Brief physician-initiated quit-smoking strategies for clinical oncology settings: a trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

Development of an Intervention Targeted to Patients with Cancers Not Typically Perceived as Smoking-Related

Smoking by cancer patients impairs treatment outcomes and prognoses across cancer types. Previous research shows greater smoking cessation motivation and quit rates among patients with cancers strongly linked to smoking (i.e., thoracic, head and neck) compared to other cancer types (e.g., melanoma). Therefore, there is a need to increase cessation motivation among patients with malignancies less commonly associated with smoking. Yet, no targeted educational materials exist to meet this information gap. This manuscript describes the development of theory-based self-help educational materials, targeted by cancer type, to increase motivation to quit smoking among patients with cancers not widely perceived as smoking-related (i.e., breast, melanoma, bladder, colorectal, gynecological). Using a three-phase iterative process, we first conducted in-depth interviews with our intended audience (N = 18) to identify information needs and nuanced content. Themes included patients' low knowledge about the connection between smoking and cancer etiology and outcomes; negative affect, habit, dependence, and weight gain as quitting barriers; and a preference for positive and non-judgmental content. Second, content creation was based on interview findings, the scientific literature, and framed following the teachable moment model. Last, learner verification and revisions via interviews with 22 patients assessed suitability of draft materials, with generally favorable responses. Resulting edits included tailoring cost savings to the cancer context, explaining cessation medications, and increasing appeal by improving the diversity (e.g., race) of the individuals in the photographs. The final booklets are low cost, easy to disseminate, and-pending efficacy studies-may expand smoking cessation to a wider spectrum of cancer patients.

Systematic Review for the Follow-up of Curatively Treated Patients With Lung Cancer

INTRODUCTION

The follow-up of patients with lung cancer after curative-intent treatment should include strategies to improve their quality of life and survival. These could include the monitoring and management of symptoms of recurrence and late toxicities from cancer treatments, the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools, and smoking cessation interventions. The objective of this systematic review was to examine these follow-up strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review was developed by Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario)'s Program in Evidence-Based Care. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different types of clinicians, PRO tools, smoking cessation interventions, and management strategies for signs, symptoms, risk factors, comorbidities, or late toxicities in adult patients with NSCLC or SCLC after curative-intent treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-five RCTs and nineteen systematic reviews were included. For nurse-led interventions, either significant effects were found in favor of the intervention, or no significant effects were found. The results for the use of PRO tools were mixed, possibly due to differences in comparators and settings. Evidence suggested that smoking cessation interventions might benefit these patients (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.03). There was limited evidence in the target population for the management of signs, symptoms, risk factors, comorbidities, or late toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation interventions, exercise training, and the use of PRO tools may benefit these patients. The results of this systematic review were used to inform recommendations in a clinical practice guideline. Further RCTs in this patient population are needed.

Motivating smoking cessation among patients with cancers not perceived as smoking-related: a targeted intervention

PURPOSE

Smoking after cancer impairs cancer treatment outcomes and prognosis, regardless of cancer type. Prior data suggest that patients with cancers other than lung or head/neck cancer had lower cessation motivation, which in turn predicted lower smoking abstinence. This study evaluated feasibility for a future efficacy trial and assessed the acceptability of brief self-help materials, targeted by cancer type, to enhance cessation motivation.

METHODS

Patients had a diagnosis of skin melanoma, breast, bladder, colorectal, or gynecological cancers within ≤ 6 months, smoked ≥ 1 cigarette in the past month, and were not currently participating in a cessation program. After completing a baseline assessment, participants received the booklet corresponding to their cancer type. Follow-ups were conducted 1 week and 1 month post-intervention.

RESULTS

Among 118 patients potentially eligible, 109 were successfully contacted and 53 patients were eligible and all consented. Among consenting patients, 92.5% completed baseline, and 90.6% received the intervention. Among patients receiving the intervention, 91.7% completed all study procedures and follow-up. At 1 month, 87.5% reported reading the booklet and 92.8% rated it as good/excellent. Motivation to quit smoking increased over time among those with lower motivation at baseline, 33.3% sought smoking cessation assistance, and 25.0% were smoke-free 1 month post-intervention.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the first intervention developed for patients with cancers not typically associated with smoking. This low-cost and easy to disseminate intervention has potential to increase motivation to quit smoking among patients with cancers not typically perceived as smoking-related.

Tobacco Cessation Interventions in Non-Respiratory Cancers: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Considering the high rates of persistent tobacco use, effective cessation interventions are needed for cancer patients and caregivers. Despite the need, there is a significant lack of research on tobacco cessation, especially for non-respiratory cancers (breast, prostate, colorectal, cervical, and bladder cancer).

PURPOSE

The objective was to evaluate tobacco use and tobacco cessation interventions among patients and caregivers for non-respiratory cancers.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions were identified. Five electronic databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines through July 2023. Studies exclusive to lung, oral, thoracic, and head and neck cancers were excluded. Effect sizes were estimated; risk of bias was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 3,304 studies, 17 were included. Interventions included behavioral (n = 6), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), and a combination (n = 9) treatment. Eight studies included a health behavior model; mean behavioral change techniques were 5.57. Pooled magnitude of the odds of cessation was positive and significant (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [Lower Limit 1.02, Upper Limit 1.51]) relative to usual care/placebo. Cumulative meta-analysis examined the accumulation of results over-time and demonstrated that studies have been significant since 2020. Two studies included caregivers' who were involved in the provision of social support.

CONCLUSIONS

Current interventions have the potential to reduce tobacco use in non-respiratory cancers. Results may be beneficial for promoting tobacco cessation among non-respiratory cancers. There is a considerable lack of dyadic interventions for cancer survivors and caregivers; researchers are encouraged to explore dyadic approaches.

Do Tobacco Treatment Trials Address Disparities in Smoking Outcomes Among Black and Hispanic Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Smoking Cessation Interventions for Black and Hispanic Patients Diagnosed with Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the representation of Black and Hispanic cancer patients in tobacco treatment trials, and to offer recommendations for future research.

METHODS

We conducted two systematic searches of the literature (2018, 2021) using 5 databases (MEDLINE via EBSCO, Pubmed, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE)) to examine the prevalence of tobacco trials that included Black or Hispanic cancer patients. Two coders independently screened all articles at title, abstract, and full-text to identify eligible trials. Information about the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients included, trial design features, and whether the authors analyzed outcomes for Black and Hispanic patients were documented.

RESULTS

Of 4682 identified studies, only 10 published trials included and reported on the rates of Black or Hispanic cancer patients enrolled in their tobacco trial. The proportion of enrolled Black cancer patients ranged from 2 to 55.6%. Only our studies documented enrollment rates for Hispanics, and rates were less than 6%. None of the studies offered strategies to promote or the accrual of Black or Hispanic patients.

DISCUSSION

There remains a large gap in the literature regarding the reach and efficacy of tobacco treatment for Black and Hispanic cancer patients. Black and Hispanic cancer patients remain largely under-represented in tobacco cessation trials, limiting the applicability of existing, evidence-based treatments. To optimize intervention generalizability, future studies should emphasize the targeted recruitment and engagement of these patients in tobacco trials.

Implementation, enrollment, and engagement in an opt-out telehealth pharmacist-assisted tobacco treatment program for patients seen in oncology outpatient clinics

OBJECTIVE

To describe the workflow, reach, cost, and self-reported quit rates for an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) for patients seen in 43 oncology outpatient clinics.

METHODS

Between May 25, 2021, and December 31, 2022, adult patients (≥18 years) visiting clinics affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina Hollings Cancer Center were screened for smoking status. Those currently smoking were referred to a telehealth pharmacy-assisted TTP. An attempt was made to contact referred patients by phone. Patients reached were offered free smoking cessation counseling and a 2-week starter kit of nicotine replacement medication. A random sample of 420 patients enrolled in the TTP were selected to participate in a telephone survey to assess smoking status 4 to 12 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

During the reference period 35,756 patients were screened and 9.3% were identified as currently smoking. Among the 3319 patients referred to the TTP at least once, 2393 (72.1%) were reached by phone, of whom 426 (12.8%) were ineligible for treatment, 458 (13.8%) opted out of treatment, and 1509 (45.5%) received treatment. More than 90% of TTP enrollees smoked daily, with an average of 13.1 cigarettes per day. Follow-up surveys were completed on 167 of 420 patients, of whom 23.4% to 33.5% reported not smoking; if all nonresponders to the survey are counted as smoking, the range of quit rates is 9.3% to 13.3%.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the feasibility of reaching and delivering smoking cessation treatments to patients from a diverse set of geographically dispersed oncology clinics.

Smoking patterns and the intention to quit in German cancer patients: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis can be associated with lower treatment tolerance, poorer outcomes, and reduced quality of life compared to non-smoking cancer patients or to those who have quit. Yet about 60% of patients continue to smoke after being diagnosed and find it difficult to quit. To address this problem, it is necessary to identify current and past smoking patterns (e.g., frequency of use, types of tobacco products) and determine whether there is motivation to quit. Similarly, factors associated with continued smoking should be identified. These data will provide the basis for the development of smoking cessation programs tailored to the needs of cancer patients.

METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed to cancer patients older than 18 years in a German Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participating cancer patients were divided into three main groups: 1) patients who stopped smoking before being diagnosed with cancer (Ex-before); 2) patients who stopped smoking after a cancer diagnosis (Ex-after); and 3) patients who currently smoke cigarettes (CS). Sociodemographic, medical, and psychosocial data were collected, as well as smoking patterns and the motivation to quit smoking.

RESULTS

About half of patients (51%) who smoked before diagnosis continue to smoke after a cancer diagnosis. Being diagnosed with a tobacco-related cancer type was associated with a decreased probability of continued smoking. Patients with tobacco-related tumors and receiving positive support in burdensome situations were more likely to have a higher cigarette dependence. Of all CS, 59.1% had intention to quit, and 22.7% reported having taken action to quit. The support by a smoking cessation program was considered important. CS were willing to spend up to €100 for support and were open to multiple sessions per week, group sessions, one-on-one sessions and/or online support.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore the importance of educating cancer patients about the consequences of smoking and to provide them with support to quit. Identified risk factors may further help to recognize cancer patients with high risk of continued smoking after diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at OSF ( https://osf.io/3c9km ) and published as a study protocol at " https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e069570 ".

The effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions after cancer diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

patients with cancer who smoke have more side effects during and after treatment, and a lower survival rate than patients with cancer who quit smoking. Supporting patients with cancer to quit smoking should be standard care. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the most effective smoking cessation method for patients diagnosed with cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar were systematically searched. Included were randomized controlled trials and observational studies published after January 2000 with any smoking cessation intervention in patients with any type of cancer. Result of these studies were evaluated in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 18,780 papers were retrieved. After duplicate removal and exclusion based on title and abstract, 72 publications were left. After full text screening, 19 (randomized) controlled trials and 20 observational studies were included. The overall methodological quality of the included studies, rated by GRADE criteria, was very low. Two out of 21 combined intervention trials showed a statistical significant effect. Meta-analysis of 18 RCTs and 3 observational studies showed a significant benefit of combined modality interventions (OR 1.67, 95% C.I.: 1.24-2.26, p = 0.0008) and behavioural interventions (OR 1.33, 95% C.I.: 1.02 - 1.74, p = 0.03), but not for single modality pharmacological interventions (OR 1.11; 95% C.I.: 0.69-1.78, p = 0.66).

CONCLUSION

A combination of pharmacological and behavioural interventions may be the most effective intervention for smoking cessation in patients with cancer.

Effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions among persons with cancer: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Continued smoking after cancer diagnosis is associated with worse outcomes, however, many persons diagnosed with cancer who smoke are unable to quit successfully. Effective interventions are needed to promote quitting in this population. The purpose of this systematic review is to understand the most effective interventions for smoking cessation among persons with cancer and to identify gaps in knowledge and methodology to suggest directions for future research.

METHODS

Three electronic databases (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) were searched for studies of smoking cessation interventions among persons with cancer, published up to 1 July 2021. Title and abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction was completed by two independent reviewers, via Covalence software, with any discordance resolved by a third reviewer. A quality assessment was completed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Version 2.

RESULTS

Thirty-six articles were included in the review, including 17 randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) and 19 non-RCT studies. Of the 36 studies, 28 (77.8%) utilized an intervention that included both counseling and medication, with 24 (85.7%) providing medication to participants at no cost. Abstinence rates in the RCT intervention groups (n = 17) ranged from 5.2% to 75%, while the non-RCTs found abstinence rates ranging from 15% to 46%. Overall, studies met a mean of 2.28 out of seven quality items, ranging from 0 to 6.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the importance of utilizing intensive combined behavioral and pharmacological interventions for persons with cancer. While combined therapy interventions seem to be the most effective, more research is needed, as current studies have several quality issues, including the lack of biochemical verification for abstinence.

Brief intervention to enhance cessation of smokeless tobacco use in newly diagnosed patients with head and neck cancers: A randomized controlled trial in patient-relative dyads

Introduction

Tobacco use is a major causative factor for head and neck cancers (HNC). Continued use of tobacco even after cancer diagnosis is common and is associated with all-cause and cancer-specific mortality, cancer recurrence and poor treatment response. Evidence suggests that behavioral interventions, help achieve greater smoking cessation rates in HNC patients. However, intervention studies focussed on HNC patients using smokeless tobacco, which is more common than smoking in India, are sparse.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a parallel arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) on dyads of patients with recently diagnosed HNC and a close relative. The experimental arm received a brief tobacco cessation intervention (BTCI) and the control arm received treatment as usual (TAU); 27 and 25 dyads in each arm completed the trial.

Results

Overall for the dyads using SLT, the relative risk of continuing to use SLT was 3.23 times higher (odds ratio = 7.01) if BTCI was not undertaken at one-month follow-up and 4.43 times higher (odds ratio = 8.65) at 3-months follow-up. For patients only, the relative risk of continuing to use SLT at one-month and 3-months follow-ups was 4.99 and 12.04 times higher, respectively, if BTCI was not undertaken. For relatives only, the corresponding relative risk values were 2.14 and 2.2.

Conclusion

We conclude that BTCI delivered to patient-relative dyads, compared to TAU, is effective in enhancing the discontinuation rates of the use of SLT in newly diagnosed patients with HNC. This form of intervention is significantly effective for discontinuing SLT use in the relatives too.

Cigarette smoking cessation, duration of smoking abstinence, and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma prognosis

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is a major risk factor for developing head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, the prognostic associations with smoking cessation are limited. The authors assessed whether smoking cessation and increased duration of abstinence were associated with improved overall (OS) and HNSCC-specific survival.

METHODS

Clinicodemographic and smoking data from patients with HNSCC at Princess Margaret Cancer Center (2006-2019) were prospectively collected. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Gray competing-risk models were used to assess the impact of smoking cessation and duration of abstinence on overall mortality and HNSCC-specific/noncancer mortality, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 2482 patients who had HNSCC, former smokers (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.87; p = .001; N = 841) had a reduced risk of overall mortality compared with current smokers (N = 931). Compared with current smokers, former smokers who quit >10 years before diagnosis (long-term abstinence; n = 615) had the most improved OS (aHR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.93; p = .001). The 5-year actuarial rates of HNSCC-specific and noncancer deaths were 16.8% and 9.4%, respectively. Former smokers (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95; p = .019) had reduced HNSCC-specific mortality compared with current smokers, but there was no difference in noncancer mortality. Abstinence for >10 years was associated with decreased HNSCC-specific death compared with current smoking (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.91; p = .012). Smoking cessation with a longer duration of quitting was significantly associated with reduced overall and HNSCC-specific mortality in patients who received primary radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation before the time of diagnosis reduced overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality among patients with HNSCC, but no difference was observed in noncancer mortality. Long-term abstinence (>10 pack-years) had a significant OS and HNSCC-specific survival benefit.

Preventive Behaviors Among Leukemia and Lymphoma Cancer Survivors: Results From the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey

Introduction

Maintaining a healthy lifestyle is an important factor in promoting positive outcomes for cancer survivors. Health behaviors, such as engaging in physical activity, not consuming large amounts of alcohol, abstaining from cigarette smoking, receiving routine immunizations, and undergoing recommended cancer screening tests, may lead to improved physical health, health status, and quality of life.

Methods

We examined preventive behaviors among hematologic cancer survivors in a cross-sectional analysis, using data from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

Results

Adherence to cancer screening test and immunization recommendations among hematologic cancer survivors compares favorably with that among persons with no history of cancer. However, no statistically significant differences in the frequency of current smoking, heavy drinking, and physical activity were observed across these 2 groups. No important differences were observed in health behaviors between male and female cancer survivors, except that female hematologic cancer survivors were more likely to adhere to influenza and pneumococcal pneumonia immunization recommendations than female survivors of other types of cancer, whereas no such differences were found among their male counterparts.

Conclusions

Although hematologic cancer survivors were more adherent to preventive health behaviors such as cancer screening and immunization, they were not different from persons without any history of cancer in exhibiting behavioral risk factors such as smoking and heavy drinking. Intervention studies are needed to identify effective ways to assist hematologic cancer survivors to quit smoking and refrain from hazardous alcohol consumption.

Oncology Patient Smoking Cessation Treatment Preferences: Perceptions Across Former and Current Cigarette Smokers

Although the benefits of smoking cessation following a cancer diagnosis have been well-established, up to 50% of cancer patients continue to smoke. Continued smoking through oncology treatment leads to increased risk of adverse events including reduced effectiveness of treatment, recurrence of additional malignancies, and reduced survival rates. Upon the cancer diagnosis, oncology healthcare providers become the primary trusted source of information and support, which represents a great opportunity to assist these patients to quit smoking. However, it remains unclear how oncology healthcare providers can best address smoking cessation from a patient-centered perspective. The present study surveyed oncology patients from Birmingham, AL, classified as either former (n = 174) or current smokers (n = 81) to identify their perceptions regarding the role of oncology healthcare providers in their smoking cessation efforts. Current smokers were more likely to be younger, received their cancer diagnosis within the past 3 years, and have a cancer diagnosis with high smoking-related public awareness (i.e., head, neck, or lung) compared to former smokers. Additionally, 81% of current smokers reported experiencing smoking cessation discussions with their oncology healthcare providers with the most prominent recommendations being use of nicotine replacement therapies (46.9%) and medication (35.8%). These smoking cessation experiences align with patient preferences. However, despite the frequency of smoking cessation discussions, current smokers demonstrated an ambivalence in understanding the risks of continued smoking during their medical treatment. Overall, this study highlights the important role of oncology healthcare providers on implementing smoking cessation intervention for their patients who continue to smoke.

Study protocol for a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial testing virtual tobacco treatment in oncology practices [Smokefree Support Study 2.0]

BACKGROUND

Persistent smoking among patients diagnosed with cancer is associated with adverse clinical outcomes, yet an evidence-based tobacco use intervention has not been well-integrated into cancer care in community oncology settings. This paper describes the protocol of a nation-wide clinical trial conducted by the ECOG-ACRIN National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Research Base to assess the effectiveness of a virtual tobacco treatment intervention and the process of implementing tobacco treatment in NCORP community oncology settings.

METHODS/DESIGN

This two-arm, multisite (n: 49 NCORP sites) hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial compares the effectiveness of a Virtual Intervention Treatment (VIT) versus an Enhanced Usual Control (EUC) among English and Spanish speaking patients recently diagnosed with cancer, reporting current smoking and receiving care at a participating NCORP Community or Minority/Underserved Site. The VIT includes up to 11 virtual counseling sessions with a tobacco treatment specialist and up to 12 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). The EUC arm receives a referral to the NCI Quitline. The primary study outcome is biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence. Moderators of treatment effect will be assessed. The study evaluates implementation processes from participating NCORP site staff via survey, administrative, and focus group data, including reach, acceptability, appropriateness, fidelity, feasibility, adoption, cost and sustainability outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This trial will generate findings about the effectiveness of an evidence-based virtual tobacco treatment intervention targeting patients diagnosed with cancer and illuminate barriers and facilitators that influence implementing tobacco treatment into community oncology settings nationally. In the era of COVID-19, virtual care solutions are vital for maximizing access and utilization of tobacco treatment delivery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03808818) on January 18th, 2019; Last update posted: May 21st, 2020.

Implementation strategies for integrating tobacco cessation treatment in cancer care: A qualitative study

Purpose

The objective of this study was to determine how to optimize implementation of tobacco cessation treatment interventions in cancer care by (1) investigating the feasibility and acceptability of a multi-level approach to tobacco cessation treatment intervention, (2) identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation, and (3) eliciting additional strategies to improve implementation of the intervention.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with oncologists (n = 15) from one large academic health center in the Southeastern United States. We asked about their knowledge, attitudes, and current practices regarding tobacco use screening and treatment. We also asked about two proposed strategies to support implementation of tobacco cessation treatment: (1) developing a registry of tobacco users in collaboration with the state-run tobacco cessation program, and (2) providing on-site tobacco cessation counseling from trained professionals.

Results

Oncologists saw addressing tobacco use as valuable; however, they felt restricted from consistently addressing tobacco use by multi-level barriers such as workload, electronic health record (EHR) design, patient anxiety, and low self-efficacy for treating tobacco dependence. Oncologists responded positively to on-site treatment and felt this strategy would increase treatment accessibility and enhance engagement. Reaction to developing a registry of tobacco users was mixed, with concerns regarding lack of oncologist involvement and patient privacy expressed. Other suggested strategies for supporting implementation of tobacco cessation treatment included reducing referral complexity, establishing financial or quality incentives for oncologists, and leveraging existing EHR tools to facilitate integration of cessation interventions into clinic workflows.

Conclusion

We identified several challenges to implementing tobacco use treatment in cancer care; however, we considered strategies to overcome these barriers that were viewed as feasible and acceptable. Our work highlights the importance of engaging stakeholders in implementation efforts. Future work should explore the impact of the implementation strategies identified in this study.

Perceived cancer-related benefits of quitting smoking and associations with quit intentions among recently diagnosed cancer patients

One third of smokers diagnosed with cancer continue smoking, perhaps due to low perceived cancer-related benefits of cessation. To examine perceived cancer-related benefits of quitting among newly diagnosed cancer patients who smoke and associations with quit intentions, baseline measures from patients (N = 303) enrolled in a randomized controlled trial were analyzed using hierarchical regression models and bootstrapping. Higher perceived cancer-related benefits of quitting were associated with having a smoking-related cancer and less education. Perceived cancer-related benefits of quitting and quit intentions were positively correlated, particularly among patients with smoking-related cancers. For smokers with smoking-related cancers, perceived cancer-related benefits of quitting are correlated with quit intentions.

Factors associated with receipt of the 5As model of brief intervention for smoking cessation among hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Guidelines recommend the 5As model of brief intervention for providing smoking cessation support in clinical settings. This study assessed patient and hospital characteristics associated with self-reported receipt of the 5As (ask, advise, assess, assist and arrange).

DESIGN

Multi-center cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adult inpatients (n = 1047) were randomly selected from 13 hospitals in the Barcelona province of Spain in 2014-2015.

MEASUREMENTS

We explored participants' receipt of the 5As through a questionnaire. Given the progressiveness of the 5As, we recoded the fulfillment of the intervention as: A₀ : no intervention; A₁ : ask; A₂ : ask and advise; A₃ : A₂ and assess; A₄ : A₃ and assist; and A₅ : A₄ and arrange a follow-up. We explored patient (e.g. age, sex, comorbidities) and hospital (e.g. type of hospital, unit) characteristics. We adjusted multi-level robust Poisson regression models to estimate the adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of the association between the recoded 5As intervention received.

FINDINGS

A total of 60.4% (n = 624) of patients had been asked (A₁ ) about their smoking status. Among smokers, 46.5% (n = 90) were advised (A₂ ), 26.6% (n = 48) assessed (A₃ ) and 4.6% (n = 10) received all the components of the 5As (A₅ ). Middle-aged smokers [aPR = 3.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.69-7.79] with a respiratory disease (aPR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.11-4.34) were most likely to have been asked, advised and assessed (A₃ ). The cessation intervention was most frequently performed by physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Barcelona province of Spain, it appears that fewer than half of hospitalized patients who smoke were advised to quit and few received the full 'five As' brief intervention for smoking cessation.

Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Treatment is complex for patients with head and neck (H&N) cancers with specific site of disease, stage, and pathologic findings guiding treatment decision-making. Treatment planning for H&N cancers involves a multidisciplinary team of experts. This article describes supportive care recommendations in the NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancers, as well as the rationale supporting a new section on imaging recommendations for patients with H&N cancers. This article also describes updates to treatment recommendations for patients with very advanced H&N cancers and salivary gland tumors, specifically systemic therapy recommendations.

Brief Intervention for Tobacco when Diagnosed with Oral Cancer (BITDOC): Study protocol of a randomized clinical trial studying efficacy of brief tobacco cessation intervention, Chhattisgarh, India

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco use is a major causative factor for cancer. Cessation programs along with diagnosis of cancer as a motivating factor may improve quitting rates in patients. This is a protocol of a study that aims to assess the efficacy of brief tobacco cessation intervention (compared to treatment as usual, TAU) on pattern and attitudes towards tobacco chewing in newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients and their relatives.

METHODS

The proposed study will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1 will include 105 dyads of patients and relatives and shall assess patterns (amount, frequency, duration of use and dependence etc.) and knowledge and attitudes (quitting, continued use, health-behavioural modifications, long-term effects on treatment etc.) towards tobacco chewing in newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients using smokeless tobacco and their relatives. Sample will be recruited from outpatients attending the ear, nose, throat and head and neck surgery department of a tertiary health care institute. Phase 2 will be a randomized trial that will compare the efficacy of the ‘Brief Intervention for Tobacco when Diagnosed with Oral Cancer’ (BITDOC) and TAU, and will include 27 dyads in each of the two groups. Intervention will be delivered in three sessions, based on the principles of motivational interviewing and the 3As model.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will help in the evaluation of the attitude towards smokeless tobacco (SLT) in a population that has faced the adverse consequences from its use and changes brought by a diagnosis of HNC. It will also help in developing a cost-effective model for promotion of smoking cessation.

Feasibility and Acceptability of Mindfulness-Based Group Visits for Smoking Cessation in Low-Socioeconomic Status and Minority Smokers with Cancer

Objective: Smoking cessation studies tailored for low-income and racial/ethnic minority cancer patients are limited. African American and low-socioeconomic status (SES) smokers have higher cancer mortality rates and are less likely to use evidence-based smoking cessation treatments compared with white and higher SES counterparts. Mindfulness training is a promising approach to address racial and SES disparities in smoking cessation. The authors assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a mindfulness-based smoking cessation (MBSC) medical group visit for low-income and racially diverse smokers with cancer. Design and intervention: The authors adapted the integrative medical group visit model used for chronic pain and included the You Can Quit smoking cessation curriculum used at the study site, Tobacco Treatment Center. The program was conducted in eight weekly 2-h visits. The authors then tested the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention for actively smoking cancer patients and cancer survivors in two pilot groups (N = 18) using a pre-post design. Setting/Location: This study took place at Boston Medical Center, a large urban safety net academic teaching hospital. Outcome measures: The authors used a medical group visit intake form to collect data on weekly cigarette intake and home practice. They also gathered additional qualitative data from focus groups and in-depth interviews. Results: Over 50% of participants (n = 10) self-identified as black and 56% reported an annual income of $20,000 or less. Over two-thirds of the participants attended four or more of the eight group visits. There was a significant decrease in weekly cigarette intake from 75.1 cigarettes at baseline to 44.3 at 3 months (p = 0.039). None of the participants quit smoking. Participants were satisfied with the program and reported positive lifestyle changes. Conclusion: MBSC group visits are feasible and acceptable among racially diverse and low-SES smokers with cancer and should be further studied in a larger cohort.

Interventions for smoking cessation in people diagnosed with lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is one of the most common causes of death from cancer worldwide. Smoking induces and aggravates many health problems, including vascular diseases, respiratory illnesses and cancers. Tobacco smoking constitutes the most important risk factor for lung cancer. Most people with lung cancer are still active smokers at diagnosis or frequently relapse after smoking cessation. Quitting smoking is the most effective way for smokers to reduce the risk of premature death and disability. People with lung cancer may benefit from stopping smoking. Whether smoking cessation interventions are effective for people with lung cancer and whether one method of quitting is more effective than any other has not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of smoking cessation programmes for people with lung cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (accessed via PubMed) and Embase up to 22 December 2018. We also searched the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting proceedings, the lung cancer sections of the proceedings of the ESMO Congress, the lung cancer sections of the proceedings of the European Conference of Clinical Oncology (ECCO) Congress, the World Conference on Lung Cancer proceedings, the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Annual Meeting from 2013, the Food and Drug Administration website, the European Medicine Agency for drug registration website, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) to 30 December 2018. We applied no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include any randomised controlled trial (RCT) of any psychosocial or pharmacological smoking cessation intervention or combinations of both, compared with no intervention, a different psychosocial or pharmacological (or both) intervention or placebo for pharmacological interventions in people with lung cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the studies from the initial search for potential trials for inclusion. We planned to use standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We found no trials that met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. Among the 1817 records retrieved using our search strategy, we retrieved 19 studies for further investigation. We excluded 15 trials: ten trials because we could not distinguish people with lung cancer from the other participants, or the participants were not people with lung cancer, four because they were not randomised, or RCTs. We excluded one trial because, though it was completed in 2004, no results are available. We assessed four ongoing trials for inclusion when data become available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no RCTs that determined the effectiveness of any type of smoking cessation programme for people with lung cancer. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether smoking cessation interventions are effective for people with lung cancer and whether one programme is more effective than any other. People with lung cancer should be encouraged to quit smoking and offered smoking cessation interventions. However, due to the lack of RCTs, the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions for people with lung cancer cannot be evaluated and concluded. This systematic review identified a need for RCTs to explore these.

A smoking cessation and pain management program for cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Many cancer survivors continue to smoke. Further, most survivors also report high levels of persistent pain and smoke in response to pain. The investigators tested the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a smoking cessation program paired with a pain management program for cancer survivors.

METHODS

The investigators conducted a two-arm, wait-list randomized controlled pilot study in which they delivered a combined smoking cessation and pain management intervention.

RESULTS

The investigators randomized 30 survivors (14 intervention and 16 wait-list control). Seventy-one percent of the survivors who received the intervention rated it as extremely useful (5 out of 5) in helping them quit smoking. Further, 86% would recommend the program to other survivors. Although we could not conduct inferential statistics, 14% of those in the intervention arm, compared to 6% in the control condition had biochemically validated cessation at 2-months post-randomization. Survivors in the intervention also reported less pain, had improvements in depressive symptoms, and better physical function than those in the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pilot data suggest the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of this approach. The next step is to conduct a large randomized controlled trial to fully test the efficacy of the intervention.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

A combined smoking cessation and pain program might help improve both issues simultaneously.

Associations between the smoking-relatedness of a cancer type, cessation attitudes and beliefs, and future abstinence among recent quitters

OBJECTIVE

Smoking after a diagnosis of cancer can negatively impact treatment outcomes and quality of life. It is important that patients quit smoking and remain abstinent regardless of cancer type. Some cancer types (eg, lung) have stronger links to smoking as a cause than do others (eg, colorectal). The aims of this study were to (1) assess associations between smoking-relatedness of the cancer type with beliefs and attitudes concerning smoking abstinence (eg, confidence, self-efficacy), and (2) assess these variables as predictors of future abstinence.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis, cancer patients (N = 357) who quit smoking within the previous 90 days were assigned a code of 3, 2, or 1 according to the cancer type's level of smoking-relatedness: Very related (n = 134, thoracic and head and neck), Somewhat related (n = 93, acute myeloid leukemia, bladder, cervix, colorectal, esophageal, kidney, liver, pancreas, and stomach), and Unlikely related (n = 137, all other cancer types).

RESULTS

Smoking-relatedness was positively associated with plan to stay smoke-free, maximum confidence in being smoke-free in 6 months, higher abstinence self-efficacy, and lower expected difficulty in staying smoke-free. Each of the 4 beliefs and attitude variables predicted abstinence 2 months later. Smoking-relatedness also predicted abstinence in a univariate model, but not in a multivariable model with the belief and attitude variables. Using backwards stepwise procedures, the final model included plan to stay smoke-free, confidence in being smoke-free, and abstinence self-efficacy.

CONCLUSION

These results are consistent with our conceptualization of cessation motivation differing by smoking-relatedness of the cancer type and predicting future abstinence.

Pilot randomized controlled trial of a comprehensive smoking cessation intervention for patients with upper aerodigestive cancer undergoing radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Smoking among patients with cancer is associated with poor outcomes, however, smoking cessation interventions have had limited success.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial compared a novel smoking cessation intervention ("intervention") with enhanced usual care ("control"). Participants were smokers with head and neck or thoracic malignancies undergoing radiation. Controls received brief counseling. Intervention participants received intensive counseling, pharmacotherapy, text-messaging, and financial incentives. Biochemically confirmed 7-day abstinence at 8 weeks was compared using Fisher's exact t test. Smoking abstinence and intensity were also analyzed using time-series panel regression.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 19 intervention and 10 control participants. More intervention (74%) than control (30%) participants abstained from smoking at 8 weeks (P = .05). Intervention participants were significantly more likely to abstain (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 14.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.56-60.76) and smoked fewer cigarettes (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.16; 95% CI 0.06-0.40) during weeks 1 to 8.

CONCLUSION

This intervention decreased smoking among patients with upper aerodigestive cancers during radiotherapy.

Change in alcohol and tobacco consumption after a diagnosis of head and neck cancer: Findings from Head and Neck 5000

Background

Tobacco and alcohol consumption are risk factors for developing head and neck cancer, and continuation postdiagnosis can adversely affect prognosis. We explored changes to these behaviors after a head and neck cancer diagnosis.

Methods

Demographic and clinical data were collected from 973 people newly diagnosed with oral cavity, oropharyngeal, or laryngeal cancer. Tobacco and alcohol consumption were additionally collected 4 and 12 months later.

Results

The prevalence of high alcohol consumption reduced from 54.3% at diagnosis to 41.4% at 12 months, and smoking reduced from 21.0% to 11.7%. Changes in behavior were dynamic, for example, 44% of smokers at 12 months were not smoking at diagnosis or 4 months. Several factors were associated with alcohol consumption, whereas only tumor site and comorbidities were associated with smoking.

Conclusion

A diagnosis of head and neck cancer can result in important changes in alcohol consumption and smoking prevalence. However, these changes are dynamic in the first year after diagnosis.

Cancer-related disease factors and smoking cessation treatment: Analysis of an ongoing clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Smoking cessation treatment should be an important aspect of cancer care. In this study, we evaluated whether cancer-related disease factors adversely influence smoking cessation treatment.

METHODS

Smokers with cancer (within 5 years of diagnosis, any tumor site) were recruited for an ongoing trial of varenicline for smoking cessation. Disease factors, assessed at baseline, included tumor site, cancer treatment, time since diagnosis, and health-related quality of life. Medication adherence was defined by 132 of 165 pills taken and counseling adherence was defined by 4 of 4 behavioral counseling sessions attended. Abstinence was bioverified at Week 12. Using logistic regression analysis, we assessed the relationship between disease factors and 12-week medication adherence, counseling adherence, and abstinence.

RESULTS

Of 144 participants, 56% were medication adherent, 74% were counseling adherent, and 39% were abstinent. Health-related quality of life predicted medication adherence (OR: 1.08, 95% CI, 1.01-1.16, P = .019, d = 0.20) but not counseling adherence or 12-week abstinence. Tumor site, cancer treatment, and time since diagnosis did not predict any smoking cessation treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer-related disease factors did not predict cancer survivors' engagement or success in smoking cessation treatment. Findings support National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice guidelines that recommend smoking cessation treatment for all smokers with cancer, regardless of time since diagnosis.

A smoking cessation programme for current and recent ex-smokers following diagnosis of a potentially curable cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients who quit smoking have improved survival rates. The time of diagnosis provides a 'teachable moment' when healthcare providers can offer smoking-cessation treatment.

AIMS

To assess the impact on quit rates of a tailored smoking-cessation intervention for patients diagnosed with a potentially curable cancer.

METHODS

A prospective, one-arm cohort study of current smokers and recent quitters (<30 days) who had commenced treatment for a potentially curable cancer was performed. Intervention involved an initial motivational interview, regular follow up and pharmacotherapy when appropriate. Quit rates were measured at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months by self-reported abstinence and biochemical confirmation. The primary end point was prolonged abstinence at 12 months. Changes in quality of life parameters and distress were also assessed.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were recruited, with a median age of 56 years. Forty-one patients (58%) had a smoking-related cancer. The prolonged abstinence rate at 12 months was 24% (95% confidence interval 14-36%). Factors associated with successful quitting included being in the preparation or action phase of readiness to change at study entry (P = 0.012) and having complications of treatment requiring hospitalisation (P = 0.024). Between baseline and 12 months, quitters reported improvement in self-control (P < 0.001) and reduced levels of distress (P = 0.03) compared to non-quitters.

CONCLUSION

Patients who continue to smoke after being diagnosed with cancer require intensive support to quit. An individualised behavioural and pharmacological intervention can be successful in helping patients quit smoking, with quality of life improvements seen amongst successful quitters. Population measures to stop people starting smoking remain essential.

Treating Nicotine Dependence and Preventing Smoking Relapse in Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite the well-documented harmful effects of smoking, many cancer patients continue to smoke. Smoking cessation is critical to address in this population given the associated increase in treatment toxicity, risk of second primary tumors, decrease in treatment response and higher disease-specific and all-cause mortality with continued smoking following a cancer diagnosis. This review seeks to summarize the latest recommendations and guidelines on smoking cessation treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer, and the evidence behind those recommendations.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the latest evidence for smoking cessation treatments for cancer patients and the clinical guidelines and recommendation available for oncologists and health care providers. The unique aspects of nicotine dependence among patients diagnosed with cancer, and key challenges and barriers that cancer survivors and health care providers experience when considering smoking cessation treatments, and available clinical resources, are also discussed. Lastly, the authors summarize future directions in the field of smoking cessation treatment for cancer patients.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

While there are areas of improvement in research of smoking cessation treatment for cancer patients, critical under-explored areas remain. Nonetheless, providers should adhere to the NCCN guidelines and offer a brief counseling intervention to motivate patients to quit smoking when appropriate resources are not available.

Socioeconomic status and lifestyle behaviours in cancer survivors: smoking and physical activity

PURPOSE

Smoking cessation and increased physical activity (pa) have been linked to better outcomes in cancer survivors. We assessed whether socioeconomic factors influence changes in those behaviours after a cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

As part of a cross-sectional study, a diverse group of cancer survivors at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON), completed a questionnaire about past and current lifestyle behaviours and perceptions about the importance of those behaviours with respect to their health. The influence of socioeconomic indicators on smoking status and physical inactivity at 1 year before and after diagnosis were assessed using multivariable logistic regression with adjustment for clinico-demographic factors.

RESULTS

Of 1222 participants, 1192 completed the smoking component. Of those respondents, 15% smoked before diagnosis, and 43% of those smokers continued to smoke after. The proportion of survivors who continued to smoke increased with lower education level (p = 0.03). Of the 1106 participants answering pa questions, 39% reported being physically inactive before diagnosis, of whom 82% remained inactive afterward. Survivors with a lower education level were most likely to remain inactive after diagnosis (p = 0.003). Lower education level, household income, and occupation were associated with the perception that pa had no effect or could worsen fatigue and quality of life (p ≤ 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In cancer survivors, education level was a major modifier of smoking and pa behaviours. Lower socioeconomic status was associated with incorrect perceptions about pa. Targeting at-risk survivors by education level should be evaluated as a strategy in cancer survivorship programs.

Smoking cessation care among patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in improving cessation rates and smoking related behaviour in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC).

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

We searched the following data sources: CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to February 2016. A search of reference lists of included studies and Google Scholar (first 200 citations published online between 2000 and February 2016) was also undertaken. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). 2 study authors independently screened and extracted data with disagreements resolved via consensus.

RESULTS

Of the 5167 studies identified, 3 were eligible and included in the review. Trial designs of included studies were 2 randomised controlled trials and 1 non-randomised controlled trial. 2 studies received a weak methodological rating and 1 received a moderate methodological rating. The trials examine the impact of the following interventions: (1) nurse delivered cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) via telephone and accompanied by a workbook, combined with pharmacotherapy; (2) nurse and physician brief advice to quit and information booklets combined with pharmacotherapy; and (3) surgeon delivered enhanced advice to quit smoking augmented by booster sessions. Only the trial of the nurse delivered CBT and pharmacotherapy reported significant increases in smoking cessation rates. 1 study measured quit attempts and the other assessed consumption of cigarettes per day and readiness to change. There was no significant improvement in quit attempts or cigarettes smoked per day among patients in the intervention groups, relative to control.

CONCLUSIONS

There are very few studies evaluating the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions that report results specific to the HNC population. The 3 trials identified reported equivocal findings. Extended CBT counselling coupled with pharmacotherapy may be effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016016421.

Does Quitting Smoking Make a Difference Among Newly Diagnosed Head and Neck Cancer Patients?

INTRODUCTION

To determine if smoking after a cancer diagnosis makes a difference in mortality among newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients.

METHODS

Longitudinal data were collected from newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients with a median follow-up time of 1627 days (N = 590). Mortality was censored at 8 years or September 1, 2011, whichever came first. Based on smoking status, all patients were categorized into four groups: continuing smokers, quitters, former smokers, or never-smokers. A broad range of covariates were included in the analyses. Kaplan-Meier curves, bivariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were constructed.

RESULTS

Eight-year overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality were 40.5% (239/590) and 25.4% (150/590), respectively. Smoking status after a cancer diagnosis predicted overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality. Compared to never-smokers, continuing smokers had the highest hazard ratio (HR) of dying from all causes (HR = 2.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.48-4.98). Those who smoked at diagnosis, but quit and did not relapse-quitters-had an improved hazard ratio of dying (HR = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.29-4.36) and former smokers at diagnosis with no relapse after diagnosis-former smokers-had the lowest hazard ratio of dying from all causes (HR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.12-2.56). Similarly, quitters had a slightly higher hazard ratio of dying from cancer-specific reasons (HR = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.13-5.01) than never-smokers, which was similar to current smokers (HR = 2.07, 95% CI = 0.96-4.47), followed by former smokers (HR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.00-2.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to never-smokers, continuing smokers have the highest HR of overall mortality followed by quitters and former smokers, which indicates that smoking cessation, even after a cancer diagnosis, may improve overall mortality among newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients. Health care providers should consider incorporating smoking cessation interventions into standard cancer treatment to improve survival among this population.

IMPLICATIONS

Using prospective observational longitudinal data from 590 head and neck cancer patients, this study showed that continuing smokers have the highest overall mortality relative to never-smokers, which indicates that smoking cessation, even after a cancer diagnosis, may have beneficial effects on long-term overall mortality. Health care providers should consider incorporating smoking cessation interventions into standard cancer treatment to improve survival among this population.

Helping patients to reduce tobacco consumption in oncology: a narrative review

The present overview focuses on evidence of smoking cessation approaches in oncology settings with the aim to provide health personnel a critical perspective on how to help their patients. This narrative review is structured in two main sections: the first one describes the psycho-cognitive variables involved in the decision to continue smoking after a cancer diagnosis and during the treatment; the second section relates methods and tools may be recommended, being evidence-based, to support smoking cessation in oncology settings. Active smoking increases not only susceptibility to common cancers in the general population, but also increases disease severity and comorbidities in cancer patients. Nowadays, scientific evidence has identified many strategies to give up smoking, but a lack of knowledge exists for treatment of nicotine dependence in the cancer population. Health personnel is often ambiguous when approaching the problem, while their contribution is essential in guiding patients towards healthier choices. We argue that smoking treatments for cancer patients deserve more attention and that clinical features, individual characteristics and needs of the patient should be assessed in order to increase the attempts success rate. Health personnel that daily work and interact with cancer patients and their caregivers have a fundamental role in the promotion of the health changing. For this reason, it is important that they have adequate knowledge and resources in order to support cancer patients to stop tobacco cigarette smoking and promoting and healthier lifestyle.

Integrating tobacco treatment into cancer care: Study protocol for a randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the well-established risks of persistent smoking, 10-30% of cancer patients continue to smoke after diagnosis. Evidence-based tobacco treatment has yet to be integrated into routine oncology care. This paper describes the protocol, manualized treatment, evaluation plan, and overall study design of comparing the effectiveness and cost of two treatments across two major cancer centers.

METHODS/DESIGN

A two-arm, two-site randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial is testing the hypothesis that an Intensive Treatment (IT) intervention is more effective than a Standard Treatment (ST) intervention in helping recently diagnosed cancer patients quit smoking. Both interventions include 4 weekly counseling sessions and FDA-approved smoking cessation medication advice. The IT includes an additional 4 biweekly and 3 monthly booster sessions as well as dispensal of the recommended FDA-approved smoking cessation medication at no cost. The trial is enrolling patients with suspected or newly diagnosed cancer who have smoked a cigarette in the past 30days. Participants are randomly assigned to receive the ST or IT condition. Tobacco cessation outcomes are assessed at 3 and 6months. The primary study outcome is 7-day point prevalence biochemically-validated tobacco abstinence. Secondary study outcomes include the incremental cost-effectiveness of the IT vs. ST.

DISCUSSION

This trial will answer key questions about delivering tobacco treatment interventions to newly diagnosed cancer patients. If found to be efficacious and cost-effective, this treatment will serve as a model to be integrated into oncology care settings nation-wide, as we strive to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life for cancer patients.

Smoking behaviours of current cancer patients in Canada

Evidence shows that continued smoking by cancer patients leads to adverse treatment outcomes and affects survival. Smoking diminishes treatment effectiveness, exacerbates side effects, and increases the risk of developing additional complications. Patients who continue to smoke also have a higher risk of developing a second primary cancer or experiencing a cancer recurrence, both of which ultimately contribute to poorer quality of life and poorer survival. Here, we present a snapshot of smoking behaviours of current cancer patients compared with the non-cancer patient population in Canada. Minimal differences in smoking behaviours were noted between current cancer patients and the rest of the population. Based on 2011-2014 data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, 1 in 5 current cancer patients (20.1%) reported daily or occasional smoking. That estimate is comparable to findings in the surveyed non-cancer patient population, of whom 19.3% reported smoking daily or occasionally. Slightly more male cancer patients than female cancer patients identified as current smokers. A similar distribution was observed in the non-cancer patient population. There is an urgent need across Canada to better support cancer patients in quitting smoking. As a result, the quality of patient care will improve, as will cancer treatment and survival outcomes, and quality of life for these patients.

Counseling Is Effective for Smoking Cessation in Head and Neck Cancer Patients-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the efficacy of smoking cessation counseling and the resulting quit rate in patients with head and neck cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Predictor variables were smoking cessation counseling and smoking cessation interventions. The outcome was smoking cessation. Data collection and quality assessment were performed independently by 2 of the authors. Selected publications were assessed for potential risk of bias, and the level of evidence was evaluated using National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines. Review Manager 5.3 was used to conduct the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 1,239 patients were included (3 randomized controlled trials, 3 cohorts, and 2 case series). Smoking cessation was achieved considerably more often in patients who received smoking cessation counseling compared with those who received usual care.

CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that counseling supplemented with nicotine replacement therapy increases the possibility for smoking cessation in patients with head and neck cancer.

Exploring Issues of Comorbid Conditions in People Who Smoke

Smoking affects comorbid disease outcomes, and patients with comorbid conditions may have unique characteristics that are important to consider when treating tobacco use. However, addressing tobacco in patients being treated for comorbid conditions is not a consistent practice. Recognizing the need for a "call-to-action" to address tobacco use in people with comorbid conditions, the Tobacco Treatment Network within the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) convened a Comorbidities Workgroup to explore the relationship between smoking and comorbid disease to identify common themes including: the harms associated with continued tobacco use, the frequency of comorbid disease and tobacco use, the potential effect of comorbid disease on the ability to quit tobacco use, the association between tobacco use and suboptimal disease-specific treatment response, and evidence regarding potential approaches to improve addressing tobacco use in patients with comorbid disease. Five candidate conditions (psychiatric, cancer, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and human immunodeficiency virus infected patients) were explored. Across comorbid conditions, smoking adversely affects treatment efficacy and promotes other adverse health conditions. People with comorbid conditions who smoke are motivated to quit and respond to evidence-based smoking cessation treatments. However, tobacco cessation is not regularly incorporated into the clinical care of many individuals with comorbidities. Optimal strategies for addressing tobacco use within each comorbid disease are also not well defined. Further work is needed to disseminate evidence-based care into clinical practice for smokers with comorbid disease and addiction research should consider comorbid conditions as an important construct to explore.

IMPLICATIONS

This article explores how physical and psychiatric conditions may interact in the treatment of tobacco dependence, and discusses the need for smoking cessation as a critical component of comorbid condition management. Five common comorbid domains-psychiatric, cancer, pulmonary, cardiovascular, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-are highlighted to illustrate how these different conditions might interact with smoking with respect to prevalence and harm, motivation to quit, and cessation treatment utilization and success.

Interventions for smoking cessation in people diagnosed with lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is one of the most common causes of death from cancer worldwide. Smoking induces and aggravates many health problems, including vascular diseases, respiratory illnesses and cancers. Tobacco smoking constitutes the most important risk factor for lung cancer. Most people with lung cancer are still active smokers at diagnosis or frequently relapse after smoking cessation. Quitting smoking is the most effective way for smokers to reduce the risk of premature death and disability. People with lung cancer may benefit from stopping smoking. Whether smoking cessation interventions are effective for people with lung cancer and whether one method of quitting is more effective than any other has not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of smoking cessation programmes for people with lung cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (accessed via PubMed) and EMBASE up to 22 June 2015. We also searched the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting proceedings, the lung cancer sections of the proceedings of the ESMO Congress, the lung cancer sections of the proceedings of the European Conference of Clinical Oncology (ECCO) Congress, the World Conference on Lung Cancer proceedings, the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Annual Meeting from 2013, the Food and Drug Administration website, the European Medicine Agency for drug registration website, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) to 1 July 2015. We applied no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include any randomised controlled trial (RCT) of any psychosocial or pharmacological smoking cessation intervention or combinations of both, compared with no intervention, a different psychosocial or pharmacological (or both) intervention or placebo for pharmacological interventions in people with lung cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the studies from the initial search for potential trials for inclusion. We planned to use standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We found no trials that met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. Among the 1052 records retrieved using our search strategy, we retrieved 13 studies for further investigation. We excluded 10 trials: five trials because we could not distinguish people with lung cancer from the other participants, or the participants were not people with lung cancer, four because they were not randomised, or RCTs. We excluded one trial because, though it was completed in 2004, no results are available. We assessed three ongoing trials for inclusion when data become available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no RCTs that determined the effectiveness of any type of smoking cessation programme for people with lung cancer. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether smoking cessation interventions are effective for people with lung cancer and whether one programme is more effective than any other. People with lung cancer should be encouraged to quit smoking and offered smoking cessation interventions. However, due to the lack of RCTs, the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions for people with lung cancer cannot be evaluated and concluded. This systematic review identified a need for RCTs to explore these.

Systematic Review of Tobacco Use after Lung or Head/Neck Cancer Diagnosis: Results and Recommendations for Future Research

Tobacco use after cancer diagnosis is associated with adverse cancer outcomes, yet reliable prevalence estimates for this behavior are lacking. We conducted a systematic literature review of the prevalence of current tobacco use among individuals with a history of lung or head/neck cancer (CRD #42012002625). An extensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) identified 7,777 potentially relevant articles published between 1980 and 2014 and 131 of these yielded pertinent information. Aggregating results across heterogeneous study designs and diverse patient samples, the overall mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 33.0% (median, 31.0%). Among current tobacco users at cancer diagnosis, the mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 53.8% (median, 50.3%). In many cases, an operational definition of "current" tobacco use was absent, and biochemical verification of self-reported smoking status was infrequent. These and other observed methodologic limitations in the assessment and reporting of cancer patients' tobacco use underscore the necessity of uniform tobacco use assessment in future clinical research and cancer care.

Tobacco use in the oncology setting: advancing clinical practice and research

Although tobacco is a well-established causal agent for many human cancers, less emphasis has been placed on translating this evidence by evaluating the effects of continued tobacco use after a cancer diagnosis. A broad assessment of the effects of continued tobacco use demonstrates that tobacco increases cancer treatment toxicity, recurrence, second primary tumors, and mortality in patients with cancer. Few studies report the potential benefits of cessation after a cancer diagnosis, but data suggest improved treatment outcomes in patients with cancer who quit smoking. Improving tobacco cessation treatment efficacy and access to cessation support has been sparsely researched in the oncology setting compared with the general population; however, patients with cancer are receptive to standard evidence-based tobacco cessation guidelines. Several studies demonstrate moderate tobacco cessation success in patients with cancer using the general principles of evidence-based tobacco cessation support. Several systems-level issues and research efforts are needed to standardize tobacco use definitions, increase access to tobacco cessation support, improve tobacco cessation efficacy, understand the time-dependent effects of tobacco and cessation on cancer biology, and realize the potential benefits of tobacco cessation for patients with cancer.

Opportunities to address lung cancer disparities among African Americans

Race and socioeconomic status are well known to influence lung cancer incidence and mortality patterns in the U.S. Lung cancer incidence and mortality rates are higher among blacks than whites. In this article we review opportunities to address disparities in lung cancer incidence, mortality, and survivorship among African Americans. First, we summarize recent advances in the early detection and treatment of lung cancer. Then we consider black-white disparities in lung cancer treatment including factors that may contribute to such disparities; the literature on smoking cessation interventions for patients with or without a lung cancer diagnosis; and the important roles played by cultural competency, patient trust in their physician, and health literacy in addressing lung cancer disparities, including the need for culturally competent lung cancer patient navigators. Intervention efforts should focus on providing appropriate quality treatment for lung cancer and educating African Americans about the value of having these treatments in order to reduce these disparities. Culturally competent, patient navigation programs are needed that support lung cancer patients, especially socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, from the point of diagnosis to the initiation and completion of treatment, including cancer staging.

Smoking cessation treatment and outcomes in medium to heavy cigarette smokers being treated for cancer in Jordan

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating smoking cessation treatment outcomes in cancer patients are scarce, despite smoking cessation importance in cancer care. We sought to add to the literature by evaluating smoking cessation in a challenging group of cancer patients (medium-to-heavy smokers) visiting an out-patient smoking cessation clinic (SCC) in a cancer center in Amman, Jordan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients smoking >9 cigarettes per day (CPD) and referred to the SCC between June 2009 and May 2012 were studied. Clinic records were reviewed to measure demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, and longitudinal (3-, 6- and 12- month) follow- up by phone/clinic visit was conducted. At each follow-up, patients were asked if they experienced medication side-effects, if they had returned to smoking, and reasons for failing to abstain. Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 201 smokers were included in the analysis. The 3-month abstinence was 23.4% and significantly associated with older age, being married, and presenting with lower (≤ 10 ppm) baseline carbon monoxide (CO) levels. On a multivariable level, lower CO levels, a higher income (relative to the lowest income group), being older, and reporting severe dependence (relative to dependence reported as 'somewhat' or 'not') were significant predictors of higher odds of abstinence at three months. Reasons for failing to quit included not being able to handle withdrawal and seeing no value in quitting. Long- term ARs did not reach 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a sample of Jordanian smokers (>9CPD) with cancer and receiving smoking cessation treatment, ARs were low and further declined with time. Results underscore the need for more aggressive patient management and rigorous follow-up during and after smoking cessation treatment, particularly when this takes place in challenging settings. Observed reasons for failure to abstain should be used to tailor counseling practices.

Smoking status, service use and associated factors among Japanese cancer survivors--a web-based survey

PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate smoking status and its associated factors among Japanese cancer survivors. We stretched our focus on association with health-related behaviors other than smoking (alcohol intake, physical exercise, and social activity) and the smoking cessation strategies used by cancer survivors.

METHODS

An anonymous cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted, enrolling survivors of various types of cancer up to 10 years after diagnosis. Smoking status, socioeconomic status, health-related behaviors other than smoking, and smoking cessation resource that the participants used were evaluated. Factors associated with continuous smoking after cancer diagnosis were explored using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among 168 participants who were smoking at the time of cancer diagnosis, 96 participants (57.1 %) continued smoking. Sixty-seven survivors (69.8 %) were willing to reduce or quit smoking, however, only 39 survivors (40.6 %) were provided with counseling or intervention on smoking cessation. Male gender, shorter time after cancer diagnosis, and lack of regular physical exercise associated with continuous smoking. Higher level of fear of cancer recurrence had trend-level significance of association with smoking cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial proportions of Japanese cancer survivors continue smoking after diagnosis of cancer. The majority of them are not provided with relevant information or support, despite their willingness of reducing or quitting smoking. Smoking cessation is associated with other health behaviors (i.e., physical exercise). This suggests considerable missed opportunities for health-care providers to provide cancer survivors with counseling and evidence-based interventions. Promotion of professional support on smoking cessation and education to encourage healthy behaviors are needed.

National cancer institute conference on treating tobacco dependence at cancer centers

The National Cancer Institute cancer centers possess the credibility to help smokers quit. With the greater life expectancies forecast for patients with cancer, addressing smoking at cancer centers has taken on greater importance.

Discussing the diagnosis of HPV-OSCC: common questions and answers

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is responsible for a rising proportion of oropharyngeal squamous cell cancers (OSCCs). HPV-positive OSCCs (HPV-OSCCs) are associated with oral HPV infection and sexual behavior. Patient questions regarding risk factors, prognosis and implications for past, present and future relationships often arise. This manuscript addresses frequently asked questions by patients with HPV-OSCC and their families. A framework for clinicians to address these conversations and the limitations of our present knowledge base is also presented.

Treatment of tobacco use in lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Continued tobacco use in the setting of lung cancer management is frequently confounding and always of critical importance. We summarized the published literature concerning the management of tobacco dependence in patients with lung cancer and offer recommendations for integrating dependence treatment into ongoing oncologic care.

METHODOLOGY

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Collaborative databases were searched for English language randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, secular trend analyses, and case series relevant to the a priori identified clinical questions. Evidence grading, integration, and genesis of recommendations followed the methods described in "Methodology for Development of Guidelines for Lung Cancer" in the American College of Chest Physicians Lung Cancer Guidelines, 3rd ed.

RESULTS

We describe the approach to tobacco dependence in patients with lung cancer at various phases in the evolution of cancer care. For example, among patients undergoing lung cancer screening procedures, we recommend against relying on the screening itself, including procedures accompanied solely by self-help materials, as an effective strategy for achieving abstinence. Among patients with lung cancer undergoing surgery, intensive perioperative cessation pharmacotherapy is recommended as a method for improving abstinence rates. Cessation pharmacotherapy is also recommended for patients undergoing chemotherapy, with specific recommendations to use bupropion when treating patients with lung cancer with depressive symptoms, as a means of improving abstinence rates, depressive symptoms, and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal treatment of lung cancer includes attention to continued tobacco use, with abstinence contributing to improved patient-related outcomes at various phases of lung cancer management. Effective therapeutic interventions are available and are feasibly integrated into oncologic care. A number of important clinical questions remain poorly addressed by the existing evidence.