18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Flexible, dual-form nicotine replacement therapy or varenicline in comparison with nicotine patch for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Extended use of combined pharmacotherapies to treat tobacco dependence may increase smoking abstinence; few studies have examined their effectiveness. The objective of this study was to evaluate smoking abstinence with standard nicotine patch (NRT), extended use of combined formulations of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT+), or varenicline (VR).

          Methods

          A total of 737 smokers, including those with medical and psychiatric comorbidities, were randomly assigned to one of the above three treatment conditions. The NRT group received 10 weeks of patches (21 mg daily maximum); the NRT+ group received patches (35 mg daily maximum) and gum or inhaler for up to 22 weeks; and the VR group received 1 mg twice daily for up to 24 weeks (22 weeks post target quit date). All participants also received six standardized 15-minute smoking cessation counseling sessions by nurses experienced in tobacco dependence treatment. The primary outcome was carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rates (CAR) from weeks 5–52. Secondary outcomes were: CAR from weeks 5–10 and 5–22, and carbon monoxide-confirmed 7-day point prevalence (7PP) at weeks 10, 22, and 52. Adjusted and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat procedures.

          Results

          The CARs for weeks 5–52 were 10.0 %, 12.4 %, and 15.3 % in the NRT, NRT+, and VR groups, respectively; no group differences were observed. Results with 7PP showed that VR was superior to NRT at week 52 (odds ratio (OR), 1.84; 97.5 % Confidence Interval (CI), 1.04–3.26) in the adjusted intention-to-treat analysis. Those in the VR group had higher CAR at weeks 5–22 (OR, 2.01; CI, 1.20–3.36) than those in the NRT group. Results with 7PP revealed that both NRT+ (OR, 1.72; CI, 1.04–2.85) and VR (OR, 1.96; CI, 1.20–3.23) were more effective than NRT at 22 weeks. As compared to NRT monotherapy, NRT+ and VR produced significant increases in CAR for weeks 5–10 (OR, 1.52; CI, 1.00–2.30 and OR, 1.58; CI, 1.04–2.39, respectively); results were similar, but somewhat stronger, when 7PP was used at 10 weeks (OR, 1.57; CI, 1.03–2.41 and OR, 1.79; CI, 1.17–2.73, respectively). All medications were well tolerated, but participants in the VR group experienced more fatigue, digestive symptoms (e.g., nausea, diarrhea), and sleep-related concerns (e.g., abnormal dreams, insomnia), but less dermatologic symptoms than those in the NRT or NRT+ groups. The frequency of serious adverse events did not differ between groups.

          Conclusions

          Flexible and combination NRT and varenicline enhance success in the early phases of quitting. Varenicline improves abstinence in the medium term; however, there is no clear evidence that either varenicline or flexible, dual-form NRT increase quit rates in the long-term when compared to NRT monotherapy.

          Trial registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01623505; Retrospectively registered on July 13, 2011

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Signs and symptoms of tobacco withdrawal.

          To test the validity, magnitude, and clinical significance of the signs and symptoms of tobacco withdrawal defined by DSM-III, both observed and reported signs and symptoms were measured in 50 smokers during two days of ad lib smoking and then during the first four days of abstinence. Observer and subject ratings of the DSM-III symptoms of craving for tobacco, irritability, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and restlessness increased after cessation. In addition, bradycardia, impatience, somatic complaints, insomnia, increased hunger, and increased eating occurred after cessation. The frequency and intensity of these symptoms varied across subjects; however, the average distress from tobacco withdrawal was similar to that observed in psychiatric outpatients. Subjects who had more withdrawal discomfort were more tolerant to the cardiovascular effects of nicotine. Subjects who had more withdrawal discomfort did not have a lower rate of smoking cessation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Shape of the relapse curve and long-term abstinence among untreated smokers.

            To describe the relapse curve and rate of long-term prolonged abstinence among smokers who try to quit without treatment. Systematic literature review. Cochrane Reviews, Dissertation Abstracts, Excerpt Medica, Medline, Psych Abstracts and US Center for Disease Control databases plus bibliographies of articles and requests of scientists. Prospective studies of self-quitters or studies that included a no-treatment control group. Two reviewers independently extracted data in a non-blind manner. The number of studies was too small and the data too heterogeneous for meta-analysis or other statistical techniques. There is a paucity of studies reporting relapse curves of self-quitters. The existing eight relapse curves from two studies of self-quitters and five no-treatment control groups indicate most relapse occurs in the first 8 days. These relapse curves were heterogeneous even when the final outcome was made similar. In terms of prolonged abstinence rates, a prior summary of 10 self-quitting studies, two other studies of self-quitters and three no-treatment control groups indicate 3-5% of self-quitters achieve prolonged abstinence for 6-12 month after a given quit attempt. More reports of relapse curves of self-quitters are needed. Smoking cessation interventions should focus on the first week of abstinence. Interventions that produce abstinence rates of 5-10% may be effective. Cessation studies should report relapse curves.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials.

              Meta-analyses are now widely used to provide evidence to support clinical strategies. However, large randomized, controlled trials are considered the gold standard in evaluating the efficacy of clinical interventions. We compared the results of large randomized, controlled trials (involving 1000 patients or more) that were published in four journals (the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet, the Annals of Internal Medicine, and the Journal of the American Medical Association) with the results of meta-analyses published earlier on the same topics. Regarding the principal and secondary outcomes, we judged whether the findings of the randomized trials agreed with those of the corresponding meta-analyses, and we determined whether the study results were positive (indicating that treatment improved the outcome) or negative (indicating that the outcome with treatment was the same or worse than without it) at the conventional level of statistical significance (P<0.05). We identified 12 large randomized, controlled trials and 19 meta-analyses addressing the same questions. For a total of 40 primary and secondary outcomes, agreement between the meta-analyses and the large clinical trials was only fair (kappa= 0.35; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.64). The positive predictive value of the meta-analyses was 68 percent, and the negative predictive value 67 percent. However, the difference in point estimates between the randomized trials and the meta-analyses was statistically significant for only 5 of the 40 comparisons (12 percent). Furthermore, in each case of disagreement a statistically significant effect of treatment was found by one method, whereas no statistically significant effect was found by the other. The outcomes of the 12 large randomized, controlled trials that we studied were not predicted accurately 35 percent of the time by the meta-analyses published previously on the same topics.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                hetulloch@ottawaheart.ca
                Journal
                BMC Med
                BMC Med
                BMC Medicine
                BioMed Central (London )
                1741-7015
                7 June 2016
                7 June 2016
                2016
                : 14
                : 80
                Affiliations
                [ ]Division of Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4 W7 Canada
                [ ]Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
                [ ]School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
                [ ]Department of Psychiatry, 1E1 Walter Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R7 Canada
                Article
                626
                10.1186/s12916-016-0626-2
                4884360
                27233840
                242f68e7-137d-441a-b82b-999db7cac36d
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 27 January 2016
                : 13 May 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004411, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada;
                Award ID: 6614
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Medicine
                smoking cessation,rct,efficacy,intervention,extended treatment
                Medicine
                smoking cessation, rct, efficacy, intervention, extended treatment

                Comments

                Comment on this article