Comparing the Effectiveness, Tolerability, and Acceptability of Heated Tobacco Products and Refillable Electronic Cigarettes for Cigarette Substitution (CEASEFIRE): Randomized Controlled Trial

The potential of new nicotine and tobacco products as tools for people who smoke to quit combustible cigarettes - a systematic review of common practices and guidance towards a robust study protocol to measure cessation efficacy

New types of nicotine and tobacco products like electronic cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products or nicotine pouches have been discussed as less harmful alternatives to combustible cigarettes and other toxic forms of tobacco products. Their harm reduction potential lay in the efficient transition away from smoking to those new products. Numerous studies addressing the cessation efficacy of ECs have been published with contradictory outcomes. Yet, a comprehensive Cochrane review concluded with high certainty on the cessation efficacy of ECs. This prompted us to perform a review to identify weaknesses in common study designs and to summarize best practices for the study design on the potential of new nicotine products as cessation aids. 120 articles retrieved from Medline were found to be eligible. Most of the studies in the field were interventional trials while observational studies played a minor role in the evaluation of smoking cessation. Efficacy was predominantly assessed for ECs in 77% of the reports while heated tobacco (17%) and non-combustible products (11%) were less frequently investigated up to now. Measures to determine the efficacy were questionnaire-based assessments as well as use documentation/prevalence and abstinence rates. Studies varied largely in their duration and sample size with medians of 3 months and 156.5 participants, respectively.With the help of this review, we identified several weaknesses in the common study designs. One major limitation in longitudinal trials was the lack of compliance measures suited to verify the use status over longer time periods, relying solely on self-reports. Moreover, the motivation of the participants to quit was rarely defined and a profound familiarization period was not taken into account for the majority of the studies. To what extent such weaknesses influence the outcome of the studies was beyond the scope of this review. We encourage researchers to consider the recommendations which resulted from this review in order to determine the abuse liability and cessation efficacy of the products in a more robust manner. Finally, we like to call attention to the missing data for low- and middle-income countries which would require quitting strategies most urgently to combat the tobacco smoking epidemic.

A Scoping Review of Behavioural Studies on Heated Tobacco Products

Heated tobacco products (HTPs) are electronic devices that heat tobacco sticks to temperatures much lower than those which cause pyrolysis and combustion in cigarettes. While this electrical heating causes the formation of an inhalable aerosol which contains nicotine, the aerosol from HTPs contains significantly fewer and lower levels of the harmful and potentially harmful chemicals found in cigarette smoke. As a result, HTP use potentially conveys reduced risks to health compared to cigarette smoking. While this relative reduction in individual health risk is becoming clearer, what is less certain is the impact of HTPs on overall population‑level health, taking into account both the potential positive impact on adult smokers who completely switch to using HTPs and any unintended impacts such as use by tobacco non‑users and particularly by youth. The aim of this scoping review was to collate and evaluate the published scientific evidence to date, with a cut‑off of 1 January 2024, investigating the impact of HTPs on population‑level health. This evaluation suggests that HTP use is almost exclusively observed among those with a history of cigarette smoking, and there is a growing body of evidence for the ability of HTPs to provide support for adult smokers to transition away from cigarette smoking, in the absence of any significant "gateway" into tobacco use initiation. Many studies have reported a significant degree of dual use of cigarettes and HTPs, and efforts to assess the reasons for such patterns of use, whether these provide overall exposure reductions, and whether dual use acts as a bridge towards a complete transition away from cigarette smoking, requires further investigation. In addition, correction of the widespread and increasing misperceptions of HTPs among adult smokers is recommended to promote HTP uptake as a potentially less harmful alternative to smoking in this population.

Switching from cigarettes to IQOS: the relative importance of IQOS-associated reward, reinforcement and abstinence relief

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated whether IQOS, a heated tobacco product, can fully substitute for combustible cigarettes and the factors that promote substitution.

METHODS

Adults who smoked cigarettes daily (N=90; 21-65 years) completed a baseline ad-lib smoking period (days 1-5), two laboratory visits (days 6-7) and a 2-week period where they were instructed to switch from smoking cigarettes to using IQOS 3.0 (days 8-21). Mixed-effect modelling estimated the changes in cigarettes per day (CPD) and the percentage of baseline CPD substituted by HeatSticks during the switch period. Predictors included IQOS-associated subjective reward, relative reinforcing value, craving relief and withdrawal relief.

RESULTS

Participants reduced their CPD to about 30% of their baseline smoking rate by the end of the 14-day switch period (p<0001). A lower versus higher reinforcing value of smoking relative to IQOS (RRV; break point <5 vs ≥5) predicted greater reductions in CPD (β=-1.31 (95% CI -2.35 to -0.27) p=0.013). Initially, IQOS use was 72% of the baseline smoking rate (β=71.64 (95% CI 42.79 to 100.48) p<0.0001) and climbed by 0.8% per day (β=0.82 (95% CI 0.01 to 1.64) p=0.05), for an average substitution rate of 83%. The subjective reward of IQOS was the only predictor of a higher substitution rate (β=4.26 (95% CI 1.03 to 7.50) p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

IQOS fully substituted for cigarettes in ~20% of people who were not immediately interested in quitting smoking while the remainder significantly reduced their smoking. Positive reinforcing effects of IQOS foster use and the transition away from combustible cigarettes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05076708.

Impact of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) and heat-not-burn/heated tobacco products (HnB/HTP) on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a viewpoint of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine

The association of cigarette smoking with several severe and very severe diseases (oncological, cardiovascular, respiratory) which have dramatic epidemiological, medical, and financial impact, is a well-known public threat. Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are highly prevalent diseases in Italy, posing significant public health challenges. Tobacco smoking, a primary risk factor for COPD and a common asthma trigger, remains a critical preventable public health issue. While universally acknowledged that quitting smoking drastically reduces the risk of smoking-related health issues, a significant portion of smokers and patients find quitting challenging or undesirable, hence a need for new ways to deal with it. A worth considering alternative might be the switch to electronic cigarettes (e-cig), and heat-not-burn/heated tobacco products (HnB/HTP). Emerging evidence suggests potential benefits in asthma and COPD management when transitioning from traditional smoking to e-cigs or HnB devices. However, the effectiveness of these products in facilitating smoking cessation is still debated, alongside concerns about their role in promoting smoking initiation among non-smokers. Internists are among the physicians who most frequently assist patients with smoking-related diseases, and in this perspective they cannot avoid paying attention to the progressive diffusion of smoking products alternative to the traditional cigarette, and to the controversies with respect to their use. In this context, the Italian Society of Internal Medicine, also recognizing a growing need for clarity for healthcare providers, has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of existing literature to offer an informed perspective on the health impact of e-cigs and HnB/HTP on asthma and COPD.

Nicotine Delivery and Changes in Withdrawal and Craving During Acute Electronic Cigarette, Heated Tobacco Product, and Cigarette Use Among a Sample of Black and White People Who Smoke

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs) may serve as potential options for harm reduction for smokers if they possess reward profiles similar to cigarettes. Little is known about the abuse liability of HTPs and e-cigarettes versus cigarettes in racial/ethnic minority smokers.

AIMS AND METHODS

Twenty-two nicotine-deprived people who smoke (black [n = 12] and white [n = 10]) completed three visits that included a standardized 10-puff bout followed by a 50-minute ad libitum use assessment with their usual brand cigarette (UBC), an e-cigarette, and HTP. Visits were completed in a randomized crossover design and were separated by a minimum 48-hour washout period. Assessments included plasma nicotine, Cmax, and reductions in craving and withdrawal.

RESULTS

UBC delivered significantly greater levels of nicotine compared to the e-cigarette (p < .001) and HTP (p < .01) during both the standardized and ad libitum sessions. HTP delivered more nicotine than the e-cigarette during the standardized puffing session (p = .047) but not the ad libitum session. Only craving during the standardized puffing session and not the ad libitum session showed significant differences across products (p < .001) such that UBC resulted in the greatest reduction followed by HTP and e-cigarette.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite greater nicotine delivery from the UBC compared to e-cigarette and HTP, participants reported reductions in craving and withdrawal across products, particularly following ad libitum use.

IMPLICATIONS

Use of participant's UBCs (UBC) resulted in greater nicotine delivery compared to both the e-cigarette and HTP. Despite this relative difference in nicotine delivery, participants reported reductions in craving and withdrawal across products, particularly following ad libitum use. These findings suggest that in this sample of black and white people who smoke, HTPs and e-cigarettes provided significant relief from negative symptoms that maintain smoking.

Comparing identity, attitudes, and indicators of effectiveness in people who smoke, vape or use heated tobacco products: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There is limited long-term and independent research on heated tobacco products (HTPs). We compared people who used HTPs with those who used nicotine vaping products (NVP) or cigarettes on smoker identity, indicators of effectiveness and, among NVP/HTP users, perceptions of these products.

METHODS

Adults exclusive cigarette smokers (N = 45) and ex-smokers with medium/long-term (>3months) NVP (N = 46) or HTP use (N = 45) were recruited in London, UK. Participants completed a questionnaire assessing socio-demographics, smoking characteristics, smoker identity, dependence, intention to stop and attitudes towards HTP/NVP.

RESULTS

In adjusted analysis, people who used cigarettes (Mean Difference (MD) = 1.4, 95%Confidence Intervals (CI) 0.7,2.0) and HTPs (MD = 0.8, 95%CI 0.1, 1.5) reported stronger smoker identities than those who used NVPs. Compared with smokers, HTP/NVP users had lower cravings for cigarettes (MD = 3.0, 95%CI 1.6, 4.3; MD = 3.1, 95%CI 1.9, 4.3, respectively), and higher intention to stop product use (MD = -0.8, 95%CI -1.7,-0.01; MD = -1.2, 95%CI -2.0, -0.3, respectively). People using HTPs or NVPs reported similar perceived product satisfaction (HTP:M = 3.4, 95%CI 2.8, 3.9; NVP:M = 3.0, 95%CI 2.5, 3.5), efficacy for smoking cessation (HTP:M = 4.5, 95%CI 4.2, 4.9; NVP:M = 4.6, 95%CI 4.3, 4.9) and safety (HTP:M = 2.1, 95%CI 2.0, 2.2; NVP:M = 2.0, 95%CI 1.8, 2.1). HTP users reported greater perceived addictiveness than NVPs (MD = 0.3, 95%CI 0.2, 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

HTP and NVP users perceived products to be similarly acceptable and effective suggesting that HTPs, like NVPs, may support smoking cessation. However, since HTP use appears to maintain a stronger smoker identity and perceived addiction, this may suggest a more limited role of HTP for a permanent transition away from cigarettes.

Protocol for the "magnitude of cigarette substitution after initiation of e-cigarettes and its impact on biomarkers of exposure and potential harm in dual users" (MAGNIFICAT) study

Introduction

Many smokers who use e-cigarettes (ECs) to quit continue smoking alongside vaping. The impact on health among individuals who simultaneously smoke conventional cigarettes (CCs) and use ECs remains unclear. The varying patterns of dual use present differing levels of overall toxin exposure and relative risks concerning smoking-related diseases. Understanding these complexities is vital to assessing the implications for human health.

Objective

Herein we describe a protocol designed to analyze the impact of different level of substituting CCs with ECs on exposure to toxicants. We'll use biomarkers to measure this exposure and assess harm reduction in dual users through clinical endpoints, harm-related biomarkers, and behavioral correlations. We expect to observe progressive changes with varying patterns of dual use.

Methods and analyses

For this purpose, we planned to recruit a group of 250 smokers who will be asked to reduce their CC consumption by adopting ECs (intervention group). A separate group of 50 smokers will continue to smoke CC (reference group). Study groups will be followed up for 6 months during which biospecimens will be collected for biomarker analyses, and clinical endpoints will be assessed. The trial is structured to characterize subjects' usage patterns over time using robust biomarkers of exposure and a standardized mobile phone application to facilitate the precise categorization of dual users along the risk continuum based on their usage behaviors. Subject recruitment will start in February 2024 and enrolment is expected to be completed by August 2024. Results will be reported early in 2025. Study findings may provide valuable insights into health benefits or risks associated with varying patterns of dual use.

Ethics and dissemination

The study protocol and informed consent forms will be approved by the local Ethical Review Boards. Study results will be disseminated through articles published in reputable, peer-reviewed, open access, scientific journals, presentations at conferences, and the University website.

The potential health effects associated with electronic-cigarette

A good old gateway theory that electronic-cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are widely recognized as safer tobacco substitutes. In actuality, demographics also show that vaping cannibalizes smoking, the best explanation of the data is the "common liability". However, the utilization of e-cigarette products remains a controversial topic at present. Currently, there has been a widespread and substantial growth in e-cigarette use worldwide owing to their endless new flavors and customizable characteristics. Furthermore, e-cigarette has grown widespread among smokers as well as non-smokers, including adolescents and young adults. And some studies have shown that e-cigarette users are at greater risk to start using combustible cigarettes while e-cigarettes use was also observed the potential benefits to people who want to quit smoking or not. Although it is true that e-cigarettes generally contain fewer toxic substances than combustible cigarettes, this does not mean that the chemical composition in e-cigarettes aerosols poses absolutely no risks. While concerns about toxic substances in e-cigarettes and their widespread use in the population are reasonable, it is also crucial to consider that e-cigarettes have been associated with the potential for promoting smoking cessation and the clinically relevant improvements in users with smoking-related pathologies. Meanwhile, there is still short of understanding of the health impacts associated with e-cigarette use. Therefore, in this review, we discussed the health impacts of e-cigarette exposure on oral, nasal, pulmonary, cardiovascular systems and brain. We aspire for this review to change people's previous perceptions of e-cigarettes and provide them with a more balanced perspective. Additionally, we suggest appropriate adjustments on regulation and policy for e-cigarette to gain greater public health benefits.

A multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial investigating the effects of combustion-free nicotine alternatives on cardiovascular risk factors and metabolic parameters in individuals with type 2 diabetes who smoke: the DiaSmokeFree study protocol

Stopping smoking is crucial for public health and especially for individuals with diabetes. Combustion-free nicotine alternatives like e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products are increasingly being used as substitutes for conventional cigarettes, contributing to the decline in smoking prevalence. However, there is limited information about the long-term health impact of those products in patients with diabetes. This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether switching from conventional cigarettes to combustion-free nicotine alternatives will lead to a measurable improvement in cardiovascular risk factors and metabolic parameters over a period of 2 years in smokers with type 2 diabetes. The multicenter study will be conducted in seven sites across four countries. A total of 576 smokers with type 2 diabetes will be randomly assigned (1:2 ratio) to either standard of care with brief cessation advice (Control Arm) or combustion-free nicotine alternatives use (Intervention Arm). The primary end point is the change in the proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome between baseline and the 2-year follow-up. Additionally, the study will analyze the absolute change in the sum of the individual factors of metabolic syndrome at each study time point. Patient recruitment has started in September 2021 and enrollment is expected to be completed by December 2023. Results will be reported in 2026. This study may provide valuable insights into cardiovascular and metabolic health benefits or risks associated with using combustion-free nicotine alternatives for individuals with type 2 diabetes who are seeking alternatives to tobacco cigarette smoking. The study protocol, informed consent forms, and relevant documents were approved by seven ethical review boards. Study results will be disseminated through articles published in high-quality, peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences.

Changes in Oral Health and Dental Esthetic in Smokers Switching to Combustion-Free Nicotine Alternatives: Protocol for a Multicenter and Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Although the detrimental effects of conventional combustible cigarettes on oral health and dental esthetics are well known, there is limited information about the long-term impact of combustion-free nicotine alternatives (C-F NA) such as e-cigarettes or heated tobacco products.

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter, prospective, 3-parallel-arm randomized controlled trial will investigate whether switching from combustible cigarettes to C-F NA will lead to measurable improvements in oral health parameters and dental esthetics over 18 months in adult smokers with limited gum disease.

METHODS

Regular smokers not intending to quit and without clinical signs of periodontitis will be randomly assigned (1:4 ratio) to either standard of care with brief cessation advice (control group; arm A) or C-F NA use (intervention group; arm B). The study will also include a reference group of never smokers (reference group; arm C). The primary end point is the change in the Modified Gingival Index (MGI) score from baseline between the control arm (arm A) and the intervention arm (arm B) at the 18-month follow-up. In addition, the study will analyze the within- and between-group (arms A, B, and C) changes in MGI assessment, plaque imaging, dental shade quantitation, tooth stain scores, and oral health-related quality of life questionnaires measured at each study time point. All participants will attend a total of 7 clinic visits: screening, enrollment, and randomization (visit 0); baseline visit-day 14 (visit 1); day 90 (visit 2); day 180 (visit 3); day 360 (visit 4); and day 540 (visit 5). This multicenter study will be conducted in 4 dental clinics in 4 countries. The statistical analysis will involve descriptive statistics for continuous and categorical data. Primary end points will undergo tests for normality and, based on distribution, either a 2-sided t test or Mann-Whitney U test. Linear mixed model with random factors center and study arms by center will also be applied. Secondary end points, including MGI assessment and quality of life, will be subjected to similar tests and comparisons. Only if one value of the parameter MGI is missing after day 1, the last available observation will be carried forward. The analysis will be performed on the substituted data. Secondary parameters will not have missing value replacement.

RESULTS

Participant recruitment began in October 2021, and enrollment was completed in June 2023. Results will be reported in 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

This will be the first study to provide key insights into oral health benefits or risks associated with using C-F NA in smokers who are seeking alternatives to cigarette smoking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04649645; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04649645.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/53222.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol by heating an e-liquid. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit smoking, and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is a review update conducted as part of a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the safety, tolerability and effectiveness of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke tobacco achieve long-term smoking abstinence, in comparison to non-nicotine EC, other smoking cessation treatments and no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register to 1 February 2023, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to 1 July 2023, and reference-checked and contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials in which people who smoke were randomized to an EC or control condition. We also included uncontrolled intervention studies in which all participants received an EC intervention as these studies have the potential to provide further information on harms and longer-term use. Studies had to report an eligible outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Critical outcomes were abstinence from smoking after at least six months, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences. Where appropriate, we pooled data in pairwise and network meta-analyses (NMA).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 88 completed studies (10 new to this update), representing 27,235 participants, of which 47 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Of the included studies, we rated ten (all but one contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 58 at high risk overall (including all non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There is high certainty that nicotine EC increases quit rates compared to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.93; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 2544 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional four quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 6 more). There is moderate-certainty evidence (limited by imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs is similar between groups (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2052 participants). SAEs were rare, and there is insufficient evidence to determine whether rates differ between groups due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.60; I2 = 32%; 6 studies, 2761 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that nicotine EC increases quit rates compared to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.96; I2 = 4%; 6 studies, 1613 participants). In absolute terms, this might lead to an additional three quitters per 100 (95% CI 1 to 7 more). There is moderate-certainty evidence of no difference in the rate of AEs between these groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1840 participants). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differ between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.79; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 1412 participants; low-certainty evidence). Due to issues with risk of bias, there is low-certainty evidence that, compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates may be higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.25; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 5024 participants). In absolute terms, this represents an additional four quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 5 more). There was some evidence that (non-serious) AEs may be more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32; I2 = 41%, low-certainty evidence; 4 studies, 765 participants) and, again, insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.34; I2 = 23%; 10 studies, 3263 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Results from the NMA were consistent with those from pairwise meta-analyses for all critical outcomes, and there was no indication of inconsistency within the networks. Data from non-randomized studies were consistent with RCT data. The most commonly reported AEs were throat/mouth irritation, headache, cough, and nausea, which tended to dissipate with continued EC use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons, hence, evidence for these is limited, with CIs often encompassing both clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to NRT and moderate-certainty evidence that they increase quit rates compared to ECs without nicotine. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain due to risk of bias inherent in the study design. Confidence intervals were for the most part wide for data on AEs, SAEs and other safety markers, with no difference in AEs between nicotine and non-nicotine ECs nor between nicotine ECs and NRT. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect evidence of serious harm from nicotine EC, but the longest follow-up was two years and the number of studies was small. The main limitation of the evidence base remains imprecision due to the small number of RCTs, often with low event rates. Further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information to decision-makers, this review is a living systematic review. We run searches monthly, with the review updated when relevant new evidence becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the review's current status.

Examining acute psychopharmacological effects of nicotine vaping versus heated tobacco products in a randomised crossover study of product naïve adult smokers

Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) are designed to replicate the sensory and behavioural aspects of smoking cigarettes while avoiding combustion. The success of these products as harm reduction tools will partially depend on their ability to satisfy smokers and alleviate nicotine-related withdrawal symptoms. This study aims to compare short-term effects of NVPs (Juul and Aspire PockeX) versus HTPs (IQOS) on smoking-related withdrawal relief, product satisfaction, intention to switch to NVP/HTP, perceptions and attitudes in UK adult cigarette smokers naïve to these products. In a randomized cross-over study, 45 participants visited the lab twice, at each visit trying one of the two products (NVP/HTP) and completing a questionnaire. Responses were normalized on a 0-100% scale and mean differences (MD) between NVP and HTP scores computed, with positive and negative MD values indicating greater endorsement for NVP and HTP, respectively. Cigarette cravings were reduced similarly (~ 20.0%) by both products (MD = 4.5%, 95%Confidence Interval (CI) - 4.8, 13.8). Direct positive effects (MD = - 3.5%, 95%CI - 7.2, 0.2) and adverse side effects (MD = 1.8%, 95%CI - 0.3, 3.8) were comparable after each product use, though marginally favouring HTPs. HTPs were perceived as more satisfying overall (MD = - 13.2%, 95%CI - 20.3 - 6.1) than NVPs but both were perceived as similarly addictive (MD = 3.6%, 95%CI - 4.6, 11.8), relative to cigarettes. Intention to switch to either product was comparable (MD = 4.0%, 95%CI - 5.7, 13.8). Comparison of acute use of NVP versus HTP in a sample of UK smokers naïve to these products suggests that HTPs are perceived as more satisfying than NVPs, though still less satisfying than cigarettes.Registration: The analysis plan was pre-registered, and it is available at https://osf.io/6ymdu.

Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS): A convenient means of smoking?

Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), which are becoming increasingly popular in many parts of the world, have recently become more sophisticated in terms of their more active content and better controlled vaporisation. This review begins by describing how cigarette smoking led to the development of ENDS as a means of combatting nicotine addiction. ENDS are usually categorised as belonging to one of only three main generations, but a fourth has been added in order to differentiate the latest, most powerful, most advanced and innovative that have improved heating efficiency. Descriptions of the principal substances contained in ENDS are followed by considerations concerning the risk of toxicity due to the presence of albeit low concentrations of such a variety of compounds inhaled over a long time, and the increasingly widespread use of ENDS as a means of smoking illicit drugs. We also review the most widely used pharmacotherapeutic approaches to smoking cessation, and recent epidemiological data showing that ENDS can help some people to stop smoking. However, in order to ensure their appropriate regulation, there is a need for higher-quality evidence concerning the health effects and safety of ENDS, and their effectiveness in discouraging tobacco smoking.

Effectiveness of smoking cessation on the high-risk population of lung cancer with early screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials until January 2022

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer has always been the malignant tumor with the highest incidence rate. Smoking is the most important risk factor for lung cancer. Although potential positive effects of smoking cessation interventions on the high-risk population of lung cancer have been observed, evidence of its definitive effect remains uncertain. This study aimed to summarize the evidence related to the effects and safety of smoking cessation interventions for the high-risk population of lung cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted through the following seven databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Science Direct. Screening and assessment for risk of bias were conducted by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed for the 7-day-point prevalence of smoking abstinence and continuous smoking abstinence using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis results show that in the 7-day-point prevalence of smoking abstinence (by patient-reported outcome): individualized intervention was significantly higher than that of the standard care [RR = 1.46, 95%CI = (1.04,2.06), P < 0.05]. Moreover, the smoking cessation interventions were significantly elevated than that of standard care [RR = 1.58, 95%CI = (1.12, 2.23), P < 0.05] within 1-6 month follow-up time. In line with the findings in cigarette smoking, the continuous smoking abstinence of E-cigarettes (biochemical verified): E-cigarettes were significantly higher than that of the standard care [RR = 1.51, 95%CI = (1.03, 2.21), P < 0.05], and within 1-6 month follow-up time, the smoking cessation interventions were significantly greater than that of standard care [RR = 1.51, 95%CI = (1.03, 2.21), P < 0.05]. Publication bias was detected possibly.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review show that smoking cessation intervention is effective for long-term lung cancer high-risk smokers who participate in early screening, of which E-cigarettes are the best, followed by individual smoking cessation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

A review protocol was developed and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42019147151. Registered 23 June 2022.

Le tabac chauffé est-il un outil de réduction des risques ?

Heated tobacco (HT), a new tobacco product, is presented by the tobacco industry as an effective and safe alternative to cigarettes. Even if the quantities of harmful compounds emitted by HT are lower than those found in cigarette smoke, this reduction in exposure cannot be equated with a reduction in risk. No study has provided evidence that switching from cigarettes to HT reduces the risk of tobacco-related diseases. HT cannot be considered as a cigarette cessation product and was even designed as a product to initiate or return to tobacco consumption. To promote this product, the tobacco industry essentially exploits the concept of harm reduction and, as such, tries in its commercial communication to create confusion between HT and electronic cigarettes, despite these two products having nothing in common. This promotion is based, on the one hand, on the data of internal studies in contradiction with those of independent studies, and, on the other, illegally, on social networks and communication in contradiction with the statements of regulation authorities. HT is a new lure offered by the tobacco industry, intended to maintain its profits in a world that is moving away from "traditional" cigarettes. It should be strictly advised against for both non-smokers and smokers.