Systematic review and meta-analyses of cytisine to support tobacco cessation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cytisine (also known as cytisinicline) is a low-cost partial agonist of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors used to assist tobacco cessation. We aimed to review the effectiveness of cytisine for tobacco cessation and the effects of dose and co-use of behavioural or other pharmacological interventions on cessation outcomes. METHODS: We searched seven databases, Google Scholar, and reference lists of included publications for randomised controlled trials investigating use of cytisine as a tobacco cessation aid. Studies were eligible if participants were ≥15 years old and used tobacco upon study enrolment. We conducted four random effects meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses with fixed effects models. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials version 2 to assess risk of bias in included studies, with adjustments recommended by the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group. RESULTS: Participants using cytisine were significantly more likely to quit tobacco than participants who received placebo/no intervention/usual care (risk ratio [RR] = 2.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50-4.67, 6 trials, 5194 participants) or nicotine replacement therapy (RR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.06-1.73, p = 0.0152, 2 trials, 1511 participants). The difference in cessation rates among participants receiving cytisine versus varenicline was not statistically significant (RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.63-1.45, P = 0.8464, 3 trials, 2508 participants). Two trials examined longer versus shorter treatment duration, finding higher abstinence rates with longer treatment (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.02-1.63, 2 trials, 1009 participants). The differences in the number of adverse events reported by participants who received cytisine versus placebo (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.99-1.41, P = 0.0624; 6 trials; 4578 participants) or cytisine versus varenicline (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 0.57-3.33, P = 0.4835; 2 trials; 1345 participants) were not statistically significant. Most adverse events were mild (e.g. abnormal dreams, nausea, headaches). CONCLUSIONS: Cytisine is an effective aid for tobacco cessation and appears to be more effective for tobacco cessation than placebo, no intervention, usual care and nicotine replacement therapy.

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.

Combination Treatment With Varenicline and Nicotine Patch on Smoking Cessation Outcomes in Heavy Drinkers at 26-Week Follow-up.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: People who smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol heavily are less likely to quit smoking compared with those who do not drink heavily. The current study examined the effects of a 12-week treatment phase of combination varenicline and nicotine patch compared with placebo and nicotine patch on smoking cessation (primary outcome) and alcohol consumption (secondary outcome) in heavy drinking smokers at 26-week follow-up. METHODS/PROCEDURES: Participants were daily smokers who met heavy drinking criteria. They were randomly assigned to receive either varenicline and nicotine patch (n = 61) or placebo and nicotine patch (n = 61) for 12 weeks. At week 26, self-reports of point prevalence cigarette abstinence were biochemically confirmed, and past-month alcohol drinking days and heavy drinking days were assessed. FINDINGS/RESULTS: At week 26, smoking quit rates did not differ by treatment group (25% varenicline and 26% placebo). Relative to week 12 outcomes, week 26 quit rates significantly dropped off in the varenicline group but not in the placebo group. Alcohol drinking reductions for the whole sample that were previously observed from baseline to week 12 were sustained at week 26, although they did not differ between treatment groups. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: In heavy drinking smokers, smoking cessation success was evident in a quarter of the total sample at 3 months postmedication discontinuation. At this time, quit rates were the same between those who received varenicline and nicotine patch and those who received nicotine patch alone. Future research is warranted to examine what may aid in longer-term smoking quit rates in heavy drinking smokers.

Cytisinicline for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cytisinicline (cytisine) is a plant-based alkaloid that, like varenicline, binds selectively to α4ß2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, which mediate nicotine dependence. Although not licensed in the US, cytisinicline is used in some European countries to aid smoking cessation, but its traditional dosing regimen and treatment duration may not be optimal. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of cytisinicline for smoking cessation when administered in a novel pharmacokinetically based dosing regimen for 6 or 12 weeks vs placebo. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial (ORCA-2) compared 2 durations of cytisinicline treatment (6 or 12 weeks) vs placebo, with follow-up to 24 weeks, among 810 adults who smoked cigarettes daily and wanted to quit. It was conducted at 17 US sites from October 2020 to December 2021. Interventions: Participants were randomized (1:1:1) to cytisinicline, 3 mg, 3 times daily for 12 weeks (n = 270); cytisinicline, 3 mg, 3 times daily for 6 weeks then placebo 3 times daily for 6 weeks (n = 269); or placebo 3 times daily for 12 weeks (n = 271). All participants received behavioral support. Main Outcomes and Measures: Biochemically verified continuous smoking abstinence for the last 4 weeks of cytisinicline treatment vs placebo (primary) and from end of treatment to 24 weeks (secondary). Results: Of 810 randomized participants (mean age, 52.5 years; 54.6% female; mean of 19.4 cigarettes smoked daily), 618 (76.3%) completed the trial. For the 6-week course of cytisinicline vs placebo, continuous abstinence rates were 25.3% vs 4.4% during weeks 3 to 6 (odds ratio [OR], 8.0 [95% CI, 3.9-16.3]; P < .001) and 8.9% vs 2.6% during weeks 3 to 24 (OR, 3.7 [95% CI, 1.5-10.2]; P = .002). For the 12-week course of cytisinicline vs placebo, continuous abstinence rates were 32.6% vs 7.0% for weeks 9 to 12 (OR, 6.3 [95% CI, 3.7-11.6]; P < .001) and 21.1% vs 4.8% during weeks 9 to 24 (OR, 5.3 [95% CI, 2.8-11.1]; P < .001). Nausea, abnormal dreams, and insomnia occurred in less than 10% of each group. Sixteen participants (2.9%) discontinued cytisinicline due to an adverse event. No drug-related serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: Both 6- and 12-week cytisinicline schedules, with behavioral support, demonstrated smoking cessation efficacy and excellent tolerability, offering new nicotine dependence treatment options. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04576949.

Frequently Reported Adverse Events With Smoking Cessation Medications: Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence, severity, and clinical course of frequently reported adverse events (AEs) after treatment with smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. METHODS: This was a multinational, multicenter, post hoc analysis of frequently reported treatment-emergent AEs from a large, phase 4, double-blind, randomized, triple-dummy, placebo-controlled trial (EAGLES), conducted between November 30, 2011, and January 13, 2015, that included smokers with and without psychiatric disorders (N=8144). Treatments were varenicline 1 mg twice daily, bupropion sustained-release 150 mg twice daily, and nicotine patch 21 mg once daily with tapering (12-week treatment, 12-week nontreatment follow-up), with incidence, time to onset, and duration of frequently reported AEs (≥5% of participants in any treatment group) measured. Risk differences for AEs for varenicline and bupropion vs nicotine patch were compared. RESULTS: Across frequently reported AEs, nausea, insomnia, abnormal dreams, anxiety, irritability, dry mouth, fatigue, and application site pruritus differed significantly in active treatment vs placebo groups. Risk differences were as follows: for nausea with varenicline vs nicotine patch, 15.50% (95% CI, 13.20% to 17.80%); for insomnia with bupropion vs nicotine patch, 2.58% (CI, 0.65% to 4.51%); and for abnormal dreams with varenicline and bupropion vs nicotine patch, -2.49% (CI, -4.35% to -0.64%) and -5.60% (CI, -7.27% to -3.93%), respectively. Frequently reported AEs of severe intensity and treatment discontinuation were experienced by less than 1.5% and less than 3% of participants across all groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Active treatments were well tolerated with comparable AE profiles. Most AEs are not clinically important, and prescribers can reassure patients that those experienced will be manageable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456936.

Rodent models for nicotine withdrawal.

BACKGROUND: Animal models are critical to improve our understanding of the neuronal mechanisms underlying nicotine withdrawal. Nicotine dependence in rodents can be established by repeated nicotine injections, chronic nicotine infusion via osmotic minipumps, oral nicotine intake, tobacco smoke exposure, nicotine vapor exposure, and e-cigarette aerosol exposure. The time course of nicotine withdrawal symptoms associated with these methods has not been reviewed in the literature. AIM: The goal of this review is to discuss nicotine withdrawal symptoms associated with the cessation of nicotine, tobacco smoke, nicotine vapor, and e-cigarette aerosol exposure in rats and mice. Furthermore, age and sex differences in nicotine withdrawal symptoms are reviewed. RESULTS: Cessation of nicotine, tobacco smoke, nicotine vapor, and e-cigarette aerosol exposure leads to nicotine withdrawal symptoms such as somatic withdrawal signs, changes in locomotor activity, anxiety- and depressive-like behavior, learning and memory deficits, attention deficits, hyperalgesia, and dysphoria. These withdrawal symptoms are most pronounced within the first week after cessation of nicotine exposure. Anxiety- and depressive-like behavior, and deficits in learning and memory may persist for several months. Adolescent (4-6 weeks old) rats and mice display fewer nicotine withdrawal symptoms than adults (>8 weeks old). In adult rats and mice, females show fewer nicotine withdrawal symptoms than males. The smoking cessation drugs bupropion and varenicline reduce nicotine withdrawal symptoms in rodents. CONCLUSION: The nicotine withdrawal symptoms that are observed in rodents are similar to those observed in humans. Tobacco smoke and e-cigarette aerosol contain chemicals and added flavors that enhance the reinforcing properties of nicotine. Therefore, more valid animal models of tobacco and e-cigarette use need to be developed by using tobacco smoke and e-cigarette aerosol exposure methods to induce dependence.

Development and Validation of a Model to Predict Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate clinical risk prediction tools for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). STUDY DESIGN: We developed prediction models for NAS based on a set of 30 demographic and antenatal exposure covariates collected during pregnancy. Data (outpatient prescription, vital, and administrative records), were obtained from enrollees in the Tennessee Medicaid Program from 2009 to 2014. Models were created using logistic regression and backward selection based on improvement in the Akaike information criterion, and internally validated using bootstrap cross-validation. RESULTS: A total of 218 020 maternal and infant dyads met inclusion criteria, of whom 3208 infants were diagnosed with NAS. The general population model included age, hepatitis C virus infection, days of opioid used by type, number of cigarettes used daily, and the following medications used in the last 30 day of pregnancy: bupropion, antinausea medicines, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, and gabapentin. Infant characteristics included birthweight, small for gestational age, and infant sex. A high-risk model used a smaller number of predictive variables. Both models discriminated well with an area under the curve of 0.89 and were well-calibrated for low-risk infants. CONCLUSIONS: We developed 2 predictive models for NAS based on demographics and antenatal exposure during the last 30 days of pregnancy that were able to risk stratify infants at risk of developing the syndrome.

Varenicline rescues nicotine-induced decrease in motivation for sucrose reinforcement.

Varenicline is one of the top medications used for smoking cessation and is often prescribed before termination of nicotine use. The effect of this combined nicotine and varenicline use on the reward system and motivation for primary reinforcement is underexplored. The goal of this study was to assess the effects of nicotine and varenicline on motivation for a food reinforcer. In Experiment 1, we first assessed the responding for sucrose after pretreatment with nicotine (0, 0.1, or 0.4 mg/kg) and varenicline (0.0, 0.1, 1.0 mg/kg) using a behavioral economics approach. The responding for sucrose was then assessed using a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement after pretreatment with all possible combinations of nicotine and varenicline doses. In Experiment 2, rats were assessed for the consumption of sucrose in home cages after pretreatment with nicotine and varenicline. We found that (a) nicotine decreased economic demand for sucrose, (b) varenicline rescued nicotine-induced reduction in economic demand for sucrose, and (c) history of varenicline treatment predicted responding for sucrose on a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement where rats with a history of varenicline treatment responded significantly lower for sucrose across nicotine doses than rats that had not been exposed to varenicline. The results of Experiment 2 largely confirmed that nicotine decreases motivation for sucrose using a passive consumption protocol and that varenicline rescues this effect. Overall, these findings suggest that varenicline interacts with the effects of nicotine by restoring nicotine-induced reduction in motivation for appetitive rewards.

High-dose and low-dose varenicline for smoking cessation in adolescents: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although cigarette smoking typically begins in adolescence, evidence for successful pharmacological smoking cessation interventions for this population is scarce. In adult smokers, varenicline is the most effective single pharmacotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of varenicline for smoking cessation in adolescents. METHODS: We did a randomised, placebo-controlled trial with adolescent smokers aged 12-19 years who were seeking treatment to quit at 57 outpatient centres (in the USA, Russia, South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, and Georgia). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 12 weeks of high-dose varenicline (1 mg twice daily; 0·5 mg twice daily if bodyweight ≤55 kg), low-dose varenicline (0·5 mg twice daily; 0·5 mg once daily if bodyweight ≤55 kg), or placebo, then followed up for 40 additional weeks. At all visits, participants received brief, developmentally tailored smoking cessation counselling (<10 min per session) delivered by a trained counsellor. The primary efficacy outcome was continuous abstinence from weeks 9 to 12, measured via a Nicotine Use Inventory and confirmed by urine cotinine testing. The primary tolerability outcome was frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events, including neuropsychiatric adverse events, occurring after the first dose and within 30 days of the last dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01312909. FINDINGS: Between April 26, 2011, and Jan 18, 2018, 312 participants were enrolled and completed participation in the study: 109 in the high-dose varenicline group, 103 in the low-dose varenicline group, and 100 in the placebo group. The continuous abstinence rates from week 9 to 12 were 20% (22 of 109) in the high-dose varenicline group, 27% (28 of 103) in the low-dose varenicline group, and 18% (18 of 100) in the placebo group. Abstinence rates between high-dose varenicline and placebo groups (odds ratio [OR] 1·18 [95% CI 0·59-2·37]; p=0·63) and between low-dose varenicline and placebo groups (1·73 [0·88-3·39]; p=0·11) did not differ significantly. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 65 (60%) of 108 participants in the high-dose group, 53 (53%) of 100 in the low-dose group, and 52 (53%) of 99 in the placebo group, and most were rated as mild. Neuropsychiatric treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 18 (17%) of 108 participants in the high-dose group, 11 (11%) of 100 in the low-dose group, and 12 (12%) of 99 in the placebo group, and none was rated as severe. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show an advantage in abstinence with varenicline compared with placebo among adolescent smokers. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar to those in previous trials of adult smokers, raising no new tolerability signals. These findings do not support the use of varenicline as a first-line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation in adolescents. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Pharmacovigilance Assessment of Cardiac Implications of Nicotine Replacement Therapy Among Smokers.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this quantitative comparative study was to examine the possible relationship between nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and cardiac disorder risk by comparing the rates of cardiac disorder risk of NRT with cardiac disorder risk of non-replacement drugs among smokers seeking smoking cessation. METHODS: The study used retrospective quantitative design, which involved the collection of secondary data from the adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database of the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Rates of cardiac disorder were compared between the NRT group and non- NRT (varenicline and bupropion) group. Statistical analyses involved using a 2x2 contingency table and logistic regression to calculate odds ratio (reporting odds ratio (ROR)). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Unadjusted ROR was 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28, 0.70). With age and sex as confounding factors, the smokers in the NRT group still had lower odds of having cardiac disorder risk than the non-NRT group (adjusted ROR=0.44, 95% CI 0.28, 0.70). CONCLUSION: Our study findings showed lower cardiac disorder risk with the NRT group compared to the non-NRT (varenicline and bupropion) group. While the study did not aim to undermine either using NRT or non-NRT for smoking cessation therapy to prevent smoking illness, the study results offer informed findings that could potentially improve current smoking cessation management using NRT intervention among smokers and enhance smokers' health outcome. Despite the negative signal detection of cardiac disorder risk with NRT as compared to non-NRT in final findings, we still recommend further research on the causal relationship between NRT and non-NRT and cardiac disorder risk.

Varenicline versus nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: an observational study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the leading avoidable cause of illness and premature mortality. The first-line treatments for smoking cessation are nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline. Meta-analyses of experimental studies have shown that participants allocated to the varenicline group were 1.57 times (95% confidence interval 1.29 to 1.91 times) as likely to be abstinent 6 months after treatment as those allocated to the nicotine replacement therapy group. However, there is limited evidence about the effectiveness of varenicline when prescribed in primary care. We investigated the effectiveness and rate of adverse events of these medicines in the general population. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of prescribing varenicline on smoking cessation rates and health outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Clinical Practice Research Datalink. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study using electronic medical records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We extracted data on all patients who were prescribed varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy after 1 September 2006 who were aged ≥ 18 years. We investigated the effects of varenicline on smoking cessation, all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality and hospitalisation for: (1) chronic lung disease, (2) lung cancer, (3) coronary heart disease, (4) pneumonia, (5) cerebrovascular disease, (6) diabetes, and (7) external causes; primary care diagnosis of myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, or prescription for anxiety; weight in kg; general practitioner and hospital attendance. Our primary outcome was smoking cessation 2 years after the first prescription. We investigated the baseline differences between patients prescribed varenicline and patients prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. We report results using multivariable-adjusted, propensity score and instrumental variable regression. Finally, we developed methods to assess the relative bias of the different statistical methods we used. RESULTS: People prescribed varenicline were healthier at baseline than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy in almost all characteristics, which highlighted the potential for residual confounding. Our instrumental variable analysis results found little evidence that patients prescribed varenicline had lower mortality 2 years after their first prescription (risk difference 0.67, 95% confidence interval -0.11 to 1.46) than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. They had similar rates of all-cause hospitalisation, incident primary care diagnoses of myocardial infarction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. People prescribed varenicline subsequently attended primary care less frequently. Patients prescribed varenicline were more likely (odds ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.42 to 1.50) to be abstinent 6 months after treatment than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy when estimated using multivariable-adjusted for baseline covariates. Patients from more deprived areas were less likely to be prescribed varenicline. However, varenicline had similar effectiveness for these groups. CONCLUSION: Patients prescribed varenicline in primary care were more likely to quit smoking than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy, but there was little evidence that they had lower rates of mortality or morbidity in the 4 years following the first prescription. There was little evidence of heterogeneity in effectiveness across the population. FUTURE WORK: Future research should investigate the decline in prescribing of smoking cessation products; develop an optimal treatment algorithm for smoking cessation; use methods for using instruments with survival outcomes; and develop methods for comparing multivariable-adjusted and instrumental variable estimates. LIMITATIONS: Not all of our code lists were validated, body mass index and Index of Multiple Deprivation had missing values, our results may suffer from residual confounding, and we had no information on treatment adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as NCT02681848. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Smoking is the number one avoidable cause of ill health and death. Experiments suggest that more smokers will quit after being given the drug varenicline than with any other smoking cessation treatment. However, most of the experiments used to license varenicline had a relatively short follow-up (< 1 year) and did not necessarily recruit participants who were representative of smokers seen in a general practice in the UK, who tend to be older, are sicker and more likely to have neuropsychiatric illnesses. In this study, we investigated the outcomes of 287,079 patients prescribed varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (e.g. nicotine patches and gum). We followed each patient for up to 4 years after they received their prescriptions and matched their data to information on deaths from the Office for National Statistics and hospital admissions. We investigated how often these patients subsequently attended their general practitioner, and how often they received a diagnosis of myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression or anxiety in primary care. We found that patients who were prescribed varenicline were much more likely to quit smoking up to 4 years after they received treatment and subsequently attended their general practitioner less frequently. These findings were robust across the three different analysis methods we used. We also found that patients prescribed varenicline were much less likely to be ill or to die than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. However, these results may be because the patients who were prescribed varenicline were much healthier before they received the prescription. Therefore, these differences in health are unlikely to be caused by taking varenicline or quitting smoking. In conclusion, varenicline helped patients quit smoking, but there was little causal evidence that prescribing patients varenicline causally reduced rates of mortality or morbidity compared with prescribing nicotine replacement therapy.

Receipt and predictors of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy among veterans with and without HIV.

Smoking is highly prevalent among people living with HIV (PLWH) and increases cardiovascular risk. Pharmacotherapies such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, and varenicline help to reduce smoking, though rates of receipt among PLWH compared with HIV-uninfected persons are unknown. Among 814 PLWH and 908 uninfected patients enrolled in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (2012-2017) who reported current smoking, we used marginal multivariable log-linear regression models to estimate adjusted relative risks (ARR) of receiving pharmacotherapy by HIV status. We also assessed patient-level factors associated with pharmacotherapy receipt within each group. In multivariable analyses, receipt of NRT was less likely among PLWH relative to uninfected participants (ARR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67, 0.89). In both populations, documented mental health disorders and contemplation to quit were associated with greater likelihood of receiving pharmacotherapy. Further research is needed to explore potential treatment disparities.

Exercise for Smoking Cessation in Postmenopausal Women: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal smokers have difficulty quitting smoking and experience considerable weight gain with smoking cessation. We examined whether adjunctive smoking treatment with exercise, compared to a relaxation control condition, could improve cigarette abstinence, decrease cigarettes smoked per day (CPD), and ameliorate changes in body mass index (BMI) in postmenopausal smokers. METHODS: Women (N = 301) signed informed consent and were randomized to treatment at two sites (Universities of Connecticut and Minnesota). We randomized groups of participants to a comprehensive group treatment program that included 12 weeks of varenicline and either a moderate exercise or relaxation component for 6 months. Participants were followed for a year after medication treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 17.3% of patients reported carbon monoxide-verified continuous abstinence for the 9- to 12-week period, and 11.6% reported prolonged abstinence at 1 year, with no significant differences between treatment conditions. CPD reported at study visits showed significant main effects for time in weeks, for site, and for treatment. The Exercise condition reported smoking fewer CPD over time, and that advantage widened over time. In terms of BMI, significant effects for time in weeks, and for the interaction of Week × Treatment condition, reflected gradually increasing BMI in these women over time, but with the increase in BMI slower in the Exercise condition. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise, compared to relaxation, was associated with a reduced BMI and CPD in postmenopausal women, but did not increase end of treatment or prolonged abstinence. Further research is needed to devise exercise programs that increase smoking cessation rates in postmenopausal women. IMPLICATIONS: This study adds to the literature on the effectiveness of a moderate exercise intervention compared to a relaxation control condition as an adjunctive treatment for smoking cessation in postmenopausal women. Our exercise program did not increase end of treatment or prolonged abstinence rates in postmenopausal women; however, there was a beneficial effect on smoking reduction and reduced body mass index. Additional research is needed to devise exercise programs that increase smoking cessation rates in postmenopausal women.

The Novel CYP2A6 Inhibitor, DLCI-1, Decreases Nicotine Self-Administration in Mice.

During tobacco and e-cigarette use, nicotine is mainly metabolized in the human liver by cytochrome P450 2A6 (CYP2A6). Given that a slower CYP2A6 metabolism has been associated with less vulnerability to develop nicotine dependence, the current studies sought to validate a novel CYP2A6 inhibitor, (5-(4-ethylpyridin-3-yl)thiophen-2-yl)methanamine (DLCI-1), for its effects on intravenous nicotine self-administration. Male and female mice were trained to self-administer nicotine across daily sessions. Once stable responding was achieved, DLCI-1 or vehicle control was administered prior to nicotine sessions. We found that the lower 25 mg/kg and moderate 50 mg/kg doses of DLCI-1 induced a significant decrease in nicotine intake for both males and females. DLCI-1 was further shown to be more effective than a moderate 1 mg/kg dose of bupropion on reducing nicotine intake and did not exert the adverse behavioral effects found with a high 75 mg/kg dose of bupropion. Although mice treated with DLCI-1 self-administered significantly less nicotine, similar nicotine-mediated behavioral effects on locomotion were observed. Together, along with the analysis of nicotine metabolites during self-administration, these findings support the contention that blocking hepatic nicotine metabolism would allow for similar activation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors at lower nicotine doses. Moreover, these effects of DLCI-1 were specific to nicotine self-administration, as DLCI-1 did not result in any behavioral changes during food self-administration. Taken together, these studies validate DLCI-1 as a novel compound to decrease nicotine consumption, which may thereby promote tobacco and nicotine product cessation. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Current pharmacological approaches for nicotine and tobacco cessation have only been able to achieve limited efficaciousness in promoting long-term abstinence. In this work, we characterize the effects of a novel compound, (5-(4-ethylpyridin-3-yl)thiophen-2-yl)methanamine (DLCI-1), which inhibits the main enzyme that metabolizes nicotine, and we report a significant decrease in intravenous nicotine self-administration in male and female mice, supporting the potential of DLCI-1 as a novel tobacco cessation pharmacotherapeutic.

Insurance coverage and utilization of nicotine patches after receipt of a prescription.

Introduction: Changes in reimbursement policy have made nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) much more available, but little is known about what happens to patients after they receive their prescription. This study describes rates of successfully filling prescriptions for NRT and its association with type of insurance. Methods: We identified 224 patients who received a prescription for NRT during an outpatient visit to an academic medical center between January 1st 2016 and February 10th 2017. We conducted telephone surveys to assess whether they tried to fill their prescriptions and if so, determine the effects of insurance type on the ability to successfully fill the prescription. Results: Of 117 patients completing the survey, 23 (19.6%) did not attempt to fill and 6 (5.1%) had no insurance. Of the 90 patients with insurance who attempted to fill their prescription, 67 (74.4%) were successful and 23 (25.6%) were unsuccessful in obtaining medications. Success varied by insurance with successful fills ranging from 34 (87.2%) of those with commercial insurance, 24 (70.6%) with Medicaid, to 9 (52.9%) with Medicare. Of 37 participants living with another smoker, 31 (83.7%) wanted an NRT prescription specifically for their partner; several volunteered that they had shared patches with their partner. Conclusions: Despite widespread coverage for NRT, many patients may still encounter difficulties in getting their prescriptions filled. Some tobacco users might also benefit from getting NRT prescriptions for their partners that smoke.

Effects of chronic treatment with bupropion on self-administration of nicotine + cocaine mixtures in nonhuman primates.

Chronic health problems associated with long-term nicotine use are the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. The use of tobacco products is 3-4 times greater among individuals with cocaine use disorder than that observed in the general population. This may reflect the propensity of nicotine to augment the reinforcing effects of cocaine. However, the mechanism of action of nicotine differs from that of cocaine, which presents a significant challenge for the development of pharmacotherapeutic interventions for the management of nicotine + cocaine polydrug abuse. Bupropion, an FDA-approved smoking cessation aid, has pharmacological actions at both monoamine transporters and nicotinic receptors, suggesting that it may be effective at decreasing nicotine + cocaine coabuse. Here, rhesus monkeys (n = 4) responded for food pellets and, separately, intravenous injections of nicotine, cocaine, or nicotine + cocaine mixtures under a second-order FR2(VR16:S) schedule of reinforcement during 7- to 10-day continuous treatment with saline or bupropion (1.0 and 1.8 mg/kg/hr). Results show that bupropion treatment dose-dependently decreased self-administration of nicotine combined with a low dose of cocaine (0.0032 mg/kg/inj); however, when the dose of cocaine in the mixture was higher (i.e., 0.01 mg/kg/inj), bupropion attenuated self-administration in only a subset of subjects. The effective dosage of bupropion increased responding for cocaine alone, nicotine alone, and for saline injections and significantly increased measures of daily activity. The apparent stimulant-like effects of bupropion at the dosage required to decrease cocaine + nicotine self-administration does not support its clinical use for the management of nicotine + cocaine polydrug abuse. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).