Preloaded combination nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation in Kazakhstan: A randomized controlled trial study protocol
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Purushothama C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10681200 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The use of nicotine replacement therapy before quitting smoking is called nicotine preloading. Standard smoking cessation protocols suggest commencing nicotine replacement therapy only on the first day of quitting smoking (quit day) aiming to reduce withdrawal symptoms and craving. However, other, more successful smoking cessation pharmacotherapies are used prior to the quit day as well as after. Nicotine preloading could improve quit rates by reducing satisfaction from smoking prior to quitting and breaking the association between smoking and reward. A systematic literature review suggests that evidence for the effectiveness of preloading is inconclusive and further trials are needed.This is a study protocol for a multicenter, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial based in the United Kingdom, enrolling 1786 smokers who want to quit, funded by the National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment program, and sponsored by the University of Oxford. Participants will primarily be recruited through general practices and smoking cessation clinics, and randomized (1:1) either to use 21 mg nicotine patches, or not, for four weeks before quitting, whilst smoking as normal. All participants will be referred to receive standard smoking cessation service support. Follow-ups will take place at one week, four weeks, six months and 12 months after quit day. The primary outcome will be prolonged, biochemically verified six-month abstinence. Additional outcomes will include point prevalence abstinence and abstinence of four-week and 12-month duration, side effects, costs of treatment, and markers of potential mediators and moderators of the preloading effect.This large trial will add substantially to evidence on the effectiveness of nicotine preloading, but also on its cost effectiveness and potential mediators, which have not been investigated in detail previously. A range of recruitment strategies have been considered to try and compensate for any challenges encountered in recruiting the large sample, and the multicentre design means that knowledge can be shared between recruitment teams. The pragmatic study design means that results will give a realistic estimate of the success of the intervention if it were to be rolled out as part of standard smoking cessation service practice.Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33031001. Registered 27 April 2012.
| S-EPMC4223826 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionTobacco hazard is one of the most serious public health problems, accounting for up to 6 million deaths worldwide p.a. We aim to determine the efficacy and safety of acupuncture and/or nicotine replacement therapy on smoking cessation.MethodsWe will recruit 96 participants who are willing to quit smoking by acupuncture and/or nicotine replacement therapy in Chengguan, Xigu and Heping Districts, Lanzhou city, for multicenter randomized, double-blind, double-dummy controlled clinical trial. Following obtained the informed consent forms, all eligible participants will be randomly divided into 4 groups: (1) acupuncture combined with nicotine patch, (2) acupuncture combined with sham nicotine patch, (3) sham acupuncture combined with nicotine patch, and (4) sham acupuncture combined with sham nicotine patch. These participants will be treated with different intervention modalities for 8 weeks and then will be followed-up for 8 weeks. The SPSS 26.0 software will be applied to analyze the clinical effects and adverse reactions of different intervention measures for smoking cessation.DiscussionThis trial is a prospective, pragmatic, randomized, multicenter trial study protocol. The outcomes will illustrate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture and/or nicotine patches for smoking cessation. Provide smokers with a superior smoking cessation program.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100042912 . Registered on January 31, 2021.
| S-EPMC9169389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRecent evidence suggests that the efficacy of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy can vary across patients based on their genotypes. This study tests whether the coding variant rs16969968 in the CHRNA5 nicotinic receptor gene predicts the effects of combination nicotine replacement therapy (cNRT) and varenicline on treatment outcomes.MethodIn two randomized smoking cessation trials comparing cNRT vs. placebo, and varenicline vs. placebo, we used logistic regression to model associations between CHRNA5 rs16969968 and abstinence at end of treatment.ResultsFor abstinence at end of treatment, there was an interaction between cNRT and rs16969968 (X(2)=8.15, df=2, omnibus-p=0.017 for the interaction); individuals with the high-risk AA genotype were more likely to benefit from cNRT. In contrast, varenicline increased abstinence, but its effect did not vary with CHRNA5. However, the genetic effects differed between the placebo control groups across two trials (wald=3.94, df=1, p=0.047), this non-replication can alter the interpretation of pharmacogenetic findings.ConclusionsResults from two complementary smoking cessation trials demonstrate inconsistent genetic results in the placebo arms. This evidence highlights the need to compare the most effective pharmacotherapies with the same placebo control to establish pharmacogenetic evidence to aid decisions on medication choice for patients trying to quit smoking.
| S-EPMC4537319 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSmoking cessation medications are routinely used in health care; it is vital to identify medications that most effectively treat this leading cause of preventable mortality.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacies of varenicline, combination nicotine replacement therapy (C-NRT), and the nicotine patch for 26-week quit rates.Design, setting, and participantsThree-group randomized intention-to-treat clinical trial occurring from May 2012 to November 2015 among smokers recruited in the Madison, Wisconsin, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, communities; 65.5% of smokers offered the study (2687/4102) refused participation prior to randomization.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to one of three 12-week open-label smoking cessation pharmacotherapy groups: (1) nicotine patch only (n = 241); (2) varenicline only (including 1 prequit week; n = 424); and (3) C-NRT (nicotine patch + nicotine lozenge; n = 421). Six counseling sessions were offered.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was carbon monoxide-confirmed self-reported 7-day point-prevalence abstinence at 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes were carbon monoxide-confirmed self-reported initial abstinence, prolonged abstinence at 26 weeks, and point-prevalence abstinence at weeks 4, 12, and 52.ResultsAmong 1086 smokers randomized (52% women; 67% white; mean age, 48 years; mean of 17 cigarettes smoked per day), 917 (84%) provided 12-month follow-up data. Treatments did not differ on any abstinence outcome measure at 26 or 52 weeks, including point-prevalence abstinence at 26 weeks (nicotine patch, 22.8% [55/241]; varenicline, 23.6% [100/424]; and C-NRT, 26.8% [113/421]) or at 52 weeks (nicotine patch, 20.8% [50/241]; varenicline, 19.1% [81/424]; and C-NRT, 20.2% [85/421]). At 26 weeks, the risk differences for abstinence were, for patch vs varenicline, -0.76% (95% CI, -7.4% to 5.9%); for patch vs C-NRT, -4.0% (95% CI, -10.8% to 2.8%); and for varenicline vs C-NRT, -3.3% (95% CI, -9.1% to 2.6%). All medications were well tolerated, but varenicline produced more frequent adverse events than did the nicotine patch for vivid dreams, insomnia, nausea, constipation, sleepiness, and indigestion.Conclusions and relevanceAmong adults motivated to quit smoking, 12 weeks of open-label treatment with nicotine patch, varenicline, or C-NRT produced no significant differences in biochemically confirmed rates of smoking abstinence at 26 weeks. The results raise questions about the relative effectiveness of intense smoking pharmacotherapies.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01553084.
| S-EPMC4824537 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExtended use of combined pharmacotherapies to treat tobacco dependence may increase smoking abstinence; few studies have examined their effectiveness. The objective of this study was to evaluate smoking abstinence with standard nicotine patch (NRT), extended use of combined formulations of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT+), or varenicline (VR).MethodsA total of 737 smokers, including those with medical and psychiatric comorbidities, were randomly assigned to one of the above three treatment conditions. The NRT group received 10 weeks of patches (21 mg daily maximum); the NRT+ group received patches (35 mg daily maximum) and gum or inhaler for up to 22 weeks; and the VR group received 1 mg twice daily for up to 24 weeks (22 weeks post target quit date). All participants also received six standardized 15-minute smoking cessation counseling sessions by nurses experienced in tobacco dependence treatment. The primary outcome was carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rates (CAR) from weeks 5-52. Secondary outcomes were: CAR from weeks 5-10 and 5-22, and carbon monoxide-confirmed 7-day point prevalence (7PP) at weeks 10, 22, and 52. Adjusted and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat procedures.ResultsThe CARs for weeks 5-52 were 10.0 %, 12.4 %, and 15.3 % in the NRT, NRT+, and VR groups, respectively; no group differences were observed. Results with 7PP showed that VR was superior to NRT at week 52 (odds ratio (OR), 1.84; 97.5 % Confidence Interval (CI), 1.04-3.26) in the adjusted intention-to-treat analysis. Those in the VR group had higher CAR at weeks 5-22 (OR, 2.01; CI, 1.20-3.36) than those in the NRT group. Results with 7PP revealed that both NRT+ (OR, 1.72; CI, 1.04-2.85) and VR (OR, 1.96; CI, 1.20-3.23) were more effective than NRT at 22 weeks. As compared to NRT monotherapy, NRT+ and VR produced significant increases in CAR for weeks 5-10 (OR, 1.52; CI, 1.00-2.30 and OR, 1.58; CI, 1.04-2.39, respectively); results were similar, but somewhat stronger, when 7PP was used at 10 weeks (OR, 1.57; CI, 1.03-2.41 and OR, 1.79; CI, 1.17-2.73, respectively). All medications were well tolerated, but participants in the VR group experienced more fatigue, digestive symptoms (e.g., nausea, diarrhea), and sleep-related concerns (e.g., abnormal dreams, insomnia), but less dermatologic symptoms than those in the NRT or NRT+ groups. The frequency of serious adverse events did not differ between groups.ConclusionsFlexible and combination NRT and varenicline enhance success in the early phases of quitting. Varenicline improves abstinence in the medium term; however, there is no clear evidence that either varenicline or flexible, dual-form NRT increase quit rates in the long-term when compared to NRT monotherapy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01623505 ; Retrospectively registered on July 13, 2011.
| S-EPMC4884360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe QuitNic pilot trial aimed to test the feasibility of providing a nicotine vaping product (NVP) compared with combination nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to smokers upon discharge from a smoke-free residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment service.MethodsQuitNic was a pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial. At discharge from residential withdrawal, 100 clients received telephone Quitline behavioral support and either 12-week supply of NRT or an NVP. Treatment adherence and acceptability, self-reported abstinence, cigarettes smoked per day (CPD), frequency of cravings, and severity of withdrawal symptoms were assessed at 6 and 12 weeks. Results are reported for complete cases and for abstinence outcomes, penalized imputation results are reported where missing is assumed smoking.ResultsRetention on was 63% at 6 weeks and 50% at 12 weeks. At 12 weeks, 68% of the NRT group reported using combination NRT while 96% of the NVP group used the device. Acceptability ratings for the products were high in both groups. At 12 weeks, 14% of the NVP group and 18% of the NRT group reported not smoking at all in the last 7 days. Mean CPD among continued smokers decreased significantly between baseline to 12 weeks in both groups; from 19.91 to 4.72 for the NVP group (p < .001) and from 20.88 to 5.52 in the NRT group (p < .001). Cravings and withdrawal symptoms significantly decreased for both groups.ConclusionsClients completing residential withdrawal readily engaged with smoking cessation post-treatment when given the opportunity. Further research is required to identify the most effective treatments postwithdrawal for this population at elevated risk of tobacco-related harm.Trial registration numberACTRN12617000849392.ImplicationsThis pilot study showed that smoking cessation support involving options for nicotine replacement and Quitline-delivered cognitive behavioral counseling is attractive to people after they have been discharged from SUD treatment. Both nicotine vaping products and nicotine replacement therapies were highly acceptable and used by participants who reported reductions in cravings for cigarettes and perceptions of withdrawal symptoms and reductions in number of cigarettes smoked. Some participants self-reported abstinence from cigarettes-around one in five reported having quit smoking cigarettes at 12 weeks postdischarge. The results have significant public health implications for providing quit support following discharge from SUD treatment.
| S-EPMC7885782 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6353172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAdherence to smoking cessation treatment is generally low, especially among socio-economically disadvantaged groups including individuals experiencing homelessness and those with mental illnesses. Despite the high smoking rates in homeless populations (~70%) no study to date has systematically examined predictors of adherence to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in this population.ObjectiveThe aim of this secondary analysis was to identify predictors of adherence to NRT in a smoking cessation trial conducted among homeless smokers.MethodsSecondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial enrolling 430 persons who were homeless and current cigarette smokers. Participants were assigned to one of the two study conditions to enhance smoking cessation: Motivational Interviewing (MI; 6 sessions of MI + 8 weeks of NRT) or Standard Care (Brief advice to quit+ 8 weeks of NRT). The primary outcome for the current analysis was adherence to NRT at end of treatment (8 weeks following randomization). Adherence was defined as a total score of zero on a modified Morisky adherence scale). Demographic and baseline psychosocial, tobacco-related, and substance abuse measures were compared between those who did and did not adhere to NRT.ResultsAfter adjusting for confounders, smokers who were depressed at baseline (OR=0.58, 95% CI, 0.38-0.87, p=0.01), had lower confidence to quit (OR=1.10, 95% CI, 1.01-1.19, p=0.04), were less motivated to adhere (OR=1.04, 95% CI, 1.00-1.07, p=0.04), and were less likely to be adherent to NRT. Further, age of initial smoking was positively associated with adherence status (OR= 0.83, 95% CI, 0.69-0.99, p=0.04).ConclusionThese results suggest that smoking cessation programs conducted in this population may target increased adherence to NRT by addressing both depression and motivation to quit.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov: NCT00786149.
| S-EPMC5453676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe primary aim was to compare the efficacy of smoking cessation treatment using a combination of active nicotine patch plus active nicotine gum versus therapy consisting of active nicotine patch plus placebo gum in a sample of alcohol-dependent tobacco smokers in an early phase of out-patient alcohol treatment. A secondary aim was to determine whether or not there were any carry-over effects of combination nicotine replacement on drinking outcomes.DesignSmall-scale randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial with 1-year smoking and drinking outcome assessment.SettingTwo out-patient substance abuse clinics provided a treatment platform of behavioral alcohol and smoking treatment delivered in 3 months of weekly sessions followed by three monthly booster sessions.ParticipantsParticipants were 96 men and women with a diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence and smoking 15 or more cigarettes per day.InterventionAll participants received open-label transdermal nicotine patches and were randomized to receive either 2 mg nicotine gum or placebo gum under double-blind conditions.FindingsAnalysis of 1-year follow-up data revealed that patients receiving nicotine patch plus active gum had better smoking outcomes than those receiving patch plus placebo gum on measures of time to smoking relapse and prolonged abstinence at 12 months. Alcohol outcomes were not significantly different across medication conditions.ConclusionsResults of this study were consistent with results of larger trials of smokers without alcohol problems, showing that combination therapy (nicotine patch plus gum) is more effective than monotherapy (nicotine patch) for smoking cessation.
| S-EPMC2753831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTobacco dependence is the leading cause of preventable death and disabilities worldwide and nicotine is the main substance responsible for the addiction to tobacco. A vaccine against nicotine was tested in a 6-month randomized, double blind phase II smoking cessation study in 341 smokers with a subsequent 6-month follow-up period.Methodology/principal findings229 subjects were randomized to receive five intramuscular injections of the nicotine vaccine and 112 to receive placebo at monthly intervals. All subjects received individual behavioral smoking cessation counseling. The vaccine was safe, generally well tolerated and highly immunogenic, inducing a 100% antibody responder rate after the first injection. Point prevalence of abstinence at month 2 showed a statistically significant difference between subjects treated with Nicotine-Qbeta (47.2%) and placebo (35.1%) (P = 0.036), but continuous abstinence between months 2 and 6 was not significantly different. However, in subgroup analysis of the per-protocol population, the third of subjects with highest antibody levels showed higher continuous abstinence from month 2 until month 6 (56.6%) than placebo treated participants (31.3%) (OR 2.9; P = 0.004) while medium and low antibody levels did not increase abstinence rates. After 12 month, the difference in continuous abstinence rate between subjects on placebo and those with high antibody response was maintained (difference 20.2%, P = 0.012).ConclusionsWhereas Nicotine-Qbeta did not significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in the intention-to-treat population, subgroup analyses of the per-protocol population suggest that such a vaccination against nicotine can significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in smokers when sufficiently high antibody levels are achieved. Immunotherapy might open a new avenue to the treatment of nicotine addiction.Trial registrationSwiss Medical Registry 2003DR2327; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00369616.
| S-EPMC2432028 | biostudies-literature