Characterizing reward and relief/habit drinking profiles in a study of naltrexone, varenicline, and placebo.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to clarify differences in mood, craving, and treatment response between reward and relief/habit individuals in a study of naltrexone, varenicline, and placebo. We hypothesized that relief/habit individuals would have a poorer mood during early abstinence and higher levels of alcohol craving than reward individuals. We hypothesized that reward individuals would demonstrate better drinking outcomes on naltrexone versus placebo. METHODS: Data were culled from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled human trial of 53 individuals (18F/16M) with alcohol use disorder randomized to varenicline (n = 19), naltrexone (n = 15), or matched placebo (n = 19). In this 6-day practice quit trial, participants attempted to abstain from drinking and completed daily diaries. Participants were classified into reward or relief/habit subgroups based on self-reported motivation for drinking. Multilinear models tested differences in mood and alcohol craving between reward and relief/habit individuals. General linear models tested differences between reward and relief/habit individuals' drinking outcomes on each medication versus placebo. RESULTS: Relief/habit individuals showed decreases in positive mood and increases in negative mood over the quit attempt across medications, compared to reward individuals (P's < .05). Reward individuals' tension decreased on naltrexone, while relief/habit individuals' tension remained stable (F = 3.64, P = .03). Reward individuals in the placebo group had higher percent days abstinent than relief individuals in the placebo group (P < .001). DISCUSSION: This study suggests relief/habit individuals' mood worsens during early abstinence. Our finding that reward individuals' tension decreased on naltrexone and increased on placebo may suggest a clinical response to the medication.

Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapy Use in Pregnancy.

Importance: Significant evidence gaps exist regarding the safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy, especially for the risk of congenital malformations. Consequently, professional bodies advise against the use of varenicline and bupropion and recommend caution with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Contemporary estimates of the use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy are lacking. Objective: To quantify the proportion of individuals using prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies during pregnancy and during the first trimester specifically, in 4 countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked birth records, hospital admission records, and dispensing records of prescribed medications from all pregnancies resulting in birth between 2015 and 2020 in New South Wales, Australia; New Zealand; Norway; and Sweden. Data analyses were conducted in October and November 2023. Exposure: Prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapy use (varenicline, NRT, and bupropion) during pregnancy was defined as days' supply overlapping the period from date of conception to childbirth. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence of use among all pregnancies and pregnancies with maternal smoking were calculated. Among women who used a pharmacotherapy, the proportion of women with use during the first trimester of pregnancy was also calculated. Results: Among 1 700 638 pregnancies in 4 countries, 138 033 (8.1%) had maternal smoking and 729 498 (42.9%) were younger than 30 years. The prevalences ranged from 0.02% to 0.14% for varenicline, less than 0.01% to 1.86% for prescribed NRT, and less than 0.01% to 0.07% for bupropion. Among pregnant individuals who smoked, use of pharmacotherapies was up to 10 times higher, with maximum prevalences of 1.25% for varenicline in New South Wales, 11.39% for NRT in New Zealand, and 0.39% for bupropion in New Zealand. Use in the first trimester occurred among more than 90% of individuals using varenicline, approximately 60% among those using NRT, and 80% to 90% among those using bupropion. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of pregnant individuals in 4 high-income countries, the low prevalence of varenicline and bupropion use during pregnancy and higher prevalence of NRT use aligned with current clinical guidelines. As most use occurred in the first trimester, there is a need for evidence on the risk of congenital malformations for these medications.

Association of smoking cessation patterns and untreated smoking with glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration: a population-based retrospective study.

This study aims to assess the association between nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, and untreated smoking with the risk of developing eye disorders. We employed a new-user design to investigate the association between NRT use and the incidence of eye disorders by the Taiwan National Health Insurance program. This study included 8416 smokers who received NRT and 8416 smokers who did not receive NRT (control group) matched using propensity scores between 2007 and 2018. After adjustment for relevant factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that compared with untreated smokers, NRT use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of macular degeneration (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.87, P = 0.024). When stratified by dose, short-term NRT use (8-28 defined daily doses) was associated with significantly lower risk of glaucoma (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.16-0.80, P = 0.012) and a trend toward reduced risk of cataract (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36-1.01, P = 0.053) compared to no treatment. However, these associations were not observed with long-term NRT use. The results of this real-world observational study indicate that NRT use, particularly short-term use, was associated with a lower risk of certain eye disorders compared to no treatment for smoking cessation. Long-term NRT use did not demonstrate the same benefits. Thus, short-term NRT may be a beneficial treatment strategy for reducing the risk of eye disorders in smokers attempting to quit. However, further evidence is required to verify these findings and determine the optimal duration of NRT use.

The efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological monotherapies and e-cigarette on smoking cessation: a systemic review and network meta-analysis.

Background and aims: Several pharmacological interventions, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, and bupropion, have been approved for clinical use of smoking cessation. E-cigarettes (EC) are increasingly explored by many RCTs for their potentiality in smoking cessation. In addition, some RCTs are attempting to explore new drugs for smoking cessation, such as cytisine. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to investigate how these drugs and e-cigarettes compare regarding their efficacy and acceptability. Materials and methods: This systematic review and NMA searched all clinical studies on smoking cessation using pharmacological monotherapies or e-cigarettes published from January 2011 to May 2022 using MEDLINE, COCHRANE Library, and PsychINFO databases. NRTs were divided into transdermal (TDN) and oronasal nicotine (ONN) by administrative routes, thus 7 network nodes were set up for direct and indirect comparison. Two different indicators measured the efficacy: prevalent and continuous smoking abstinence. The drop-out rates measured the acceptability. Results: The final 40 clinical studies included in this study comprised 77 study cohorts and 25,889 participants. Varenicline is more effective intervention to assist in smoking cessation during 16-32 weeks follow-up, and is very likely to prompt dropout. Cytisine shows more effectiveness in continuous smoking cessation but may also lead to dropout. E-cigarettes and oronasal nicotine are more effective than no treatment in encouraging prevalent abstinence, but least likely to prompt dropout. Finally, transdermal nicotine delivery is more effective than no treatment in continuous abstinence, with neither significant effect on prevalent abstinence nor dropout rate. Conclusion: This review suggested and agreed that Varenicline, Cytisine and transdermal nicotine delivery, as smoking cessation intervention, have advantages and disadvantages. However, we had to have reservations about e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking in adolescents.

Varenicline and Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smokers Admitted to Hospitals: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Varenicline is the most effective sole pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. If used in combination with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), cessation rates may be further improved, but the efficacy and safety of the combination need to be evaluated. Objective: To examine whether hospitalized smokers treated with varenicline and NRT lozenges achieve higher prolonged smoking abstinence rates compared with those treated with varenicline alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in adult medical or surgical inpatients of 5 Australian public hospitals with a history of smoking 10 cigarettes or more per day, interested in quitting, and available for 12-month follow-up between May 1, 2019, and May 1, 2021 (final 12-month data collection in May 2022). Data analysis was performed from June 1 to August 30, 2023. Interventions: A 12-week varenicline regimen was initiated during hospitalization at standard doses in all participants. Participants were randomized to additionally use NRT (2 mg) or placebo lozenges if there was an urge to smoke. Behavioral support (Quitline) was offered to all participants. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was biochemically verified sustained abstinence at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-reported prolonged abstinence, 7-day point prevalence abstinence (3, 6, and 12 months), and medicine-related adverse events. Results: A total of 320 participants (mean [SD] age, 52.5 [12.1] years; 183 [57.2%] male) were randomized. The conduct of biochemical verification was affected by COVID-19 restrictions; consequently, the biochemically verified abstinence in the intervention vs control arms (18 [11.4%] vs 16 [10.1%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% CI, 0.56-2.33) did not support the combination therapy. The secondary outcomes in the intervention vs control arms of 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6 months (54 [34.2%] vs 37 [23.4%]; OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.04-2.80), prolonged abstinence at 12 months (47 [29.9%] vs 30 [19.1%]; OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.05-3.00), and 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12-months (48 [30.6%] vs 31 [19.7%]; OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.07-2.99) significantly improved with the combination therapy. The self-reported 6-month prolonged abstinence (61 [38.6%] vs 47 [29.7%]; OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.93-2.39) favored the combination therapy but was not statistically significant. Medicine-related adverse events were similar in the 2 groups (102 [74.5%] in the intervention group vs 86 [68.3%] in the control group). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of the combination of varenicline and NRT lozenges in hospitalized adult daily smokers, the combination treatment improved self-reported abstinence compared with varenicline alone, without compromising safety, but it did not improve biochemically validated abstinence. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12618001792213.

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.

Investigating disparities in smoking cessation treatment for veterans with multiple sclerosis: A national analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking is a risk factor for multiple sclerosis (MS) development, symptom burden, decreased medication efficacy, and increased disease-related mortality. Veterans with MS (VwMS) smoke at critically high rates; however, treatment rates and possible disparities are unknown. To promote equitable treatment, we aim to investigate smoking cessation prescription practices for VwMS across social determinant factors. METHODS: We extracted data from the national Veterans Health Administration electronic health records between October 1, 2017, and September 30, 2018. To derive marginal estimates of the association of MS with receipt of smoking-cessation pharmacotherapy, we used propensity score matching through the extreme gradient boosting machine learning model. VwMS who smoke were matched with veterans without MS who smoke on factors including age, race, depression, and healthcare visits. To assess the marginal association of MS with different cessation treatments, we used logistic regression and conducted stratified analyses by sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: The matched sample achieved a good balance across most covariates, compared to the pre-match sample. VwMS (n = 3320) had decreased odds of receiving prescriptions for nicotine patches ([Odds Ratio]OR = 0.86, p < .01), non-patch nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; OR = 0.81, p < .001), and standard practice dual NRT (OR = 0.77, p < .01), compared to matches without MS (n = 13,280). Men with MS had lower odds of receiving prescriptions for nicotine patches (OR = 0.88, p = .05), non-patch NRT (OR = 0.77, p < .001), and dual NRT (OR = 0.72, p < .001). Similarly, Black VwMS had lower odds of receiving prescriptions for patches (OR = 0.62, p < .001), non-patch NRT (OR = 0.75, p < .05), and dual NRT (OR = 0.52, p < .01). The odds of receiving prescriptions for bupropion or varenicline did not differ between VwMS and matches without MS. CONCLUSION: VwMS received significantly less smoking cessation treatment, compared to matched controls without MS, showing a critical gap in health services as VwMS are not receiving dual NRT as the standard of care. Prescription rates were especially lower for male and Black VwMS, suggesting that under-represented demographic groups outside of the white female category, most often considered as the "traditional MS" group, could be under-treated regarding smoking cessation support. This foundational work will help inform future work to promote equitable treatment and implementation of cessation interventions for people living with MS.

Impact of the disruption in supply of varenicline since 2021 on smoking cessation in England: A population study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Varenicline is one of the most effective smoking cessation treatments. Its supply in England was disrupted in July 2021 due to nitrosamine impurities found by its supplier, Pfizer. This study measured the impact of this disruption on smoking cessation in England. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study used repeated cross-sectional surveys conducted monthly, from June 2018 to December 2022. Set in England, it comprised a total of 3024 adults who reported smoking during the past year and had made at least one serious attempt to quit in the past 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: Generalized additive models analyzed the association of the varenicline supply disruption with the trend in self-reported varenicline use in the most recent quit attempt. We used these results to estimate the population-level impact of the disruption on smoking cessation. FINDINGS: Before July 2021, the proportion of past 6-month quit attempts using varenicline was stable at approximately 3.9% [risk ratio (RR)trend = 1.034, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.823-1.298]. The trend in varenicline use has changed sharply since the supply disruption (RRΔtrend = 0.297, 95% CI = 0.120-0.738), with prevalence falling by 69.3% per year since; from 4.1% in June 2021 to 0.8% in December 2022. Convergently, National Health Service general practitioner prescribing data reported that just 0.1% of prescriptions for smoking cessation treatments in December 2022 were for varenicline. Assuming that varenicline does not return to the market, we estimate that this could result in ~8400 fewer people stopping smoking for at least 6 months, ~4200 fewer long-term ex-smokers and ~1890 more avoidable deaths each year. CONCLUSIONS: In England, the disruption in supply of varenicline since 2021 has coincided with a substantial fall in the use of varenicline in attempts to quit smoking.

Economic Evaluation of Enhanced vs Standard Varenicline Treatment for Tobacco Cessation.

Importance: Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and illness in the US. Identifying cost-effective smoking cessation treatment may increase the likelihood that health systems deliver such treatment to their patients who smoke. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of standard vs enhanced varenicline use (extended varenicline treatment or varenicline in combination with nicotine replacement therapy) among individuals trying to quit smoking. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation assesses the Quitting Using Intensive Treatments Study (QUITS), which randomized 1251 study participants who smoked into 4 conditions: (1) 12-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 315); (2) 24-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 311); (3) 12-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 314); or (4) 24-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 311). Study enrollment occurred in Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, between November 11, 2017, and July 2, 2020. Statistical analysis took place from May to October 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence (biochemically confirmed with exhaled carbon monoxide level ≤5 ppm) at 52 weeks. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), or cost per additional person who quit smoking, was calculated using decision tree analysis based on abstinence and cost for each arm of the trial. Results: Of the 1251 participants, mean (SD) age was 49.1 (11.9) years, 675 (54.0%) were women, and 881 (70.4%) completed the 52-week follow-up. Tobacco cessation at 52 weeks was 25.1% (79 of 315) for 12-week monotherapy, 24.4% (76 of 311) for 24-week monotherapy, 23.6% (74 of 314) for 12-week combination therapy, and 25.1% (78 of 311) for 24-week combination therapy, respectively. The total mean (SD) cost was $1175 ($365) for 12-week monotherapy, $1374 ($412) for 12-week combination therapy, $2022 ($813) for 24-week monotherapy, and $2118 ($1058) for 24-week combination therapy. The ICER for 12-week varenicline monotherapy was $4681 per individual who quit smoking and $4579 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) added. The ICER for 24-week varenicline combination therapy relative to 12-week monotherapy was $92 000 000 per additional individual who quit smoking and $90 000 000 (95% CI, $15 703 to dominated or more costly and less efficacious) per additional QALY. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic evaluation of standard vs enhanced varenicline treatment for smoking cessation suggests that 12-week varenicline monotherapy was the most cost-effective treatment option at the commonly cited threshold of $100 000/QALY. This study provides patients, health care professionals, and other stakeholders with increased understanding of the health and economic impact of more intensive varenicline treatment options.

Sleep-related adverse events of smoking cessation drugs: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Smoking cessation medications have the potential to affect the functioning of the nervous system, leading to sleep disturbances. Our study aimed to compare the sleep-related side effects (such as insomnia, abnormal dreams, nightmares, and somnolence) induced by different smoking cessation medications in non-psychiatric smokers. We conducted a thorough search of five electronic databases (Cochrane, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science) for randomized controlled trials. This study was registered with the PROSPERO (registration number CRD42022347976). A total of 79 full-text articles, encompassing 36,731 participants, were included in our analysis. Individuals using bupropion, bupropion in combination with a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist (NRA), and bupropion in conjunction with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) exhibited a higher likelihood of experiencing insomnia compared to those using NRT alone. Bupropion plus NRA had the highest ranking on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for insomnia risk, while placebo had the lowest ranking. Additionally, NRA plus NRT ranked first for abnormal dream outcomes, NRA alone for nightmares, and nortriptyline for somnolence, based on the SUCRA results. Healthcare providers should exercise caution when prescribing smoking cessation drugs, particularly in consideration of their potential sleep-related side effects.

Incremental net monetary benefit of using varenicline for smoking cessation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of economic evaluation studies.

AIMS: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis and pool the incremental net benefits (INBs) of varenicline compared with behaviour support with bupropion or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), behaviour support alone and unaided cessation in adult smokers making a first-time attempt to quit. METHODS: A search for economic evaluation studies was conducted from inception to 30 September 2022, on PubMed, Embase, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry by Tufts Medical Centre, EconLit and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED). Eligible studies were included if they were (1) conducted among adults ages 18 years old and older who were smokers attempting to quit for the first time; (2) compared varenicline to behaviour support with bupropion or NRT, behaviour support alone and unaided cessation; and (3) performed a CEA or cost-utility analysis. The INBs were calculated and pooled across studies stratified by country income level and study perspective using the random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochrane Q statistic. RESULTS: Of the 1433 identified studies, 18 studies were included in our review. Our findings from healthcare system/payer perspective suggested that the use of varenicline is statistically significantly cost-effective compared with bupropion (pooled INB, $830.75 [95% confidence interval, $208.23, $1453.28]), NRTs ($636.16 [$192.48, $1079.84]) and unaided cessation ($4212.35 [$1755.79, $6668.92]) in high-income countries. Similarly, varenicline is also found to be cost-effective compared to bupropion ($2706.27 [$1284.44, $4128.11]), NRTs ($3310.01 [$1781.53, $4838.50]) and behavioural support alone ($5438.22 [$4105.99, $6770.46]) in low- and middle-income countries. CONCLUSION: Varenicline is cost-effective as a smoking cessation aid when compared with behavioural support with bupropion or nicotine replacement therapies and behavioural support alone in both high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries, from the healthcare system/payer perspective in adult smokers who attempt to quit for the first time.

Efficacy of varenicline or bupropion and its association with nicotine metabolite ratio among smokers with COPD.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nicotine metabolic ratio (NMR) has been associated with nicotine metabolism and smoking characteristics. However, there are few studies on the potential association between NMR and smoking cessation efficacy in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in China or elsewhere. METHODS: This study was a stratified block randomized controlled trial for smoking cessation in Chinese smokers with COPD. NMR was used as a stratification factor; slow metabolizers were defined as those with NMR <0.31, and normal metabolizers as those with NMR ≥0.31. Participants were randomly assigned to the varenicline or bupropion group. Follow-up visits were conducted at 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four participants were recruited and analysed from February 2019 to June 2022. In normal metabolizers, the 9-12 weeks continuous abstinence rate of varenicline (43.1%) was higher than in bupropion (23.5%) (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.05-5.78, p = 0.038). There was no significant difference in abstinence rates between treatment groups in slow metabolizers (54.1% vs. 45.9%, OR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.68-2.83, p = 0.366). For slow metabolizers, the total score of side effects in the varenicline group was significantly higher than the bupropion group (p = 0.048), while there was no significant difference in side effects between groups for normal metabolizers (p = 0.360). CONCLUSION: Varenicline showed better efficacy than bupropion in normal metabolizers, and bupropion showed equivalent efficacy in slow metabolizers with less side effects. According to our study, NMR provides a better justification for both scientific research and tailoring optimal pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation among smokers in COPD.

Changes in distinct brain systems identified with fMRI during smoking cessation treatment with varenicline: a review.

BACKGROUND: Varenicline is considered one of the most effective treatment options for smoking cessation. Nonetheless, it is only modestly effective. A deeper comprehension of the effects of varenicline by means of the in-depth review of relevant fMRI studies may assist in paving the development of more targeted and effective treatments. METHODOLOGY: A search of PubMed and Google Scholar databases was conducted with the keywords "functional magnetic resonance imaging" or "fMRI", and "varenicline". All peer-reviewed articles regarding the assessment of smokers with fMRI while undergoing treatment with varenicline and meeting the predefined criteria were included. RESULTS: Several studies utilizing different methodologies and targeting different aspects of brain function were identified. During nicotine withdrawal, decreased mesocorticolimbic activity and increased amygdala activity, as well as elevated amygdala-insula and insula-default-mode-network functional connectivity are alleviated by varenicline under specific testing conditions. However, other nicotine withdrawal-induced changes, including the decreased reward responsivity of the ventral striatum, the bilateral dorsal striatum and the anterior cingulate cortex are not influenced by varenicline suggesting a task-dependent divergence in neurocircuitry activation. Under satiety, varenicline treatment is associated with diminished cue-induced activation of the ventral striatum and medial orbitofrontal cortex concomitant with reduced cravings; during the resting state, varenicline induces activation of the lateral orbitofrontal cortex and suppression of the right amygdala. CONCLUSIONS: The current review provides important clues with regard to the neurobiological mechanism of action of varenicline and highlights promising research opportunities regarding the development of more selective and effective treatments and predictive biomarkers for treatment efficacy.

Identifying determinants of varenicline adherence using the Theoretical Domains framework: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Adhering to varenicline has been shown to significantly improve the chances of successfully quitting smoking, with studies indicating a twofold increase in 6-month quit rates. However, despite its potential benefits, many individuals struggle with maintaining good adherence to varenicline; thus there is a need to develop scalable strategies to help people adhere. As a first step to inform the development of an intervention to improve adherence to varenicline, we conducted a rapid literature review to identify: 1) modifiable barriers and facilitators to varenicline adherence, and 2) behaviour change techniques associated with increased adherence to varenicline. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published between 2006 and 2022. Search terms included "varenicline," "smoking cessation," and "adherence," and their respective subject headings and synonyms. We screened and included studies reporting modifiable determinants of adherence to varenicline and then assessed quality, extracted modifiable determinants and mapped them to the Theoretical Domains Framework version 2 and the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy version 1. RESULTS: A total of 1,221 titles were identified through the database searches; 61 met the eligibility criteria. Most of the studies were randomized controlled trials and predominantly focused on barriers to varenicline. Only nine studies explicitly mentioned behaviour change techniques used to help varenicline adherence. Eight domains were identified as barriers to varenicline adherence (behavioural regulation, memory, goals, intentions, beliefs about capabilities, beliefs about consequences, optimism/pessimism, and environmental context) and five as facilitators (knowledge, behavioural regulation, beliefs about capabilities, social influences, and environmental context). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies barriers and facilitators that should be addressed when developing a complex adherence intervention tailored to patients' needs based on modifiable determinants of medication adherence, some of which are under- used by existing adherence interventions. The findings from this review will inform the design of a theory-based healthbot planned to improve varenicline adherence in people undergoing smoking cessation treatment. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This study was registered with PROSPERO (# CRD42022321838).

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial on the efficacy of varenicline and bupropion in combination and alone for treatment of alcohol use disorder: Protocol for the COMB study.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is a major cause of premature death, disability and suffering. Available treatments are of modest efficacy and under-prescribed so there is a pressing need for a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for AUD. Dopamine is hypothesized to be involved in the development of alcohol dependence. To challenge the low-dopamine hypothesis of addiction, this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 13-week, multicentre clinical trial with four parallel arms is designed to evaluate the efficacy of two substances raising dopamine levels, varenicline and bupropion, alone and in combination vs. placebo on alcohol consumption in AUD. Varenicline, a partial agonist at brain nicotinic acetylcholine receptors increases dopamine release, whereas bupropion is a centrally-acting, norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitor. Varenicline is previously shown to reduce alcohol intake in individuals with AUD. We hypothesize that the effect size of a combination of two drugs affecting dopamine levels in the brain will exceed that of approved AUD therapies. METHODS: Consenting individuals with AUD will be recruited via media advertisements. Those fulfilling the eligibility criteria (N = 380) will be randomized to one of four interventions (n = 95 per arm). Treatment will comprise one week of titration (varenicline 0.5‒2 mg; bupropion SR 150‒300 mg) plus 12 weeks at steady state. Efficacy will be evaluated using two primary endpoints of alcohol consumption: Heavy Drinking Days and blood levels of phosphatidylethanol. Secondary objectives, exploratory and subgroup analyses will be also performed. The modified Intention-to-Treat and Per Protocol datasets will be evaluated using Analysis of Covariance. Last patient out is estimated to occur in December, 2022. DISCUSSION: The COMB Study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of varenicline and bupropion, two drugs affecting dopamine, on alcohol consumption, and to challenge the low-dopamine hypothesis of addiction. Study Code COMB-BO8, EudraCT 2018-000048-24, Version 3.2, Lidö & deBejczy, 2020-06-16; https://clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04167306.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of cytisine for the treatment of smoking cessation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking is considered the main cause of preventable death world-wide. This study aimed to review the efficacy and safety of cytisine for smoking cessation. METHODS: This review included an exhaustive search of databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in health centers of any level with smokers of any age or gender investigating the effects of cytisine at standard dosage versus placebo, varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). RESULTS: We identified 12 RCTs. Eight RCTs compared cytisine with placebo at the standard dose covering 5922 patients, 2996 of whom took cytisine, delivering a risk ratio (RR) of 2.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.42-3.56; I2  = 88%; moderate-quality evidence]. The greater intensity of behavioral therapy was associated directly with the efficacy findings (moderate-quality evidence). The confirmed efficacy of cytisine was not evidenced in trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries. We estimate a number needed to treat (NNT) of 11. Two trials compared the efficacy of cytisine versus NRT, and the combination of both studies yields modest results in favor of cytisine. Three trials compared cytisine with varenicline, without a clear benefit for cytisine. Meta-analyses of all non-serious adverse events in the cytisine group versus placebo groups yielded a RR of 1.24 (95% CI = 1.11-1.39; participants = 5895; studies = 8; I2 = 0%; high-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Cytisine increases the chances of successful smoking cessation by more than twofold compared with placebo and has a benign safety profile, with no evidence of serious safety concerns. Limited evidence suggests that cytisine may be more effective than nicotine replacement therapy, with modest cessation rates.

Effect of early medication adherence on behavioral treatment utilization and smoking cessation among individuals with current or past major depressive disorder.

SIGNIFICANCE: Little is known about the mechanisms by which medication adherence promotes smoking cessation among adults with MDD. We tested the hypothesis that early adherence promotes abstinence by increasing behavioral treatment (BT) utilization. METHODS: Data for this post-hoc analysis were from a randomized trial of 149 adults with current or past MDD treated with BT and either varenicline (n = 81) or placebo (n = 68). Arms were matched on medication regimen. Early medication adherence was measured by the number of days in which medication was taken at the prescribed dose during the first six of 12 weeks of pharmacological treatment (weeks 2-7). BT consisted of eight 45-minute sessions (weeks 1-12). Bioverified abstinence was assessed at end-of-treatment (week 14). A regression-based approach was used to test whether the effect of early medication adherence on abstinence was mediated by BT utilization. RESULTS: Among 141 participants who initiated the medication regimen, BT utilization mediated the effect of early medication adherence on abstinencea) an interquartile increase in early medication days from 20 to 42 predicted a 4.2 times increase in abstinence (Total Risk Ratio (RR) = 4.24, 95% CI = 2.32-13.37; p <.001); b) increases in BT sessions predicted by such an increase in early medication days were associated with a 2.7 times increase in abstinence (Indirect RR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.54-7.58; p <.001); and c) early medication adherence effects on abstinence were attenuated, controlling for BT (Direct RR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.83-4.23, p =.17). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of early medication adherence on abstinence in individuals with current or past MDD is mediated by intensive BT utilization.

Is Abstinence from Alcohol and Smoking Associated with Less Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms Among People with HIV?

Achieving abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, or both may improve mental health, but is understudied in people with HIV (PWH). The St PETER HIV randomized clinical trial compared varenicline, cytisine, and nicotine replacement therapy on alcohol and smoking behavior among 400 PWH in Russia. The primary exposure was thirty-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) from (1) alcohol, (2) smoking, (3) both, or (4) neither and was assessed at 1, 3, 6 and 12-months as were the study outcomes of anxiety (GAD-7) and depressive (CES-D) symptoms. The primary aim was to examine the association between smoking and/or alcohol abstinence and subsequent symptoms of depression and anxiety. Primary analysis used repeated measures generalized linear modeling to relate PPA with mental health scores across time. In secondary analyses, Kruskal-Wallis tests related PPA with mental health scores at each timepoint. Primary analyses did not identify significant differences in anxiety or depressive symptoms between exposure groups over time. Secondary analyses found CES-D scores across PPA categories were similar at 1-month (11, 10, 11, 11) and 6-months (10, 10, 11, 11) but differed at 3-months (9, 11, 10, 12; p = 0.035) and 12-months (10, 6, 11, 10; p = 0.019). GAD-7 scores did not vary across PPA categories at any time point. While abstinence was associated with fewer depressive symptoms at times, findings were not consistent during follow-up, perhaps reflecting intermittent relapse. PWH with polysubstance use and mental health comorbidity are complex, and larger samples with sustained abstinence would further elucidate effects of abstinence on mental health.

Efficacy of Electronic Cigarettes vs Varenicline and Nicotine Chewing Gum as an Aid to Stop Smoking: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are often used by smokers as an aid to stopping smoking, but evidence is limited regarding their efficacy compared with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and no evidence is available on how their efficacy compares with that of varenicline. Objective: To evaluate whether ECs are superior to NRT and noninferior to varenicline in helping smokers quit. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a randomized clinical trial conducted at 7 sites in China and including participants who were smoking at least 10 cigarettes per day and motivated to quit, not using stop-smoking medications or EC, and willing to use any of the study products. Participants were first recruited in May 2021, and data analysis was conducted in December 2022. Interventions: A cartridge-based EC (30 mg/mL nicotine salt for 2 weeks and 50 mg/mL after that), varenicline (0.5 mg, once a day for 3 days; 0.5 mg, twice a day for 4 days; and 1 mg, twice a day, after that), and 2 mg (for smokers of ≤20 cigarettes per day) or 4 mg (>20 cigarettes per day) nicotine chewing gum, all provided for 12 weeks and accompanied by minimal behavioral support (an invitation to join a self-help internet forum). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was sustained abstinence from smoking at 6 months as validated by an expired-air carbon monoxide reading (<8 parts per million). Participants lost to follow-up were included as nonabstainers. Results: Of 1068 participants, 357 (33.5%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 33.9 (3.1) years. A total of 409 (38.3%), 409 (38.3%), and 250 (23.4%) participants were randomized to the EC, varenicline, and NRT arms, respectively. The 6-month biochemically validated abstinence rates were 15.7% (n = 64), 14.2% (n = 58), and 8.8% (n = 22) in the EC, varenicline, and NRT study arms, respectively. The quit rate in the EC arm was noninferior to the varenicline arm (absolute risk reduction, 1.47%; 95% CI, -1.41% to 4.34%) and higher than in the NRT arm (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.15-3.21). Treatment adherence was similar in all study arms during the initial 3 months, but 257 participants (62.8%) in the EC arm were still using ECs at 6 months, with no further use in the 2 other study arms. The most common adverse reactions were throat irritation (32 [7.8%]) and mouth irritation (28 [6.9%]) in the EC arm, nausea (36 [8.8%]) in the varenicline arm, and throat irritation (20 [8.0%]) and mouth irritation (22 [8.8%]) in the NRT arm. No serious adverse events were recorded. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial found that when all treatments were provided with minimal behavior support, the efficacy of EC was noninferior to varenicline and superior to nicotine chewing gum. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2100048156.

A practice quit model to test early efficacy of medications for alcohol use disorder in a randomized clinical trial.

RATIONALE: Screening novel medications for alcohol use disorder (AUD) requires models that are both efficient and ecologically-valid. Ideally, such models would be associated with the outcomes of a given medication in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: To test a novel human laboratory model in which individuals with intrinsic motivation to change their drinking engage in a "practice quit" attempt consisting of 6 days of complete abstinence from alcohol. METHOD: Individuals with current AUD completed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of naltrexone (50 mg), varenicline (2 mg bid), or matched placebo. Participants were titrated onto the study medication for 1 week prior to starting the 6-day practice quit attempt. During the practice quit attempt, participants completed daily interviews with research staff. All participants completed an alcohol cue-exposure paradigm before starting the study medication and after 2 weeks of study medication. RESULTS: There were no significant medication effect on drinks per drinking day (F(2,49) = 0.66, p = 0.52) or percent days abstinent (F(2,49) = 0.14, p = 0.87) during the 6-day practice quit period. There were no medication effects on alcohol cue-reactivity (F(2,44) = 0.80, p = 0.46). Notably, participants sharply reduced their drinking during the entire 13-day medication treatment period, as compared to reducing only during the 6-day practice quit period. During the total medication period, higher levels of motivation to change was associated with higher percent days abstinent (F(1,49) = 8.12, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports mostly null findings, which challenges us to decompose its nuanced design to consider model refinements. Possible changes to the model include considering the requirement for intrinsic motivation for change, including a longer practice quit period, encompassing the medication administration timeframe in the practice quit period, increasing the required sample size for signal detection, and examining a post COVID-19 pandemic cohort.