-
Frontiers in Neuroscience 2023Tinnitus impacts between 10-20% of the population. Individuals most troubled by their tinnitus have their attention bound to and are distracted by, their tinnitus...
Tinnitus impacts between 10-20% of the population. Individuals most troubled by their tinnitus have their attention bound to and are distracted by, their tinnitus percept. While numerous treatments to ameliorate tinnitus have been tried, no therapeutic approach has been clinically accepted. The present study used an established condition-suppression noise-exposure rat model of tinnitus to: (1) examine tinnitus-related changes in nAChR function of layer 5 pyramidal (PNs) and of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) neurons in primary auditory cortex (A1) and (2) examine how the partial desensitizing nAChR agonists, sazetidine-A and varenicline, can act as potential therapeutic agents in the treatment of tinnitus. We posited that tinnitus-related changes in layer 5 nAChR responses may underpin the decline in attentional resources previously observed in this animal model (Brozoski et al., 2019). whole-cell patch-clamp studies previously revealed a significant tinnitus-related loss in nAChR-evoked excitatory postsynaptic currents from A1 layer 5 PNs. In contrast, VIP neurons from animals with behavioral evidence of tinnitus showed significantly increased nAChR-evoked excitability. Here we hypothesize that sazetidine-A and varenicline have therapeutic benefits for subjects who cannot divert their attention away from the phantom sound in their heads. We found that sazetidine-A or varenicline normalized tinnitus-related reductions in GABAergic input currents onto A1 layer 5 PNs. We then tested sazetidine-A and varenicline for the management of tinnitus using our tinnitus animal model. Subcutaneous injection of sazetidine-A or varenicline, 1 h prior to tinnitus testing, significantly decreased the rat's behavioral evidence of tinnitus in a dose-dependent manner. Collectively, these results support the need for additional clinical investigations of partial desensitizing nAChR agonists sazetidine-A and varenicline for the treatment of tinnitus.
PubMed: 37304018
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1197909 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023While cigarette smoking has declined globally, waterpipe smoking is rising, especially among youth. The impact of this rise is amplified by mounting evidence of its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
While cigarette smoking has declined globally, waterpipe smoking is rising, especially among youth. The impact of this rise is amplified by mounting evidence of its addictive and harmful nature. Waterpipe smoking is influenced by multiple factors, including appealing flavors, marketing, use in social settings, and misperceptions that waterpipe is less harmful or addictive than cigarettes. People who use waterpipes are interested in quitting, but are often unsuccessful at doing so on their own. Therefore, developing and testing waterpipe cessation interventions to help people quit was identified as a priority for global tobacco control efforts. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of tobacco cessation interventions for people who smoke waterpipes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Review Group Specialized Register from database inception to 29 July 2022, using variant terms and spellings ('waterpipe' or 'narghile' or 'arghile' or 'shisha' or 'goza' or 'narkeela' or 'hookah' or 'hubble bubble'). We searched for trials, published or unpublished, in any language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, or cluster-RCTs of any smoking cessation interventions for people who use waterpipes, of any age or gender. In order to be included, studies had to measure waterpipe abstinence at a three-month follow-up or longer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from waterpipe use at least three months after baseline. We also collected data on adverse events. Individual study effects and pooled effects were summarized as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to combine studies, where appropriate. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with the I statistic. We summarized secondary outcomes narratively. We used the five GRADE considerations (risk of bias, inconsistency of effect, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias) to assess the certainty of the body of evidence for our primary outcome in four categories high, moderate, low, or very low.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included nine studies, involving 2841 participants. All studies were conducted in adults, and were carried out in Iran, Vietnam, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Pakistan, and the USA. Studies were conducted in several settings, including colleges/universities, community healthcare centers, tuberculosis hospitals, and cancer treatment centers, while two studies tested e-health interventions (online web-based educational intervention, text message intervention). Overall, we judged three studies to be at low risk of bias, and six studies at high risk of bias. We pooled data from five studies (1030 participants) that tested intensive face-to-face behavioral interventions compared with brief behavioral intervention (e.g. one behavioral counseling session), usual care (e.g. self-help materials), or no intervention. In our meta-analysis, we included people who used waterpipe exclusively, or with another form of tobacco. Overall, we found low-certainty evidence of a benefit of behavioral support for waterpipe abstinence (RR 3.19 95% CI 2.17 to 4.69; I = 41%; 5 studies, N = 1030). We downgraded the evidence because of imprecision and risk of bias. We pooled data from two studies (N = 662 participants) that tested varenicline combined with behavioral intervention compared with placebo combined with behavioral intervention. Although the point estimate favored varenicline, 95% CIs were imprecise, and incorporated the potential for no difference and lower quit rates in the varenicline groups, as well as a benefit as large as that found in cigarette smoking cessation (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.24; I = 0%; 2 studies, N = 662; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence because of imprecision. We found no clear evidence of a difference in the number of participants experiencing adverse events (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.44; I = 31%; 2 studies, N = 662). The studies did not report serious adverse events. One study tested the efficacy of seven weeks of bupropion therapy combined with behavioral intervention. There was no clear evidence of benefit for waterpipe cessation when compared with behavioral support alone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.41; 1 study, N = 121; very low-certainty evidence), or with self-help (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.00; 1 study, N = 86; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies tested e-health interventions. One study reported higher waterpipe quit rates among participants randomized to either a tailored mobile phone or untailored mobile phone intervention compared with those randomized to no intervention (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.05; 2 studies, N = 319; very low-certainty evidence). Another study reported higher waterpipe abstinence rates following an intensive online educational intervention compared with a brief online educational intervention (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.21; 1 study, N = 70; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low-certainty evidence that behavioral waterpipe cessation interventions can increase waterpipe quit rates among waterpipe smokers. We found insufficient evidence to assess whether varenicline or bupropion increased waterpipe abstinence; available evidence is compatible with effect sizes similar to those seen for cigarette smoking cessation. Given e-health interventions' potential reach and effectiveness for waterpipe cessation, trials with large samples and long follow-up periods are needed. Future studies should use biochemical validation of abstinence to prevent the risk of detection bias. Finally, there has been limited attention given to high-risk groups for waterpipe smoking, such as youth, young adults, pregnant women, and dual or poly tobacco users. These groups would benefit from targeted studies.
Topics: Adolescent; Female; Humans; Bupropion; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Smoking Cessation; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Varenicline; Water Pipe Smoking
PubMed: 37286509
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005549.pub4 -
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia :... Jun 2023
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Brazil; Alkaloids; Smoking Cessation
PubMed: 37283405
DOI: 10.36416/1806-3756/e20230185 -
The Primary Care Companion For CNS... May 2023
Topics: Humans; Varenicline; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Nicotinic Agonists; Cocaine
PubMed: 37276057
DOI: 10.4088/PCC.22l03375 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Smoking in patients with Schizophrenia is more common than in the general population. Varenicline, a partial agonist at α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, is an...
BACKGROUND
Smoking in patients with Schizophrenia is more common than in the general population. Varenicline, a partial agonist at α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, is an effective smoking cessation pharmacotherapy in patients with Schizophrenia. However, its effects on the serum levels of antipsychotics in Schizophrenia are understudied. This study investigated the impact of smoking cessation with varenicline on the serum concentration of olanzapine in patients with Schizophrenia.
METHODS
Adult smokers with Schizophrenia were enrolled in a 12-week course of varenicline and placebo for smoking cessation. The serum concentration of olanzapine was measured at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12. Data were analyzed with the generalized additive mixed model.
RESULTS
During the 12-week study, the results indicated that olanzapine concentrations increased nonlinearly in the varenicline and placebo groups. Threshold effect analysis suggested that the olanzapine concentrations increased over time until the turning point (week 4). However, there was no significant difference between the two treatment groups.
CONCLUSION
Varenicline showed safety and efficacy in smoking cessation in people with Schizophrenia.
PubMed: 37275966
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1142419 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023To estimate the rate and predictors of smoking cessation in smokers attending smoking cessation clinics in primary care settings in Qatar.
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the rate and predictors of smoking cessation in smokers attending smoking cessation clinics in primary care settings in Qatar.
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was conducted among 759 smokers who had attended any of the 10 smoking cessation clinics in primary health care centers from January 2019 to June 2020. The sociodemographic, clinical, and smoking-related variables were assessed. Tailored behavioral and pharmacotherapy were delivered, and patients were interviewed at 6 months to estimate the 30-day point prevalence abstinence. To identify independent factors associated with smoking cessation, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed.
RESULTS
The mean age of participants was 40.6 (±11.3), majority being married, Arab and employed, and having a tertiary education. Almost half of the smokers (48.7%) received varenicline alone, 42.6% received NRT, and 31.8% received a combination of both. The selection of drug therapy was based on preferences, experiences, and history of previously encountered adverse effects. The overall 30-day quit rate at 6 months follow-up was 32.4%. About three-quarters (72.5%) of participants had at least one quit attempt and 12.5% had 3 or more attempts. Later age at smoking initiation, lower cigarette consumption at baseline, lower CO concentration at baseline, use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy, having made fewer quit attempts and non-exposure to secondhand smoke among friends were identified as significant predictors of successful quitting at 6 months.
CONCLUSION
The 30-day quit rate at 6 months follow-up (32.4%) is comparable to the worldwide figure. However, further efforts should be made to plan cost-effective tobacco dependence treatment taking into account predictors and at-risk groups.
Topics: Humans; Smoking Cessation; Follow-Up Studies; Prevalence; Qatar; Cross-Sectional Studies; Smokers; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 37275499
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1166016 -
Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) May 2023Self-inflicted violence is a major and growing public health problem and its prediction and prevention is challenging for healthcare systems worldwide. Our aim was to...
Self-inflicted violence is a major and growing public health problem and its prediction and prevention is challenging for healthcare systems worldwide. Our aim was to identify prescribed drugs associated with self-directed violent behaviors in Spain. A descriptive, longitudinal and retrospective study of spontaneous reports of adverse drug reactions corresponding to self-directed violence was recorded in the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Database (FEDRA) from 1984 to 31 March 2021. A total of 710 cases were reported in the study period. The mean age was 45.52 years (range 1-94). There were no gender differences except in children, where most reports were of male children. The main therapeutic groups that were involved included drugs for the nervous system (64.5%) and anti-infectives for systemic use (13.2%). The most commonly reported drugs were varenicline, fluoxetine, lorazepam, escitalopram, venlafaxine, veralipride, pregabalin, roflumilast and bupropion. There were reports of montelukast, hydroxychloroquine, isotretinoin, methylphenidate, infliximab, natalizumab, ribavirin and efavirenz, which were less known to be involved in self-directed violence. This study shows that self-directed violence is a rare adverse drug reaction, and can be related to the use of some medicines. It is important for healthcare professionals to consider this risk in their clinical praxis, implementing person-centred approaches. Further studies are needed, considering comorbidities and potential interactions.
PubMed: 37242555
DOI: 10.3390/ph16050772 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023The pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied. However, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco: nicotine... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied. However, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco: nicotine withdrawal can produce short-term low mood that antidepressants may relieve; and some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence for the efficacy, harms, and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, most recently on 29 April 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people who smoked, comparing antidepressant medications with placebo or no pharmacological treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used differently. We excluded trials with fewer than six months of follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length for our analyses of harms.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months' follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Our secondary outcomes were harms and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropouts due to treatment. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 124 studies (48,832 participants) in this review, with 10 new studies added to this update version. Most studies recruited adults from the community or from smoking cessation clinics; four studies focused on adolescents (with participants between 12 and 21 years old). We judged 34 studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk of bias did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased smoking cessation rates when compared to placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.49 to 1.72; I = 16%; 50 studies, 18,577 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that a combination of bupropion and varenicline may have resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence to establish whether a combination of bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.44; I = 43%; 15 studies, 4117 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was moderate-certainty evidence that participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs than those taking placebo or no pharmacological treatment. However, results were imprecise and the CI also encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I = 0%; 23 studies, 10,958 participants). Results were also imprecise when comparing SAEs between people randomised to a combination of bupropion and NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.26 to 8.89; I = 0%; 4 studies, 657 participants) and randomised to bupropion plus varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.42; I = 0%; 5 studies, 1268 participants). In both cases, we judged evidence to be of low certainty. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to AEs than placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.65; I = 2%; 25 studies, 12,346 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence that bupropion combined with NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.92; I = 0%; 3 studies, 737 participants) or bupropion combined with varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.45; I = 0%; 4 studies, 1230 participants) had an impact on the number of dropouts due to treatment. In both cases, imprecision was substantial (we judged the evidence to be of low certainty for both comparisons). Bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80; I = 0%; 9 studies, 7564 participants), and to combination NRT (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98; I = 0%; 2 studies; 720 participants). However, there was no clear evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and single-form NRT (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13; I = 0%; 10 studies, 7613 participants). We also found evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), and some evidence that bupropion resulted in superior quit rates to nortriptyline (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants), although this result was subject to imprecision. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion may increase SAEs (moderate-certainty evidence when compared to placebo/no pharmacological treatment). There is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with people receiving placebo or no pharmacological treatment. Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo, although bupropion may be more effective. Evidence also suggests that bupropion may be as successful as single-form NRT in helping people to quit smoking, but less effective than combination NRT and varenicline. In most cases, a paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions regarding harms and tolerability. Further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over other licensed smoking cessation treatments; namely, NRT and varenicline. However, it is important that future studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation measure and report on harms and tolerability.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Humans; Young Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Bupropion; Nicotinic Agonists; Nortriptyline; Smoking Cessation; Varenicline
PubMed: 37230961
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000031.pub6 -
Tobacco Induced Diseases 2023Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and illness globally. There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between quitting rates and partners'...
INTRODUCTION
Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and illness globally. There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between quitting rates and partners' smoking status. It is thought that spouses influence one another's health habits, including smoking. This study aims to evaluate this association in patients who made a smoking cessation attempt with pharmacotherapy.
METHODS
For this Israeli nationwide retrospective cohort study, we randomly selected patients who filled a prescription for varenicline as part of their smoking cessation process and were partnered. The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire 26-52 weeks after the first varenicline purchase. The independent variables were the partner's smoking status at the beginning of the smoking cessation process and while answering the questionnaire. The outcome was a success in the quitting process.
RESULTS
In all, 226 (50%) participants had partners who smoked at the beginning of the quitting process, and 230 (50%) had non-smoking partners; 178 (39%) participants reported successful smoking cessation. There was a significant difference in success rates depending on partners' smoking status at the end of the process, with success rates of 39% with a non-smoking partner, 76% with a partner who also stopped smoking, and 31% with a partner who continued smoking (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that having a partner who stopped smoking during the quitting process was associated with higher odds of quitting compared with having a non-smoking partner (OR=4.73; 95% CI: 1.86-12.05).
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed that both partners quitting was associated with increased odds of successful quitting. Health providers should make efforts to engage both partners in smoking cessation.
PubMed: 37215194
DOI: 10.18332/tid/162367 -
Przeglad Menopauzalny = Menopause Review Mar 2023Menopause is a vital stage in which the risk of the appearance of metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular diseases is increased. Cardiovascular risk in menopausal women...
INTRODUCTION
Menopause is a vital stage in which the risk of the appearance of metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular diseases is increased. Cardiovascular risk in menopausal women must be monitored because it is one of the most common causes of mortality in these women. Smoking is an important risk factor for the development of many diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, so promoting smoking cessation in these women is important for the maintenance of cardiovascular health.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Current smoking cessation programs mainly include nicotine and varenicline as therapeutic agents, due to their history of success, safety, and efficacy in aiding in cessation, but they do not include "new" agents such as cytisine as coadjuvant in the elimination of the habit of smoking.
RESULTS
Cytisine is a therapeutic agent traditionally used in Eastern Europe, which has demonstrated efficacy and safety in smoking cessation, also showing other new pharmacological actions. It has been widely used since World War II as a nicotine substitute.
CONCLUSIONS
These pharmacological actions, together with their efficacy in smoking cessation, should be explored to evaluate the convenience of the use of cytisine in premenopausal and postmenopausal women, so that cytisine can be identified as a useful therapeutic tool in smoking cessation programs and in particular in menopausal women.
PubMed: 37206678
DOI: 10.5114/pm.2023.126439