1
|
Abstract
Background Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2007. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register in April 2022 for trials, using relevant terms in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials that compared the treatment drug with placebo, another smoking cessation drug, e‐cigarettes, or no medication. We excluded trials that did not report a minimum follow‐up period of six months from baseline. Data collection and analysis We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcome was abstinence from smoking at longest follow‐up using the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically validated rates where reported. We pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel‐Haenszel fixed‐effect model. We also reported the number of people reporting serious adverse events (SAEs). Main results We included 75 trials of 45,049 people; 45 were new for this update. We rated 22 at low risk of bias, 18 at high risk, and 35 at unclear risk. We found moderate‐certainty evidence (limited by heterogeneity) that cytisine helps more people to quit smoking than placebo (RR 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.47; I2 = 83%; 4 studies, 4623 participants), and no evidence of a difference in the number reporting SAEs (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 3781 participants; low‐certainty evidence). SAE evidence was limited by imprecision. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than placebo (RR 2.32, 95% CI 2.15 to 2.51; I2 = 60%, 41 studies, 17,395 participants), and moderate‐certainty evidence that people taking varenicline are more likely to report SAEs than those not taking it (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 26 studies, 14,356 participants). While point estimates suggested increased risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.84; I2 = 0%; 18 studies, 7151 participants; low‐certainty evidence), and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.29; I2 = 0%; 22 studies, 7846 participants; low‐certainty evidence), in both cases evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals were compatible with both benefit and harm. Pooled results from studies that randomised people to receive cytisine or varenicline found no clear evidence of difference in quit rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.26; I2 = 65%; 2 studies, 2131 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and reported SAEs (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.03; I2 = 45%; 2 studies, 2017 participants; low‐certainty evidence). However, the evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals incorporated the potential for benefit from either cytisine or varenicline. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than bupropion (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 7560 participants), and no clear evidence of difference in rates of SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 5317 participants), neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.04; I2 = 10%; 2 studies, 866 participants), or cardiac SAEs (RR 3.17, 95% CI 0.33 to 30.18; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 866 participants). Evidence of harms was of low certainty, limited by imprecision. We found high‐certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than a single form of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; I2 = 28%; 11 studies, 7572 participants), and low‐certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, of fewer reported SAEs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99; I2 = 24%; 6 studies, 6535 participants). We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found no clear evidence of a difference in quit rates between varenicline and dual‐form NRT (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2344 participants; low‐certainty evidence, downgraded because of imprecision). While pooled point estimates suggested increased risk of SAEs (RR 2.15, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.46; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1852 participants) and neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 4.69, 95% CI 0.23 to 96.50; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 764 participants), and reduced risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.88; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 819 participants), in all three cases evidence was of low certainty and confidence intervals were very wide, encompassing both substantial harm and benefit. Authors' conclusions Cytisine and varenicline both help more people to quit smoking than placebo or no medication. Varenicline is more effective at helping people to quit smoking than bupropion, or a single form of NRT, and may be as or more effective than dual‐form NRT. People taking varenicline are probably more likely to experience SAEs than those not taking it, and while there may be increased risk of cardiac SAEs and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs, evidence was compatible with both benefit and harm. Cytisine may lead to fewer people reporting SAEs than varenicline. Based on studies that directly compared cytisine and varenicline, there may be no difference or a benefit from either medication for quitting smoking. Future trials should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other pharmacotherapies, and should also test variations in dose and duration. There is limited benefit to be gained from more trials testing the effect of standard‐dose varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation. Further trials on varenicline should test variations in dose and duration, and compare varenicline with e‐cigarettes for smoking cessation. Can medications like varenicline and cytisine (nicotine receptor partial agonists) help people to stop smoking and do they cause unwanted effects? Key messages · Varenicline can help people to stop smoking for at least 6 months. Evidence shows it works better than bupropion and using only one type of nicotine replacement therapy (e.g. only patches). Quit rates might be similar to using more than one type of nicotine replacement therapy at the same time (e.g. patches and gum together). · Cytisine can help people to stop smoking for at least 6 months. It may work as well as varenicline, but future evidence may show that while it helps, it is not quite as helpful as varenicline. · Future studies should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other stop‐smoking medications, and should also investigate giving cytisine or varenicline at different doses and for different lengths of time. What are 'nicotine receptor partial agonists'? Smoking tobacco is extremely bad for people’s health. For people who smoke, quitting is the best thing they can do to improve their health. Many people find it difficult to quit smoking. Nicotine receptor partial agonists (NRPAs) are a type of medication used to help people to stop smoking. They help to reduce the withdrawal symptoms people experience when they stop smoking, like cravings and unpleasant mood changes. They also reduce the pleasure people usually experience when they smoke. The most widely‐available treatment in this drug type is varenicline. Cytisine is another, similar medication. They may cause unwanted effects such as feeling sick (nausea) and other stomach problems, difficulties sleeping, abnormal dreams, and headache. They may also lead to potentially serious unwanted effects, such as suicidal thoughts, heart problems and raised blood pressure. What did we want to find out? We wanted to find out if using NRPAs can help people to quit smoking, and if they cause unwanted effects. We wanted to know: · how many people stopped smoking for at least 6 months; and · how many people had unwanted effects. What did we do? We searched for studies that investigated NRPAs used to help people quit smoking. People in the studies had to be chosen at random to receive an NRPA, or another NRPA, placebo (medication like the NRPA but with no active ingredients) or no treatment. They had to be adult tobacco smokers who wanted to stop smoking. What did we find? We found 75 studies that compared NRPAs with: · placebo or no medicine; · nicotine replacement therapy, such as patches or gum; · bupropion (another medicine to help people stop smoking); · another NRPA; · e‐cigarettes. The USA hosted the most studies (28 studies). Other studies took place in a range of countries across the world, some in several countries. Main results People are more likely to stop smoking for at least six months using varenicline than using placebo (41 studies, 17,395 people), bupropion (9 studies, 7560 people), or just one type of nicotine replacement therapy, like patches alone (11 studies, 7572 people). They may be just as likely to quit as people using two or more kinds of nicotine replacement therapy, like patches and gum together (5 studies, 2344 people). Cytisine probably helps more people to stop smoking than placebo (4 studies, 4623 people) and may be just as effective as varenicline (2 studies, 2131 people). For every 100 people using varenicline to stop smoking, 21 to 25 might successfully stop, compared with only 18 of 100 people using bupropion, 18 of 100 people using a single form of nicotine‐replacement therapy, and 20 of 100 using two or more kinds of nicotine‐replacement therapy. For every 100 people using cytisine to stop smoking, 18 to 23 might successfully stop. The most common unwanted effect of varenicline is nausea, but this is mostly at mild or moderate levels and usually clears over time. People taking varenicline likely have an increased chance of a more serious unwanted effect that could result in going to hospital, however these are still rare (2.7% to 4% of people on varenicline, compared with 2.7% of people without) and may include many that are unrelated to varenicline. People taking cytisine may also have a slightly increased chance of serious unwanted effects compared with people not taking it, but this may be less likely compared with varenicline. What are the limitations of the evidence? The evidence for some of our results is very reliable. We’re very confident that varenicline helps people to quit smoking better than many alternatives. We’re less sure of some other results because fewer or smaller studies provided evidence. Several results suggest one treatment is better or less harmful than another, but the opposite could still be true. How up to date is the evidence? The evidence is up to date to 29 April 2022.
Collapse
|
2
|
Livingstone-Banks J, Fanshawe TR, Thomas KH, Theodoulou A, Hajizadeh A, Hartman L, Lindson N. Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 5:CD006103. [PMID: 37142273 PMCID: PMC10169257 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006103.pub8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nicotine receptor partial agonists may help people to stop smoking by a combination of maintaining moderate levels of dopamine to counteract withdrawal symptoms (acting as an agonist) and reducing smoking satisfaction (acting as an antagonist). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2007. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register in April 2022 for trials, using relevant terms in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The register is compiled from searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared the treatment drug with placebo, another smoking cessation drug, e-cigarettes, or no medication. We excluded trials that did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from baseline. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcome was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up using the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically validated rates where reported. We pooled risk ratios (RRs), using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. We also reported the number of people reporting serious adverse events (SAEs). MAIN RESULTS We included 75 trials of 45,049 people; 45 were new for this update. We rated 22 at low risk of bias, 18 at high risk, and 35 at unclear risk. We found moderate-certainty evidence (limited by heterogeneity) that cytisine helps more people to quit smoking than placebo (RR 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.47; I2 = 83%; 4 studies, 4623 participants), and no evidence of a difference in the number reporting SAEs (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 3781 participants; low-certainty evidence). SAE evidence was limited by imprecision. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than placebo (RR 2.32, 95% CI 2.15 to 2.51; I2 = 60%, 41 studies, 17,395 participants), and moderate-certainty evidence that people taking varenicline are more likely to report SAEs than those not taking it (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 26 studies, 14,356 participants). While point estimates suggested increased risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.84; I2 = 0%; 18 studies, 7151 participants; low-certainty evidence), and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.29; I2 = 0%; 22 studies, 7846 participants; low-certainty evidence), in both cases evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals were compatible with both benefit and harm. Pooled results from studies that randomised people to receive cytisine or varenicline showed that more people in the varenicline arm quit smoking (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2131 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and reported SAEs (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.03; I2 = 45%; 2 studies, 2017 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the evidence was limited by imprecision, and confidence intervals incorporated the potential for benefit from either cytisine or varenicline. We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than bupropion (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 7560 participants), and no clear evidence of difference in rates of SAEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 5317 participants), neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.04; I2 = 10%; 2 studies, 866 participants), or cardiac SAEs (RR 3.17, 95% CI 0.33 to 30.18; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 866 participants). Evidence of harms was of low certainty, limited by imprecision. We found high-certainty evidence that varenicline helps more people to quit than a single form of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.37; I2 = 28%; 11 studies, 7572 participants), and low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, of fewer reported SAEs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99; I2 = 24%; 6 studies, 6535 participants). We found no data on neuropsychiatric or cardiac SAEs. We found no clear evidence of a difference in quit rates between varenicline and dual-form NRT (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2344 participants; low-certainty evidence, downgraded because of imprecision). While pooled point estimates suggested increased risk of SAEs (RR 2.15, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.46; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1852 participants) and neuropsychiatric SAEs (RR 4.69, 95% CI 0.23 to 96.50; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 764 participants), and reduced risk of cardiac SAEs (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.88; I2 not estimable as events only in 1 study; 2 studies, 819 participants), in all three cases evidence was of low certainty and confidence intervals were very wide, encompassing both substantial harm and benefit. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Cytisine and varenicline both help more people to quit smoking than placebo or no medication. Varenicline is more effective at helping people to quit smoking than bupropion, or a single form of NRT, and may be as or more effective than dual-form NRT. People taking varenicline are probably more likely to experience SAEs than those not taking it, and while there may be increased risk of cardiac SAEs and decreased risk of neuropsychiatric SAEs, evidence was compatible with both benefit and harm. Cytisine may lead to fewer people reporting SAEs than varenicline. Based on studies that directly compared cytisine and varenicline, there may be a benefit from varenicline for quitting smoking, however further evidence could strengthen this finding or demonstrate a benefit from cytisine. Future trials should test the effectiveness and safety of cytisine compared with varenicline and other pharmacotherapies, and should also test variations in dose and duration. There is limited benefit to be gained from more trials testing the effect of standard-dose varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation. Further trials on varenicline should test variations in dose and duration, and compare varenicline with e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Thomas R Fanshawe
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kyla H Thomas
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Annika Theodoulou
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anisa Hajizadeh
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Lilian Hartman
- University of Oxford Medical School, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Nicola Lindson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ock M, Shin JS, Ra SW. Safety and Effectiveness of Varenicline in Korean Smokers: A Nationwide Post-Marketing Surveillance Study. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16:413-426. [PMID: 35210758 PMCID: PMC8858022 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s344757] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2021] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Varenicline has demonstrated its safety and efficacy in Western studies including <3% of Asian participants. This prospective multi-center observational study investigated the safety and effectiveness of varenicline in Korean smokers. PATIENTS AND METHODS Smokers prescribed varenicline for the first time were enrolled from 252 medical institutions. Investigators recorded and graded all adverse events (AEs). To assess the effectiveness of varenicline, the 7-day point prevalence (PP) of smoking cessation was evaluated at the four visits during the 12-week treatment course. Rates of AE incidence and smoking cessation were analyzed using Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00483002. RESULTS A total of 3719 and 3700 study subjects were included in the safety and effectiveness analyses, respectively. Overall, 346 (9.3%) subjects experienced 471 AEs: 358 mild, 97 moderate, 9 severe, and 7 serious. The most frequent AEs were nausea (5.1%), dyspepsia (0.8%), abnormal dreams (0.8%), insomnia (0.8%), and headache (0.7%). Among the subjects with AEs, 73 subjects discontinued treatment, of which 68 were due to AE occurrence. The 7-day PP of smoking cessation at weeks 1-2, 3-6, 7-10, and ≥ week 11 were 51.7% (387/749), 59.6% (1740/2922), 73.3% (1114/1520), and 77.0% (1116/1449), respectively (p for trend = 0.023). Comorbidities and allergies were associated with a higher incidence of AEs and lower smoking cessation rate (p < 0.05). Younger subjects, infrequent alcohol drinkers, and lighter smokers showed a higher smoking cessation rate (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION Varenicline in adult Korean smokers was well tolerated and effective as a smoking cessation aid in routine clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minsu Ock
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, South Korea
| | - Ji Soo Shin
- Medical Affairs, Pfizer Korea, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Seung Won Ra
- Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, South Korea
- Correspondence: Seung Won Ra, Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 877 Bangeojinsunhwan-doro, Dong-gu, Ulsan, 44033, South Korea, Tel +82 52 250 8857, Fax +82 52 250 7048, Email
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hartmann-Boyce J, Theodoulou A, Farley A, Hajek P, Lycett D, Jones LL, Kudlek L, Heath L, Hajizadeh A, Schenkels M, Aveyard P. Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 10:CD006219. [PMID: 34611902 PMCID: PMC8493442 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006219.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jamie Hartmann-Boyce
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Annika Theodoulou
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Amanda Farley
- Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Peter Hajek
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Deborah Lycett
- Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK
| | - Laura L Jones
- Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Laura Kudlek
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Laura Heath
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anisa Hajizadeh
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mishra A, Maiti R, Mishra BR, Jena M. Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in healthy adults: A network meta-analysis. Pharmacol Res 2021; 166:105478. [PMID: 33549729 DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105478] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2020] [Revised: 01/25/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Smoking is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in different non-communicable diseases, and cessation leads to immense health benefits. The present network meta-analysis has been conducted to evaluate and compare the effects of available pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in adults. A standard meta-analysis protocol was developed and after performing a comprehensive literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane databases, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, reviewers extracted data from 97 randomized controlled trials. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction, analysis and reporting of findings. Random effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was done to pool the effects across the interventions. Network graph was built, and for closed triangles in the network graph, node splitting analysis was performed. The primary outcome measure was self-reported biochemically verified smoking abstinence at six months. The number of participants achieving continuous abstinence was reported. Data for the number of participants reporting at least one adverse event was also extracted, if available. Combination of nicotine receptor agonist and nicotine replacement therapy had a significant odd of 4.4 (95%CrI:2.2-8.7), bupropion and nicotine receptor agonist 4.0 (95%CrI:2.1-7.7), bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy 3.8 (95%CrI:2.3-6.2), combination nicotine replacement therapy has an odd of 2.6 (95%CrI:1.8-3.8), and nicotine receptor agonist had a significant odd of 2.7 (95%CrI:2.3-3.2) when compared to placebo (moderate quality of evidence) for continuous abstinence at 6 months. When compared with behavioural therapy, the odds ratio of interventions was not statistically significant. Combination of nicotine receptor agonist and nicotine replacement therapy has the highest probability of being the best treatment for abstinence from smoking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Archana Mishra
- Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India
| | - Rituparna Maiti
- Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, India.
| | - Biswa Ranjan Mishra
- Department of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, India
| | - Monalisa Jena
- Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, India
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chu S, Liang L, Jing H, Zhang D, Tong Z. Safety of varenicline as an aid to smoking cessation in professional drivers and its impact on driving behaviors: An observational cohort study of taxi drivers in Beijing. Tob Induc Dis 2020; 18:45. [PMID: 32494237 PMCID: PMC7263361 DOI: 10.18332/tid/120935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2019] [Revised: 03/10/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Varenicline is an effective smoking cessation medicine. However, the possible adverse neuropsychiatric events reported by Food and Drug Administration for varenicline may cause safety problems for professional drivers. We aimed to investigate its safety and impacts on driving behaviors among taxi drivers in Beijing, China. METHODS An observational cohort study was conducted in a smoking cessation clinic in Beijing, China, between September 2017 and April 2018. Smokers with varenicline for smoking cessation were included and categorized into taxi-driver smokers (n=103) and non-taxi-driver smokers (n=119). All participants received varenicline up to 12 weeks and five standardized counseling sessions. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were collected in all participants and their impacts on driving behaviors were assessed in taxi-driver smokers. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine potential risk factors for vareniclinerelated somnolence/fatigue. RESULTS The incidence of most treatment-related AEs was similar between taxi-driver smokers and non-taxi-driver smokers, but treatment-related somnolence/ fatigue was more frequently reported in taxi-driver smokers (18.4% vs 6.7%; p=0.008). Most taxi-driver smokers (87.4%) reported that treatment-related AEs did not affect their driving behaviors, and no traffic accident was reported during treatment. CONCLUSIONS Varenicline appears to be a well-tolerated smoking cessation aid for Beijing taxi drivers and has less impact on driving behaviors. However, taxi-driver smokers were more likely to report somnolence/fatigue during varenicline treatment and physicians should pay more attention to this occupational population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuilian Chu
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Tobacco Dependence Treatment Research, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.,Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Lirong Liang
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Tobacco Dependence Treatment Research, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.,Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Hang Jing
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Tobacco Dependence Treatment Research, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.,Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Di Zhang
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Tobacco Dependence Treatment Research, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.,Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Zhaohui Tong
- Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China.,Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Jackson SE, McGowan JA, Ubhi HK, Proudfoot H, Shahab L, Brown J, West R. Modelling continuous abstinence rates over time from clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation. Addiction 2019; 114:787-797. [PMID: 30614586 PMCID: PMC6492005 DOI: 10.1111/add.14549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Revised: 10/16/2018] [Accepted: 12/28/2018] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM It is useful, for theoretical and practical reasons, to be able to specify functions for continuous abstinence over time in smoking cessation attempts. This study aimed to find the best-fitting models of mean proportion abstinent with different smoking cessation pharmacotherapies up to 52 weeks from the quit date. METHODS We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological treatments to aid smoking cessation. For comparability, we selected trials that provided 12 weeks of treatment. Continuous abstinence rates for each treatment at each follow-up point in trials were extracted along with methodological details of the trial. Data points for each pharmacotherapy at each follow-up point were aggregated where the total across contributing studies included at least 1000 participants per data point. Continuous abstinence curves were modelled using a range of different functions from the quit date to 52-week follow-up. Models were compared for fit using R2 and Bayesian information criterion (BIC). RESULTS Studies meeting our selection criteria covered three pharmacotherapies [varenicline, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion] and placebo. Power functions provided the best fit (R2 > 0.99, BIC < 17.0) to continuous abstinence curves from the target quit date in all cases except for varenicline, where a logarithmic function described the curve best (R2 = 0.99, BIC = 21.2). At 52 weeks, abstinence rates were 22.5% (23.0% modelled) for varenicline, 16.7% (16.0% modelled) for bupropion, 13.0% (12.4% modelled) for NRT and 8.3% (8.9% modelled) for placebo. For varenicline, bupropion, NRT and placebo, respectively, 55.9, 65.0, 62.3 and 56.5% of participants who were abstinent at the end of treatment were still abstinent at 52 weeks. CONCLUSIONS Mean continuous abstinence rates up to 52 weeks from initiation of smoking cessation attempts in clinical trials can be modelled using simple power functions for placebo, nicotine replacement therapy and bupropion and a logarithmic function for varenicline. This allows accurate prediction of abstinence rates from any time point to any other time point up to 52 weeks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah E. Jackson
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Jennifer A. McGowan
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Harveen Kaur Ubhi
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Hannah Proudfoot
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Lion Shahab
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Jamie Brown
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Robert West
- Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bozkurt N, Altıntas F, Bozkurt AI, Turgut G, Turgut S. Effect of MDR C3435T polymorphism on Varenicline treatment in quit smoking. BRAZ J PHARM SCI 2019. [DOI: 10.1590/s2175-97902019000118186] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
|
9
|
Nakamura M, Abe M, Ohkura M, Treadow J, Yu CR, Park PW. Efficacy of Varenicline for Cigarette Reduction Before Quitting in Japanese Smokers: A Subpopulation Analysis of the Reduce to Quit Trial. Clin Ther 2017; 39:863-872. [PMID: 28365035 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.03.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2016] [Revised: 03/05/2017] [Accepted: 02/11/2017] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This prospective analysis of the Japanese subpopulation of the varenicline reduce to quit study was conducted to evaluate whether results for Japanese participants were consistent with the full study population. METHODS Patients received varenicline or placebo for a 24-week treatment period (12-week smoking reduction phase then a 12-week smoking abstinence phase) followed by a 28-week nontreatment, follow-up phase. Participants were to reduce the daily number of cigarettes smoked by at least 50% by week 4 and by a further 50% by week 8, with the goal of achieving complete abstinence by week 12. The primary efficacy end point was the carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence during weeks 15 to 24. FINDINGS Overall, 210 Japanese patients were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 study groups (varenicline, 107; placebo, 103). Continuous abstinence rates for weeks 15 to 24 were higher for participants in the varenicline group versus the placebo group (46.7% vs 12.6%; odds ratio = 14.68; 95% CI, 5.38-40.05), and the 7-day point prevalence of abstinence rates were higher for varenicline versus placebo at week 12 (odds ratio = 13.76; 95% CI, 5.28-35.86). The number of participants with a ≥50% reduction in the number of daily cigarettes smoked from baseline to week 4 and a ≥75% reduction by week 8 was greater in the varenicline group versus the placebo group (week 4: 59.8% vs 30.1%; week 8: 38.3% vs 12.6%). Serious adverse events were reported in 3.7% of varenicline participants and 1.0% of placebo participants. IMPLICATIONS The efficacy and tolerability results of this analysis are consistent with those of the full varenicline reduce to quit study. Varenicline treatment and cigarette reduction before quitting may provide an alternative approach to smoking cessation in Japanese smokers who are not ready to quit immediately. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01370356.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masakazu Nakamura
- Health Promotion Research Center, Institute of Committee Medicine, Japan Association for Development of Community Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lee JE, Shin DW, Suh B, Chun S, Nam YS, Cho B. Development and application of culturally appropriate decision aids for smoking cessation in Korea: a pragmatic clustered randomization crossover trial. Patient Prefer Adherence 2016; 10:1929-1936. [PMID: 27703338 PMCID: PMC5038567 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s114387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In Asian countries, reluctance to seek pharmacological intervention is a major barrier for smoking cessation. Culturally appropriate decision aids are expected to help people in the decision making for the use of smoking cessation medication. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop a culturally tailored decision aid for smoking cessation and evaluate its effect on the use of smoking cessation medication. PATIENTS AND METHODS A 7-minute video on smoking cessation information and options was developed. Physicians were randomized into intervention and control groups. The decision aid was provided to patients in the intervention group, and they watched it, while those in the control group were provided usual medical care for smoking cessation. The primary outcome was the proportion of smokers who were prescribed smoking cessation medication within 1 month after consultation. The secondary outcomes were abstinence rate and use of smoking cessation medication within 6 months. A logistic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of the decision aid on the outcomes. RESULTS In total, 414 current smokers (intervention group: 195; control group: 219) were enrolled. The mean age of the participants was 48.2 years, and 381 subjects (92%) were males. In total, 11.8% of the participants in the intervention group and 10.5% in the control group were prescribed smoking cessation medications within 1 month. The odds ratio was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.40-2.63) after adjustment for baseline characteristics. Within 6 months, 17.4% of the participants in the intervention group and 15% in the control group were prescribed medication (adjusted odds ratio 1.12, 95% CI: 0.59-2.13). CONCLUSION The culturally tailored smoking cessation decision aid developed in this study did not show a significant impact on the decision to use smoking cessation medication. Further research to develop more effective and more interactive interventions is expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ji Eun Lee
- Department of Family Medicine, Health Promotion Center
| | - Dong Wook Shin
- Department of Family Medicine, Health Promotion Center
- Laboratory of Health Promotion and Health Behavior, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital
- JW Lee Center for Global Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine
| | - Beomseok Suh
- Department of Family Medicine, Health Promotion Center
| | - Sohyun Chun
- International Health Services, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - You-Seon Nam
- JW Lee Center for Global Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine
| | - Belong Cho
- Department of Family Medicine, Health Promotion Center
- Laboratory of Health Promotion and Health Behavior, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Cahill K, Lindson‐Hawley N, Thomas KH, Fanshawe TR, Lancaster T. Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2016:CD006103. [PMID: 27158893 PMCID: PMC6464943 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006103.pub7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 185] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Cahill
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Nicola Lindson‐Hawley
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Kyla H Thomas
- University of BristolSchool of Social and Community MedicineCanynge Hall39 Whatley RoadBristolUKBS8 2PS
| | - Thomas R Fanshawe
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| | - Tim Lancaster
- University of OxfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesRadcliffe Observatory QuarterWoodstock RoadOxfordUKOX2 6GG
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
Smoking is a modifiable risk factor for morbidity and mortality caused by cancer, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, and many other diseases. Given the large population size and high prevalence of smoking in Asia, successful smoking cessation could potentially prevent the large number of premature deaths in Asians. However, most dependent smokers cannot successfully quit smoking due to nicotine addiction, and they need professional help and smoking cessation therapies. Varenicline is a highly selective partial agonist for the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor α4β2 subtype, which is believed to be responsible for mediating the reinforcing properties of nicotine. This article is a narrative review, which summarizes the smoking cessation efficacy, side effects, and cost utilities of varenicline in Asians. From this review, we conclude that varenicline is an effective medication that could assist smoking cessation in the Asian populations. The adverse events of varenicline are tolerable, and the most common events were nausea and abnormal dreams. Both the efficacy and tolerance of varenicline in Asians are similar to that in Western populations. Considering the cost utilities, varenicline should be recommended for use in smoking cessation and be covered by medical insurance in most Asian countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dan Xiao
- Clinical Cessation and Tobacco Medicine Research Centre, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Shuilian Chu
- Clinical Cessation and Tobacco Medicine Research Centre, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Chen Wang
- Clinical Cessation and Tobacco Medicine Research Centre, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Koç A, Erken HA, Koçak FE, Yay A, Güçlü A, Sari E, Şimşek H, Önder GÖ, Genç O. Nephrotoxic effects of varenicline as the most effective drug used for smoking cessation: a preliminary experimental study. Int Urol Nephrol 2015; 47:823-9. [PMID: 25812822 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-015-0949-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2014] [Accepted: 03/07/2015] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Varenicline is a new most effective drug for smoking cessation. Its effect on kidney functions remains unclear. This study purposed to investigate whether varenicline causes nephrotoxicity in rats. METHODS Fifteen rats were randomly assigned to three groups: control, 0.0125 mg kg(-1) varenicline and 0.025 mg kg(-1) varenicline (single dose for 3 days, i.p.). Before and after experimental period, serum neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, creatinine and urea levels were measured. Total oxidant and antioxidant status were measured in kidney homogenates. Histological examination was performed in kidney. RESULTS The nephrotoxic effects of varenicline were detected by histopathological and biochemical examinations in the varenicline treatment groups. No change was observed in the control group. CONCLUSIONS These findings firstly indicate that a 3-day varenicline treatment causes nephrotoxic effects in rats.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akif Koç
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Balikesir University, ÇağişYerleşkesi, 10145, Balikesir, Turkey,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Schwartz J, Fadahunsi O, Hingorani R, Mainali NR, Oluwasanjo A, Aryal MR, Donato A. Use of Varenicline in Smokeless Tobacco Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nicotine Tob Res 2015; 18:10-6. [DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntv010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2014] [Accepted: 01/07/2015] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
|
15
|
Oishi M, Hiro S, Matsuoka N, Hotta S, Ono R, Mori Y, Takenaka N, Uchikawa Y, Arakawa A, Yuasa H, Ishibashi T, Miyoshi S, Hirai K, Kawai N. A Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics and Drug Safety Among East Asian Populations. Ther Innov Regul Sci 2014; 48:393-403. [DOI: 10.1177/2168479013517892] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
16
|
Nakamura M, Oshima A, Ohkura M, Arteaga C, Suwa K. Predictors of lapse and relapse to smoking in successful quitters in a varenicline post hoc analysis in Japanese smokers. Clin Ther 2014; 36:918-27. [PMID: 24811751 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.03.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2013] [Revised: 02/26/2014] [Accepted: 03/23/2014] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of the smoking-cessation agent varenicline has been reported in Asian smokers; however, few studies have investigated factors that contribute to lapse and relapse. OBJECTIVE This post hoc analysis aimed to identify predictors of smoking lapse and relapse. METHODS This was a post-hoc analysis based on a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-group study in which Japanese smokers (aged 20-75 years) who smoked ≥ 10 cigarettes/day and were motivated to quit were randomized to receive varenicline (0.25 mg twice daily [BID], 0.5 mg BID, 1 mg BID) or placebo for 12 weeks followed by a 40-week non-treatment follow-up. For inclusion in this analysis, participants must have been nicotine dependent (Tobacco Dependence Screener score ≥ 5) and must have successfully quit smoking continuously for 4 weeks (weeks 9-12). Lapse was defined by answering yes to ≥ 1 question in the Nicotine Use Inventory. Relapse was defined by participants having smoked for ≥ 7 days during follow-up measured by the Nicotine Use Inventory. RESULTS Of the 619 randomized individuals, 515 had a Tobacco Dependence Screener score of ≥ 5, and 277 quit smoking continuously from weeks 9 to 12. Approximately 75% were male, with a mean (SD) BMI of 23.0 (3.0) kg/m(2). Maximum length of continuous abstinence (CA) during treatment and age (both P < 0.0001) were significant predictors of lapse. Maximum CA (P < 0.0001), age (P = 0.0002), Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale (MNWS) score for urge to smoke (P = 0.0019), and having made ≥ 1 serious quit attempt (P = 0.0063) were significant predictors of relapse. For participants with a maximum CA of 4 to 6 weeks versus those with a maximum CA of 10 to 11 weeks, the ORs for lapse and relapse were 4.649 (95% CI, 2.071-10.434) and 3.337 (95% CI, 1.538-7.239), respectively. In participants aged 21-34 years versus those aged 47-72 years, the ORs for lapse and relapse were 3.453 (95% CI 1.851, 6.441) and 3.442 (95% CI 1.795, 6.597), respectively. Participants with a MNWS urge to smoke score of 2 to 4 versus 0 had an OR for relapse of 3.175 (95% CI, 1.166-8.644). Participants having made ≥ 1 versus no serious quit attempts had an OR for relapse of 2.108 (95% CI, 1.168-3.805). CONCLUSION Shorter maximum CA and younger age at quit attempt were associated with increased risk of lapse and relapse. Higher MNWS urge to smoke score and having made ≥ 1 serious quit attempt were associated with increased relapse risk. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00139750.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masakazu Nakamura
- Department of Health Promotion and Prevention, Osaka Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases Prevention, Osaka, Japan.
| | - Akira Oshima
- Cancer Information Services, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease, Osaka, Japan
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Kim HE, Song YM, Kim BK, Park YS, Kim MH. Factors associated with persistent smoking after the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease. Korean J Fam Med 2013; 34:160-8. [PMID: 23730483 PMCID: PMC3667223 DOI: 10.4082/kjfm.2013.34.3.160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2012] [Accepted: 05/07/2013] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although cigarette smoking is a major modifiable risk factor for the occurrence of primary and secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD), not all survivors from CVD attacks can successfully stop smoking. However, little is known about the factors associated with the change in smoking behavior after CVD attack. Methods Study subjects included 16,807 participants (≥19 years) in the fourth Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. From them, we selected 180 persons who had previous CVD diagnosis (angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and were smoking at the time of CVD diagnosis. Then, we categorized the 180 persons into two groups according to change in smoking status after the CVD: quitter and non-quitter. Logistic regression analysis was done to evaluate multivariable-adjusted association. Results Even after CVD diagnosis, 63.60% continued to smoke. Fully-adjusted analysis revealed that regular drinking (odds ratio [OR], 4.44) and presence of smokers among family members (OR, 5.86) were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with greater risk of persistent smoking, whereas lower education level (OR, 0.20), larger amount of smoking (OR, 0.95), longer time since diagnosis (OR, 0.88), and diabetes (OR, 0.36) were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with decreased risk of persistent smoking after CVD. Conclusion A great proportion of CVD patients tended to continue smoking in the Korean population. In order to reduce smoking rates among CVD patients further, more aggressive efforts towards smoking cessation should be continuously made with consideration of individual socioeconomic, behavioral, and clinical characteristics of CVD patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyo-Eun Kim
- Department of Family Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Wang C, Cho B, Xiao D, Wajsbrot D, Park PW. Effectiveness and safety of varenicline as an aid to smoking cessation: results of an inter-Asian observational study in real-world clinical practice. Int J Clin Pract 2013; 67:469-76. [PMID: 23574106 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2012] [Accepted: 12/27/2012] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
AIMS To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation among Asian adult smokers in real-world clinical practice. METHODS A multicentre, prospective, non-comparative, observational study conducted in China, India, Philippines and Korea. Adult smokers, willing to make a quit attempt, who reached a joint decision with the investigators to take varenicline received 1 mg twice daily (after 1-week titration) for 12 weeks. No exclusion criteria were specified. Effectiveness evaluations included smoking abstinence status for the 7-day period before the Week 12 visit and the last observed study visit, determined by verbal reporting using a nicotine use inventory and carbon monoxide levels if part of usual practice (end of study only). The safety profile of varenicline was also assessed. RESULTS Of 1377 subjects enrolled in the study, 1373 (99.7%) received varenicline and were evaluated for safety and effectiveness. Overall, 46.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 43.73-49.07] of subjects successfully quit smoking by the end of the treatment phase at Week 12. When analysed by country, 57.1% (95% CI: 53.55-60.65) of subjects from China, 52.8% (95% CI: 45.21-60.25) of subjects from India, 51.0% (95% CI: 36.60-65.25) of subjects from Philippines and 20.3% (95% CI: 16.29-24.73) of subjects from Korea had quit smoking at Week 12. The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse event was nausea (11.5%). CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates the effectiveness and acceptable safety profile of varenicline for smoking cessation in a real-world setting among Asian populations, with results consistent with those of varenicline randomised controlled trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Wang
- Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Beijing, China; Beijing Hospital, Ministry of Health, Beijing, China
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Over the past years, the impact of varenicline in patients with mental illness has been debated as serious neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs) have been reported with varenicline use. AIM To identify and summarize published case reports of neuropsychiatric AEs ascribed to varenicline and to determine potential risk factors for these AEs. METHODS A literature search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PsychInfo database was conducted for case reports concerning the neuropsychiatric AEs of varenicline published in English from 2006 (approval year by the US Food and Drug Administration and the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board) to January 1, 2012. RESULTS We identified 25 published cases. In most reports, patients had been admitted to psychiatric hospitals with serious neuropsychiatric AEs due to varenicline. The average patient age was 46.4 years, and 56% were men; 68% of patients had a psychiatric history. The onset of symptoms started 2 days to 3 months after the initiation of varenicline. One report described completed suicide in a man with no psychiatric history. In most cases (84%), the neuropsychiatric symptoms resolved after the discontinuation of varenicline. Analysis of all reports using the Naranjo causality scale, a method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions, indicated probable causality in 76% of the cases and definite causality in 12% of cases. CONCLUSION Varenicline is associated with an increased risk of serious neuropsychiatric AEs, especially in patients with a psychiatric illness. It is strongly recommended that varenicline be administered only to mentally stable patients and under close monitoring.
Collapse
|
20
|
Dhelaria RK, Friderici J, Wu K, Gupta E, Khan C, Rothberg MB. Effectiveness of varenicline for smoking cessation at 2 urban academic health centers. Eur J Intern Med 2012; 23:461-4. [PMID: 22726377 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2012.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2011] [Revised: 03/16/2012] [Accepted: 03/27/2012] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Smoking is a major cause of morbidity in lower socioeconomic groups. In randomized trials, varenicline improves long term quit rates, but effectiveness in a clinic setting is unknown. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults who received a prescription for varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) at two inner city health centers in 2008-9. Primary outcome was smoking status at 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included follow up visits, behavioral counseling, and side effects. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to compare quit rates with varenicline and NRT adjusted for covariates. KEY RESULTS A total of 371 patients received a prescription for varenicline (46%) or NRT (54%). The mean age was 43 years, 58% were female, 44% white, 29% African American and 12% Hispanic. Mental illness, alcohol and drug abuse were common. Within one year, 247 (67%) had follow-up, and 26 (10.5%) maintained abstinence through week 52, 10.2% with varenicline and 10.8% with NRT (p=1.0). Loss to follow-up was 37% for varenicline, 31% for NRT (p=0.20). Including lost patients as smokers, the adjusted quit rates for varenicline and NRT were similar (6.5% vs. 7.6%, p=0.69). Only 69/371 (19%) received behavioral counseling. Counseled patients were more likely to maintain abstinence (13% vs. 7.8%, p=0.04). Side effects were more common with varenicline than NRT (6.5% vs. 2.5%, p=0.07). CONCLUSION In an inner city clinic, abstinence rates were lower than those in clinical trials and did not differ between varenicline and NRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ranjit K Dhelaria
- Division of General Medicine, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA 01199, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
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 The primary objective of this review is to assess the efficacy and tolerability of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including cytisine, dianicline and varenicline 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, PsycINFO and Web of Science 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 December 2011. We also searched online clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized 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 randomization 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 recent cytisine trials (937 people) found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at longest follow-up, with a pooled RR of 3.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.01 to 7.87). One trial of dianicline (602 people) failed to find evidence that it was effective (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.75). Fifteen trials compared varenicline with placebo for smoking cessation; three of these also included a bupropion treatment arm. We also found one open-label trial comparing varenicline plus counselling with counselling alone. We found one relapse prevention trial, comparing varenicline with placebo, and two open-label trials comparing varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). We also include one trial in which all the participants were given varenicline, but received behavioural support either online or by phone calls, or by both methods. This trial is not included in the analyses, but contributes to the data on safety and tolerability. The included studies covered 12,223 participants, 8100 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 2.27 (95% CI 2.02 to 2.55; 14 trials, 6166 people, excluding one trial evaluating long term safety). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.09 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1272 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at one year was 1.52 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.88; 3 trials, 1622 people). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for point prevalence abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.35; 2 trials, 778 people). The two 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 main adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. A meta-analysis of reported serious adverse events occurring during or after active treatment and not necessarily considered attributable to treatment suggests there may be a one-third increase in the chance of severe adverse effects among people using varenicline (RR 1.36; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.79; 17 trials, 7725 people), but this finding needs to be tested further. Post-marketing safety data have raised questions about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation. The labelling of varenicline was amended in 2008, and the manufacturers produced a Medication Guide. Thus far, surveillance reports and secondary analyses of trial data are inconclusive, but the possibility of a link between varenicline and serious psychiatric or cardiovascular events cannot be ruled out. 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 threefold 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. Two open-label trials of varenicline versus NRT suggested a modest benefit of varenicline but confidence intervals did not rule out equivalence. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The main adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Possible links with serious adverse events, including serious psychiatric or cardiovascular events, cannot be ruled out.Future trials of cytisine may test extended regimens and more intensive behavioural support. There is a need for further trials of the efficacy of varenicline treatment extended beyond 12 weeks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Cahill
- Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Leung L, Neufeld T, Marin S. Effect of self-administered auricular acupressure on smoking cessation--a pilot study. BMC COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE 2012; 12:11. [PMID: 22373002 PMCID: PMC3328240 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-12-11] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2011] [Accepted: 02/28/2012] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Background Tobacco smoking is still a worldwide health risk. Current pharmacotherapies have at best, a success rate of no more than 50%. Auricular (ear) acupressure has been purported to be beneficial in achieving smoking cessation in some studies, while in others has been deemed insignificant. We hereby describe the protocol for a three-arm randomised controlled trial to examine the possible benefits of self-administered acupressure for smoking cessation. Methods Sixty consenting participants with confirmed habit of tobacco smoking will be recruited and randomized into three arms to receive either auricular acupressure at five true acupoints (NADA protocol), auricular acupressure at five sham points, or no auricular acupressure at all. Participants having auricular acupressure will exert firm pressure to each acupoint bilaterally via the bead in the attached plasters whenever they feel the urge to smoke. The treatment phase will last for six weeks during which all participants will be assessed weekly to review their smoking log, state of abstinence, end-exhalation carbon monoxide levels and possible adverse effects including withdrawal reactions and stress levels. At any time, a successful quit date will be defined with continuous abstinence for the following consecutive 7 days. From then on, participants will be evaluated individually for continuous abstinence rate (CAR), end-exhalation carbon monoxide levels and adverse effects of stress and withdrawal at specified intervals up to 26 weeks. Expectancy of treatment will be assessed with a four-item Borkovec and Nau self-assessment credibility scale during and after intervention. Discussion We incorporate validated outcome measures of smoking cessation into our randomised controlled trial design with the objectives to evaluate the feasibility and possible benefits of self-administered auricular acupressure as a non-invasive alternative to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01389622 (registered Jul 7 2011)
Collapse
|
23
|
Farley AC, Hajek P, Lycett D, Aveyard P. Interventions for preventing weight gain after smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 1:CD006219. [PMID: 22258966 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006219.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 111] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most people who stop smoking gain weight. There are some interventions that have been designed to reduce weight gain when stopping smoking. Some smoking cessation interventions may also limit weight gain although their effect on weight has not been reviewed. OBJECTIVES To systematically review the effect of: (1) Interventions targeting post-cessation weight gain on weight change and smoking cessation.(2) Interventions designed to aid smoking cessation that may also plausibly affect weight on post-cessation weight change. SEARCH METHODS Part 1 - We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register and CENTRAL in September 2011.Part 2 - In addition we searched the included studies in the following "parent" Cochrane reviews: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants, nicotine receptor partial agonists, cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists and exercise interventions for smoking cessation published in Issue 9, 2011 of the Cochrane Library. SELECTION CRITERIA Part 1 - We included trials of interventions that were targeted at post-cessation weight gain and had measured weight at any follow up point and/or smoking cessation six or more months after quit day.Part 2 - We included trials that had been included in the selected parent Cochrane reviews if they had reported weight gain at any time point. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data on baseline characteristics of the study population, intervention, outcome and study quality. Change in weight was expressed as difference in weight change from baseline to follow up between trial arms and was reported in abstinent smokers only. Abstinence from smoking was expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using the inverse variance method for weight and Mantel-Haenszel method for smoking using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS Part 1: Some pharmacological interventions tested for limiting post cessation weight gain (PCWG) resulted in a significant reduction in WG at the end of treatment (dexfenfluramine (Mean difference (MD) -2.50 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.98 to -2.02, 1 study), phenylpropanolamine (MD -0.50 kg, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.20, N=3), naltrexone (MD -0.78 kg, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.05, N=2). There was no evidence that treatment reduced weight at 6 or 12 months (m). No pharmacological intervention significantly affected smoking cessation rates.Weight management education only was associated with no reduction in PCWG at end of treatment (6 or 12m). However these interventions significantly reduced abstinence at 12m (Risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90, N=2). Personalised weight management support reduced PCWG at 12m (MD -2.58 kg, 95% CI -5.11 to -0.05, N=2) and was not associated with a significant reduction of abstinence at 12m (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.43, N=2). A very low calorie diet (VLCD) significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -3.70 kg, 95% CI -4.82 to -2.58, N=1), but not significantly so at 12m (MD -1.30 kg, 95% CI -3.49 to 0.89, N=1). The VLCD increased chances of abstinence at 12m (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.73, N=1). There was no evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy to allay concern about weight gain (CBT) reduced PCWG, but there was some evidence of increased PCWG at 6m (MD 0.74, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.24). It was associated with improved abstinence at 6m (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.13, N=2) but not at 12m (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.86, N=2). However, there was significant statistical heterogeneity.Part 2: We found no evidence that exercise interventions significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.25 kg, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.29, N=4) however a significant reduction was found at 12m (MD -2.07 kg, 95% CI -3.78 to -0.36, N=3).Both bupropion and fluoxetine limited PCWG at the end of treatment (bupropion MD -1.12 kg, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.77, N=7) (fluoxetine MD -0.99 kg, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.61, N=2). There was no evidence that the effect persisted at 6m (bupropion MD -0.58 kg, 95% CI -2.16 to 1.00, N=4), (fluoxetine MD -0.01 kg, 95% CI -1.11 to 1.10, N=2) or 12m (bupropion MD -0.38 kg, 95% CI -2.00 to 1.24, N=4). There were no data on WG at 12m for fluoxetine.Overall, treatment with NRT attenuated PCWG at the end of treatment (MD -0.69 kg, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.51, N=19), with no strong evidence that the effect differed for the different forms of NRT. There was evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity caused by one study which reported a 4.3 kg reduction in PCWG due to NRT. With this study removed, the difference in weight change at end of treatment was -0.45 kg (95% CI -0.66 to -0.27, N=18). There was no evidence of an effect on PCWG at 12m (MD -0.42 kg, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.08, N=15).We found evidence that varenicline significantly reduced PCWG at end of treatment (MD -0.41 kg, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.19, N=11), but this effect was not maintained at 6 or 12m. Three studies compared the effect of bupropion to varenicline. Participants taking bupropion gained significantly less weight at the end of treatment (-0.51 kg (95% CI -0.93 to -0.09 kg), N=3). Direct comparison showed no significant difference in PCWG between varenicline and NRT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Although some pharmacotherapies tested to limit PCWG show evidence of short-term success, other problems with them and the lack of data on long-term efficacy limits their use. Weight management education only, is not effective and may reduce abstinence. Personalised weight management support may be effective and not reduce abstinence, but there are too few data to be sure. One study showed a VLCD increased abstinence but did not prevent WG in the longer term. CBT to accept WG did not limit PCWG and may not promote abstinence in the long term. Exercise interventions significantly reduced weight in the long term, but not the short term. More studies are needed to clarify whether this is an effect of treatment or a chance finding. Bupropion, fluoxetine, NRT and varenicline reduce PCWG while using the medication. Although this effect was not maintained one year after stopping smoking, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a modest long-term effect. The data are not sufficient to make strong clinical recommendations for effective programmes to prevent weight gain after cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda C Farley
- Primary Care Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Kim SS, Chen W, Kolodziej M, Wang X, Wang VJ, Ziedonis D. A systematic review of smoking cessation intervention studies in China. Nicotine Tob Res 2012; 14:891-9. [PMID: 22249687 DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntr289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION China has the highest number of tobacco smokers among the world's nations; however, no systematic review has been conducted of clinical trials on the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions in China. This paper summarizes findings of studies in order to compare the effect of pharmacotherapy, counseling, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) approaches on the abstinence rate. METHODS Clinical trials of smoking cessation interventions published in English or Chinese were extracted from an electronic search of PubMed and WanFang databases. The search yielded 234 studies from the PubMed and 78 studies from the WanFang. RESULTS Twenty-nine studies were included in this review. Of these, 11 (37.9%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the following approaches: counseling (5 studies), TCM (3 studies), pharmacotherapy (1 study), a combination of pharmacotherapy and counseling (1 study), and physician advice (1 study). Pharmacotherapy alone or in combination with counseling generally resulted in a higher abstinence rate than counseling alone. TCM techniques such as acupuncture and ear point seed pressure yielded a much higher abstinence rate than pharmacotherapy and counseling. Findings are inconclusive, however, because most of the TCM studies were noncontrolled trials and did not provide a definition of "abstinence." Findings on the effectiveness of physician advice to quit smoking were also inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS A review of smoking cessation studies revealed that pharmacotherapy was effective in China. More RCTs of TCM approaches and physician advice are needed with long-term follow-up assessments and biochemical verification of self-reported abstinence before these approaches are adopted as evidence-based smoking cessation interventions in China.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sun S Kim
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Park PW, Casiano EM, Escoto L, Claveria AM. Observational study of safety and efficacy of varenicline for smoking cessation among Filipino smokers. Curr Med Res Opin 2011; 27:1869-75. [PMID: 21838412 DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2011.607436] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Varenicline, an α4β2 receptor nicotinic receptor partial agonist, is known to be an effective aid for smoking cessation. To date, few observational studies of varenicline have been conducted. This prospective, non-interventional, post-marketing surveillance study (NCT00794365) was designed to monitor the efficacy and safety of varenicline for 12 weeks in Filipino smokers who were motivated to quit. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This study was conducted between July 2, 2008, and November 23, 2009, in 70 centers throughout the Philippines. Participants were adult smokers who were prescribed varenicline (0.5 mg orally once daily, days 1 to 3; 0.5 mg twice daily, days 4 to 7; 1 mg twice daily for the remainder of a 12-week treatment period) for the first time. Participants made five clinic visits (weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Adverse events (AEs) were recorded at each clinic visit and up to 28 days after administration of the last study treatment. Seven-day point prevalence of smoking cessation was measured at weeks 4, 8, and 12. RESULTS A total of 330 participants were enrolled into the study, of whom 251 (76.1%) completed the study. At the end of week 12, 57.6% (95% confidence interval, 52.0, 63.0) of participants had been abstinent for the previous 7 days. The most frequently reported AEs were headache (5.5%), dizziness (3.9%), and nausea (3.6%). Ten participants (3.0%) permanently discontinued varenicline treatment due to AEs, and 13 (3.9%) reduced their varenicline dose or discontinued treatment temporarily due to AEs. There were no reports of any serious AEs, deaths, suicidal ideation, or behavior. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study in adult Filipino smokers prescribed varenicline for the first time during routine clinical practice demonstrate that varenicline was well tolerated and efficacious as an aid for smoking cessation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter W Park
- Pfizer, Inc., 235 East 42nd Street, New York, NY 10017-5703, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Leung LK, Patafio FM, Rosser WW. Gastrointestinal adverse effects of varenicline at maintenance dose: a meta-analysis. BMC CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY 2011; 11:15. [PMID: 21955317 PMCID: PMC3192741 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6904-11-15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2011] [Accepted: 09/28/2011] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Background Tobacco smoking remains the leading modifiable health hazard and varenicline is amongst the most popular pharmacological options for smoking cessation. The purpose of this study is to critically evaluate the extent of gastrointestinal adverse effects of varenicline when used at maintenance dose (1 mg twice a day) for smoking cessation. Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials published in PUBMED and EMBASE according to the PRISMA guidelines. Selected studies satisfied the following criteria: (i) duration of at least 6 weeks, (ii) titrated dose of varenicline for 7 days then a maintenance dose of 1 mg twice-per-day, (iii) randomized placebo-controlled design, (iv) extractable data on adverse event - nausea, constipation or flatulence. Data was synthesized into pooled odd ratios (OR) basing on random effects model. Quality of studies was also rated as per Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment. Number need to harm (NNH) was calculated for each adverse effect. Results 98 potentially relevant studies were identified, 12 of which met the final inclusion criteria (n = 5114). All 12 studies reported adverse events on nausea, which led to an OR of 4.45 (95% CI = 3.79-5.23, p < 0.001; I2 = 0.06%, CI = 0%-58.34%) and a NNH of 5. Eight studies (n = 3539) contain data on constipation pooled into an OR of 2.45 (95% CI = 1.61-3.72, p < 0.001; I2 = 34.09%, CI = 0%-70.81%) with a NNH of 24. Finally, five studies (n = 2516) reported adverse events of flatulence, which pooled an OR of 1.74 (95% CI = 1.23-2.48, p = 0.002; I2 = 0%, CI = 0%- 79.2%) with a NNH of 35. Conclusions Use of varenicline at maintenance dose of 1 mg twice a day for longer than 6 weeks is associated with adverse gastrointestinal effects. In realistic terms, for every 5 treated subjects, there will be an event of nausea, and for every 24 and 35 treated subjects, we will expect an event of constipation and flatulence respectively. Family physicians should counsel patients of such risks accordingly during their maintenance therapy with varenicline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lawrence K Leung
- Centre of Studies in Primary Care, Queen's University, Kingston Ontario, K7L 5E9, Canada.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Abstract
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). Varenicline was developed as a nicotine receptor partial agonist from cytisine, a drug widely used in central and eastern Europe for smoking cessation. The first trial reports of varenicline were released in 2006, and further trials have now been published or are currently underway. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review is to assess the efficacy and tolerability of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('varenicline' or 'cytisine' or 'Tabex' or 'nicotine receptor partial agonist') and 'smoking' in the title or abstract, or as keywords. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL using MeSH terms and free text, and we contacted authors of trial reports for additional information where necessary. The latest search was in September 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized 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 randomization procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow up.The main outcome measured was abstinence from smoking after at least six months from the beginning of treatment. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where they were reported. Where appropriate we performed meta-analysis to produce a risk ratio, using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS We found 11 trials of varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation; three of these included a bupropion experimental arm. We also found one relapse prevention trial, comparing varenicline with placebo, and two open-label trials comparing varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). We also include one trial in which all the participants were given varenicline, but received behavioural support either online or by phone calls, or by both methods. This trial is not included in the analyses, but contributes to the data on safety and tolerability. The included studies covered >10,300 participants, 6892 of whom used varenicline. We identified one trial of cytisine (Tabex) for inclusion.The pooled risk ratio (RR) (10 trials, 4443 people, excluding one trial evaluating long term safety) for continuous abstinence at six months or longer for varenicline at standard dosage versus placebo was 2.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01 to 2.66). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.09 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1272 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at one year was 1.52 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.88; 3 trials, 1622 people). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for point prevalence abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.35; 2 trials, 778 people). The two 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 main adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. Post-marketing safety data raised questions about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation. The labelling of varenicline was amended in 2008, and the manufacturers produced a Medication Guide. Thus far, surveillance reports and secondary analyses of trial data lend little support to a causal relationship.The one cytisine trial included in this review found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at two-year follow up, with an RR of 1.61 (95% CI 1.24 to 2.08). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Varenicline at standard dose increased the chances of successful long-term smoking cessation between two- and threefold 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. Two open-label trials of varenicline versus NRT suggested a modest benefit of varenicline but confidence intervals did not rule out equivalence. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The main adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Possible links with serious adverse events, including depressed mood, agitation and suicidal thoughts, have been reported but are so far not substantiated.There is a need for further independent community-based trials of varenicline, to test its efficacy and safety in smokers with varying co-morbidities and risk patterns. There is a need for further trials of the efficacy of treatment extended beyond 12 weeks. Cytisine may also increase the chances of quitting, but the evidence at present is inconclusive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Cahill
- Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Rosemary Rue Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK, OX3 7LF
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
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). Varenicline was developed as a nicotine receptor partial agonist from cytisine, a drug widely used in central and eastern Europe for smoking cessation. The first trial reports of varenicline were released in 2006, and further trials have now been published or are currently underway. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review is to assess the efficacy and tolerability of nicotine receptor partial agonists, including varenicline and cytisine, for smoking cessation. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('varenicline' or 'cytisine' or 'Tabex' or 'nicotine receptor partial agonist') and 'smoking' in the title or abstract, or as keywords. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL using MeSH terms and free text, and we contacted authors of trial reports for additional information where necessary. The latest search was in September 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized 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 randomization procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow up.The main outcome measured was abstinence from smoking after at least six months from the beginning of treatment. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where they were reported. Where appropriate we performed meta-analysis to produce a risk ratio, using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS We found 11 trials of varenicline compared with placebo for smoking cessation; three of these included a bupropion experimental arm. We also found one relapse prevention trial, comparing varenicline with placebo, and two open-label trials comparing varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). We also include one trial in which all the participants were given varenicline, but received behavioural support either online or by phone calls, or by both methods. This trial is not included in the analyses, but contributes to the data on safety and tolerability. The included studies covered >10,300 participants, 6892 of whom used varenicline. We identified one trial of cytisine (Tabex) for inclusion.The pooled risk ratio (RR) (10 trials, 4443 people, excluding one trial evaluating long term safety) for continuous abstinence at six months or longer for varenicline at standard dosage versus placebo was 2.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01 to 2.66). Varenicline at lower or variable doses was also shown to be effective, with an RR of 2.09 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.78; 4 trials, 1272 people). The pooled RR for varenicline versus bupropion at one year was 1.52 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.88; 3 trials, 1622 people). The RR for varenicline versus NRT for point prevalence abstinence at 24 weeks was 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.35; 2 trials, 778 people). The two 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 main adverse effect of varenicline was nausea, which was mostly at mild to moderate levels and usually subsided over time. Post-marketing safety data raised questions about a possible association between varenicline and depressed mood, agitation, and suicidal behaviour or ideation. The labelling of varenicline was amended in 2008, and the manufacturers produced a Medication Guide. Thus far, surveillance reports and secondary analyses of trial data lend little support to a causal relationship.The one cytisine trial included in this review found that more participants taking cytisine stopped smoking compared with placebo at two-year follow up, with an RR of 1.61 (95% CI 1.24 to 2.08). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Varenicline at standard dose increased the chances of successful long-term smoking cessation between two- and threefold 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. Two open-label trials of varenicline versus NRT suggested a modest benefit of varenicline but confidence intervals did not rule out equivalence. Limited evidence suggests that varenicline may have a role to play in relapse prevention. The main adverse effect of varenicline is nausea, but mostly at mild to moderate levels and tending to subside over time. Possible links with serious adverse events, including depressed mood, agitation and suicidal thoughts, have been reported but are so far not substantiated.There is a need for further independent community-based trials of varenicline, to test its efficacy and safety in smokers with varying co-morbidities and risk patterns. There is a need for further trials of the efficacy of treatment extended beyond 12 weeks. Cytisine may also increase the chances of quitting, but the evidence at present is inconclusive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Cahill
- Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Rosemary Rue Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK, OX3 7LF
| | | | | |
Collapse
|