-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2019A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in February 2018 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in their title, abstracts, or keywords.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included studies that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 77 studies (67,285 participants), 15 of which are new to this update. We judged 21 studies to be at high risk of bias, 51 to be at unclear risk of bias, and five studies to be at low risk of bias. Forty-eight studies included abstainers, and 29 studies helped people to quit and then tested treatments to prevent relapse. Twenty-six studies focused on special populations who were abstinent because of pregnancy (18 studies), hospital admission (five studies), or military service (three studies). Most studies used behavioural interventions that tried to teach people skills to cope with the urge to smoke, or followed up with additional support. Some studies tested extended pharmacotherapy.We focused on results from those studies that randomised abstainers, as these are the best test of relapse prevention interventions. Of the 12 analyses we conducted in abstainers, three pharmacotherapy analyses showed benefits of the intervention: extended varenicline in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 1297, risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.41, I² = 82%; moderate certainty evidence), rimonabant in assisted abstainers (1 study, RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in unaided abstainers (2 studies, n = 2261, RR 1.24, 95% Cl 1.04 to 1.47, I² = 56%). The remainder of analyses of pharmacotherapies in abstainers had wide confidence intervals consistent with both no effect and a statistically significant effect in favour of the intervention. These included NRT in hospital inpatients (2 studies, n = 1078, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.60, I² = 0%), NRT in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 553, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), extended bupropion in assisted abstainers (6 studies, n = 1697, RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and bupropion plus NRT (2 studies, n = 243, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.87, I² = 66%; low certainty evidence). Analyses of behavioural interventions in abstainers did not detect an effect. These included studies in abstinent pregnant and postpartum women at end of pregnancy (8 studies, n = 1523, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11, I² = 0%) and at postpartum follow-up (15 studies, n = 4606, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, I² = 3%), studies in hospital inpatients (4 studies, n = 1300, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.11, I² = 0%), and studies in assisted abstainers (10 studies, n = 5408, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13, I² = 56%; moderate certainty evidence) and unaided abstainers (5 studies, n = 3561, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, I² = 1%) from the general population.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Behavioural interventions that teach people to recognise situations that are high risk for relapse along with strategies to cope with them provided no worthwhile benefit in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers, although unexplained statistical heterogeneity means we are only moderately certain of this. In people who have successfully quit smoking using pharmacotherapy, there were mixed results regarding extending pharmacotherapy for longer than is standard. Extended treatment with varenicline helped to prevent relapse; evidence for the effect estimate was of moderate certainty, limited by unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not detect a benefit from extended treatment with bupropion, though confidence intervals mean we could not rule out a clinically important benefit at this stage. Low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not show a benefit of extended treatment with nicotine replacement therapy in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers. More research is needed in this area, especially as the evidence for extended nicotine replacement therapy in unassisted abstainers did suggest a benefit.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Bupropion; Chewing Gum; Female; Humans; Male; Nicotine; Nicotinic Agonists; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Smoking Prevention; Varenicline
PubMed: 30758045
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003999.pub5 -
Nicotine & Tobacco Research : Official... Aug 2019Pharmacogenomic studies have used genetic variants to identify smokers likely to respond to pharmacological treatments for smoking cessation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Pharmacogenomic studies have used genetic variants to identify smokers likely to respond to pharmacological treatments for smoking cessation.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of primary and secondary analyses of trials of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Eligible were trials with data on a priori selected single nucleotide polymorphisms, replicated non-single nucleotide polymorphisms, and/or the nicotine metabolite ratio. We estimated the genotype × treatment interaction as the ratio of risk ratios (RRR) for treatment effects across genotype groups.
RESULTS
We identified 18 trials (N = 9017 participants), including 40 active (bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy [NRT], varenicline, or combination therapies) versus placebo comparisons and 16 active versus active comparisons. There was statistical evidence of heterogeneity across rs16969968 genotypes in CHRNA5 with regard to both 6-month abstinence and end-of-treatment abstinence in non-Hispanic black smokers and end-of-treatment abstinence in non-Hispanic white smokers. There was also heterogeneity across rs1051730 genotypes in CHRNA3 with regard to end-of-treatment abstinence in non-Hispanic white smokers. There was no clear statistical evidence for other genotype-by-treatment combinations. Compared with placebo, NRT was more effective among non-Hispanic black smokers with rs16969968-GG with regard to both 6-month abstinence (RRR for GG vs. GA or AA, 3.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 10.30) and end-of-treatment abstinence (RRR for GG vs. GA or AA, 5.84; 95% CI = 1.89 to 18.10). Among non-Hispanic white smokers, NRT effectiveness relative to placebo was comparable across rs1051730 and rs169969960 genotypes.
CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify widespread differential effects of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies based on genotype. The quality of the evidence is generally moderate.
IMPLICATIONS
Although we identified some evidence of genotype × treatment interactions, the vast majority of analyses did not provide evidence of differential treatment response by genotype. Where we find some evidence, these results should be considered preliminary and interpreted with caution because of the small number of contributing trials per genotype comparison, the wide confidence intervals, and the moderate quality of evidence. Prospective trials and individual-patient data meta-analyses accounting for heterogeneity of treatment effects through modeling are needed to assess the clinical utility of genetically informed biomarkers to guide pharmacotherapy choice for smoking cessation.
Topics: Bupropion; Clinical Trials as Topic; Female; Genetic Markers; Genotype; Humans; Male; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Prospective Studies; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Varenicline
PubMed: 30690475
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntz009 -
The Indian Journal of Medical Research Oct 2018Smokeless tobacco (SLT) consumption is a global health issue with about 350 million users and numerous adverse health consequences like oral cancer and myocardial...
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES
Smokeless tobacco (SLT) consumption is a global health issue with about 350 million users and numerous adverse health consequences like oral cancer and myocardial disorders. Hence, cessation of SLT use is as essential as smoking cessation. An update on the available literature on SLT cessation intervention studies is provided here.
METHODS
Through an extensive literature search on SLT cessation intervention studies, using keywords such as smokeless tobacco, cessation, interventions, quitlines, brief advice, nicotine replacement therapy, nicotine gum, nicotine lozenge, nicotine patch, bupropion, varenicline, mHealth, etc., 59 eligible studies were selected. Furthermore, efficacy of the interventions was assessed from the reported risk ratios (RRs) [confidence intervals (CIs)] and quit rates.
RESULTS
Studies were conducted in Scandinavia, India, United Kingdom, Pakistan and the United States of America, with variable follow up periods of one month to 10 years. Behavioural interventions alone showed high efficacy in SLT cessation; most studies were conducted among adults and showed positive effects, i.e. RR [CI] 0.87 [0.7, 1.09] to 3.84 [2.33, 6.33], quit rate between 9-51.5 per cent, at six months. Regular telephone support/quitlines also proved beneficial. Among pharmacological modalities, nicotine lozenges and varenicline proved efficacious in SLT cessation.
INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSIONS
Globally, there is limited information available on SLT cessation intervention trials, research on which must be encouraged, especially in the low-resource, high SLT burden countries; behavioural interventions are most suitable for such settings. Appropriate training/sensitization of healthcare professionals, and school-based SLT use prevention and cessation programmes need to be encouraged.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Hotlines; Humans; Nicotinic Agonists; Tobacco Use Cessation; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Tobacco Use Disorder; Tobacco, Smokeless; Varenicline
PubMed: 30666002
DOI: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1983_17 -
Addiction (Abingdon, England) Apr 2019To summarize evidence for the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To summarize evidence for the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
SETTING
LMICs as defined by the World Bank.
PARTICIPANTS
Adult current cigarette smokers residing in LMICs.
INTERVENTIONS
Behavioral and/or pharmacotherapy smoking cessation interventions.
MEASUREMENTS
PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE (embase.com), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), PsycINFO (Ebsco), SciELO, WHO Global Index Medicus and Scopus were searched from inception to 4 April 2018. Only studies with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. We used the most rigorous assessment of abstinence reported by each study. Effect sizes were computed from abstracted data. Where possible, a meta-analysis was performed using Mantel-Haenzel random-effect models reporting odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
FINDINGS
Twenty-four randomized controlled trials were included. Six investigated the efficacy of pharmacological agents. Four trials that compared nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to placebo found NRT improved cessation rates (n : NRT 546, control 684, OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.30-2.77, P < 0.001, I = 13%). Eight trials found that behavioral counseling was more effective than minimal interventions (e.g. brief advice); n : Counseling 2941, control 2794, OR = 6.87, 95% CI = 4.18-11.29, P < 0.001, I = 67%). There was also evidence of the benefit of brief advice over usual care (n : Brief advice 373, control 355, OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.56-3.88, P < 0.001, I = 0%).
CONCLUSION
Nicotine replacement therapy, behavioral counseling and brief advice appear to be effective in aiding smoking cessation in low- and middle-income countries. There is limited rigorous research on other smoking cessation interventions in these regions.
Topics: Adult; Behavior Therapy; Bupropion; Cigarette Smoking; Clonidine; Counseling; Developing Countries; Humans; Mobile Applications; Naltrexone; Nortriptyline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Varenicline
PubMed: 30506845
DOI: 10.1111/add.14518 -
Journal of Thoracic Disease Jul 2018Smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the developed world and kills half of all long-term users. Smoking resumption after heart or lung... (Review)
Review
Smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the developed world and kills half of all long-term users. Smoking resumption after heart or lung transplantation is associated with allograft dysfunction, higher incidence of cancer, and reduced overall survival. Although self-reporting is considered an unreliable method for tobacco use detection, implementing systematic cotinine-based screening has proven challenging. This review examines the prevalence of smoking resumption in thoracic transplant patients, explores the risk factors associated with a post-transplant smoking resumption and discusses the currently available smoking cessation interventions for transplant patients.
PubMed: 30174913
DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2018.07.16 -
American Journal of Preventive Medicine Aug 2018To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32%... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32% of current smokers.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Twenty-two studies on pharmacological, behavioral, and combination smoking-cessation interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit (defined as those who reported they were not ready to quit at the time of the study) published between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. The effectiveness (measured by the number needed to treat) and cost effectiveness (measured by costs per quit) of interventions were calculated. All data collection and analyses were performed in 2017.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit can be as effective as similar interventions for smokers ready to quit; however, costs of intervening on this group may be higher for some intervention types. The most cost-effective interventions identified for this group were those using varenicline and those using behavioral interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
Updating clinical recommendations to provide cessation interventions for this group is recommended. Further research on development of cost-effective treatments and effective strategies for recruitment and outreach for this group are needed. Additional studies may allow for more nuanced comparisons of treatment types among this group.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Health Behavior; Smokers; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; United States; Varenicline
PubMed: 29903568
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.021 -
Nicotine & Tobacco Research : Official... Jul 2019Smoking in pregnancy is a substantial public health issue, but, apart from nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), pharmacological therapies are not generally used to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Smoking in pregnancy is a substantial public health issue, but, apart from nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), pharmacological therapies are not generally used to promote cessation. Bupropion and varenicline are effective cessation methods in nonpregnant smokers and this systematic review investigates their safety in pregnancy.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsychINFO databases for studies of any design reporting pregnancy outcomes after bupropion or varenicline exposure. We included studies of bupropion used for smoking cessation, depression, or where the indication was unspecified. Depending on study design, quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Most findings are reported narratively but meta-analyses were used to produce pooled estimates for the proportion of live births with congenital malformations and of the mean birthweight and gestational age at delivery following bupropion exposure.
RESULTS
In total, 18 studies were included: 2 randomized controlled trials, 11 cohorts, 2 case- control studies, and 3 case reports. Study quality was variable. Gestational safety outcomes were reported in 14 bupropion and 4 varenicline studies. Meaningful meta-analysis was only possible for bupropion exposure, for which the pooled estimated proportion of congenital malformations amongst live-born infants was 1.0% (95% CI = 0.0%-3.0%, I2 = 80.9%, 4 studies) and the mean birthweight and mean gestational age at delivery was 3305.9 g (95% CI = 3173.2-3438.7 g, I2 = 77.6%, 5 studies) and 39.2 weeks (95% CI = 38.8-39.6 weeks, I2 = 69.9%, 5 studies), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
There was no strong evidence that either major positive or negative outcomes were associated with gestational use of bupropion or varenicline. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017067064.
IMPLICATIONS
We believe this to be the first systematic review investigating the safety of bupropion and varenicline in pregnancy. Meta-analysis of outcomes following bupropion exposure in pregnancy suggests that there are no major positive or negative impacts on the rate of congenital abnormalities, birthweight, or premature birth. Overall, we found no evidence that either of these treatments might be harmful in pregnancy, and no strong evidence to suggest safety, but available evidence is of poor quality.
Topics: Bupropion; Case-Control Studies; Female; Humans; Nicotinic Agonists; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Varenicline
PubMed: 29579233
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/nty055 -
The American Journal of Cardiology May 2018Over 30% of the nearly 1 million North Americans hospitalized annually with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are smokers. Despite a substantially increased risk of...
Over 30% of the nearly 1 million North Americans hospitalized annually with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are smokers. Despite a substantially increased risk of morbidity and mortality, 2/3 of patients who quit smoking after ACS return to smoking within 1 year. To summarize the evidence of smoking cessation in patients hospitalized after ACS, we systematically reviewed all randomized controlled trials of pharmacologic and behavioral smoking cessation therapies in patients with ACS. In addition, we reviewed the clinical considerations surrounding the use of smoking cessation therapies, including their broad mechanisms of action and possible alternative treatments, including cardiac rehabilitation programs and electronic cigarettes. A total of 7 randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria (4 pharmacotherapies and 3 behavioral therapies). In pharmacologic trials, only varenicline increased point prevalence abstinence at 12 months. Behavioral interventions produced significantly improved abstinence rates at 6 and 12 months. However, these studies had substantial limitations affecting their generalizability. Overall, currently available smoking cessation therapies are limited in their efficacy in patients hospitalized after ACS. Because of the relative scarcity of data and the urgency of establishing clinical guidelines, there is a critical need to continue examining the efficacy and safety of smoking cessation interventions in patients hospitalized after ACS.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Behavior Therapy; Bupropion; Cardiac Rehabilitation; Counseling; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Humans; Motivation; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices; Varenicline
PubMed: 29526275
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.01.017 -
Substance Abuse 2018Smokers with major depressive disorder (MDD) or depressive symptoms (DS) represent a subgroup in need of attention, since they have specific clinical features and...
Effectiveness of pharmacological or psychological interventions for smoking cessation in smokers with major depression or depressive symptoms: A systematic review of the literature.
BACKGROUND
Smokers with major depressive disorder (MDD) or depressive symptoms (DS) represent a subgroup in need of attention, since they have specific clinical features and prognosis.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature (Cochrane, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Web of Science databases from inception to June 2017) of randomized clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of pharmacological, psychological, or combined interventions for smoking cessation in subjects with current or past MDD/DS without medical or comorbid psychiatric disorder(s) was run following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Nicotine, varenicline, and staged-care intervention were more effective in smokers with current MDD; nicotine and fluoxetine plus nicotine were more effective in smokers with DS; naltrexone and nicotine plus fluoxetine were more effective in smokers with severe current DS. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and cognitive and behavioral cessation and relapse prevention skills training were superior to placebo in smokers with past MDD.
CONCLUSIONS
More research is needed into effectively addressing smoking in people with concurrent mental disorder. Data currently available need to be confirmed in randomized trials aimed at replicating the results and disentangling the effects of each therapeutic ingredient when a combination therapy is proposed. Studies on tolerability of treatments are warranted, as well as those aimed at identifying factors of vulnerability to adverse effects.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Cigarette Smoking; Combined Modality Therapy; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Psychotherapy; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Cessation Agents
PubMed: 29436984
DOI: 10.1080/08897077.2018.1439802 -
Substance Use & Misuse Feb 2018ADHD is a highly prevalent disorder and poses a risk for a variety of mental disorders and functional impairments into adulthood. One of the most striking comorbidities... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
ADHD is a highly prevalent disorder and poses a risk for a variety of mental disorders and functional impairments into adulthood. One of the most striking comorbidities of ADHD is nicotine dependence. Youth diagnosed with ADHD are 2-3 times more likely to smoke than their peers without ADHD, initiate smoking earlier in life and progress more quickly and more frequently to regular use and dependence. Possible explanations for these increased risks are: (a) self-medication of ADHD symptoms with the stimulant nicotine; (b) ADHD symptoms like inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity predispose for smoking initiation and impede smoking cessation; (c) peer pressure; and/or (d) common genetic or environmental determinants for ADHD and smoking.
OBJECTIVE
Identify the most probable causes of the high prevalence of smoking and nicotine dependence in subjects with ADHD.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed and the causality of the observed relations was ranked using the Bradford Hill criteria.
FINDINGS
ADHD medication reduces early smoking initiation and alleviates smoking withdrawal. Nicotine patches, bupropion and (probably) varenicline ameliorate ADHD symptoms. Imitation of and interaction with peers and genetic and environmental determinants may contribute to the comorbidity, but seem to contribute less than self-medication.
CONCLUSION
Smoking is probably best explained by a combination of imitation, peer pressure and typical traits of ADHD. In contrast, the positive relation between ADHD and nicotine dependence is currently best explained by the self-medication hypothesis. This hypothesis has a clear pharmacological rationale and is supported by ample evidence, but awaits confirmation from longitudinal naturalistic studies.
Topics: Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Comorbidity; Humans; Risk Factors; Smoking; Tobacco Use Disorder
PubMed: 29039714
DOI: 10.1080/10826084.2017.1334066