A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Parallel, Placebo-controlled Clinical Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Nicotine Mint Lozenge (2 and 4 mg) in Smoking Cessation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy in smoking cessation and safety of 2 and 4 mg nicotine mint lozenges in Chinese adult smokers. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, stratified, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. The low-dependence stratum included 483 smokers (241 randomized to active 2 mg nicotine lozenge and 242 to placebo lozenge). The high-dependence stratum included 240 smokers (120 randomized to active 4 mg nicotine lozenge and 120 to placebo lozenge). The primary endpoint was successful smoking cessation at 6 weeks postquit, defined as continuous abstinence from smoking for the 28-day period up to and including the 6-week visit (verified by CO measurement). Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests were performed to compare quit rates between active nicotine and placebo separately for the high-dependence and low-dependence strata. RESULTS: The primary analysis showed that in the low-dependence (2 mg) stratum, 59 subjects (24.5%) of 241 in the active nicotine group and 52 subjects (21.5%) of 242 in the placebo group were successful quitters (P = .3851). In the high-dependence (4 mg) stratum, 37 subjects (30.8%) of 120 in the active nicotine group and 24 subjects (20.2%) of 119 in the placebo group were successful quitters (P = .0565). CONCLUSIONS: The 4 mg nicotine lozenge provided a directionally significant improvement in smoking cessation rates compared with placebo in Chinese adult smokers with high nicotine dependence for the primary endpoint. The 2 mg nicotine lozenge provided higher, but nonsignificant, smoking cessation rates than placebo. Both nicotine lozenges were generally well tolerated in Chinese adult smokers.

Efficacy of a nicotine (4 mg)-containing lozenge on the cognitive impairment of nicotine withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE: Controversy exists over the effect of tobacco deprivation in nicotine-dependent individuals and the efficacy of nicotine in reversing performance decrements. This study's aim was to assess the efficacy of nicotine (4-mg lozenge) versus placebo on aspects of cognitive and psychomotor performance, mood, and withdrawal symptoms in male and female established smokers. METHODS: Male and female smokers (N = 22; mean age, 28.8 years), with a smoking history of more than 1 year and time to first cigarette of less than 30 minutes upon waking, were enrolled. Baseline measures were obtained at 17 hours of abstinence. At 18-hour abstinence, nicotine or placebo was administered every 2 hours over an 8-hour period. Cognitive and psychomotor performance measurements were taken 30 minutes after dose. Cognitive test battery included Rapid Visual Information Processing, Continuous Tracking Task, Critical Flicker Fusion, Choice Reaction Time, Stroop Test, and Sternberg's Short-term Memory Scanning Task. Withdrawal (Modified Minnesota Withdrawal Scale) and mood (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule) were also assessed. A mixed-models analysis of covariance was performed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo nicotine (4 mg) significantly improved vigilance, divided attention, executive functioning, working memory, and sensorimotor performance in abstinent volunteers (P < or = 0.05). Withdrawal symptoms including craving, difficulty concentrating, irritability, and restlessness were also attenuated, and affective state was improved after nicotine 4 mg administration. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, nicotine (4 mg) improved measures of vigilance, memory, and attention; improved mood; and reduced withdrawal symptoms. These findings suggest that repeated nicotine replacement therapy over a period of 8 hours can improve cognitive deficits associated with nicotine withdrawal.

Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Two Nicotine Patches in Smokers.

Smoking continues to be a major preventable cause of early mortality worldwide, and nicotine replacement therapy has been demonstrated to increase rates of abstinence among smokers attempting to quit. Nicotine transdermal systems (also known as nicotine patches) attach to the skin via an adhesive layer composed of a mixture of different-molecular-weight polyisobutylenes (PIBs) in a specific ratio. This randomized, single-dose, 2-treatment, crossover pharmacokinetic (PK) trial assessed the bioequivalence of nicotine patches including a replacement PIB adhesive (test) compared with the PIB adhesive historically used on marketed patches (reference). The test and reference patches were bioequivalent, as determined by the PK parameters of Cmax and AUC0-t . In addition, the parameters Tmax and t1/2 did not significantly differ between the 2 patches, supporting the bioequivalence finding from the primary analysis. The tolerability profiles of the patches containing the replacement and previously used PIB adhesives were similar; application-site adverse events did not significantly differ between test and reference patches. Overall, these data establish the bioequivalence of the nicotine patch with the replacement PIB adhesive formulation and the previously utilized PIB adhesive formulation.

Brushing with a potassium nitrate dentifrice to reduce bleaching sensitivity.

OBJECTIVE: This research systematically evaluated the use of a clinically proven desensitizing dentifrice prior to a bleaching regimen in a randomized, multi-center, parallel group, open label clinical study following Good Clinical Practice guidelines. METHODOLOGY: Fourteen dental offices in West Palm Beach, Florida participated in the study during April/May 2004. Fourteen days prior to bleaching, impressions and oral soft tissue assessments were performed, and patients were randomized to either a KNO3 plus fluoride dentifrice (Sensodyne Fresh Mint), or a standard fluoride dentifrice (Crest Regular), brushing 2x per day. On Day 14, patients returned to the dental office for their custom tray and the dispensation of a bleaching kit (Day White Excel 3; 9.5% hydrogen peroxide and KNO3). This was used daily according to the manufacturer's instructions for 30 minutes, and normal oral hygiene continued to be performed using the assigned toothbrush and dentifrice, brushing 2x per day. At the end of each bleaching day, patients answered diary questions about the occurrence and intensity of sensitivity. At the conclusion of the 14-day bleaching period (Day 28), patients returned to their dental office for re-examination, returning all products and diaries. Within seven days of completing the study, patients answered a telephone patient satisfaction survey. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients in fourteen (14) dental offices completed all aspects of the study and were used for the analysis. The professionally dispensed bleaching product provided an improvement of approximately 4.4 Vita shades, regardless of whether it was used with the KNO3 plus fluoride (Sensodyne) or a standard fluoride (Crest) dentifrice. The patient perception of increased sensitivity caused by the bleaching treatment was low but measurable. In the first week of the bleaching, significantly more patients using the KNO3 plus fluoride dentifrice were free from sensitivity (58%) than the standard fluoride dentifrice group (42%). During the 14-day bleaching treatment period, the KNO3 dentifrice patients experienced significantly more "sensitivity free days" (average = 10.1) compared to the standard fluoride dentifrice group (average = 8.6). CONCLUSION: The use of the KNO3 plus fluoride dentifrice (Sensodyne), two weeks prior to and throughout bleaching, may be a useful adjunct for the management of sensitivity caused by professionally dispensed bleaching products. With the bleaching-induced tooth sensitivity, those patients in the KNO3 plus fluoride toothpaste group were significantly more satisfied with their whitening experience and willing to repeat the bleaching treatment.

Pharmacokinetic comparison of two nicotine transdermal systems, a 21-mg/24-hour patch and a 25-mg/16-hour patch: a randomized, open-label, single-dose, two-way crossover study in adult smokers.

BACKGROUND: A comparison of the 21-mg NiQuitin patch with other marketed nicotine patches reported significant differences in pharmacokinetic profiles, even among patches of the identical labeled dose strength. The 25-mg Nicorette Invisi patch became available in the United Kingdom at the end of 2008. No published studies have directly compared the pharmacokinetic profile of this new patch with that of the 21-mg NiQuitin patch. OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to compare the single-dose pharmacokinetics of the 21-mg/24-hour patch and the 25-mg/16-hour patch. To determine whether any pharmacokinetic differences might be related to differences in wear time, a post hoc exploratory analysis evaluated the nicotine delivery profiles of the patches under the assumption that the 21-mg patch was removed after 16 rather than 24 hours. METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, single-dose, 2-way crossover study in healthy adults who smoked >10 cigarettes per day in the 6 months before the study. Eligible subjects were housed at the study center for 2 baseline and 2 treatment sessions; no smoking was permitted during the baseline or treatment sessions. Subjects were allocated to receive either the 21-mg patch (removed after 24 hours) or the 25-mg patch (removed after 16 hours) during the first treatment session, after which they crossed over to the alternative sequence in the second treatment session. Blood samples were obtained at predetermined time points before and after patch application. The primary pharmacokinetic parameter was the AUC(0-infinity), an indication of total nicotine exposure. Secondary pharmacokinetic parameters included AUC(0-t), C(max), and T(max). Post hoc exploratory parameters were the AUC(0-16) and the AUC(0-infinity) assuming a 16-hour application time for the 21-mg patch. The differences in AUC(0-infinity), AUC(0-t), Cmax, AUC(0-16), and AUC(0-infinity) assuming a 16-hour application time for the 21-mg patch were considered significant if the lower limit of the 90% CI for the geometric mean ratio (21 mg:25 mg) was >100%. T(max) values were compared using a signed-rank test. Adverse events were elicited using a standard open-ended question on each day of confinement; spontaneously reported events were also captured. The topical effects of the patch (erythema; edema; extent of erythema/papules/pustules; self-reported pruritus) were assessed by study staff before patch application and 1 and 8 hours after patch application using a 4-point rating scale; any topical effects were recorded as adverse events. RESULTS: Fifty otherwise healthy smokers (29 men, 21 women) were enrolled; 47 (94%) were white. Their mean (SD) age was 31.5 (9.57) years (range, 20-53 years), mean weight was 70.24 (9.56) kg (range, 51.0-95.9 kg), and mean height was 173.0 (8.02) cm (range, 156-194 cm). Subjects reported smoking between 11 and 40 cigarettes per day before the study. The AUC(0-infinity) was significantly higher for the 21-mg patch worn for 24 hours than for the 25-mg patch worn for 16 hours (382.36 vs 243.69 ng/mL . h, respectively; geometric mean ratio: 156.90%; 90% CI, 148.10%-166.23%; P < 0.001). T(max) was reached significantly sooner with the 21-mg patch than with the 25-mg patch (6.0 vs 12.0 hours; P < 0.001). C(max) was significantly higher for the 21-mg patch compared with the 25-mg patch (18.34 vs 16.56 ng/mL; geometric mean ratio: 110.72%; 90% CI, 104.82%-116.94%; P < 0.01). The exploratory analyses suggested that the 21-mg patch applied for 16 hours may provide greater total nicotine exposure than the 25-mg patch applied for 16 hours. Although most subjects reported adverse events (75.0% with the 21-mg patch, 89.8% with the 25-mg patch), the majority of these events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-dose study in adult smokers, the 21-mg patch was associated with significantly greater nicotine exposure compared with the 25-mg patch. The 21-mg patch provided a maximal nicotine concentration faster than did the 25-mg patch.

Non-inferiority trials: the 'at least as good as' criterion with dichotomous data.

The 'at least as good as' criterion, introduced by Laster and Johnson for a continuous response variate, is developed here for applications with dichotomous data. This approach is adaptive in nature, as the margin of non-inferiority is not taken as a fixed difference; it varies as a function of the positive control response. When the non-inferiority margin is referenced as a high fraction of the positive control response, the procedure is seen to be uniformly more efficient than the fixed margin approach, yielding smaller sample sizes when sizing non-inferiority trials under identically specified conditions. Extending this method to proportions is straightforward, but highlights special considerations in the design of non-inferiority trials versus superiority trials, including potential trade-offs in statistical efficiency and interpretability.