids has mainly led to displacement of other therapies. As a result, there was no meaningful change in population cessation rate despite a remarkable increase in varenicline use. The population impact of a new therapy is a function of more than efficacy or reach of the therapy.