Jeongki Paek1, Serhim Son2, Yoon Ji Choi3. 1. Department of Family Medicine, SanggyePaik Hospital, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. yj_choi@korea.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although successful smoking cessation after cancer diagnosis is important, research on e-cigarette use and smoking behavior among cancer survivors (CS) is limited. This study compared cigarette and e-cigarette use among CS and non-cancer populations in Korea. METHODS: This study analyzed the 2013-2018 National Health and Nutrition Survey data to investigate e-cigarette use and smoking behavior among Korean CS. The data were categorized into 1260 CS and 5040 non-cancer populations using the propensity score matching method. A multiple logistic regression was conducted among CS who previously used cigarettes or e-cigarettes to evaluate factors influencing successful cessation. RESULTS: Regarding conventional smoking, the proportion of ex-smokers was higher (25.2% versus 19.9%) than current smokers (6.7% versus 10.6%) in the CS group than in the propensity matched non-cancer population (PMNCP) (p < 0.001). However, ever use of e-cigarettes did not differ between them (2.4% versus 2.7%, p = 0.529). Successful cessation, defined as not using either cigarettes or e-cigarettes, correlated with problem drinking (OR 0.442, 95% CI 0.207-0.940), depression (OR 0.276, 95% CI 0.087-0.872), and cancer sites. CS of stomach, liver, colorectal, and lung cancer maintained higher successful smoking cessation rates than PMNCP. CONCLUSIONS: Korean CS had a higher cessation rate than PMNCP regarding conventional smoking; however, there was no difference in e-cigarette use. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: In Korea, some CS continue to use e-cigarettes, and physicians should focus on helping them quit. Individualized and timely interventions should be provided for both cigarette and e-cigarette users, considering factors influencing successful cessation.
PURPOSE: Although successful smoking cessation after cancer diagnosis is important, research on e-cigarette use and smoking behavior among cancer survivors (CS) is limited. This study compared cigarette and e-cigarette use among CS and non-cancer populations in Korea. METHODS: This study analyzed the 2013-2018 National Health and Nutrition Survey data to investigate e-cigarette use and smoking behavior among Korean CS. The data were categorized into 1260 CS and 5040 non-cancer populations using the propensity score matching method. A multiple logistic regression was conducted among CS who previously used cigarettes or e-cigarettes to evaluate factors influencing successful cessation. RESULTS: Regarding conventional smoking, the proportion of ex-smokers was higher (25.2% versus 19.9%) than current smokers (6.7% versus 10.6%) in the CS group than in the propensity matched non-cancer population (PMNCP) (p < 0.001). However, ever use of e-cigarettes did not differ between them (2.4% versus 2.7%, p = 0.529). Successful cessation, defined as not using either cigarettes or e-cigarettes, correlated with problem drinking (OR 0.442, 95% CI 0.207-0.940), depression (OR 0.276, 95% CI 0.087-0.872), and cancer sites. CS of stomach, liver, colorectal, and lung cancer maintained higher successful smoking cessation rates than PMNCP. CONCLUSIONS: Korean CS had a higher cessation rate than PMNCP regarding conventional smoking; however, there was no difference in e-cigarette use. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: In Korea, some CS continue to use e-cigarettes, and physicians should focus on helping them quit. Individualized and timely interventions should be provided for both cigarette and e-cigarette users, considering factors influencing successful cessation.
Authors: Lois B Travis; Charles S Rabkin; Linda Morris Brown; James M Allan; Blanche P Alter; Christine B Ambrosone; Colin B Begg; Neil Caporaso; Stephen Chanock; Angela DeMichele; William Douglas Figg; Mary K Gospodarowicz; Eric J Hall; Michie Hisada; Peter Inskip; Ruth Kleinerman; John B Little; David Malkin; Andrea K Ng; Kenneth Offit; Ching-Hon Pui; Leslie L Robison; Nathaniel Rothman; Peter G Shields; Louise Strong; Toshiyasu Taniguchi; Margaret A Tucker; Mark H Greene Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-01-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Makenzie L Hawkins; Saundra S Buys; Lisa H Gren; Sara E Simonsen; Anne C Kirchhoff; Mia Hashibe Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: M Shayne Gallaway; Rebecca Glover-Kudon; Behnoosh Momin; Mary Puckett; Natasha Buchanan Lunsford; Kathleen R Ragan; Elizabeth A Rohan; Stephen Babb Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-01-05 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Karin A Kasza; Bridget K Ambrose; Kevin P Conway; Nicolette Borek; Kristie Taylor; Maciej L Goniewicz; K Michael Cummings; Eva Sharma; Jennifer L Pearson; Victoria R Green; Annette R Kaufman; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Mark J Travers; Jonathan Kwan; Cindy Tworek; Yu-Ching Cheng; Ling Yang; Nikolas Pharris-Ciurej; Dana M van Bemmel; Cathy L Backinger; Wilson M Compton; Andrew J Hyland Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ramzi G Salloum; Jinhai Huo; Ji-Hyun Lee; Juhan Lee; Jesse Dallery; Thomas George; Graham Warren Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240