Smoking Cessation After Initial Treatment Failure With Varenicline or Nicotine Replacement: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Most people who smoke do not quit on their initial attempt. Objective: To determine the best subsequent strategy for nonabstinence following initial treatment with varenicline or combined nicotine replacement therapy (CNRT). Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, 490 volunteers were randomized to receive 6 weeks of varenicline or CNRT. After 6 weeks, nonabstainers were rerandomized to continue, switch, or increase medication dosage for 6 additional weeks. The study was conducted from June 2015 through October 2019 in a Texas tobacco treatment clinic. Interventions: The initial treatment was 2 mg/d of varenicline or the combined replacement therapy of a 21-mg patch plus 2-mg lozenge. The rerandomized participants either continued with their initial therapies, switched between varenicline and CNRT, or increased dosages either to 3-mg or more of varenicline or to a 42-mg patch and lozenges. All received weekly brief counseling. Main Outcomes and Measures: Biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of treatment at 12 weeks. Results: The 490 randomized participants (210 female [43%], 287 non-Hispanic White [58%], mean age, 48.1 years) smoked an average of 20 cigarettes per day. After the first phase, 54 participants in the CNRT group were abstinent and continued their therapy; of the 191 who were not abstinent, 151 were rerandomized, and the 40 who did not return for rerandomization were assigned to continue their initial CNRT condition in phase 2. The end-of-treatment abstinence rate for the 191 phase 1 nonabstainers was 8% (95% credible interval [CrI], 6% to 10%) for the 90 (47%) who continued at the dosage condition, 14% (CrI, 10% to 18%) for the 50 (33%) who increased their dosage, and 14% (95% CrI, 10% to 18%) for the 51 (34%) who switched to varenicline (absolute risk difference [RD], 6%; 95% CrI, 6% to 11%) with more than 99% posterior probability that either strategy conferred benefit over continuing the initial dosage. After the first phase, 88 participants in the varenicline group were abstinent and continued their therapy; of the 157 who were not abstinent, 122 were rerandomized and 35 who did not return for rerandomization were assigned to continue with the varenicline condition. The end-of-treatment abstinence rate for the 157 phase 1 nonabstainers was 20% (95% CrI, 16% to 26%) for the 39 (32%) who increased their varenicline dosage, 0 (95% CrI, 0 to 0) for the 41 (34%) who switched CNRT, and 3% (95% CrI, 1% to 4%) for the 77 (49%) who were assigned to the continued varenicline condition (absolute RD, -3%; 95% CrI, -4% to -1%) with more than 99% posterior probability that continuing varenicline at the initial dosage was worse than switching to a higher dosage. Furthermore, increasing the varenicline dosage had an absolute RD of 18% (95% CrI, 13% to 24%) and a more than 99% posterior probability of conferring benefit. The secondary outcome of continuous abstinence at 6 months indicated that only increased dosages of the CNRT and varenicline provided benefit over continuation of the initial treatment dosages. Conclusions and Relevance: For individuals who smoked but did not achieve abstinence after treatment with varenicline, increasing the dosage enhanced abstinence vs continuing, whereas for nonabstainers initially treated with CNRT, a dosage increase or switch to varenicline enhanced abstinence and may be viable rescue strategies. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02271919.

Comparing the Fagerström Test and Heaviness of Smoking Index in Predicting Smoking Abstinence in Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: People with cancer who smoke exhibit greater cigarette dependence than people without cancer who smoke, a crucial factor in smoking cessation. Research is limited on the predictive potential of the Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence (FTCD) and the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI) on smoking abstinence in cancer patients undergoing smoking cessation treatment. METHODS: We analyzed data from 5,934 cancer patients seeking smoking cessation treatment at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (female 52.08%; Mean age = 55.52, SD = 11.17). We evaluated the predictive accuracy of FTCD and HSI on abstinence at 3-, 6-, and 9-months from first consultation, and assessed the concordance between these tools in measuring cigarette dependence using Cohen's kappa test and different correlation and regression models. We also analyzed variations across sex at birth and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Both the FTCD and the HSI demonstrated comparable predictive accuracy for smoking cessation at all follow-ups, with neither showing high accuracy (Areas Under the Curve scores around 0.6). Concordance analysis revealed substantial agreement between FTCD and HSI scores (Cohen's kappa ~ 0.7), particularly at lower levels of dependence. However, this agreement varied by race, with reduced concordance observed in Non-Hispanic Blacks. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that both the FTCD and HSI are effective tools for predicting smoking cessation in cancer patients, with the HSI offering a less burdensome assessment option. Nevertheless, the findings suggest the need for tailored approaches in assessing cigarette dependence that could predict smoking cessation more accurately, considering racial differences. IMPLICATIONS: The burden of assessing cigarette dependence in cancer care settings can be reduced by using the HSI instead of the FTCD. In addition, both instruments could be substantially interchanged and used for meta-analytic studies examining dependence and abstinence, but race/ethnicity should be considered.

Brief report: Characterization of electronic cigarette use among patients of a comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We provide an initial characterization of e-cigarette use among adult cancer patients. METHODS: Data were collected between November 2020 and August 2022 at a comprehensive cancer center. RESULTS: Relatively few (4.59%) of the assessed patients (n = 47,117) reported ever using e-cigarettes. Over one-third of current e-cigarette users reported being current combustible cigarette users. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that e-cigarette use is uncommon but associated with other tobacco use among adult cancer patients. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: This is among the first comprehensive surveys of adult cancer patient e-cigarette use that details the types of e-cigarette and other tobacco products used by this population.

Examining the Association between Abstinence from Smoking and Healthcare Costs Among Patients with Cancer.

Continuous tobacco use in cancer patients is linked to substantial healthcare costs due to increased risks and complications, whereas quitting smoking leads to improved treatment outcomes and cost reductions. Addressing the need for empirical evidence on the economic impact of smoking cessation, this study examined the association between smoking cessation and healthcare cost utilization among a sample of 930 cancer patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center's Tobacco Research and Treatment Program (TRTP). Applying conditional quantile regression and propensity scores to address confounding, our findings revealed that abstinence achieved through the TRTP significantly reduced the median cost during a 3-month period post-quitting by $1,095 (ß=-$1,095, p=0.007, 95%CI=[-$1,886, -$304]). Sensitivity analysis corroborated these conclusions, showing a pronounced cost reduction when outlier data were excluded. The long-term accrued cost savings from smoking cessation could potentially offset the cost of participation in the TRTP program, underscoring its cost-effectiveness. An important implication of this study is that by reducing smoking rates, healthcare systems can more efficiently allocate resources, enhance patient health outcomes, and lessen the overall cancer burden.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tobacco Treatment Program Implementation at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted cancer screening and treatment delivery, but COVID-19's impact on tobacco cessation treatment for cancer patients who smoke has not been widely explored. AIMS AND METHODS: We conducted a sequential cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 34 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers participating in NCI's Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I), across three reporting periods: one prior to COVID-19 (January-June 2019) and two during the pandemic (January-June 2020, January-June 2021). Using McNemar's Test of Homogeneity, we assessed changes in services offered and implementation activities over time. RESULTS: The proportion of centers offering remote treatment services increased each year for Quitline referrals (56%, 68%, and 91%; p = .000), telephone counseling (59%, 79%, and 94%; p = .002), and referrals to Smokefree TXT (27%, 47%, and 56%; p = .006). Centers offering video-based counseling increased from 2020 to 2021 (18% to 59%; p = .006), Fewer than 10% of centers reported laying off tobacco treatment staff. Compared to early 2020, in 2021 C3I centers reported improvements in their ability to maintain staff and clinician morale, refer to external treatment services, train providers to deliver tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid transition to new telehealth program delivery of tobacco treatment for patients with cancer. C3I cancer centers adjusted rapidly to challenges presented by the pandemic, with improvements reported in staff morale and ability to train providers, refer patients to tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. These factors enabled C3I centers to sustain evidence-based tobacco treatment implementation during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: This work describes how NCI-designated cancer centers participating in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) adapted to challenges to sustain evidence-based tobacco use treatment programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work offers a model for resilience and rapid transition to remote tobacco treatment services delivery and proposes a policy and research agenda for telehealth services as an approach to sustaining evidence-based tobacco treatment programs.

The effects of varenicline, bupropion, nicotine patch, and placebo on smoking cessation among smokers with major depression: A randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Improving treatment outcomes for smokers with major depressive disorder (MDD) can have significant public health implications. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy among smokers with MDD. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, active- (nicotine patch) and placebo-controlled trial of 12 weeks of either varenicline or bupropion with a 12-week follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: Community volunteers 18-75 years of age; smoke 10+ cigarettes/day; with clinically stable MDD (N = 2635) or no psychiatric disorder (N = 4028), from 140 sites in 16 countries. INTERVENTION: Twelve weeks of pharmacotherapy (placebo [PLA], nicotine replacement therapy [NRT], bupropion [BUP], varenicline [VAR]) plus brief cessation counseling. MEASURE(S): Primary safety outcome: the occurrence of ≥1 treatment-emergent, moderate to severe neuropsychiatric adverse event (NPSAE). Primary efficacy outcome: biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence (CA) during the final 4 weeks of treatment (Weeks 9-12). RESULTS: A total of 6653 participants (56% female; 39% MDD) ~47 years old. Risk of NPSAEs did not differ by medication for MDD. MDD had higher risk (p < .0001) for NPSAEs than the NPC. Efficacy (6653; intent-to-treat): CA rates for MDD versus NPC respectively were 31.2% versus 38.0% VAR; 23.0% versus 26.1% BUP; 22.6% versus 26.4% NRT; and 13.4% versus 13.7% PLA but no differential treatment effect was noted within the cohorts. All active treatments differed from PLA but VAR showed the largest effect. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that for MDD smokers, inclusive of those with recurrent episode, varenicline plus counseling may be the best pharmacological option for the treatment of smoking given its greater efficacy effect size and similar risk of NPSAEs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456936. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01456936.

Bupropion XL and SR have similar effectiveness and adverse event profiles when used to treat smoking among patients at a comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Bupropion extended-release (XL; once-daily dosing) has equal efficacy with the sustained-release (SR) formulation (twice-daily dosing) for treating depression, but no studies have compared the two formulations for the treatment of smoking. In a naturalistic open-label study, we compared the effectiveness and the adverse event profiles of XL and SR in treating cancer patients for smoking. METHODS: Cancer patients (N = 648) were prescribed bupropion XL (n = 454) or SR (n = 194) alone or in combination with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for treating smoking from September 2006 to December 2017. We analyzed 7-day point prevalence abstinence at end-of-treatment (EOT; 3 months postmedication initiation) and evaluated for noninferiority. We also analyzed the adverse event profile differences between the medications. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in abstinent rates at EOT between bupropion XL and SR when using intent-to-treat models, regardless of concomitant NRT. XL demonstrated noninferiority in treatment efficacy compared to SR when excluding those on combined treatment with NRT. Further, there were no significant differences in spontaneously reported adverse events between XL and SR. CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not reveal a difference between bupropion XL and SR formulations in terms of effectiveness or adverse event profiles among cancer patients prescribed bupropion alone or in combination with NRTs to quit smoking. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: In this first published direct comparison of their effectiveness and adverse event profiles, we found that bupropion XL is likely therapeutically equivalent to bupropion SR when treating smoking among cancer patients, and produces similar side effects.

Association of a Comprehensive Smoking Cessation Program With Smoking Abstinence Among Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Patients with cancer who smoke after diagnosis risk experiencing reductions in treatment effectiveness, survival rates, and quality of life, and increases in complications, cancer recurrence, and second primary cancers. Smoking cessation can significantly affect these outcomes, but to date comprehensive treatment is not widely implemented in the oncologic setting. Objectives: To describe a potential model tobacco treatment program (TTP) implemented in a cancer setting, report on its long-term outcomes, and highlight its importance to quality patient care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort of smokers was treated in the TTP at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 2006, to August 31, 2015. Data analysis was performed from November 2017 to December 2018. Participants included 3245 patients (2343 with current cancer; 309 with previous cancer; 593 with no cancer history) drawn from a population of 5061 smokers referred for treatment in the TTP. Reasons for exclusion included follow-up for a noncancerous disease, no medical consultation, smoked less than 1 cigarette per day; or died before the 9-month follow-up. Exposures: Treatment consisted of an in-person medical consultation, 6 to 8 in-person and telephone follow-up counseling sessions, and 10 to 12 weeks of pharmacotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was 9-month 7-day point-prevalence abstinence evaluated using time-specific (3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-ups) and longitudinal covariate-adjusted and unadjusted regression models with multiple imputation, intention-to-treat, and respondent-only approaches to missing data. The Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence was used as a measure of dependence (possible range, 0-10; higher numbers indicate greater dependence). Results: Of the 3245 smokers, 1588 (48.9%) were men, 322 (9.9%) were of black race/ethnicity, 172 (5.3%) were of Hispanic race/ethnicity, and 2498 (76.0%) were of white race/ethnicity. Mean (SD) age was 54 (11.4) years; Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence score, 4.41 (2.2), number of cigarettes smoked per day, 17.1 (10.7); years smoked, 33 (13.2); and 1393 patients (42.9%) had at least 1 psychiatric comorbidity. Overall self-reported abstinence was 45.1% at 3 months, 45.8% at 6 months, and 43.7% at 9 months in the multiply imputed sample. Results across all models were consistent, suggesting that, in comparison with smokers with no cancer history, abstinence rates within this TTP program did not differ appreciably whether smokers had current cancer, were a cancer survivor, or had smoking-related cancers, with the exception of patients with head and neck cancer; the rates were higher at 9 months (relative risk, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11-1.56; P = .001) and in longitudinal models (relative risk, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.42; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, mean smoking abstinence rates did not differ significantly between patients with cancer and those without cancer. These findings suggest that providing comprehensive tobacco treatment in the oncologic setting can result in sustained high abstinence rates for all patients with cancer and survivors and should be included as standard of care to ensure the best possible cancer treatment outcomes.

A tele-mentoring tobacco cessation case consultation and education model for healthcare providers in community mental health centers.

Smoking prevalence among individuals with mental and behavioral health needs is considerably higher compared to the general population, but evidence-based smoking cessation therapies are underutilized in mental and behavioral healthcare settings, despite the fact that these treatments are both safe and effective. The goal of this paper is to present the background, design and pilot of Project TEACH (Tobacco Education and Cessation in the Health System) developed to improve clinical practice by offering specialized training in the provision of smoking cessation interventions to care providers in community mental health centers in Texas. This is achieved through engaging the expertise of clinicians at the MD Anderson Cancer Center's Tobacco Treatment Program and disseminating this expertise to care providers by means of a novel tele-mentoring approach called Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes). Evaluation of our pilot ECHO training project demonstrated that the training was very well received and resulted in self-reported enhancement of the providers' professional practice. This is the first project to extend the collaborative ECHO model to train healthcare providers in smoking cessation. This approach has potential to reduce smoking rates among smokers with mental and behavioral health needs, and consequently contribute to the prevention of cancer and other chronic diseases in this vulnerable population.

Tobacco Cessation Treatment Pathways for Patients With Cancer: 10 Years in the Making.

Tobacco use is the most common cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States; it accounts for one-third of all cancer deaths and is thought to account for half of preventable cancer deaths. This article describes the Tobacco Treatment Program at a major academic cancer center. Patients and employees may access these services in a number of ways. All current smokers and recent quitters are proactively contacted and invited to participate. Services provided are tailored to the motivational level of individual patients and their immediate medical needs. The treatment pathways we present are based on our experience from the last 10 years in treating more than 5,000 unique patients with around 60,000 patient visits. These pathways include behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy, including first-line, second-line, and off-label medication use. This article describes the program with the goal of providing guidance and ideas to others who are developing treatment programs and providing treatment to tobacco users.