Christopher J Cadham1, Jinani C Jayasekera2, Shailesh M Advani3, Shelby J Fallon1, Jennifer L Stephens1, Dejana Braithwaite1, Jihyoun Jeon4, Pianpian Cao4, David T Levy1, Rafael Meza4, Kathryn L Taylor1, Jeanne S Mandelblatt1. 1. Georgetown University Medical Center-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, 3300 Whitehaven St. NW, Washington, DC, USA. 2. Georgetown University Medical Center-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, 3300 Whitehaven St. NW, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address: jcj74@georgetown.edu. 3. Georgetown University Medical Center-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, 3300 Whitehaven St. NW, Washington, DC, USA; The National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. University of Michigan, School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines recommend delivery of smoking cessation interventions with lung cancer screening (LCS). Unfortunately, there are limited data to guide clinicians and policy-makers in choosing cessation interventions in this setting. Several trials are underway to fill this evidence gap, but results are not expected for several years. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature on the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions among populations eligible for LCS. We searched PubMed, Medline, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials of smoking cessation interventions published from 2010-2017. Trials were eligible for inclusion if they sampled individuals likely to be eligible for LCS based on age and smoking history, had sample sizes >100, follow-up of 6- or 12-months, and were based in North America, Western Europe, Australia, or New Zealand. RESULTS: Three investigators independently screened 3,813 abstracts and identified 332 for full-text review. Of these, 85 trials were included and grouped into categories based on the primary intervention: electronic/web-based, in-person counseling, pharmacotherapy, and telephone counseling. At 6-month follow-up, electronic/web-based (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% CI 1.03-1.25), in-person counseling (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.25-1.70), and pharmacotherapy (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33-1.77) interventions significantly increased the odds of abstinence. Telephone counseling increased the odds but did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.98-1.50). At 12-months, in-person counseling (OR 1.28 95% CI 1.10-1.50) and pharmacotherapy (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17-1.84) remained efficacious, although the decrement in efficacy was of similar magnitude across all intervention categories. CONCLUSIONS: Several categories of cessation interventions are promising for implementation in the LCS setting.
OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines recommend delivery of smoking cessation interventions with lung cancer screening (LCS). Unfortunately, there are limited data to guide clinicians and policy-makers in choosing cessation interventions in this setting. Several trials are underway to fill this evidence gap, but results are not expected for several years. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature on the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions among populations eligible for LCS. We searched PubMed, Medline, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials of smoking cessation interventions published from 2010-2017. Trials were eligible for inclusion if they sampled individuals likely to be eligible for LCS based on age and smoking history, had sample sizes >100, follow-up of 6- or 12-months, and were based in North America, Western Europe, Australia, or New Zealand. RESULTS: Three investigators independently screened 3,813 abstracts and identified 332 for full-text review. Of these, 85 trials were included and grouped into categories based on the primary intervention: electronic/web-based, in-person counseling, pharmacotherapy, and telephone counseling. At 6-month follow-up, electronic/web-based (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% CI 1.03-1.25), in-person counseling (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.25-1.70), and pharmacotherapy (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33-1.77) interventions significantly increased the odds of abstinence. Telephone counseling increased the odds but did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.98-1.50). At 12-months, in-person counseling (OR 1.28 95% CI 1.10-1.50) and pharmacotherapy (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17-1.84) remained efficacious, although the decrement in efficacy was of similar magnitude across all intervention categories. CONCLUSIONS: Several categories of cessation interventions are promising for implementation in the LCS setting.
Authors: Pianpian Cao; Jihyoun Jeon; David T Levy; Jinani C Jayasekera; Christopher J Cadham; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kathryn L Taylor; Rafael Meza Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2020-03-08 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Rafael Meza; Pianpian Cao; Jihyoun Jeon; Kathryn L Taylor; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Eric J Feuer; Douglas R Lowy Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 20.121
Authors: Christopher J Cadham; Pianpian Cao; Jinani Jayasekera; Kathryn L Taylor; David T Levy; Jihyoun Jeon; Elena B Elkin; Kristie L Foley; Anne Joseph; Chung Yin Kong; Jennifer A Minnix; Nancy A Rigotti; Benjamin A Toll; Steven B Zeliadt; Rafael Meza; Jeanne Mandelblatt Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Ankita Ghatak; Sean Gilman; Siobhan Carney; Anne V Gonzalez; Andrea Benedetti; Nicole Ezer Journal: Can Respir J Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 2.130
Authors: Wayne K deRuiter; Megan Barker; Alma Rahimi; Anna Ivanova; Laurie Zawertailo; Osnat C Melamed; Peter Selby Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: Ellie Eyestone; Randi M Williams; George Luta; Emily Kim; Benjamin A Toll; Alana Rojewski; Jordan Neil; Paul M Cinciripini; Marisa Cordon; Kristie Foley; Jennifer S Haas; Anne M Joseph; Jennifer A Minnix; Jamie S Ostroff; Elyse Park; Nancy Rigotti; Lia Sorgen; Kathryn L Taylor Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 5.825