Timothy B Baker1, Megan E Piper1, James H Stein2, Stevens S Smith1, Daniel M Bolt3, David L Fraser4, Michael C Fiore1. 1. Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison2Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison. 2. Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison. 3. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison. 4. Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Smoking cessation medications are routinely used in health care; it is vital to identify medications that most effectively treat this leading cause of preventable mortality. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacies of varenicline, combination nicotine replacement therapy (C-NRT), and the nicotine patch for 26-week quit rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Three-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. INTERVENTIONS: Participants 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 MEASURES: The 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. RESULTS: Among 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 RELEVANCE: Among 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 REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01553084.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: Smoking cessation medications are routinely used in health care; it is vital to identify medications that most effectively treat this leading cause of preventable mortality. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacies of varenicline, combination nicotine replacement therapy (C-NRT), and the nicotine patch for 26-week quit rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Three-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. INTERVENTIONS:Participants 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 MEASURES: The 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. RESULTS: Among 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 RELEVANCE: Among 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 REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01553084.
Authors: Theodore V Cooper; Margaret W DeBon; Michelle Stockton; Robert C Klesges; Timothy A Steenbergh; Deborah Sherrill-Mittleman; Lyndy C Jennings; Karen C Johnson Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Douglas E Jorenby; J Taylor Hays; Nancy A Rigotti; Salomon Azoulay; Eric J Watsky; Kathryn E Williams; Clare B Billing; Jason Gong; Karen R Reeves Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-07-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Amir I A Ahmed; Abdullah N A Ali; Cees Kramers; Linda V D Härmark; David M Burger; Willem M A Verhoeven Journal: J Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.153
Authors: Asha Asthana; Megan E Piper; Patrick E McBride; Ann Ward; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker; James H Stein Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Mark J Eisenberg; Kristian B Filion; Daniel Yavin; Patrick Bélisle; Salvatore Mottillo; Lawrence Joseph; André Gervais; Jennifer O'Loughlin; Gilles Paradis; Stephane Rinfret; Louise Pilote Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Mitchell Nides; Elbert D Glover; Victor I Reus; Arden G Christen; Barry J Make; Clare B Billing; Kathryn E Williams Journal: Am J Health Behav Date: 2008 Nov-Dec
Authors: James H Stein; Asha Asthana; Stevens S Smith; Megan E Piper; Wei-Yin Loh; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bryan W Heckman; K Michael Cummings; Jonathan J K Stoltman; Jennifer Dahne; Ron Borland; Geoffrey T Fong; Matthew J Carpenter Journal: Behav Res Ther Date: 2018-11-23
Authors: Li-Shiun Chen; Timothy B Baker; J Philip Miller; Michael Bray; Nina Smock; Jingling Chen; Faith Stoneking; Robert C Culverhouse; Nancy L Saccone; Christopher I Amos; Robert M Carney; Douglas E Jorenby; Laura J Bierut Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Carol Mitchell; Megan E Piper; Stevens S Smith; Claudia E Korcarz; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker; James H Stein Journal: Vasc Med Date: 2019-08-17 Impact factor: 3.239
Authors: William V Lechner; Rachel L Gunn; Alexia Minto; Noah S Philip; Richard A Brown; Lisa A Uebelacker; Lawrence H Price; Ana M Abrantes Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2017-11-29 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Neil M Davies; Amy E Taylor; Gemma Mj Taylor; Taha Itani; Tim Jones; Richard M Martin; Marcus R Munafò; Frank Windmeijer; Kyla H Thomas Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Suzaynn F Schick; Benjamin C Blount; Peyton Jacob; Najat A Saliba; John T Bernert; Ahmad El Hellani; Peter Jatlow; R Steven Pappas; Lanqing Wang; Jonathan Foulds; Arunava Ghosh; Stephen S Hecht; John C Gomez; Jessica R Martin; Clementina Mesaros; Sanjay Srivastava; Gideon St Helen; Robert Tarran; Pawel K Lorkiewicz; Ian A Blair; Heather L Kimmel; Claire M Doerschuk; Neal L Benowitz; Aruni Bhatnagar Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Jon O Ebbert; Melissa A Little; Robert C Klesges; Zoran Bursac; Karen C Johnson; Fridtjof Thomas; Mark W Vander Weg Journal: Health Educ Res Date: 2017-02-01
Authors: Tanya R Schlam; Timothy B Baker; Stevens S Smith; Jessica W Cook; Megan E Piper Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 4.244