Kevin M Gray1, Erin A McClure1, Nathaniel L Baker2, Karen J Hartwell1,3, Matthew J Carpenter1,4, Michael E Saladin1,5. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences. 3. Ralph H. Johnson Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. 4. Hollings Cancer Center. 5. Department of Health Sciences and Research, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: Within a parent study examining ovarian hormone effects on smoking cessation in women, we conducted an exploratory short-term trial of varenicline versus transdermal nicotine patch. DESIGN: Double-blind double-dummy randomized trial. SETTING: Single-site out-patient research clinic in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Female smokers, ages 18-45 years and averaging ≥10 cigarettes per day for at least 6 months (n=140). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive a 4-week course of (a) varenicline tablets and placebo patches (n = 67) or (b) placebo tablets and nicotine patches (n=73). Two brief cessation counseling sessions were provided for all participants. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome of primary clinical interest was 2-week end-of-treatment abstinence. Secondary outcomes included 1- and 4-week end-of treatment abstinence and abstinence at a post-treatment follow-up visit occurring 4 weeks after treatment conclusion. Breath carbon monoxide (≤ 10 parts per million) was used to confirm biochemically self-reported abstinence. FINDINGS: Two-week end-of-treatment abstinence was achieved by 37.3% (25 of 67) of varenicline participants and by 17.8% (13 of 73) of nicotine patch participants [odds ratio (OR) = 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.3-6.0, P=0.011]. One-week (44.8 versus 20.6%, OR=3.1, 95% CI=1.5-6.6, P=0.003) and 4-week (22.4 versus 9.6%, OR=2.7, 95% CI=1.0-7.2, P=0.043) end-of-treatment abstinence similarly favored varenicline, although post-treatment follow-up Russell Standard abstinence was not significantly different between groups (23.9 versus 13.7%, OR=2.0, 95% CI=0.8-4.7, P=0.126). CONCLUSION: In an exploratory 4-week head-to-head trial in female smokers, varenicline, compared with nicotine patch, more than doubled the odds of end-of-treatment abstinence, although this diminished somewhat at post-treatment follow-up.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Within a parent study examining ovarian hormone effects on smoking cessation in women, we conducted an exploratory short-term trial of varenicline versus transdermal nicotine patch. DESIGN: Double-blind double-dummy randomized trial. SETTING: Single-site out-patient research clinic in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Female smokers, ages 18-45 years and averaging ≥10 cigarettes per day for at least 6 months (n=140). INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomized to receive a 4-week course of (a) varenicline tablets and placebo patches (n = 67) or (b) placebo tablets and nicotine patches (n=73). Two brief cessation counseling sessions were provided for all participants. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome of primary clinical interest was 2-week end-of-treatment abstinence. Secondary outcomes included 1- and 4-week end-of treatment abstinence and abstinence at a post-treatment follow-up visit occurring 4 weeks after treatment conclusion. Breath carbon monoxide (≤ 10 parts per million) was used to confirm biochemically self-reported abstinence. FINDINGS: Two-week end-of-treatment abstinence was achieved by 37.3% (25 of 67) of vareniclineparticipants and by 17.8% (13 of 73) of nicotine patch participants [odds ratio (OR) = 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.3-6.0, P=0.011]. One-week (44.8 versus 20.6%, OR=3.1, 95% CI=1.5-6.6, P=0.003) and 4-week (22.4 versus 9.6%, OR=2.7, 95% CI=1.0-7.2, P=0.043) end-of-treatment abstinence similarly favored varenicline, although post-treatment follow-up Russell Standard abstinence was not significantly different between groups (23.9 versus 13.7%, OR=2.0, 95% CI=0.8-4.7, P=0.126). CONCLUSION: In an exploratory 4-week head-to-head trial in female smokers, varenicline, compared with nicotine patch, more than doubled the odds of end-of-treatment abstinence, although this diminished somewhat at post-treatment follow-up.
Authors: A Rogier T Donders; Geert J M G van der Heijden; Theo Stijnen; Karel G M Moons Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: David Gonzales; Stephen I Rennard; Mitchell Nides; Cheryl Oncken; Salomon Azoulay; Clare B Billing; Eric J Watsky; Jason Gong; Kathryn E Williams; Karen R Reeves Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-07-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael E Saladin; Erin A McClure; Nathaniel L Baker; Matthew J Carpenter; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Karen J Hartwell; Kevin M Gray Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: D V Sheehan; Y Lecrubier; K H Sheehan; P Amorim; J Janavs; E Weiller; T Hergueta; R Baker; G C Dunbar Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 1998 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Michael E Saladin; Erin A McClure; Nathaniel L Baker; Matthew J Carpenter; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Karen J Hartwell; Kevin M Gray Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Joshua L Karelitz; Erin A McClure; Caitlin Wolford-Clevenger; Lauren R Pacek; Karen L Cropsey Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Frank T Leone; Yuqing Zhang; Sarah Evers-Casey; A Eden Evins; Michelle N Eakin; Joelle Fathi; Kathleen Fennig; Patricia Folan; Panagis Galiatsatos; Hyma Gogineni; Stephen Kantrow; Hasmeena Kathuria; Thomas Lamphere; Enid Neptune; Manuel C Pacheco; Smita Pakhale; David Prezant; David P L Sachs; Benjamin Toll; Dona Upson; Dan Xiao; Luciane Cruz-Lopes; Izabela Fulone; Rachael L Murray; Kelly K O'Brien; Sureka Pavalagantharajah; Stephanie Ross; Yuan Zhang; Meng Zhu; Harold J Farber Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-07-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Luba Yammine; Thomas R Kosten; Paul M Cinciripini; Charles E Green; Janet C Meininger; Jennifer A Minnix; Thomas F Newton Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 1.889