Implementation, enrollment, and engagement in an opt-out telehealth pharmacist-assisted tobacco treatment program for patients seen in oncology outpatient clinics.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the workflow, reach, cost, and self-reported quit rates for an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) for patients seen in 43 oncology outpatient clinics. METHODS: Between May 25, 2021, and December 31, 2022, adult patients (≥18 years) visiting clinics affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina Hollings Cancer Center were screened for smoking status. Those currently smoking were referred to a telehealth pharmacy-assisted TTP. An attempt was made to contact referred patients by phone. Patients reached were offered free smoking cessation counseling and a 2-week starter kit of nicotine replacement medication. A random sample of 420 patients enrolled in the TTP were selected to participate in a telephone survey to assess smoking status 4 to 12 months after enrollment. RESULTS: During the reference period 35,756 patients were screened and 9.3% were identified as currently smoking. Among the 3319 patients referred to the TTP at least once, 2393 (72.1%) were reached by phone, of whom 426 (12.8%) were ineligible for treatment, 458 (13.8%) opted out of treatment, and 1509 (45.5%) received treatment. More than 90% of TTP enrollees smoked daily, with an average of 13.1 cigarettes per day. Follow-up surveys were completed on 167 of 420 patients, of whom 23.4% to 33.5% reported not smoking; if all nonresponders to the survey are counted as smoking, the range of quit rates is 9.3% to 13.3%. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate the feasibility of reaching and delivering smoking cessation treatments to patients from a diverse set of geographically dispersed oncology clinics.

Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapy Efficacy in Comorbid Medical Populations: Secondary Analysis of the Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study (EAGLES) Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to compare medication efficacy in participants with medical comorbidities who smoke in the Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study (EAGLES) trial, a double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled randomized controlled trial. AIMS AND METHODS: Participants were from the U.S. cohort of the main trial and randomized (1:1:1:1) to varenicline, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) patch, or placebo for 12 weeks with follow-up through week 24. Medical comorbidity data were derived from the baseline medical screening questionnaire and categorized into four subgroups (cardiac, respiratory, vascular, and diabetes). Within each comorbidity, generalized linear mixed models were used to assess the association between treatment and continuous abstinence rates from weeks 9-12 to 9-24. Similar models were used to test the effect of number of comorbidities on abstinence. RESULTS: Varenicline resulted in the highest week 12 abstinence rates across all pharmacotherapies and compared to placebo in all comorbidity subgroups: Cardiac (40.0% vs. 3.6%; odds ratios [OR] = 23.3 [5.1-107.1]), respiratory (24.7% vs. 12.8%; OR = 2.2 [1.3-3.8]), vascular (29.1% vs. 10.4%; OR = 3.6 [2.3-5.7]), and diabetes (30.9% vs. 8.3%; OR = 6.5 [2.3-19.0]). This was maintained at week 24 for those with cardiac (23.3% vs. 1.8%; OR = 21.7 [2.7-178.2]), vascular (18.9% vs. 7.1%; OR = 3.1 [1.8-5.3]), and diabetes (20.6% vs. 4.2%; OR = 8.4 [2.1-33.7]) comorbidities. Treatment contrasts within some comorbidity subgroups revealed superior efficacy of varenicline over other pharmacotherapies. All pharmacotherapies increased the odds of abstinence regardless of number of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline is the most efficacious option for patients with manageable cardiac, respiratory, vascular, and diabetes conditions to quit smoking, supporting recent clinical practice guidelines that recommend varenicline as first-line pharmacotherapy. Bupropion and NRT demonstrated efficacy for some comorbidity subgroups. IMPLICATIONS: This secondary analysis of the EAGLES trial demonstrated that varenicline is the most efficacious option for patients with cardiac, respiratory, vascular, and diabetes diagnoses to quit smoking. This demonstration of varenicline efficacy among individuals with comorbid medical conditions supports recent clinical practice guidelines that recommend varenicline as a first-line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation.

Implementation of an "opt-out" tobacco treatment program in six hospitals in South Carolina.

OBJECTIVE: Describe the screening, referral, and treatment delivery associated with an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) implemented in six hospitals varying in size, rurality and patient populations. METHODS: Between March 6, 2021 and December 17, 2021, adult patients (≥ 18 years) admitted to six hospitals affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina were screened for smoking status. The hospitals ranged in size from 82 to 715 beds. Those currently smoking were automatically referred to one of two tobacco treatment options: 1) Enhanced care (EC) where patients could receive a bedside consult by a trained tobacco treatment specialist plus an automated post-discharge follow-up call designed to connect those smoking to the South Carolina Quitline (SCQL); or 2) Basic care (BC) consisting of the post-discharge follow-up call only. An attempt was made to survey patients at 6-weeks after hospitalization to assess smoking status. RESULTS: Smoking prevalence ranged from 14 to 49% across the six hospitals; 6,000 patients were referred to the TTP.The delivery of the bedside consult varied across the hospitals with the lowest in the Charleston hospitals which had the highest caseload of referred patients per specialist. Among patients who received a consult visit during their hospitalization, 50% accepted the consult, 8% opted out, 3% claimed not to be current smokers, and 38% were unavailable at the time of the consult visit. Most of those enrolled in the TTP were long-term daily smokers.Forty-three percent of patients eligible for the automated post-discharge follow-up call answered the call, of those, 61% reported smoking in the past seven days, and of those, 34% accepted the referral to theSCQL. Among the 986 of patients surveyed at 6-weeks after hospitalization quit rates ranged from 20%-30% based on duration of reported cessation and were similar between hospitals and for patients assigned to EC versus BC intervention groups. CONCLUSION: Findings demonstrate the broad reach of an opt-out TTP. Elements of treatment delivery can be improved by addressing patient-to-staffing ratios, improving systems to prescribe stop smoking medications for patients at discharge and linking patients to stop smoking services after hospital discharge.

Expectations and Preferences for Digital Cessation Treatment: Multimethods Study Among Older Adults Who Smoke Cigarettes.

BACKGROUND: To address enduring age-related tobacco disparities, it is critical to promote cessation treatment among older adults (aged 65+ years). Digital health platforms offer opportunities for wide dissemination of evidence-based behavioral cessation support. However, existing digital cessation treatments are not tailored to unique aging-related needs and preferences, resulting in low uptake. Detailed information is needed about how to best adapt these treatments for this age group. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to collect detailed, hypothesis-generating information about expectations and preferences for cessation digital treatment among older adults who smoke cigarettes. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with adults aged 65+ years currently smoking or who had quit within the past month. Interviews included open-ended questions regarding prior experiences with digital health platforms and expectations and preferences for cessation treatment via various modalities (app-delivered, texting-based, or videoconferencing counseling). Interviews also elicited questions regarding digital modalities that integrated social components (app-delivered social forums and group videoconferencing counseling). Using an iterative, team-based approach, the thematic analysis identified meaningful themes. Interviews were supplemented with quantitative measures assessing sociodemographics, digital literacy, and physical health symptoms. RESULTS: Participants (12/20, 60% men; 15/20, 75% White; 4/20, 20% Black or African American; 1/20, 5% Asian) were currently smoking (17/20, 85%) or had recently quit (3/20, 15%). Thematic analysis identified 3 meaningful themes across all digital modalities: convenience, accessibility, and personalization. Expected benefits of digital platforms included convenient treatment access, without reliance on transportation. Participants preferred treatments to be personalized and deliver content or strategies beyond standard education. Most (17/20, 85%) were unfamiliar with cessation apps but found them appealing given the potential for offering a novel quitting strategy. App ease of use (eg, easy navigation) was preferred. Half (10/20, 50%) would try a texting-based intervention, with many preferring texting with a counselor rather than automated messaging. Most (17/20, 85%) would use videoconferencing and expected this modality to deliver better quality counseling than via telephone. Expected videoconferencing challenges included looking presentable onscreen, technological difficulties, and privacy or security. Videoconferencing was regarded as the most personalized digital treatment, yet benefits unique to app-delivered and texting-based treatments included anonymity and access to treatment 24/7. Participants expected integrating social components into digital treatment to be useful for quit success and social connection, yet were concerned about possible interpersonal challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Because a long history of quit attempts and familiarity with standard quitting advice is common among older adults who smoke cigarettes, digital platforms might offer appealing and novel strategies for cessation that are accessible and convenient. Overall, this population was open to trying digital cessation treatments and would prefer that these platforms prioritize ease of use and personalized content. These findings challenge the bias that older adults are uninterested or unwilling to engage with digital treatments for behavioral health.

Prescription of Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Hospitalized Tobacco Users.

OBJECTIVES: In hospitalized patients, cigarette smoking is linked to increased readmission rates, emergency department visits, and overall mortality. Smoking cessation reduces these risks, but many patients who smoke are unsuccessful in quitting. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is an effective tool that assists patients who smoke with quitting. This study evaluates NRT prescriptions during and after hospitalization at a large health system for patients who smoke. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to determine the number of patients who were prescribed NRT during an inpatient admission and at time of discharge from a network of nine hospitals across South Carolina between January 1, 2019 and January 1, 2023. RESULTS: This study included 20,757 patients identified as actively smoking with at least one hospitalization during the study period. Of the cohort, 34.9% were prescribed at least one prescription for NRT during their admission to the hospital. Of the patients identified, 12.6% were prescribed NRT upon discharge from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified significantly low rates of NRT prescribed to smokers during hospitalization and at discharge. Although the management of chronic conditions is typically addressed in the outpatient setting, hospitalization may provide an opportunity for patients to initiate health behavior changes. The low rates of prescriptions for NRT present an opportunity to improve tobacco treatment during hospitalization and beyond.

Tobacco use and cancer-related symptom burden: Analysis of the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the relationship between tobacco use and symptom burden may inform tobacco treatment interventions tailored to the needs of individuals with cancer. METHODS: The study included 1409 adult cancer survivors from Wave 5 of the US Food and Drug Administration Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. A multivariate analysis of variance controlling for age, sex, and race/ethnicity assessed the association of cigarette smoking and vaping on cancer-related symptom burden (fatigue, pain, emotional problems) and quality of life (QoL). Generalized linear mixed models controlling for the same factors were used to assess associations among symptom burden, QoL, and quit-smoking intentions, quit-smoking likelihood, and past 12-month smoking quit attempts. RESULTS: Weighted rates of current cigarette smoking and vaping were 14.21% and 2.88%, respectively. Current smoking was associated with greater fatigue (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .02), pain (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .08), emotional problems (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .02), and worse QoL (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .08). Current vaping was associated with greater fatigue (p = .001; partial η 2  = .008), pain (p = .009; partial η 2  = .005), and emotional problems (p = .04; partial η 2  = .003), but not worse QoL (p = .17). Higher cancer symptom burden was not associated with reduced interest in quitting, likelihood of quitting, or odds of past year quit attempts (p > .05 for each). CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with cancer, current smoking and vaping were associated with greater symptom burden. Survivors' interest in and intentions to quit smoking were not related to symptom burden. Future research should examine the role of tobacco cessation in improving symptom burden and QoL.

A Secondary Analysis of a Preliminary Contingency Management Intervention for Presurgical Cancer Patients: Evaluating Individual Participant Data.

INTRODUCTION: Contingency management (CM) interventions deliver monetary reinforcers contingent upon biochemically verified abstinence from smoking. CM has been found to be effective, however, individual participant, analyses are warranted to further elucidate how individual-level behavior patterns vary during the intervention period, both within and across treatment groups. AIMS AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled pilot trial of presurgical cancer patients who smoke (RCT N = 40). All participants were current everyday smokers and were enrolled in cessation counseling, offered nicotine replacement therapy, and submitted breath CO testing 3 times per week for 2-5 weeks. Participants randomized to CM received monetary reinforcers for breath CO ≤6 ppm on an escalating schedule of reinforcement with a reset for positive samples. Sufficient breath CO data exist for 28 participants (CM = 14; monitoring only [MO] = 14). Effect size was calculated for differences in negative CO tests. Time to first negative test was tested using survival analysis. Fisher's exact test was used to assess relapse. RESULTS: The CM group achieved abstinence more quickly (p < .05), had a lower percentage of positive tests (h = 0.80), and experienced fewer lapses following abstinence (p = .00). While 11 of 14 participants in the CM group achieved and sustained abstinence by their third breath test, this was only true for 2 of the 14 MO participants. CONCLUSIONS: Those in CM achieved abstinence quicker and with fewer lapses than those engaged in MO speaking to the efficacy of the schedule of financial reinforcement. This is particularly important within presurgical populations given the potential benefits to postoperative cardiovascular and wound infection risk. IMPLICATIONS: While the efficacy of CM as an intervention is well established, this secondary analysis provides insight into the individual behavior patterns underlying successful abstinence. Those assigned to CM were not only more likely to achieve abstinence, but did so more quickly and with fewer instances of relapse. This is of particular importance to those scheduled for surgery where achieving abstinence as early as possible impacts on the risk of postoperative complications. CM interventions may be particularly well suited for critical windows in which timely and sustained abstinence is advantageous.

Interest in quitting e-cigarette use by device type and smoking history in US adults.

BACKGROUND: The use of e-cigarettes has been increasing, especially since the introduction of 'pod' devices to the marketplace since 2018. Most adults who vape report interest in quitting. The present study examined level of interest in e-cigarette cessation between users with varying cigarette smoking histories and device types. METHODS: Data obtained from wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (n=34 309). Analyses were conducted on adult current established e-cigarette users, categorised on cigarette smoking history (current, former or never) and device type (disposable, cartridge/pod, tank or mod). Participants reported if they planned to ever quit e-cigarettes, attempted to quit in the past year and attempted to quit by cutting back in the past year. RESULTS: Of the 2922 established e-cigarette users, 68.21% reported plans to quit vaping; 17.27% reported attempting to quit e-cigarettes in the past year; and 29.28% reported attempting to quit by cutting back in the past year. Cartridge users had higher odds of interest in quitting than tank and mod users. Disposable and cartridge users had higher odds of reporting a past year quit attempt than tank and mod users. Individuals with no smoking history had higher odds of reporting a past year quit attempt or cutting back relative to those reporting dual use (of both e-cigarettes and cigarettes) and former smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco control should consider the type of e-cigarette device that is being used, alongside users' cigarette smoking history, when developing interventions and other resources for vaping cessation.

Reappraising Choice in Addiction: Novel Conceptualizations and Treatments for Tobacco Use Disorder.

The introduction of alternative nicotine and tobacco products (such as e-cigarettes, heat-not-burn devices, nicotine pouches) warrants an updated framework from which to conceptualize tobacco use disorder (TUD). The following review provides considerations for TUD within the context of novel products. Historically, the tobacco industry falsely claimed that cigarettes were not addictive or harmful and that those who smoked simply chose to do so. This generated an inaccurate lay perception that smoking is a free or informed choice. Research on nicotine pharmacology demonstrates the powerful addictive potential of nicotine, which is shaped by dose, speed of delivery, and other constituents generated. In addition, non-pharmacologic reinforcers motivate and maintain tobacco use behaviors for both traditional cigarettes and novel products. The negative consequences of combustible tobacco use are well known; however, these outcomes may differ for alternative products. Strategies used for combustible product cessation may be adapted for novel products, and treatment recommendations for TUD should be made within the context of a harm reduction framework wherein alternative product use may be the desired outcome. Providers must therefore be willing to modify their perceptions of products and treatment recommendations accordingly. Better public health outcomes are accomplished through promotion of abstinence from combustible smoking. For those who cannot wean from nicotine entirely, switching to less risky modes of delivery might be a secondary goal, with an eventual aim of stopping use of the alternative product. Implications: Given the advent of novel, alternative tobacco products, tobacco use disorder (TUD) must be conceptualized within a contemporary framework that includes harm reduction and alternative outcomes. The unique contributions of nicotine pharmacology, non-pharmacologic reinforcers, and consequences of use can be used to inform treatments for TUD with the ultimate goal of improving the health of individuals who use tobacco.

A Preoperative Contingency Management Intervention for Smoking Abstinence in Cancer Patients: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a pilot preoperative contingency management (CM) intervention for smoking abstinence. AIMS AND METHODS: This multisite pilot study was conducted at two cancer center-based tobacco treatment programs. Participants who were smoking, diagnosed with or suspected to have any type of operable cancer, and had a surgical procedure scheduled in the next 10 days to 5 weeks (N = 40) were randomized to receive standard care plus monitoring only (MO) or CM prior to surgery. All patients received breath carbon monoxide (CO) tests 3 times per week, nicotine patches, and counseling. The CM group also earned payments for self-reported smoking abstinence confirmed by CO breath test ≤6 ppm on an escalating schedule of reinforcement (with a reset if they smoked). Seven-day point prevalence abstinence rates on the day of surgery and at 3-month follow-up were compared between groups using repeated measures log-linear regression models utilizing generalized estimating equations. Participants lost to follow-up are assumed to have returned to smoking. RESULTS: The sample was 50% female and 75% White. In covariate adjusted models, patients in the CM group had a greater probability of reported abstinence. On the day of surgery (end of treatment), 52% of CM patients were abstinent compared with 16% of patients in MO (risk ratio = 3.2 [1.1-9.3]; p = .03). At the 3-month follow-up, 43% of CM patients were abstinent compared with 5% in MO (risk ratio = 8.4 [1.5-48.3]; p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Providing monetary incentives contingent on abstinence prior to cancer surgery may produce significant improvements in smoking abstinence rates relative to breath CO MO. IMPLICATIONS: In this pilot preoperative CM intervention for smoking abstinence, patients receiving a CM intervention prior to cancer surgery had a greater probability of smoking abstinence at the end of treatment compared with a breath MO group (52% vs. 16%, respectively). Thus, providing monetary incentives contingent on abstinence may produce significant improvements in smoking abstinence rates prior to cancer surgery relative to breath CO monitoring.

A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial of Remote Varenicline Sampling to Promote Treatment Engagement and Smoking Cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Medication sampling is a clinically useful tool to engage smokers in the quitting process. Whether varenicline is suitable for sampling purposes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility, uptake, and preliminary outcomes of varenicline sampling. METHODS: Smokers (N = 99), both motivated to quit and not, were recruited and randomized to varenicline sampling versus not, with 12 week follow-up. The intervention consisted of mailing one-time samples of varenicline (lasting 2-4 wks), with minimally suggestive guidance on use. RESULTS: Uptake of varenicline was strong, at 2 weeks (54% any use, 66% daily use) and 4 weeks (38%, 46%), with 58% of medication users seeking additional medication. Most users followed conventional titration patterns, self-titrating from 0.5 mg to 2 mg. Relative to control, varenicline sampling increased motivation (p = 0.006) and confidence to quit (p = 0.02), and decreased cigarette smoking (p = 0.02). Smokers receiving varenicline samples were significantly more likely to achieve 50% reduction in cigarettes per day (CPD), both immediately following the sampling exercise (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 4.12; 95% CI: 1.39 to 12.17) and at final follow-up (AOR = 4.50; 95% CI: 1.56 to 13.01). Though cessation outcomes were not statistically significant, there was a 1.5 to 3-fold increase in quit attempts and abstinence from varenicline sampling throughout follow-up. These outcomes were comparable among smokers motivated to quit and not. CONCLUSIONS: Unguided, user-driven sampling of varenicline sampling is a concrete behavioral exercise that is feasible to do and seems to suggest clinical utility. Sampling is a pragmatic clinical approach to engage more smokers in quitting. IMPLICATIONS: Use of evidence-based pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation is low. Medication sampling is a pragmatic behavioral exercise that allows smokers to experience the benefits of using them, while promoting positive downstream effects towards quitting. While previous studies have shown that nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sampling is viable and effective, whether this extends to varenicline is unclear. Results from this trial demonstrate that varenicline sampling is feasible, safe, and suggestive of clinically important steps toward quitting, deserving of a larger trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT #03742154.

Predictors of Enrollment of Older Smokers in Six Smoking Cessation Trials in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: The Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination (SCALE) Collaboration.

SIGNIFICANCE: Increased rates of smoking cessation will be essential to maximize the population benefit of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer. The NCI's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination (SCALE) Collaboration includes eight randomized trials, each assessing evidence-based interventions among smokers undergoing lung cancer screening (LCS). We examined predictors of trial enrollment to improve future outreach efforts for cessation interventions offered to older smokers in this and other clinical settings. METHODS: We included the six SCALE trials that randomized individual participants. We assessed demographics, intervention modalities, LCS site and trial administration characteristics, and reasons for declining. RESULTS: Of 6285 trial- and LCS-eligible individuals, 3897 (62%) declined and 2388 (38%) enrolled. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, Blacks had higher enrollment rates (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2,1.8) compared to Whites. Compared to "NRT Only" trials, those approached for "NRT + prescription medication" trials had higher odds of enrollment (OR 6.1, 95% CI 4.7,7.9). Regarding enrollment methods, trials using "Phone + In Person" methods had higher odds of enrollment (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2,1.9) compared to trials using "Phone Only" methods. Some of the reasons for declining enrollment included "too busy" (36.6%), "not ready to quit" (8.2%), "not interested in research" (7.7%), and "not interested in the intervention offered" (6.2%). CONCLUSION: Enrolling smokers in cessation interventions in the LCS setting is a major priority that requires multiple enrollment and intervention modalities. Barriers to enrollment provide insights that can be addressed and applied to future cessation interventions to improve implementation in LCS and other clinical settings with older smokers. IMPLICATIONS: We explored enrollment rates and reasons for declining across six smoking cessation trials in the lung cancer screening setting. Offering multiple accrual methods and pharmacotherapy options predicted increased enrollment across trials. Enrollment rates were also greater among Blacks compared to Whites. The findings offer practical information for the implementation of cessation trials and interventions in the lung cancer screening context and other clinical settings, regarding intervention modalities that may be most appealing to older, long-term smokers.

A Pilot Study of a Standardized Smoking Cessation Intervention for Patients with Vascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a smoking cessation intervention performed by a vascular surgery provider compared with current smoking cessation practices. METHODS: Patients with peripheral arterial and aneurysmal disease who presented to the vascular surgery service at a tertiary care center over a 9-month period were randomized to either control or intervention group. Both control and intervention groups received 2 weeks of free nicotine patches and referral to an outpatient smoking-cessation program. The intervention group additionally received a brief presentation by a vascular surgeon regarding the benefits of smoking cessation, with a focus on vascular complications. At enrollment and at follow-up, patients underwent carbon monoxide breath testing and completed a survey. The primary outcome was smoking cessation or reduction among control and intervention groups in patients who underwent medical management, endovascular procedures, or open surgical procedures. Fisher's exact test was used to assess the primary outcome among groups. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were enrolled in the trial initially, but 55 had 1-month follow-up (control n = 28, intervention n = 27) and 52 had long-term follow-up (control n = 28, intervention n = 24). By long-term follow-up, 40 patients (77%) had reduced smoking by at least 50% and 16 patients (31%) had quit completely. At long-term follow-up, 88% of patients in the intervention group and 68% of patients in the control group reduced smoking (P = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of vascular patients who received 2 weeks of nicotine replacement with or without the addition of brief smoking cessation counseling delivered by a vascular surgery provider were able to reduce smoking and maintain reduction after 6 months. Delivery of a brief standardized smoking cessation counseling session by a vascular surgery provider is safe and feasible. Additional randomized controlled trials with large enrollment periods and long follow-up are needed to determine the efficacy of this intervention in comparison to standard care.

Lung Cancer Screening and Smoking Cessation Clinical Trials. SCALE (Smoking Cessation within the Context of Lung Cancer Screening) Collaboration.

National recommendations for lung cancer screening for former and current smokers aged 55-80 years with a 30-pack-year smoking history create demand to implement efficient and effective systems to offer smoking cessation on a large scale. These older, high-risk smokers differ from participants in past clinical trials of behavioral and pharmacologic interventions for tobacco dependence. There is a gap in knowledge about how best to design systems to extend reach and treatments to maximize smoking cessation in the context of lung cancer screening. Eight clinical trials, seven funded by the National Cancer Institute and one by the Veterans Health Administration, address this gap and form the SCALE (Smoking Cessation within the Context of Lung Cancer Screening) collaboration. This paper describes methodological issues related to the design of these clinical trials: clinical workflow, participant eligibility criteria, screening indication (baseline or annual repeat screen), assessment content, interest in stopping smoking, and treatment delivery method and dose, all of which will affect tobacco treatment outcomes. Tobacco interventions consider the "teachable moment" offered by lung cancer screening, how to incorporate positive and negative screening results, and coordination of smoking cessation treatment with clinical events associated with lung cancer screening. Unique data elements, such as perceived risk of lung cancer and costs of tobacco treatment, are of interest. Lung cancer screening presents a new and promising opportunity to reduce morbidity and mortality resulting from lung cancer that can be amplified by effective smoking cessation treatment. SCALE teamwork and collaboration promise to maximize knowledge gained from the clinical trials.

Text Messaging to Reduce Alcohol Relapse in Prelisting Liver Transplant Candidates: A Pilot Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Many liver transplantation programs require documented alcohol sobriety prior to United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) listing. This pilot study examined the feasibility of the first mobile, alcohol relapse prevention intervention for liver transplant patients with alcoholic liver disease (ALD). METHODS: This was a randomized 8-week pilot feasibility trial of a text message-based alcohol intervention. In-treatment assessment was conducted at 4 weeks (4W), and immediate posttreatment assessment was conducted at 8W. Participants were liver transplant candidates (N = 15) diagnosed with ALD who reported at least 1 drinking episode in the past year. Primary feasibility outcomes were percent of messages responded to and posttreatment intervention satisfaction ratings. Preliminary clinical efficacy outcomes were any biologically confirmed alcohol consumption, stress, abstinence self-efficacy, and alcohol craving. RESULTS: On feasibility outcomes, participants responded to 81% of messages received and reported high rates of intervention satisfaction, looked forward to receiving the messages, and found it easy to complete the intervention. On preliminary efficacy outcomes, zero participants in the text message (TM) had positive urine alcohol tests at 8W. Two of the 6 participants in standard care (SC) tested positive at 8W. No effects were seen on craving. For stress, a condition × time interaction emerged. TM participants had less stress at 4W and 8W compared with SC at baseline. They maintained their stress level during the intervention. For self-efficacy, a trend for condition effect emerged. TM participants had higher self-efficacy than SC participants. CONCLUSIONS: Participants reported high satisfaction with the intervention, looked forward to the messages, and found it easy to complete. Participants who received the intervention had better treatment outcomes than those who received standard care. They maintained higher levels of self-efficacy and lower stress. Mobile alcohol interventions may hold significant promise to help ALD liver transplant patients maintain sobriety.

Feasibility of Implementing a Hospital-Based "Opt-Out" Tobacco-Cessation Service.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and outcomes of implementing a hospital-based "opt-out" tobacco-cessation service. METHODS: In 2014, the Medical University of South Carolina adopted a policy that all hospitalized patients who self-report using tobacco be referred to tobacco-cessation service. This is a descriptive study of a real-world effort to implement guidelines for a hospital-based cessation service consistent with Joint Commission's standards. Between February 2014 and May 2015, 42 061 adults were admitted to the Medical University of South Carolina Hospital. Eligible current cigarette smokers were referred to the tobacco-cessation service, which consisted of a bedside consult and phone follow-up 3, 14, and 30 days after hospital discharge using interactive-voice-response. The primary study outcomes evaluated the proportions of smokers reached by the bedside counselor and/or phone follow-up, smokers who opted out, and smokers who self-reported not smoking when last contacted by phone. RESULTS: Records identified 8423 smokers, of whom 69.4% (n = 5843) were referred into the service. One full-time bedside counselor was able to speak with 1918 (32.8%) patients, of whom 96 (5%) denied currently smoking and 287 (14.9%) refused counselling. Reach at follow-up was achieved for 703 (55%) smokers who received bedside counselling and 1613 (49%) who did not, yielding an overall follow-up reach rate of 60%. Of those reached by phone, 36.4% reported not smoking (51% vs. 27% for those who did and did not receive bedside counselling, respectively). Intent-to-treat abstinence rate was 13.5% according to the last known smoking status. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest that an inpatient smoking-cessation service with an "opt-out" approach can positively impact short-term cessation outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: (1) The findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing an automated large-scale opt-out tobacco-cessation service for hospitalized patients that is consistent with the Joint Commission recommended standards for treating tobacco dependence. (2) Receiving a bedside tobacco-cessation consult while hospitalized increased the use of stop smoking medications and abstinence from smoking after discharge from the hospital. (3) Even in those patients who did not receive a bedside consult, 5% accepted a referral to the South Carolina Tobacco Quitline to get help to stop smoking.

Smoking, cessation, and cessation counseling in patients with cancer: A population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is known to be carcinogenic and an important factor in the outcome of cancer treatment. However, to the authors' knowledge, smoking habits and smoking cessation counseling in patients with cancer have been poorly studied. The authors sought to analyze smoking habits among Americans diagnosed with cancer in a nationally representative dataset. METHODS: The cancer supplement of the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) in 2010 was used to obtain information regarding self-reported smoking behavior in a representative sample of the US population. Cancer history, smoking history, quitting behavior, cessation counseling, cessation approaches, and sociodemographic variables were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 27,157 individuals were interviewed for the NHIS in 2010, representing 216,052,891 individuals, 7,058,135 of whom had ever smoked and 13,188,875 of whom had been told that they had cancer. Approximately 51.7% of individuals diagnosed with cancer and who were active smokers reported being counseled to quit smoking by a health professional within the previous 12 months. Cancer survivors were no more likely to quit smoking than individuals in the general population. Those diagnosed with a tobacco-related cancer were found to be no more likely to report quitting smoking than those with other types of cancers. Rates of quitting did not appear to vary based on the type of smoking cessation method used (P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer, including those diagnosed with a tobacco-related cancer, do not appear to be more likely to quit smoking than the general population. Only approximately one-half of patients with cancer who smoke are counseled to quit. Smoking cessation in patients with cancer is an important area for intervention and investigation.

Pairing smoking-cessation services with lung cancer screening: A clinical guideline from the Association for the Treatment of Tobacco Use and Dependence and the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

Smoking cessation is crucial for reducing cancer risk and premature mortality. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently approved lung screening as a benefit for patients ages 55 to 77 years who have a 30 pack-year history. The Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) and the Association for the Treatment of Tobacco Use and Dependence (ATTUD) developed the guideline described in this commentary based on an illustrative literature review to present the evidence for smoking-cessation health benefits in this high-risk group and to provide clinical recommendations for integrating evidence-based smoking-cessation treatment with lung cancer screening. Unfortunately, extant data on lung cancer screening participants were scarce at the time this guideline was written. However, in this review, the authors summarize the sufficient evidence on the benefits of smoking cessation and the efficacy of smoking-cessation interventions for smokers ages 55 to 77 years to provide smoking-cessation interventions for smokers who seek lung cancer screening. It is concluded that smokers who present for lung cancer screening should be encouraged to quit smoking at each visit. Access to evidence-based smoking-cessation interventions should be provided to all smokers regardless of scan results, and motivation to quit should not be a necessary precondition for treatment. Follow-up contacts to support smoking-cessation efforts should be arranged for smokers. Evidence-based behavioral strategies should be used at each visit to motivate smokers who are unwilling to try quitting/reducing smoking or to try evidence-based treatments that may lead to eventual cessation.

Cognitive testing of tobacco use items for administration to patients with cancer and cancer survivors in clinical research.

BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, there are currently no standardized measures of tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure in patients diagnosed with cancer, and this gap hinders the conduct of studies examining the impact of tobacco on cancer treatment outcomes. The objective of the current study was to evaluate and refine questionnaire items proposed by an expert task force to assess tobacco use. METHODS: Trained interviewers conducted cognitive testing with cancer patients aged ≥21 years with a history of tobacco use and a cancer diagnosis of any stage and organ site who were recruited at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. Iterative rounds of testing and item modification were conducted to identify and resolve cognitive issues (comprehension, memory retrieval, decision/judgment, and response mapping) and instrument navigation issues until no items warranted further significant modification. RESULTS: Thirty participants (6 current cigarette smokers, 1 current cigar smoker, and 23 former cigarette smokers) were enrolled from September 2014 to February 2015. The majority of items functioned well. However, qualitative testing identified wording ambiguities related to cancer diagnosis and treatment trajectory, such as "treatment" and "surgery"; difficulties with lifetime recall; errors in estimating quantities; and difficulties with instrument navigation. Revisions to item wording, format, order, response options, and instructions resulted in a questionnaire that demonstrated navigational ease as well as good question comprehension and response accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) can be used as a standardized item set to accelerate the investigation of tobacco use in the cancer setting. Cancer 2016;122:1728-34. © 2016 American Cancer Society.