Kenneth A Perkins1. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. perkinska@upmc.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Acutely increased urge to smoke, or craving, in response to smoking cues (i.e., "cue reactivity") is often believed to identify those less able to later quit smoking. Although absolute craving level can predict smoking behavior, smoking cue reactivity per se may not predict cessation outcome. METHODS: All clinical trials of cue reactivity and cessation outcome published before 2007 were identified and supplemented with a web-based search of clinical studies published after 2006, producing one additional trial. Examined were a total of 6 studies that directly related self-reported craving in response to laboratory-presented smoking cues with subsequent ability to quit smoking. RESULTS: Of the 6 studies, only one found that lower cue reactivity predicted greater quitting success (with nicotine but not placebo patch). Another study found the opposite, that higher cue reactivity was related to greater, rather than less, quitting success (in an unaided attempt). The other studies showed no association between cue reactivity and cessation outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This limited research does not clearly support self-reported craving in response to smoking cues per se as a predictor of later quitting success. Lack of consistent results may partly be due to variability in methods of smoking cue assessment, type of cessation treatment, and duration of follow-up assessment. If it is to improve our understanding of an individual's ability to quit smoking, research on cue reactivity needs to show significant and reliable associations with subsequent long-term smoking behavior.
INTRODUCTION: Acutely increased urge to smoke, or craving, in response to smoking cues (i.e., "cue reactivity") is often believed to identify those less able to later quit smoking. Although absolute craving level can predict smoking behavior, smoking cue reactivity per se may not predict cessation outcome. METHODS: All clinical trials of cue reactivity and cessation outcome published before 2007 were identified and supplemented with a web-based search of clinical studies published after 2006, producing one additional trial. Examined were a total of 6 studies that directly related self-reported craving in response to laboratory-presented smoking cues with subsequent ability to quit smoking. RESULTS: Of the 6 studies, only one found that lower cue reactivity predicted greater quitting success (with nicotine but not placebo patch). Another study found the opposite, that higher cue reactivity was related to greater, rather than less, quitting success (in an unaided attempt). The other studies showed no association between cue reactivity and cessation outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This limited research does not clearly support self-reported craving in response to smoking cues per se as a predictor of later quitting success. Lack of consistent results may partly be due to variability in methods of smoking cue assessment, type of cessation treatment, and duration of follow-up assessment. If it is to improve our understanding of an individual's ability to quit smoking, research on cue reactivity needs to show significant and reliable associations with subsequent long-term smoking behavior.
Authors: Noreen L Watson; Matthew J Carpenter; Michael E Saladin; Kevin M Gray; Himanshu P Upadhyaya Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Teresa Franklin; Ze Wang; Jesse J Suh; Rebecca Hazan; Jeffrey Cruz; Yin Li; Marina Goldman; John A Detre; Charles P O'Brien; Anna Rose Childress Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2011-01-03
Authors: Christopher S Culbertson; Jennifer Bramen; Mark S Cohen; Edythe D London; Richard E Olmstead; Joanna J Gan; Matthew R Costello; Stephanie Shulenberger; Mark A Mandelkern; Arthur L Brody Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2011-01-03
Authors: Anne K Rehme; Ingo Frommann; Sandra Peters; Verena Block; Julia Bludau; Boris B Quednow; Wolfgang Maier; Christian Schütz; Michael Wagner Journal: Addiction Date: 2009-08-06 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Cynthia A Conklin; Kenneth A Perkins; Nathalie Robin; F Joseph McClernon; Ronald P Salkeld Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2010-05-26 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Saul Shiffman; Xiaoxue Li; Michael S Dunbar; Hilary A Tindle; Sarah M Scholl; Stuart G Ferguson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Marina Unrod; David J Drobes; Paul R Stasiewicz; Joseph W Ditre; Bryan Heckman; Ralph R Miller; Steven K Sutton; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2013-09-28 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Bryan W Heckman; Matthew J Carpenter; John B Correa; Jennifer M Wray; Michael E Saladin; Brett Froeliger; David J Drobes; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addiction Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Michael S Dunbar; Saul Shiffman; Thomas R Kirchner; Hilary A Tindle; Sarah M Scholl Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Cynthia A Conklin; F Joseph McClernon; Elizabeth J Vella; Christopher J Joyce; Ronald P Salkeld; Craig S Parzynski; Lee Bennett Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-01-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Max M Owens; James MacKillop; Joshua C Gray; Steven R H Beach; Michael D Stein; Raymond S Niaura; Lawrence H Sweet Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2017-09-06 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Cynthia A Conklin; Craig S Parzynski; Ronald P Salkeld; Kenneth A Perkins; Carolyn A Fonte Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2012-08-13 Impact factor: 3.157