Electronic Nicotine-Delivery Systems for Smoking Cessation.

BACKGROUND: Electronic nicotine-delivery systems - also called e-cigarettes - are used by some tobacco smokers to assist with quitting. Evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of these systems is needed. METHODS: In this open-label, controlled trial, we randomly assigned adults who were smoking at least five tobacco cigarettes per day and who wanted to set a quit date to an intervention group, which received free e-cigarettes and e-liquids, standard-of-care smoking-cessation counseling, and optional (not free) nicotine-replacement therapy, or to a control group, which received standard counseling and a voucher, which they could use for any purpose, including nicotine-replacement therapy. The primary outcome was biochemically validated, continuous abstinence from smoking at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included participant-reported abstinence from tobacco and from any nicotine (including smoking, e-cigarettes, and nicotine-replacement therapy) at 6 months, respiratory symptoms, and serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 1246 participants underwent randomization; 622 participants were assigned to the intervention group, and 624 to the control group. The percentage of participants with validated continuous abstinence from tobacco smoking was 28.9% in the intervention group and 16.3% in the control group (relative risk, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.43 to 2.20). The percentage of participants who abstained from smoking in the 7 days before the 6-month visit was 59.6% in the intervention group and 38.5% in the control group, but the percentage who abstained from any nicotine use was 20.1% in the intervention group and 33.7% in the control group. Serious adverse events occurred in 25 participants (4.0%) in the intervention group and in 31 (5.0%) in the control group; adverse events occurred in 272 participants (43.7%) and 229 participants (36.7%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of e-cigarettes to standard smoking-cessation counseling resulted in greater abstinence from tobacco use among smokers than smoking-cessation counseling alone. (Funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation and others; ESTxENDS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03589989.).

Lipid-Lowering Therapy and Risk of Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: There is debate over whether statins increase risk of hemorrhagic stroke, so we assessed current evidence, including data from new statin trials and trials of nonstatin low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)- and triglyceride-lowering therapies. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic review of large randomized clinical trials (≥1000 patients with ≥2 years follow-up) of LDL-C-lowering therapy (statin, ezetimibe, and PCSK-9 [proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9] inhibitor) and triglyceride-lowering therapy (omega-3 supplements and fibrate) that reported hemorrhagic stroke as an outcome. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to July 2, 2021 and updated a meta-analysis of cardiovascular statin trials published in 2012. Among our several subgroup analyses, we looked at difference depending on stroke status and also depending on age. We identified 37 trials for LDL-C lowering (284 301 participants) and 11 for triglyceride lowering (120 984 participants). Overall, we found a higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke for LDL-C lowering, risk ratio (RR) 1.16 (95% CI, 1.01-1.32, P=0.03). For statins (33 trials, 216 258 participants), RR=1.17 (95% CI, 1.01-1.36); for PCSK-9 inhibitors (2 trials, 46 488 participants), RR=0.86 (95% CI, 0.43-1.74); and for ezetimibe (2 trials, 21 555 participants), RR=1.14 (95% CI, 0.64-2.03). In statin trials of patients with previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, RR was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.05-2.04), and in trials with mean age ≥65 years old, RR=1.34 (95% CI, 1.04-1.73) (Pint=0.14 and Pint=0.23 respectively); for triglyceride lowering (11 trials, 120 984 participants), RR=1.05 (95% CI, 0.86-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence for a small increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke events with LDL-C-lowering therapies but no clear evidence for triglyceride-lowering therapies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42021275363.

Socioeconomic Status and Adherence to Preventive Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Switzerland: A Population Based Digital Cohort Analysis.

Objectives: To assess the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and self-reported adherence to preventive measures in Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: 4,299 participants from a digital cohort were followed between September 2020 and November 2021. Baseline equivalised disposable income and education were used as SES proxies. Adherence was assessed over time. We investigated the association between SES and adherence using multivariable mixed logistic regression, stratifying by age (below/above 65 years) and two periods (before/after June 2021, to account for changes in vaccine coverage and epidemiological situation). Results: Adherence was high across all SES strata before June 2021. After, participants with higher equivalised disposable income were less likely to adhere to preventive measures compared to participants in the first (low) quartile [second (Adj.OR, 95% CI) (0.56, 0.37-0.85), third (0.38, 0.23-0.64), fourth (0.60, 0.36-0.98)]. We observed similar results for education. Conclusion: No differences by SES were found during the period with high SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates and stringent measures. Following the broad availability of vaccines, lower incidence, and eased measures, differences by SES started to emerge. Our study highlights the need for contextual interpretation when assessing SES impact on adherence to preventive measures.