-
JAMA Jul 2023Cytisinicline (cytisine) is a plant-based alkaloid that, like varenicline, binds selectively to α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, which mediate nicotine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Cytisinicline (cytisine) is a plant-based alkaloid that, like varenicline, binds selectively to α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, which mediate nicotine dependence. Although not licensed in the US, cytisinicline is used in some European countries to aid smoking cessation, but its traditional dosing regimen and treatment duration may not be optimal.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of cytisinicline for smoking cessation when administered in a novel pharmacokinetically based dosing regimen for 6 or 12 weeks vs placebo.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A 3-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial (ORCA-2) compared 2 durations of cytisinicline treatment (6 or 12 weeks) vs placebo, with follow-up to 24 weeks, among 810 adults who smoked cigarettes daily and wanted to quit. It was conducted at 17 US sites from October 2020 to December 2021.
INTERVENTIONS
Participants were randomized (1:1:1) to cytisinicline, 3 mg, 3 times daily for 12 weeks (n = 270); cytisinicline, 3 mg, 3 times daily for 6 weeks then placebo 3 times daily for 6 weeks (n = 269); or placebo 3 times daily for 12 weeks (n = 271). All participants received behavioral support.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Biochemically verified continuous smoking abstinence for the last 4 weeks of cytisinicline treatment vs placebo (primary) and from end of treatment to 24 weeks (secondary).
RESULTS
Of 810 randomized participants (mean age, 52.5 years; 54.6% female; mean of 19.4 cigarettes smoked daily), 618 (76.3%) completed the trial. For the 6-week course of cytisinicline vs placebo, continuous abstinence rates were 25.3% vs 4.4% during weeks 3 to 6 (odds ratio [OR], 8.0 [95% CI, 3.9-16.3]; P < .001) and 8.9% vs 2.6% during weeks 3 to 24 (OR, 3.7 [95% CI, 1.5-10.2]; P = .002). For the 12-week course of cytisinicline vs placebo, continuous abstinence rates were 32.6% vs 7.0% for weeks 9 to 12 (OR, 6.3 [95% CI, 3.7-11.6]; P < .001) and 21.1% vs 4.8% during weeks 9 to 24 (OR, 5.3 [95% CI, 2.8-11.1]; P < .001). Nausea, abnormal dreams, and insomnia occurred in less than 10% of each group. Sixteen participants (2.9%) discontinued cytisinicline due to an adverse event. No drug-related serious adverse events occurred.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Both 6- and 12-week cytisinicline schedules, with behavioral support, demonstrated smoking cessation efficacy and excellent tolerability, offering new nicotine dependence treatment options.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04576949.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Alkaloids; Azocines; Duration of Therapy; Quinolizines; Smoking Cessation; Tobacco Use Disorder; Smoking Cessation Agents; Double-Blind Method; Treatment Outcome; Male; Female; Quinolizidine Alkaloids; Nicotine; Receptors, Nicotinic; Cigarette Smoking
PubMed: 37432430
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.10042 -
BMC Medicine Jul 2023Vaping cessation is virtually unexplored. The efficacy and safety of varenicline for vaping cessation has not been studied and rigorous research is required to advance... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Vaping cessation is virtually unexplored. The efficacy and safety of varenicline for vaping cessation has not been studied and rigorous research is required to advance best practice and outcomes for people who use electronic cigarettes (EC) and want to quit. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of varenicline (1 mg BID, administered for 12 weeks, with follow-up to week 24) combined with vaping cessation counseling in exclusive daily EC users intending to quit vaping.
METHODS
Design: Double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial.
SETTING
The study took place at a University-run smoking cessation center.
PARTICIPANTS
People who exclusively use ECs daily and intend to quit vaping.
INTERVENTION
A total of 140 subjects were randomized to either varenicline (1 mg, administered twice daily for 12 weeks) plus counseling or placebo treatment (administered twice daily, for 12 weeks) plus counseling. The trial consisted of a 12-week treatment phase followed by a 12-week follow-up, nontreatment phase.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was biochemically validated continuous abstinence rate (CAR) at weeks 4 to 12. Secondary efficacy end points were CAR at weeks 4 to 24 and 7-day point prevalence of vaping abstinence at weeks 12 and 24.
RESULTS
CAR was significantly higher for varenicline vs placebo at each interval: weeks 4-12, 40.0% and 20.0%, respectively (OR = 2.67, 95% CI = [1.25-5.68], P = 0.011); weeks 4-24, 34.3% for varenicline with counseling and 17.2% for placebo with counseling (OR = 2.52, 95% CI = [1.14-5.58], P = 0.0224). The 7-day point prevalence of vaping abstinence was also higher for the varenicline than placebo at each time point. Serious adverse events were infrequent in both groups and not treatment-related.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of the present RCT indicate that inclusion of varenicline in a vaping cessation program for people who use electronic cigarettes and intending to quit may result in prolonged abstinence. These positive findings establish a benchmark of intervention effectiveness, may support the use of varenicline combined with counseling in vaping cessation programs, and may also help guiding future recommendations by health authorities and healthcare providers.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The study has been registered in EUDRACT with Trial registration ID: 2016-000339-42.
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Nicotinic Agonists; Vaping; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Benzazepines; Quinoxalines; Double-Blind Method; Counseling; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37403047
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-02919-2 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Oct 2023Cytisine is a smoking cessation medication. This systematic review incorporates recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide an updated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cytisine is a smoking cessation medication. This systematic review incorporates recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide an updated evidence-based assessment of cytisine's efficacy and safety.
METHODS
We searched Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, for RCTs comparing cytisine to other smoking cessation treatments in adults who smoke.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
6-month biochemically verified continuous abstinence. Other outcomes: abstinence at longest follow-up, adverse events, mortality, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess evidence certainty.
RESULTS
We included 14 RCTs involving 9953 adults. Cytisine was superior to placebo (risk ratio [RR] 2.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-4.47; 5 RCTs, 4325 participants), but not varenicline (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.95; 2 RCTs, 2131 participants) for the primary outcome. Cytisine was superior to placebo (RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.64-4.70; 8 RCTs, 5762 participants) and nicotine replacement therapy [NRT] (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12-1.73; 2 RCTs, 1511 participants), but not varenicline (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.72-1.44; 4 RCTs, 2708 participants) for abstinence at longest follow-up. Cytisine increased mostly gastrointestinal adverse events compared to placebo (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06-1.25; 8 RCTs, 5520 participants) and NRT (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.26-1.84; 1 RCT, 1310 participants) but less adverse events compared to varenicline (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.48-0.95; 3 RCTs, 2484 participants).
CONCLUSION
Cytisine shows greater efficacy than placebo and NRT, but more adverse events. It is comparable to varenicline, with fewer adverse events. This can inform clinicians and guidelines on cytisine for smoking cessation.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Varenicline; Smoking Cessation; Nicotinic Agonists; Nicotine; Bupropion; Benzazepines; Alkaloids; Azocines; Quinolizines
PubMed: 37678096
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2023.110936 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2023Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and disease worldwide. Stopping smoking can reduce this harm and many people would like to stop. There are a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and disease worldwide. Stopping smoking can reduce this harm and many people would like to stop. There are a number of medicines licenced to help people quit globally, and e-cigarettes are used for this purpose in many countries. Typically treatments work by reducing cravings to smoke, thus aiding initial abstinence and preventing relapse. More information on comparative effects of these treatments is needed to inform treatment decisions and policies.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the comparative benefits, harms and tolerability of different smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and e-cigarettes, when used to help people stop smoking tobacco.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified studies from recent updates of Cochrane Reviews investigating our interventions of interest. We updated the searches for each review using the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group (TAG) specialised register to 29 April 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and factorial RCTs, which measured smoking cessation at six months or longer, recruited adults who smoked combustible cigarettes at enrolment (excluding pregnant people) and randomised them to approved pharmacotherapies and technologies used for smoking cessation worldwide (varenicline, cytisine, nortriptyline, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and e-cigarettes) versus no pharmacological intervention, placebo (control) or another approved pharmacotherapy. Studies providing co-interventions (e.g. behavioural support) were eligible if the co-intervention was provided equally to study arms.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening, data extraction and risk of bias (RoB) assessment (using the RoB 1 tool). Primary outcome measures were smoking cessation at six months or longer, and the number of people reporting serious adverse events (SAEs). We also measured withdrawals due to treatment. We used Bayesian component network meta-analyses (cNMA) to examine intervention type, delivery mode, dose, duration, timing in relation to quit day and tapering of nicotine dose, using odds ratios (OR) and 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). We calculated an effect estimate for combination NRT using an additive model. We evaluated the influence of population and study characteristics, provision of behavioural support and control arm rates using meta-regression. We evaluated certainty using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Of our 332 eligible RCTs, 319 (835 study arms, 157,179 participants) provided sufficient data to be included in our cNMA. Of these, we judged 51 to be at low risk of bias overall, 104 at high risk and 164 at unclear risk, and 118 reported pharmaceutical or e-cigarette/tobacco industry funding. Removing studies at high risk of bias did not change our interpretation of the results. Benefits We found high-certainty evidence that nicotine e-cigarettes (OR 2.37, 95% CrI 1.73 to 3.24; 16 RCTs, 3828 participants), varenicline (OR 2.33, 95% CrI 2.02 to 2.68; 67 RCTs, 16,430 participants) and cytisine (OR 2.21, 95% CrI 1.66 to 2.97; 7 RCTs, 3848 participants) were associated with higher quit rates than control. In absolute terms, this might lead to an additional eight (95% CrI 4 to 13), eight (95% CrI 6 to 10) and seven additional quitters per 100 (95% CrI 4 to 12), respectively. These interventions appeared to be more effective than the other interventions apart from combination NRT (patch and a fast-acting form of NRT), which had a lower point estimate (calculated additive effect) but overlapping 95% CrIs (OR 1.93, 95% CrI 1.61 to 2.34). There was also high-certainty evidence that nicotine patch alone (OR 1.37, 95% CrI 1.20 to 1.56; 105 RCTs, 37,319 participants), fast-acting NRT alone (OR 1.41, 95% CrI 1.29 to 1.55; 120 RCTs, 31,756 participants) and bupropion (OR 1.43, 95% CrI 1.26 to 1.62; 71 RCTs, 14,759 participants) were more effective than control, resulting in two (95% CrI 1 to 3), three (95% CrI 2 to 3) and three (95% CrI 2 to 4) additional quitters per 100 respectively. Nortriptyline is probably associated with higher quit rates than control (OR 1.35, 95% CrI 1.02 to 1.81; 10 RCTs, 1290 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), resulting in two (CrI 0 to 5) additional quitters per 100. Non-nicotine/placebo e-cigarettes (OR 1.16, 95% CrI 0.74 to 1.80; 8 RCTs, 1094 participants; low-certainty evidence), equating to one additional quitter (95% CrI -2 to 5), had point estimates favouring the intervention over control, but CrIs encompassed the potential for no difference and harm. There was low-certainty evidence that tapering the dose of NRT prior to stopping treatment may improve effectiveness; however, 95% CrIs also incorporated the null (OR 1.14, 95% CrI 1.00 to 1.29; 111 RCTs, 33,156 participants). This might lead to an additional one quitter per 100 (95% CrI 0 to 2). Harms There were insufficient data to include nortriptyline and non-nicotine EC in the final SAE model. Overall rates of SAEs for the remaining treatments were low (average 3%). Low-certainty evidence did not show a clear difference in the number of people reporting SAEs for nicotine e-cigarettes, varenicline, cytisine or NRT when compared to no pharmacotherapy/e-cigarettes or placebo. Bupropion may slightly increase rates of SAEs, although the CrI also incorporated no difference (moderate certainty). In absolute terms bupropion may cause one more person in 100 to experience an SAE (95% CrI 0 to 2).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The most effective interventions were nicotine e-cigarettes, varenicline and cytisine (all high certainty), as well as combination NRT (additive effect, certainty not rated). There was also high-certainty evidence for the effectiveness of nicotine patch, fast-acting NRT and bupropion. Less certain evidence of benefit was present for nortriptyline (moderate certainty), non-nicotine e-cigarettes and tapering of nicotine dose (both low certainty). There was moderate-certainty evidence that bupropion may slightly increase the frequency of SAEs, although there was also the possibility of no increased risk. There was no clear evidence that any other tested interventions increased SAEs. Overall, SAE data were sparse with very low numbers of SAEs, and so further evidence may change our interpretation and certainty. Future studies should report SAEs to strengthen certainty in this outcome. More head-to-head comparisons of the most effective interventions are needed, as are tests of combinations of these. Future work should unify data from behavioural and pharmacological interventions to inform approaches to combined support for smoking cessation.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Bupropion; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Network Meta-Analysis; Nicotine; Nortriptyline; Smoking Cessation; Varenicline
PubMed: 37696529
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015226.pub2 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2023To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
DESIGN
Umbrella review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses) in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive).
CONCLUSIONS
Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine but not without adverse events.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42018093045.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Cannabidiol; Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists; Cannabis; Chronic Pain; Hallucinogens; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Sleepiness; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37648266
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-072348 -
Science Translational Medicine Oct 2023Hyperexcitability in sensory neurons is known to underlie many of the maladaptive changes associated with persistent pain. Chemogenetics has shown promise as a means to...
Hyperexcitability in sensory neurons is known to underlie many of the maladaptive changes associated with persistent pain. Chemogenetics has shown promise as a means to suppress such excitability, yet chemogenetic approaches suitable for human applications are needed. PSAM-GlyR is a modular system based on the human α7 nicotinic acetylcholine and glycine receptors, which responds to inert chemical ligands and the clinically approved drug varenicline. Here, we demonstrated the efficacy of this channel in silencing both mouse and human sensory neurons by the activation of large shunting conductances after agonist administration. Virally mediated expression of PSAM-GlyR in mouse sensory neurons produced behavioral hyposensitivity upon agonist administration, which was recovered upon agonist washout. Stable expression of the channel led to similar reversible suppression of pain-related behavior even after 10 months of viral delivery. Mechanical and spontaneous pain readouts were also ameliorated by PSAM-GlyR activation in acute and joint pain inflammation mouse models. Furthermore, suppression of mechanical hypersensitivity generated by a spared nerve injury model of neuropathic pain was also observed upon activation of the channel. Effective silencing of behavioral hypersensitivity was reproduced in a human model of hyperexcitability and clinical pain: PSAM-GlyR activation decreased the excitability of human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived sensory neurons and spontaneous activity due to a gain-of-function Na1.7 mutation causing inherited erythromelalgia. Our results demonstrate the contribution of sensory neuron hyperexcitability to neuropathic pain and the translational potential of an effective, stable, and reversible humanized chemogenetic system for the treatment of pain.
Topics: Humans; Mice; Animals; Neuralgia; Sensory Receptor Cells; Mutation; Ganglia, Spinal
PubMed: 37792955
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.adh3839 -
The Canadian Journal of Cardiology Sep 2023This review provides an overview of potential vaping-cessation interventions in adult former smokers. The interventions reviewed include varenicline, bupropion,... (Review)
Review
This review provides an overview of potential vaping-cessation interventions in adult former smokers. The interventions reviewed include varenicline, bupropion, nicotine-replacement therapies (NRTs), and behavioural therapy. Evidence for intervention effectiveness is provided when available, such as for varenicline, whereas recommendations for bupropion and NRT are extrapolated from case studies or smoking-cessation guidelines. The limitations of these interventions, a general lack of prospective studies, and a discussion of challenges to vaping safety from a public health perspective are also discussed. Although these interventions show promise, further research is needed to establish precise protocols and dosages in the context of vaping cessation, rather than adapting existing recommendations from smoking cessation.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Bupropion; Smoking Cessation; Varenicline; Nicotinic Agonists; Vaping; Smokers; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
PubMed: 37119945
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2023.04.020 -
Brain Sciences Aug 2023(1) Background: The treatment of substance addiction is challenging and has persisted for decades, with only a few therapeutic options. Although there are some... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: The treatment of substance addiction is challenging and has persisted for decades, with only a few therapeutic options. Although there are some recommendations for specific treatments for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), there is no specific medication used to treat alcohol cravings, which could benefit millions of patients that are suffering from alcoholism. Cravings, or the urge to use drugs, refer to the desire to experience the effects of a previously experienced psychoactive substance. (2) Methods: We included original studies of alcohol abuse or dependence extracted from a controlled, blind, pharmacological treatment study which presented measures and outcomes related to alcohol cravings. (3) Results: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism, such as Naltrexone and Acamprosate, have had the best results in relieving craving symptoms, as well as promoting abstinence. Baclofen and anticonvulsants such as Gabapentin and Topiramate have shown good results in promoting abstinence and the cessation of cravings. (4) Conclusions: Specific drugs used for the treatment of alcoholism to obtain the best results can be considered the gold standard for promoting abstinence and relieving cravings. Anticonvulsants and Baclofen also had good results, with these medications being considered as second-line ones. Varenicline is an option for alcohol dependents who also concomitantly ingest tobacco.
PubMed: 37626562
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13081206