-
Archivos de Bronconeumologia Oct 2023There are multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments against nicotine dependence. However, there are few...
INTRODUCTION
There are multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments against nicotine dependence. However, there are few guidelines to answer frequent questions asked by a clinician treating a smoker. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to facilitate the treatment of tobacco addiction.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
12 PICO questions are formulated from a GLOBAL PICO question: "Efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatment of tobacco dependence". A systematic review was carried out to answer each of the questions and recommendations were made. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system was used to grade the certainty of the estimated effects and the strength of the recommendations.
RESULTS
Varenicline, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and cytisine are more effective than placebo. Varenicline and combined nicotine therapy are superior to the other therapies. In smokers with high dependence, a combination of drugs is recommended, being more effective those associations containing varenicline. Other optimization strategies with lower efficacy consist of increasing the doses, the duration, or retreat with varenicline. In specific populations varenicline or NRT is recommended. In hospitalized, the treatment of choice is NRT. In pregnancy it is indicated to prioritize behavioral treatment. The financing of smoking cessation treatments increases the number of smokers who quit smoking. There is no scientific evidence of the efficacy of pharmacological treatment of smoking cessation in adolescents.
CONCLUSIONS
The answers to the 12 questions allow us to extract recommendations and algorithms for the pharmacological treatment of tobacco dependence.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Adolescent; Tobacco Use Disorder; Varenicline; Smoking Cessation; Nicotinic Agonists; Thoracic Surgery; Pulmonary Medicine; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Bupropion; Alcoholism
PubMed: 37567792
DOI: 10.1016/j.arbres.2023.07.024 -
JAMA Network Open Sep 2023Adaptive pharmacotherapy, ie, starting a medication regimen and then modifying that regimen based on patient response, is common in many medical domains but is not... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Adaptive pharmacotherapy, ie, starting a medication regimen and then modifying that regimen based on patient response, is common in many medical domains but is not common in smoking cessation. Recently, studies have found that adaptive treatment using precessation nicotine patches is efficacious for smoking cessation; however, adaptive treatment using precessation varenicline and adaptive treatment in clinical practice settings have not been fully assessed.
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether adaptive pharmacotherapy leads to higher smoking abstinence rates than standard pharmacotherapy in a clinical practice setting.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This double-blinded stratified placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial compared adaptive treatment with standard treatment for smoking cessation. The study was conducted at a university health system in Durham, North Carolina, from February 2018 to May 2020 and was stopped early due to COVID-19. Data were analyzed as intent-to-treat from May 24, 2021, to February 27, 2022.
INTERVENTIONS
Participants were allowed to choose varenicline or nicotine patches and were then randomized to adaptive or nonadaptive (standard) treatment. Participants started on their chosen medication (adaptive) or placebo (standard) 4 weeks before their target quit day. Two weeks later, participants were assessed for treatment response. Adaptive participants who did not decrease daily cigarettes smoked by at least 50% (nonresponders) received bupropion in addition to their chosen medication. Participants in the adaptative treatment group who did decrease daily cigarettes smoked by at least 50% (responders) and participants in the standard treatment group received additional placebo bupropion. Participants in the standard treatment group received varenicline starting 1 week before the target quit date or nicotine patches starting on the target quit day. All participants received brief behavioral support.
MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES
The main outcome was biochemically verified 30-day continuous smoking abstinence 12 weeks after their target quit smoking day. Other measures included demographic characteristics, smoking history, and repeated smoking assessments.
RESULTS
Of the planned 300 participants, a total of 188 participants (mean [SD] age, 49.1 [12.5] years; 102 [54%] female) were enrolled before the trial was stopped because of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 127 participants chose to use varenicline, including 64 randomized to adaptive treatment and 63 randomized to standard treatment, and 61 participants chose to use nicotine patches, including 31 randomized to adaptive treatment and 30 randomized to standard treatment. At baseline, participants smoked a mean (SD) of 15.4 (7.3) cigarettes per day. At 12 weeks after the target quit day, biochemically verified 30-day continuous smoking abstinence was observed in 23 of 95 participants (24%) in the adaptive treatment group and 8 of 93 participants (9%) in the standard treatment (odds ratio [OR], 3.38; 95% CI, 1.43-7.99; P = .004); among participants who used varenicline, 30-day continuous abstinence was 18 participants (28%) in the adaptive treatment group, and 5 participants (8%) in the standard treatment group (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 1.57-13.15); among participants who used nicotine patches, 30-day continuous abstinence was 5 participants (16%) in the adaptive treatment group and 3 participants (10%) in the standard treatment group (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 0.38-7.99). Sleep problems were more common for participants in the varenicline adaptive treatment group than in the varenicline standard treatment group (rate ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.18-2.58; P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This randomized clinical trial found that adaptive pharmacotherapy was efficacious for smoking cessation treatment in a practice setting.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02501265.
Topics: Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Male; Smoking Cessation; Varenicline; Bupropion; Nicotine; Pandemics; COVID-19; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
PubMed: 37682573
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.32214 -
Annals of Clinical and Translational... Jan 2024The natural history of Friedreich ataxia is being investigated in a multi-center longitudinal study designated the Friedreich ataxia Clinical Outcome Measures Study...
OBJECTIVE
The natural history of Friedreich ataxia is being investigated in a multi-center longitudinal study designated the Friedreich ataxia Clinical Outcome Measures Study (FACOMS). To understand the utility of this study in analysis of clinical trials, we performed a propensity-matched comparison of data from the open-label MOXIe extension (omaveloxolone) to that from FACOMS.
METHODS
MOXIe extension patients were matched to FACOMS patients using logistic regression to estimate propensity scores based on multiple covariates: sex, baseline age, age of onset, baseline modified Friedreich Ataxia Rating scale (mFARS) score, and baseline gait score. The change from baseline in mFARS at Year 3 for the MOXIe extension patients compared to the matched FACOMS patients was analyzed as the primary efficacy endpoint using mixed model repeated measures analysis.
RESULTS
Data from the MOXIe extension show that omaveloxolone provided persistent benefit over 3 years when compared to an untreated, matched cohort from FACOMS. At each year, in all analysis populations, patients in the MOXIe extension experienced a smaller change from baseline in mFARS score than matched FACOMS patients. In the primary pooled population (136 patients in each group) by Year 3, patients in the FACOMS matched set progressed 6.6 points whereas patients treated with omaveloxolone in MOXIe extension progressed 3 points (difference = -3.6; nominal p value = 0.0001).
INTERPRETATION
These results suggest a meaningful slowing of Friedreich ataxia progression with omaveloxolone, and consequently detail how propensity-matched analysis may contribute to understanding of effects of therapeutic agents. This demonstrates the direct value of natural history studies in clinical trial evaluations.
Topics: Humans; Friedreich Ataxia; Longitudinal Studies; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Triterpenes; Male; Female; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37691319
DOI: 10.1002/acn3.51897 -
BMC Ophthalmology Jul 2023Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging evidence that nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists (e.g., varenicline and simpinicline) nasal sprays are effective for DED. Our systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of varenicline nasal spray (VNS) for DED treatment.
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of VNS versus placebo were included. The efficacy endpoint was the mean change in the anesthetized Schirmer test score (STS), a measure of basal tear production, from baseline. The safety endpoints were serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs). The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for continuous outcomes, while the risk ratio (RR) was used to demonstrate dichotomous variables. The certainty of the evidence was rated utilizing the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS
Three RCTs (n = 1063) met the eligibility criteria. All RCTs had a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis found a statistically significant increase in the mean STS change from baseline on day 28. The pooled analysis found no significant difference between VNS and placebo in the frequency of SAEs and ocular AEs. However, VNS had a significant effect on developing nasal cavity-related AEs.
CONCLUSION
VNS caused a highly significant improvement regarding the efficacy endpoint but caused an increased frequency of some nasal cavity-related AEs (i.e., cough and throat irritation). However, it caused neither SAEs nor ocular AEs. Included studies had a low risk of bias.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Sprays; Varenicline; Dry Eye Syndromes
PubMed: 37452334
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03069-y -
The Spine Journal : Official Journal of... Aug 2023High serum nicotine levels increase the risk of nonunion after spinal fusion. Varenicline, a pharmaceutical adjunct for smoking cessation, is a partial agonist designed...
BACKGROUND CONTEXT
High serum nicotine levels increase the risk of nonunion after spinal fusion. Varenicline, a pharmaceutical adjunct for smoking cessation, is a partial agonist designed to displace and outcompete nicotine at its receptor binding site, thereby limiting downstream activation. Given its mechanism, varenicline may have therapeutic benefits in mitigating nonunion for active smokers undergoing spinal fusion.
PURPOSE
To compare fusion rate and fusion mass characteristics between cohorts receiving nicotine, varenicline, or concurrent nicotine and varenicline after lumbar fusion.
STUDY DESIGN
Rodent noninstrumented spinal fusion model.
METHODS
Sixty eight-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats weighing approximately 300 grams underwent L4-5 posterolateral fusion (PLF) surgery. Four experimental groups (control: C, nicotine: N, varenicline: V, and combined: NV [nicotine and varenicline]) were included for analysis. Treatment groups received nicotine, varenicline, or a combination of nicotine and varenicline delivered through subcutaneous osmotic pumps beginning two weeks before surgery until the time of sacrifice at age 14 weeks. Manual palpation testing, microCT imaging, bone histomorphometry, and biomechanical testing were performed on harvested spinal fusion segments.
RESULTS
Control (p=0.016) and combined (p=0.032) groups, when compared directly to the nicotine group, demonstrated significantly greater manual palpation scores. The fusion rate in the control (93.3%) and combined (93.3%) groups were significantly greater than that of the nicotine group (33.3%) (p=0.007, both). Biomechanical testing demonstrated greater Young's modulus of the fusion segment in the control (17.1 MPa) and combined groups (34.5 MPa) compared to the nicotine group (8.07 MPa) (p<0.001, both). MicroCT analysis demonstrated greater bone volume fraction (C:0.35 vs N:0.26 vs NV:0.33) (p<0.001, all) and bone mineral density (C:335 vs N:262 vs NV:328 mg Ha/cm) (p<0.001, all) in the control and combined groups compared to the nicotine group. Histomorphometry demonstrated a greater mineral apposition rate in the combined group compared to the nicotine group (0.34 vs 0.24 μm/day, p=0.025).
CONCLUSION
In a rodent spinal fusion model, varenicline mitigates the adverse effects of high nicotine serum levels on the rate and quality of spinal fusion.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
These findings have the potential to significantly impact clinical practice guidelines and the use of pharmacotherapy for active nicotine users undergoing fusion surgery.
Topics: Rats; Animals; Male; Nicotine; Varenicline; Pseudarthrosis; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; Smoking Cessation
PubMed: 37086977
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.04.005 -
Psychopharmacology of smoking cessation medications: focus on patients with mental health disorders.International Review of Psychiatry... 2023The adverse effects of smoking cessation in individuals with mental health disorders have been a point of concern, and progress in the development of treatment has been... (Review)
Review
The adverse effects of smoking cessation in individuals with mental health disorders have been a point of concern, and progress in the development of treatment has been slow. The primary first-line treatments for smoking cessation are Nicotine Replacement Therapy, Bupropion, Varenicline, and behavioural support. Nortriptyline and Clonidine are second-line treatments used when the first-line treatments are not effective or are contraindicated. Smoking cessation medications have been shown to be effective in reducing nicotine cravings and withdrawal symptoms and promoting smoking cessation among patients living with mental disorders. However, these medications may have implications for patients' mental health and need to be monitored closely. The efficacy and side effects of these medications may vary depending on the patient's psychiatric condition, medication regimen, substance use, or medical comorbidities. The purpose of this review is to synthesise the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, therapeutic effects, adverse effects, and pharmacological interactions of first- and second-line smoking cessation drugs, with an emphasis on patients suffering from mental illnesses. Careful consideration of the risks and benefits of using smoking cessation medications is necessary, and treatment plans must be tailored to individual patients' needs. Monitoring symptoms and medication regimens is essential to ensure optimal treatment outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Smoking Cessation; Smoking; Nicotinic Agonists; Psychopharmacology; Mental Health; Benzazepines; Quinoxalines; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 38299651
DOI: 10.1080/09540261.2023.2249084 -
American Journal of Ophthalmology Feb 2024To report the heterogeneity in methodology of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of topical dry eye treatments. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To report the heterogeneity in methodology of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of topical dry eye treatments.
DESIGN
Comparative analysis of clinical trials' methods.
METHODS
We reviewed the online, publicly available FDA database, application review files, ClinicalTrials.gov registry records, and journal articles for each FDA-approved topical dry eye treatment. For each trial, we extracted information about the study, patient demographics, treatment names and doses, sample size in each arm, and the measurement instrument in a systematic fashion.
RESULTS
Fourteen trials were included that assessed 5 topical treatments for dry eye (cyclosporine 0.05%, cyclosporine 0.09%, lifitegrast 5%, and loteprednol 0.25% eye drops and varenicline 0.03-mg nasal spray). Median treatment duration was 12 weeks (range, 2-24 weeks). In all trials, treatments, including varying concentrations of the same treatment, were compared with vehicle. Twelve trials (85.7%) evaluated a primary clinician-measured clinical sign, and 10 trials (71.4%) evaluated a primary patient-reported symptom. Corneal staining was the most frequently evaluated clinical sign primary outcome, reported in half (6 of 12) of the trials, and was graded using 4 different scoring systems. Conjunctival staining, conjunctival hyperemia, and tear production were each measured using 2 different scoring systems. Ocular discomfort, the only patient-reported symptom primary outcome, was measured using 5 different instruments.
CONCLUSION
A variety of outcome measures were used in these clinical trials. Clinically meaningful dry eye outcome measures and standardized measurements can optimize the assessment of and comparison of therapeutic benefits.
Topics: Humans; Dry Eye Syndromes; Cyclosporine; Ophthalmic Solutions; Administration, Topical; Conjunctiva
PubMed: 37793479
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2023.09.024 -
JAMA Network Open Jun 2024Significant evidence gaps exist regarding the safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy, especially for the risk of congenital malformations....
IMPORTANCE
Significant evidence gaps exist regarding the safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy, especially for the risk of congenital malformations. Consequently, professional bodies advise against the use of varenicline and bupropion and recommend caution with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Contemporary estimates of the use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the proportion of individuals using prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy and during the first trimester specifically, in 4 countries.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked birth records, hospital admission records, and dispensing records of prescribed medications from all pregnancies resulting in birth between 2015 and 2020 in New South Wales, Australia; New Zealand; Norway; and Sweden. Data analyses were conducted in October and November 2023.
EXPOSURE
Prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapy use (varenicline, NRT, and bupropion) during pregnancy was defined as days' supply overlapping the period from date of conception to childbirth.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prevalence of use among all pregnancies and pregnancies with maternal smoking were calculated. Among women who used a pharmacotherapy, the proportion of women with use during the first trimester of pregnancy was also calculated.
RESULTS
Among 1 700 638 pregnancies in 4 countries, 138 033 (8.1%) had maternal smoking and 729 498 (42.9%) were younger than 30 years. The prevalences ranged from 0.02% to 0.14% for varenicline, less than 0.01% to 1.86% for prescribed NRT, and less than 0.01% to 0.07% for bupropion. Among pregnant individuals who smoked, use of pharmacotherapies was up to 10 times higher, with maximum prevalences of 1.25% for varenicline in New South Wales, 11.39% for NRT in New Zealand, and 0.39% for bupropion in New Zealand. Use in the first trimester occurred among more than 90% of individuals using varenicline, approximately 60% among those using NRT, and 80% to 90% among those using bupropion.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this cohort study of pregnant individuals in 4 high-income countries, the low prevalence of varenicline and bupropion use during pregnancy and higher prevalence of NRT use aligned with current clinical guidelines. As most use occurred in the first trimester, there is a need for evidence on the risk of congenital malformations for these medications.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Smoking Cessation; Adult; Retrospective Studies; Smoking Cessation Agents; Varenicline; Bupropion; New Zealand; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Pregnancy Complications; Sweden; New South Wales; Norway; Young Adult; Smoking; Pregnancy Trimester, First
PubMed: 38941092
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.19245 -
JAMA Network Open Jun 2024Varenicline is the most effective sole pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. If used in combination with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), cessation rates may be... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Varenicline is the most effective sole pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. If used in combination with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), cessation rates may be further improved, but the efficacy and safety of the combination need to be evaluated.
OBJECTIVE
To examine whether hospitalized smokers treated with varenicline and NRT lozenges achieve higher prolonged smoking abstinence rates compared with those treated with varenicline alone.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in adult medical or surgical inpatients of 5 Australian public hospitals with a history of smoking 10 cigarettes or more per day, interested in quitting, and available for 12-month follow-up between May 1, 2019, and May 1, 2021 (final 12-month data collection in May 2022). Data analysis was performed from June 1 to August 30, 2023.
INTERVENTIONS
A 12-week varenicline regimen was initiated during hospitalization at standard doses in all participants. Participants were randomized to additionally use NRT (2 mg) or placebo lozenges if there was an urge to smoke. Behavioral support (Quitline) was offered to all participants.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was biochemically verified sustained abstinence at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-reported prolonged abstinence, 7-day point prevalence abstinence (3, 6, and 12 months), and medicine-related adverse events.
RESULTS
A total of 320 participants (mean [SD] age, 52.5 [12.1] years; 183 [57.2%] male) were randomized. The conduct of biochemical verification was affected by COVID-19 restrictions; consequently, the biochemically verified abstinence in the intervention vs control arms (18 [11.4%] vs 16 [10.1%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% CI, 0.56-2.33) did not support the combination therapy. The secondary outcomes in the intervention vs control arms of 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6 months (54 [34.2%] vs 37 [23.4%]; OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.04-2.80), prolonged abstinence at 12 months (47 [29.9%] vs 30 [19.1%]; OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.05-3.00), and 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12-months (48 [30.6%] vs 31 [19.7%]; OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.07-2.99) significantly improved with the combination therapy. The self-reported 6-month prolonged abstinence (61 [38.6%] vs 47 [29.7%]; OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.93-2.39) favored the combination therapy but was not statistically significant. Medicine-related adverse events were similar in the 2 groups (102 [74.5%] in the intervention group vs 86 [68.3%] in the control group).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this randomized clinical trial of the combination of varenicline and NRT lozenges in hospitalized adult daily smokers, the combination treatment improved self-reported abstinence compared with varenicline alone, without compromising safety, but it did not improve biochemically validated abstinence.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12618001792213.
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Male; Female; Smoking Cessation; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Middle Aged; Double-Blind Method; Adult; Smoking Cessation Agents; Australia; Hospitalization; Smokers; Aged; Treatment Outcome; Nicotine Replacement Therapy
PubMed: 38935378
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18120 -
EClinicalMedicine Dec 2023The efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation among individuals who smoke tobacco cigarettes and also use electronic cigarettes (known e-cigarettes or...
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation among individuals who smoke tobacco cigarettes and also use electronic cigarettes (known e-cigarettes or vapes) have not been studied. We aimed to address this knowledge gap and examine predictors for smoking abstinence.
METHODS
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-centre randomised trial in Italy, we enrolled adults who had used an e-cigarette daily for at least 12 months and who also smoked at least one tobacco cigarette per day and had a willingness to quit smoking. 155 participants were randomly assigned to receive either varenicline (n = 78) or matched placebo (n = 77). Varenicline (1 mg, administered twice daily for 12 weeks) was given in combination with smoking cessation counseling in dual users with an intention to quit smoking. Participants in both treatment groups received the same smoking cessation counselling throughout the whole duration of the study. The trial consisted of a 12-week treatment phase followed by a 12-week follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint was continuous abstinence rate (CAR) in weeks 4-12. Secondary efficacy endpoints were the CAR in weeks 4-24 and 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence at weeks 12 and 24. This study is registered in EUDRACT, 2016-000339-42.
FINDINGS
Between November 2018, and February 2020, 114 participants (61 in the varenicline group and 53 in the placebo group) completed the intervention phase at week 12 and 88 participants (52 in the varenicline group and 36 in the placebo group) completed the follow-up phase at week 24. CARs were significantly higher for the varenicline vs placebo at each time-point: 50.0% vs 16.9% (OR = 4.9; 95% CI, 2.3-10.4; P < 0.0001) between weeks 4 and 12; and 48.7% vs 14.3% (OR = 5.7; 95% CI, 2.6-12.3; P < 0.0001) between weeks 4 and 24. The 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence was also higher for the varenicline than placebo at each time point. Adverse events were rated as mild or moderate and rarely led to treatment discontinuation.
INTERPRETATION
Our findings indicate that inclusion of varenicline in a cessation programme for adults who smoke and use e-cigarettes with an intention to quit smoking could result in smoking abstinence without serious adverse events. In the absence of evidence from other smoking cessation methods, it could be useful to suggest the use of varenicline in cessation programmes specifically designed to help dual users stop smoking. Further research in larger and more generalisable populations is required to strengthen such a suggestion.
FUNDING
Global Research Award for Nicotine Dependence, an independently reviewed competitive grants programmeme funded by Pfizer.
PubMed: 38192585
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102316