Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.918
Filter
1.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD001837, 2024 May 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38770804

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge.


Subject(s)
Bias , Counseling , Hospitalization , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Counseling/methods , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Smoking Cessation Agents/therapeutic use , Smoking/therapy
2.
World J Urol ; 42(1): 295, 2024 May 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709300

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are associated with high rates of nonadherence and sexual dysfunction, yet the correlation between these findings in young adult men is poorly characterized. We aimed to evaluate if young adult men are less willing to adhere to antidepressant treatment due to intolerable side effects, such as sexual dysfunction. METHODS: Deidentified, compensated survey that assessed baseline demographics, PHQ-8 and GAD-7 scores, attitudes towards antidepressant medication side effects, and perceptions of antidepressant medications including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, bupropion, and mirtazapine. RESULTS: From 665 delivered surveys, 505 respondents completed their survey (response rate: 76%), of which 486 were included for final analysis. After seeing common side effect profiles, our sample's willingness to take sexual function-sparing agents, such as bupropion or mirtazapine, was significantly greater than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (p < 0.001), with no significant difference between bupropion and mirtazapine (p = 0.263). The negative influence of erectile dysfunction and anorgasmia scored significantly higher than other common antidepressant side effects like weight gain, nausea, and dry mouth (range: p < 0.001, p = 0.043). With the exception of insomnia, participants indicated that experiencing sexual dysfunction while taking an antidepressant medication would lead to nonadherence at a significantly higher frequency than any other side effect assessed (range: p < 0.001, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The risk of experiencing sexual side effects when taking antidepressants could lead young adult men to become nonadherent to these medications. Strategies to augment the effectiveness of antidepressants, such as shared decision-making and the use of sexual function-sparing agents, are critical.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents , Medication Adherence , Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological , Humans , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Young Adult , Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological/chemically induced , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Mirtazapine/therapeutic use , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors/adverse effects , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Bupropion/adverse effects , Bupropion/therapeutic use
3.
Brain Behav ; 14(5): e3513, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38698620

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Healthcare Disparities , Multiple Sclerosis , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Veterans , Humans , Male , Female , Veterans/statistics & numerical data , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking Cessation/statistics & numerical data , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , Multiple Sclerosis/epidemiology , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Adult , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/statistics & numerical data , Smoking Cessation Agents/therapeutic use , Aged , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Varenicline/therapeutic use
4.
Trials ; 25(1): 230, 2024 Apr 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38570861

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is still undertreated in most patients, as evidence for pharmacological treatments is limited and conflicting. Also, the efficacy of the pharmacological agents relative to each other is still unclear. Therefore, medications that may potentially contribute to improving CRF will be investigated in this head-to-head trial. Our main objective is to compare the efficacy of methylphenidate vs. bupropion vs. ginseng vs. amantadine vs. placebo in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: The 5-EPIFAT study is a 5-arm, randomized, multi-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial that will use a parallel-group design with an equal allocation ratio comparing the efficacy and safety of four medications (Methylphenidate vs. Bupropion vs. Ginseng vs. Amantadine) versus placebo for management of CRF. We will recruit 255 adult patients with advanced cancer who experience fatigue intensity ≥ 4 based on a 0-10 scale. The study period includes a 4-week intervention and a 4-week follow-up with repeated measurements over time. The primary outcome is the cancer-related fatigue level over time, which will be measured by the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue (FACIT-F) scale. To evaluate safety, the secondary outcome is the symptomatic adverse events, which will be assessed using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in cancer clinical trials (PRO-CTCAE). Also, a subgroup analysis based on a decision tree-based machine learning algorithm will be employed for the clinical prediction of different agents in homogeneous subgroups. DISCUSSION: The findings of the 5-EPIFAT trial could be helpful to guide clinical decision-making, personalization treatment approach, design of future trials, as well as the development of CRF management guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT.ir IRCT20150302021307N6. Registered on 13 May 2023.


Subject(s)
Methylphenidate , Neoplasms , Panax , Adult , Humans , Amantadine/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Fatigue/diagnosis , Fatigue/drug therapy , Fatigue/etiology , Methylphenidate/therapeutic use , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Neoplasms/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
5.
PLoS One ; 19(4): e0299020, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38669232

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To report the first and largest systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) or major depressive disorder(MDD). METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature retrieval via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane until April 2023 for RCT, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching for patients with TRD or MDD. Outcomes measured were changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), response and remission rate, and serious adverse events. RESULTS: Five RCTs, including 4480 patients, were included for meta-analysis. Among them, two RCTs were rated as "high risk" in three aspects (allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment) because of the non-blind method, and the quality evaluation of the remaining works of literature was "low risk". Augmentation treatment with Aripiprazole (A-ARI) was associated with a significant higher response rate compared with augmentation treatment with bupropion (A-BUP) (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.25; P = 0.0007; I2 = 23%). Besides, A-ARI had a significant higher remission rate compared with switching to bupropion (S-BUP) (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.49; P = 0.05; I2 = 59%) and A-BUP had a significant higher remission rate compared with S-BUP (RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.36; P = 0.0004; I2 = 0%). In addition, there was no significant difference in remission rate(RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.17; P = 0.42; I2 = 33%), improvement of MADRS(WMD: -2.07; 95% CI: -5.84, 1.70; P = 0.28; I2 = 70%) between A-ARI and A-BUP. No significant difference was observed in adverse events and serious adverse events among the three treatment strategies. CONCLUSIONS: A-ARI may be a better comprehensive antidepressant treatment strategy than A-BUP or S-BUP for patients with TRD or MDD. More large-scale, multi-center, double-blind RCTs are needed to further evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching treatment strategies.


Subject(s)
Aripiprazole , Bupropion , Depressive Disorder, Major , Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Aripiprazole/therapeutic use , Aripiprazole/adverse effects , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Bupropion/adverse effects , Bupropion/administration & dosage , Humans , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome , Drug Therapy, Combination
6.
J Ment Health Policy Econ ; 27(1): 3-12, 2024 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38634393

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Consensus-guidelines for prescribing antidepressants recommend that clinicians should be vigilant to match antidepressants to patient's medical history but provide no specific advice on which antidepressant is best for a given medical history. AIMS OF THE STUDY: For patients with major depression who are in psychotherapy, this study provides an empirically derived guideline for prescribing antidepressant medications that fit patients' medical history. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, cohort study analyzed a large insurance database of 3,678,082 patients. Data was obtained from healthcare providers in the U.S. between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2018. These patients had 10,221,145 episodes of antidepressant treatments. This study reports the remission rates for the 14 most commonly prescribed single antidepressants (amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, and venlafaxine) and a category named "Other" (other antidepressants/combination of antidepressants). The study used robust LASSO regressions to identify factors that affected remission rate and clinicians' selection of antidepressants. The selection bias in observational data was removed through stratification. We organized the data into 16,770 subgroups, of at least 100 cases, using the combination of the largest factors that affected remission and selection bias. This paper reports on 2,467 subgroups of patients who had received psychotherapy. RESULTS: We found large, and statistically significant, differences in remission rates within subgroups of patients. Remission rates for sertraline ranged from 4.5% to 77.86%, for fluoxetine from 2.86% to 77.78%, for venlafaxine from 5.07% to 76.44%, for bupropion from 0.5% to 64.63%, for desvenlafaxine from 1.59% to 75%, for duloxetine from 3.77% to 75%, for paroxetine from 6.48% to 68.79%, for escitalopram from 1.85% to 65%, and for citalopram from 4.67% to 76.23%. Clearly these medications are ideal for patients in some subgroups but not others. If patients are matched to the subgroups, clinicians can prescribe the medication that works best in the subgroup. Some medications (amitriptyline, doxepin, nortriptyline, and trazodone) always had remission rates below 11% and therefore were not suitable as single antidepressant therapy for any of the subgroups. DISCUSSIONS: This study provides an opportunity for clinicians to identify an optimal antidepressant for their patients, before they engage in repeated trials of antidepressants. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: To facilitate the matching of patients to the most effective antidepressants, this study provides access to a free, non-commercial, decision aid at http://MeAgainMeds.com. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES:  Policymakers should evaluate how study findings can be made available through fragmented electronic health records at point-of-care. Alternatively, policymakers can put in place an AI system that recommends antidepressants to patients online, at home, and encourages them to bring the recommendation to their clinicians at their next visit. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:  Future research could investigate (i) the effectiveness of our recommendations in changing clinical practice, (ii) increasing remission of depression symptoms, and (iii) reducing cost of care. These studies need to be prospective but pragmatic. It is unlikely random clinical trials can address the large number of factors that affect remission.


Subject(s)
Citalopram , Trazodone , Humans , Citalopram/therapeutic use , Fluoxetine/therapeutic use , Paroxetine/therapeutic use , Sertraline/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Nortriptyline/therapeutic use , Amitriptyline , Duloxetine Hydrochloride , Venlafaxine Hydrochloride , Desvenlafaxine Succinate , Escitalopram , Doxepin , Prospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Psychotherapy
7.
Respirology ; 29(6): 479-488, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38494828

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Bupropion , Nicotine , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Smoking Cessation Agents , Smoking Cessation , Varenicline , Humans , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/metabolism , Male , Female , Smoking Cessation/methods , Middle Aged , Smoking Cessation Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Aged , China/epidemiology , Smokers
8.
Psiquiatr. biol. (Internet) ; 31(1): [100444], ene.-mar 2024.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-231640

ABSTRACT

Se presenta el caso de un varón de 41 años, ingresado desde los 26 en la unidad residencial y rehabilitadora con los diagnósticos de trastorno del espectro autista y trastorno obsesivo compulsivo, en tratamiento con fluvoxamina, valproico, topiramato, risperidona y clonazepam. Tras un periodo de estabilidad, aparece un cuadro compatible con un episodio depresivo mayor, que se decide tratar con bupropión, para incidir en los síntomas de apatía y lentitud psicomotriz. Se produce una recuperación rápida en 2 semanas, pero comienza a presentar copropraxia y coprolalia, que nunca antes había presentado. Se retira el bupropión y desaparece la coprolalia en 2 semanas, pero mantiene parte de estas conductas, por lo se pauta acetato de ciproterona para controlarlas, con mejoría en una semana. Tres meses después de la retirada del bupropión, alcanzó la eutimia y ya no presentó ninguna alteración conductual de temática sexual, coprolalia ni copropraxia. La literatura confirma otros casos de aparición de tics en pacientes tratados con antidepresivos para un cuadro depresivo y comorbilidad con trastorno obsesivo compulsivo, pero casi ninguno por el uso de bupropión o con coprolalia y copropraxia. (AU)


The case is presented of a 41-year-old male, admitted since age 26 to the Residential and Rehabilitation Unit with the diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder, and under treatment with fluvoxamine, valproic, topiramate, risperidone and clonazepam. After a period of stability, a picture compatible with a major depressive episode appear, which is treated with bupropion, in order to affect the symptoms of apathy and psychomotor slowness. There is a rapid recovery in two weeks, but he begins to present copropraxia and coprolalia, which he had never presented before. Bupropion is withdrawn and coprolalia disappears in two weeks, but he maintained some of these behaviors, so cyproterone acetate is prescribed to control them, with improvement in one week. Three months after withdrawal of bupropion, he reaches euthymia and no longer presented any sexual behavioral alteration, coprolalia or copropraxia. The literature confirms other cases of appearance of tics in patients treated with antidepressants for a depressive picture and comorbidity with obsessive-compulsive disorder, but almost none by the use of bupropion or with coprolalia and copropraxia. (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Adult , Autism Spectrum Disorder/drug therapy , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/drug therapy , Bupropion/adverse effects , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Sexual Behavior/psychology
9.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 6385, 2024 03 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38493193

ABSTRACT

Despite the large public health toll of smoking, genetic studies of smoking cessation have been limited with few discoveries of risk or protective loci. We investigated common and rare variant associations with success in quitting smoking using a cohort from 8 randomized controlled trials involving 2231 participants and a total of 10,020 common and 24,147 rare variants. We identified 14 novel markers including 6 mapping to genes previously related to psychiatric and substance use disorders, 4 of which were protective (CYP2B6 (rs1175607105), HTR3B (rs1413172952; rs1204720503), rs80210037 on chr15), and 2 of which were associated with reduced cessation (PARP15 (rs2173763), SCL18A2 (rs363222)). The others mapped to areas associated with cancer including FOXP1 (rs1288980) and ZEB1 (rs7349). Network analysis identified significant canonical pathways for the serotonin receptor signaling pathway, nicotine and bupropion metabolism, and several related to tumor suppression. Two novel markers (rs6749438; rs6718083) on chr2 are flanked by genes associated with regulation of bodyweight. The identification of novel loci in this study can provide new targets of pharmacotherapy and inform efforts to develop personalized treatments based on genetic profiles.


Subject(s)
Nicotinic Agonists , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Nicotinic Agonists/therapeutic use , Smoking/genetics , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Smoking Cessation/psychology , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Repressor Proteins , Forkhead Transcription Factors
10.
Drug Des Devel Ther ; 18: 845-858, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38524878

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Anti-obesity medications (AOMs), along with lifestyle interventions, are effective means of inducing and maintaining weight loss in patients with obesity. Although the efficacy of AOMs has been reported, there have been no direct comparisons of these drugs. Therefore, in the present study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of all the AOMs available in Korea in a real-world setting. Patients and Methods: The body weight and composition of 205 adults treated with phentermine, phentermine/topiramate, liraglutide, naltrexone/bupropion, lorcaserin, or orlistat for at least 6 months were analyzed at 2 month intervals. The prevalence of the achievement of a ≥5% weight loss and the changes in body composition were compared between participants using each AOM at each visit. Results: A total of 132 (64.4%) participants achieved ≥5% weight loss within 6 months (prevalence of ≥5% weight loss after 6 months: phentermine, 87.2%; phentermine/topiramate, 67.7%; liraglutide, 58.1%; naltrexone/bupropion, 35.3%; lorcaserin, 75%; orlistat, 50%). At each visit, after adjustment for age, sex, and baseline body weight, phentermine use was associated with a significantly higher prevalence of ≥5% weight loss than the use of the other AOMs, except for liraglutide. There were significant differences in the body weight, body mass index and body fat mass among the AOM groups by visit (P for interaction <0.05), but not in their waist circumference, skeletal muscle mass, percentage body fat, or visceral fat area. Conclusion: All the AOMs were effective at inducing and maintaining weight loss, in the absence of significant changes in muscle mass, over a 6 month period, and the short-term use of phentermine and the long-term use of phentermine/topiramate or liraglutide would be practical choices for the treatment of obesity. However, further, large-scale studies are necessary to confirm these findings.


Subject(s)
Anti-Obesity Agents , Liraglutide , Adult , Humans , Orlistat/therapeutic use , Topiramate/therapeutic use , Liraglutide/therapeutic use , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Fructose , Anti-Obesity Agents/therapeutic use , Obesity/drug therapy , Body Weight , Phentermine/adverse effects , Weight Loss
11.
Microbiol Spectr ; 12(4): e0387823, 2024 Apr 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38385711

ABSTRACT

The study evaluates the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions [Behavioral Change Communication (BCC) and Behavioral Change Communication plus bupropion (BCC+)] compared to conventional Directly Observed Therapy Short Course (DOT) treatment in improving pulmonary tuberculosis treatment outcomes and abstinence among newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) patients, highlighting the scarcity of robust experimental studies. The current randomized controlled trial, conducted at Ojha Institute of Chest Diseases between October 2017 and June 2019, randomized 292 patients who were current smokers with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis into three arms: control (n = 97), BCC (n = 97), and BCC+ (n = 98) arms. The outcomes of the interventions were compared in terms of favorable treatment outcomes and abstinence achieved at the end of 6 months. Baseline characteristics were compared between groups. Cox regression quantified the effect size of interventions for both outcome variables and reported as (crude and adjusted) hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI). No statistically significant difference was observed in baseline characteristics in each arm. Both BCC+ and BCC showed a statistically significant effect in achieving favorable PTB outcomes at 6 months (aHR 2.37, 95% CI 1.52-3.70 and aHR 2.34, 95% CI 1.51-3.60), as well as for abstinence from smoking at 6 months (BCC+: aHR 4.03, 95% CI 2.18-7.44 and BCC: aHR 3.87, 95% CI 2.12-7.05) compared to the control arm. Both BCC and BCC+ aided by pharmacologic agents such as bupropion when incorporated with conventional DOTs were found to be significantly effective in attaining favorable tuberculosis treatment outcomes as well as in attaining smoking abstinence at the end of the 6-month treatment.This study shows that adding smoking cessation programs (with or without extra drugs like bupropion) to standard Directly Observed Treatment Short Course (DOTs) treatment for people who have recently been diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis has a great positive impact on how well the overall antituberculosis treatment works. Our trial shows very promising results for such a combined therapy (DOTs and smoking cessation) in a country where the burden of both tuberculosis and smoking is very high.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary , Tuberculosis , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Smoking , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Tuberculosis/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/diagnosis , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/drug therapy
12.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 26(6): 2102-2110, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38419410

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To describe trends in the use of anti-obesity drugs in Norway during the period 2004-2022. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed the annual utilization of any available drug indicated for obesity recorded in the nationwide Norwegian Prescribed Drug Register for adults (age 18-79 years) from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2022. Prevalence was stratified by sex and age group (18-29 years and 10-year age groups thereafter). Additional analyses were performed in individuals initiating treatment with an anti-obesity drug and on the cost of the anti-obesity drugs since 2017. RESULTS: The prevalence of anti-obesity drug use decreased from 2009, when sibutramine and rimonabant were withdrawn from the market, and increased again after the approval of bupropion-naltrexone in 2017 and liraglutide in 2018. The use of the peripheral-acting anti-obesity drug orlistat decreased from 2004. In 2022, 1.04% of the adult Norwegian population (72.8% women) filled at least one prescription of bupropion-naltrexone, 0.91% used liraglutide (Saxenda; 74.2% women), and semaglutide without reimbursement was used by 0.68% (76.7% women). The prevalence increased with age, peaking in the age group 50 to 59 years, and decreased in older age groups. From 2017 to 2022, 2.8% of the adult residents initiated treatment with an anti-obesity drug. The total sale of those drugs increased from 1.1 million euros in 2017 to 91.8 million euros in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The use of anti-obesity drugs in Norway has increased substantially in recent years, especially among women aged 40 to 59 years. Changes in availability and reimbursement have influenced the use of these drugs in recent years.


Subject(s)
Anti-Obesity Agents , Bupropion , Liraglutide , Naltrexone , Obesity , Humans , Adult , Norway/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Female , Male , Anti-Obesity Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Obesity Agents/economics , Obesity/drug therapy , Obesity/epidemiology , Adolescent , Aged , Young Adult , Liraglutide/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Orlistat/therapeutic use , Rimonabant/therapeutic use , Glucagon-Like Peptides/therapeutic use , Glucagon-Like Peptides/analogs & derivatives , Drug Costs/statistics & numerical data , Registries , Prevalence , Drug Utilization/trends , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Cyclobutanes
13.
Addiction ; 119(4): 649-663, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38161271

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Alkaloids , Quinolizidine Alkaloids , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Nicotine/therapeutic use , Nicotinic Agonists/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Benzazepines/adverse effects , Quinoxalines/adverse effects , Alkaloids/therapeutic use , Azocines/therapeutic use , Quinolizines/therapeutic use
14.
Am J Ther ; 31(1): e24-e29, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38231578

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) affects millions of people and is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Patients report decreased quality of life and ability to perform activities of daily living. It is estimated that the current standard of care, which includes pharmacologic therapy with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, is effective in 40%-60%. Additional treatment options are warranted. The combination of dextromethorphan (DEX) and bupropion (BUP) (Auveulty) was approved for treatment in 2022. This unique combination offers an interesting mechanism of action and favorable onset of action for patients with MDD. PHARMACODYNAMICS AND PHARMACOKINETICS: The mechanism of action of DEX-BUP when used in combination is unique. DEX is a noncompetitive N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist rapidly metabolized through the CYP450 2D6. BUP is an aminoketone and CYP2D6 inhibitor, which results in increased plasma levels of DEX through competitive CYP2D6 inhibition. CLINICAL TRIALS: In a phase 2 clinical study, the efficacy of DEX-BUP was compared with BUP alone in patients with clinically diagnosed MDD. At baseline, participants had moderate-to-severe depression using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Clinical Global Impressions Severity (CGI-S) scales. There was a significant overall reduction in MADRS and CGI-S scores in the treatment group compared with the BUP monotherapy with improvement observed as early as week 1 of treatment. Later, a phase 3 study was conducted comparing DEX-BUP 45 mg/105 mg with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe MDD. Similarly, MADRS and CGI-S scores were significantly reduced in the treatment group. Adverse effects were similar in all groups. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCE: Clinical response to first line treatment options for MDD are reported to be 40%-60%. Availability of additional treatment options, particularly those with reduced time to efficacy, may improve overall treatment and patient quality of life. DEX-BUP is a combination option that has been shown to improve depression symptoms as early as 1 week after initiation.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major , Humans , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Dextromethorphan/pharmacology , Dextromethorphan/therapeutic use , Activities of Daily Living , Quality of Life
15.
PLoS One ; 19(1): e0296118, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38206930

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Alcoholism , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Alcoholism/drug therapy , Nicotinic Agonists , Dopamine , Smoking Cessation/methods , Benzazepines , Quinoxalines/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Alcohol Drinking/drug therapy , Double-Blind Method , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Multicenter Studies as Topic
16.
Ther Drug Monit ; 46(2): 155-169, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38287888

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Compared with antipsychotics, the relationship between antidepressant blood (plasma or serum) concentrations and target engagement is less well-established. METHODS: We have discussed the literature on the relationship between plasma concentrations of antidepressant drugs and their target occupancy. Antidepressants reviewed in this work are citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran, tricyclic antidepressants (amitriptyline, nortriptyline, and clomipramine), bupropion, tranylcypromine, moclobemide, and vortioxetine. Four electronic databases were systematically searched. RESULTS: We included 32 articles published 1996-2022. A strong relationship between serotonin transporter (SERT) occupancy and drug concentration is well established for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Lower limits of recommended therapeutic reference ranges largely corroborate with the findings from positron emission tomography studies (80% SERT occupancy). Only a few novel studies have investigated alternative targets, that is, norepinephrine transporters (NETs), dopamine transporters (DATs), or monoamine oxidase A (MAO-A). For certain classes of drugs, positron emission tomography study data are inconclusive. Low DAT occupancy after bupropion treatment speculates its discussed mechanism of action. For MAO inhibitors, a correlation between drug concentration and MAO-A occupancy could not be established. CONCLUSIONS: Neuroimaging studies are critical in TDM-guided therapy for certain antidepressants, whereas for bupropion and MAO inhibitors, the available evidence offers no further insight. Evidence for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors is strong and justifies a titration toward suggested ranges. For SNRIs, duloxetine, and venlafaxine, NETs are sufficiently occupied, well above the SERT efficacy threshold. For these drugs, a titration toward higher concentrations (within the recommended range) should be considered in case of no response at lower concentrations.


Subject(s)
Bupropion , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors , Humans , Venlafaxine Hydrochloride , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Duloxetine Hydrochloride , Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Positron-Emission Tomography , Monoamine Oxidase
17.
Int J Obes (Lond) ; 48(5): 683-693, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38291203

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of weight-management pharmacotherapies approved by Canada Health, i.e., orlistat, naltrexone 32 mg/bupropion 360 mg (NB-32), liraglutide 3.0 mg and semaglutide 2.4 mg as compared to the current standard of care (SoC). METHODS: Analyses were conducted using a cohort with a mean starting age 50 years, body mass index (BMI) 37.5 kg/m2, and 27.6% having type 2 diabetes. Using treatment-specific changes in surrogate endpoints from the STEP trials (BMI, glycemic, blood pressure, lipids), besides a network meta-analysis, the occurrence of weight-related complications, costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were projected over lifetime. RESULTS: From a societal perspective, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CAD 50 000 per QALY, semaglutide 2.4 mg was the most cost-effective treatment, at an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of CAD 31 243 and CAD 29 014 per QALY gained versus the next best alternative, i.e., orlistat, and SoC, respectively. Semaglutide 2.4 mg extendedly dominated other pharmacotherapies such as NB-32 or liraglutide 3.0 mg and remained cost-effective both under a public and private payer perspective. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses varying post-treatment catch-up rates, longer treatment durations and using real-world cohort characteristics. Semaglutide 2.4 mg was the preferred intervention, with a likelihood of 70% at a WTP threshold of CAD 50 000 per QALY gained. However, when the modeled benefits of weight-loss on cancer, mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) or osteoarthritis surgeries were removed simultaneously, orlistat emerged as the best value for money compared with SoC, with an ICUR of CAD 35 723 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Semaglutide 2.4 mg was the most cost-effective treatment alternative compared with D&E or orlistat alone, and extendedly dominated other pharmacotherapies such as NB-32 or liraglutide 3.0 mg. Results were sensitive to the inclusion of the combined benefits of mortality, cancer, CVD, and knee osteoarthritis.


Subject(s)
Anti-Obesity Agents , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Obesity , Orlistat , Humans , Canada , Middle Aged , Obesity/drug therapy , Obesity/economics , Female , Anti-Obesity Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Obesity Agents/economics , Male , Orlistat/therapeutic use , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Liraglutide/therapeutic use , Liraglutide/economics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/economics , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Bupropion/economics , Naltrexone/therapeutic use , Naltrexone/economics , Glucagon-Like Peptides/therapeutic use , Glucagon-Like Peptides/economics
18.
Acupunct Med ; 42(1): 44-49, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37909713

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. The most widely available treatment options to assist patients in smoking cessation are limited by side effects and moderate efficacy at best. Acupuncture may be an effective option for smoking cessation. The goal of this study was to establish the need for and interest in acupuncture therapy to potentially assist with smoking cessation from a patient perspective. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study among patients aged 18 years or older whose medical record reported current tobacco use with English as their preferred language. REDCap surveys were administered to patients during office visits and included questions regarding opinions and use of all treatments available for smoking cessation (including acupuncture) as well as perceived barriers to acupuncture treatment. RESULTS: A total of 57 surveys were distributed, and 42 (74%) were completed. Most patients reported previous attempts at quitting (76%) and had tried a variety of treatments including nicotine replacement (45%), Chantix (varenicline; 23%), Wellbutrin (bupriopion; 19%), "cold turkey" (65%) and hypnosis (3%). No respondents reported having tried acupuncture for smoking cessation. CONCLUSION: When comparing treatment options, patients reported more interest in acupuncture than other treatment options with a statistically significant difference in the level of interest between acupuncture and bupropion. All barriers (cost, time and effectiveness) were equally rated on a Likert-type scale with a median of 50 on a 101-point scale.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy , Alkaloids , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Nicotine/adverse effects , Nicotinic Agonists/adverse effects , Alkaloids/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Benzazepines/adverse effects , Quinoxalines/adverse effects , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Varenicline , Bupropion/therapeutic use
19.
Addiction ; 119(4): 664-676, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38009551

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: iCanQuit is a smartphone application (app) proven efficacious for smoking cessation in a Phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT). This study aimed to measure whether medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for smoking cessation would further enhance the efficacy of iCanQuit, relative to its parent trial comparator-the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) QuitGuide app. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the entire parent trial sample of a two-group (iCanQuit and QuitGuide), stratified, doubled-blind RCT. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Participants who reported using an FDA-approved cessation medication on their own (n = 619) and those who reported no use of cessation medications (n = 1469). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive iCanQuit app or NCI's QuitGuide app. MEASUREMENTS: Use of FDA-approved medications was measured at 3 months post-randomization. Smoking cessation outcomes were measured at 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was 12-month self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA). FINDINGS: The data retention rate at the 12-month follow-up was 94.0%. Participants were aged 38.5 years, 71.0% female, 36.6% minority race/ethnicity, 40.6% high school or less education, residing in all 50 US States and smoking 19.2 cigarettes/day. The 29.6% of all participants who used medications were more likely to choose nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; 78.8%) than other cessation medications (i.e. varenicline or bupropion; 18.3 and 10.5%, respectively) and use did not differ by app treatment assignment (all P > 0.05). There was a significant (P = 0.049) interaction between medication use and app treatment assignment on PPA. Specifically, 12-month quit rates were 34% for iCanQuit versus 20% for QuitGuide [odds ratio (OR) = 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.59, 3.49] among participants reporting any medication use, whereas among participants reporting no medication use, quit rates were 28% for iCanQuit versus 22% for QuitGuide (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.09, 1.82). Results were stronger for those using only NRT: 40% quit rates for iCanQuit versus 18% quit rates for QuitGuide (OR = 3.57, 95% CI = 2.20, 5.79). CONCLUSIONS: The iCanQuit smartphone app for smoking cessation was more efficacious than the QuitGuide smartphone app, regardless of whether participants used medications to aid cessation. Smoking cessation medications, especially nicotine replacement therapy, might enhance the efficacy of the iCanQuit app.


Subject(s)
Mobile Applications , Smoking Cessation , Female , Humans , Male , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Smoking Cessation/methods , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Adult , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
20.
J Comp Eff Res ; 13(1): e230091, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37987716

ABSTRACT

Aim: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a debilitating illness in which depressive symptoms may persist after treatment. Treatment inertia is the continued use of the same pharmacotherapy regimen when treatment goals are not met. This study assessed the frequency of treatment inertia among adult patients with MDD treated in a real-world setting. Patients & methods: This was a retrospective, observational study of patients with MDD identified in the Decision Resources Group Real World Evidence US Data Repository from January 2014 to June 2018. Patients (≥18 years) had an elevated Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score (≥5) following 8 weeks of stable baseline antidepressant use with/without mental-health outpatient therapy. Treatment inertia, modification and discontinuation were evaluated over a 16-week follow-up period (timeline based on the APA Practice Guidelines). The primary outcome was the proportion of MDD patients experiencing treatment inertia. Results: 2850 patients (median age, 55 years; 74% female) met the study criteria. Of these patients, 834 (29%) had study-defined treatment inertia, 1534 (54%) received treatment modification and 482 (17%) discontinued treatment. Use of mirtazapine (Odd ratio [OR]: 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-0.79), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.54-0.75) or bupropion (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.60-0.84) in the baseline period was associated with an increased likelihood of treatment modification versus not receiving treatment with these medications. Frequency of treatment inertia may differ among those who do not have a documented PHQ-9 score. Conclusion: Effective symptom management is critical for optimal outcomes in MDD. Results demonstrate that treatment inertia is common in MDD despite guidelines recommending treatment modification in patients not reaching remission.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Outpatients , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...