Dataset Information

Reduction of head and neck cancer risk following smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Head and neck (HN) cancer comprises the neoplasms originating from the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx. We aimed at reviewing the available literature on the effect of smoking cessation on HN cancer risk.

Method

We conducted a systematic search in Medline, PubMed and Embase to June 2022. We abstracted or calculated relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs of HN cancer after cessation of tobacco smoking (both former smoking status and duration of quitting) and combined them using random effects meta-analyses. Papers included were case-control or cohort studies available in the English language. Studies investigating smoking cessation after cancer diagnosis, case reports, intervention studies or animal studies were excluded. Quality and susceptibility to bias of each included study were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot and Egger's test.

Results

A total of 65 studies were included in the review, including 5 cohort and 60 case-control studies. The RR of HN cancer for former smokers compared with current smokers was 0.40 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.46). In an analysis by cancer site, the RR of oral cancer was 0.44 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.55), that of pharyngeal cancer 0.44 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.60) and that of laryngeal cancer 0.38 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.50). The dose-response meta-analysis was based on 37 studies. The RR per 10-year increase in smoking cessation was 0.47 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.52).

Conclusions

The risk of HN cancer declines within the first 5 years of quitting smoking. Quitting smoking is an essential element of HN cancer prevention.

Trial registration number

The protocol has been deposited in the PROSPERO repository (CRD42022338262).

SUBMITTER: Khalifeh M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11331934 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reduction of head and neck cancer risk following smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Khalifeh Malak M Ginex Pamela P Boffetta Paolo P

BMJ open 20240809 8

<h4>Objective</h4>Head and neck (HN) cancer comprises the neoplasms originating from the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx. We aimed at reviewing the available literature on the effect of smoking cessation on HN cancer risk.<h4>Method</h4>We conducted a systematic search in Medline, PubMed and Embase to June 2022. We abstracted or calculated relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs of HN cancer after cessation of tobacco smoking (both former smoking status and duration of quitting) and combined them using ...[more]

PMID: 39122405

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature deaths. Several pharmacological interventions now exist to aid smokers in cessation. These include Nicotine Replacement Therapy [NRT], bupropion, and varenicline. We aimed to assess their relative efficacy in smoking cessation by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched 10 electronic medical databases (inception to Sept. 2006) and bibliographies of published reviews. We selected randomized controlled trials [RCTs] evaluating interventions for smoking cessation at 1 year, through chemical confirmation. Our primary endpoint was smoking cessation at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included short-term smoking cessation (approximately 3 months) and adverse events. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. We compared treatment effects across interventions using head-to-head trials and when these did not exist, we calculated indirect comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 70 trials of NRT versus control at 1 year, Odds Ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.55-1.88, P =< 0.0001). This was consistent when examining all placebo-controlled trials (49 RCTs, OR 1.78, 95% CI, 1.60-1.99), NRT gum (OR 1.60, 95% CI, 1.37-1.86) or patch (OR 1.63, 95% CI, 1.41-1.89). NRT also reduced smoking at 3 months (OR 1.98, 95% CI, 1.77-2.21). Bupropion trials were superior to controls at 1 year (12 RCTs, OR1.56, 95% CI, 1.10-2.21, P = 0.01) and at 3 months (OR 2.13, 95% CI, 1.72-2.64). Two RCTs evaluated the superiority of bupropion versus NRT at 1 year (OR 1.14, 95% CI, 0.20-6.42). Varenicline was superior to placebo at 1 year (4 RCTs, OR 2.96, 95% CI, 2.12-4.12, P =< 0.0001) and also at approximately 3 months (OR 3.75, 95% CI, 2.65-5.30). Three RCTs evaluated the effectiveness of varenicline versus bupropion at 1 year (OR 1.58, 95% CI, 1.22-2.05) and at approximately 3 months (OR 1.61, 95% CI, 1.16-2.21). Using indirect comparisons, varenicline was superior to NRT when compared to placebo controls (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.17-2.36, P = 0.004) or to all controls at 1 year (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.22-2.45, P = 0.001). This was also the case for 3-month data. Adverse events were not systematically different across studies. CONCLUSION: NRT, bupropion and varenicline all provide therapeutic effects in assisting with smoking cessation. Direct and indirect comparisons identify a hierarchy of effectiveness.

Project description:To systematically review the effectiveness of community pharmacy-delivered interventions for alcohol reduction, smoking cessation and weight management.Systematic review and meta-analyses. 10 electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2014.randomised and non-randomised controlled trials; controlled before/after studies, interrupted times series.any relevant intervention set in a community pharmacy, delivered by the pharmacy team. No restrictions on duration, country, age, or language.19 studies were included: 2 alcohol reduction, 12 smoking cessation and 5 weight management. Study quality rating: 6 'strong', 4 'moderate' and 9 'weak'. 8 studies were conducted in the UK, 4 in the USA, 2 in Australia, 1 each in 5 other countries. Evidence from 2 alcohol-reduction interventions was limited. Behavioural support and/or nicotine replacement therapy are effective and cost-effective for smoking cessation: pooled OR was 2.56 (95% CI 1.45 to 4.53) for active intervention vs usual care. Pharmacy-based interventions produced similar weight loss compared with active interventions in other primary care settings; however, weight loss was not sustained longer term in a range of primary care and commercial settings compared with control. Pharmacy-based weight management interventions have similar provider costs to those delivered in other primary care settings, which are greater than those delivered by commercial organisations. Very few studies explored if and how sociodemographic or socioeconomic variables moderated intervention effects. Insufficient information was available to examine relationships between effectiveness and behaviour change strategies, implementation factors, or organisation and delivery of interventions.Community pharmacy-delivered interventions are effective for smoking cessation, and demonstrate that the pharmacy is a feasible option for weight management interventions. Given the potential reach, effectiveness and associated costs of these interventions, commissioners should consider using community pharmacies to help deliver public health services.

Project description:BackgroundThe success of pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation in real-life remains limited, with a significant number of long-term relapses. Despite first promising results, the duration of the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes is still unknown. Our objective was to assess the duration of the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes on smoking cessation and reduction in daily smokers.MethodsThe databases EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov and PUBMED were consulted until March 23, 2022. We selected only randomized controlled trials with daily adult smokers. The intervention was the nicotinic electronic cigarette vs. non-nicotine electronic cigarette or other validated pharmacotherapies (varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy). The minimum duration of the intervention was 3 months, with a follow-up of at least 6 months. Two independent reviewers used the PRISMA guidelines. The primary endpoint was smoking cessation at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods confirmed by a reduction in expired CO < 10 ppm. The reduction was defined as at least 50% of the initial consumption or by a decrease of daily mean cigarette consumption at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods.ResultsAbstinence at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods was significantly higher in the nicotine electronic cigarette group, compared to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) [respectively: RR: 1.37 (CI 95%: 1.32-2.93) and RR: 1.49 (CI 95%: 1.14-1.95)] and to the non-nicotine electronic cigarette condition [respectively: RR: 1.97 (CI 95%: 1.18-2.68) and RR: 1.66 (CI 95%: 1.01-2.73)]. With regard to smoking reduction, the electronic cigarette with nicotine is significantly more effective than NRT at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods [respectively RR: 1.48 (CI 95%: 1.04-2.10) and RR: 1.47 (CI 95%: 1.18-1.82)] and non-nicotine electronic cigarette in the long term [RR: 1.31 (CI 95%: 1.02-1.68)].ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows the duration of the effectiveness of the nicotine electronic cigarette vs. non-nicotine electronic cigarette and NRT on smoking cessation and reduction. There are still uncertainties about the risks of its long-term use and its potential role as a gateway into smoking, particularly among young people.

Project description:ImportanceTobacco smoking is associated with increased risk of various cancers, and smoking cessation has been associated with reduced cancer risks, but it is still unclear how many years of smoking cessation are required to significantly reduce the cancer risk. Therefore, investigating the association of smoking cessation with cancer is essential.ObjectiveTo investigate the time course of cancer risk according to the time elapsed since smoking cessation and the benefits of smoking cessation according to the age at quitting.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based, retrospective cohort study included Korean participants aged 30 years and older who underwent 2 or more consecutive health examinations under the National Health Insurance Service since 2002 and were followed-up until 2019. Data analysis was performed from April to September 2023.ExposuresExposures included (1) time-updated smoking status based on biennial changes in smoking status, defined as complete quitters, transient quitters, relapsed quitters, continuous smokers, and never smokers; (2) duration of smoking cessation, defined as years since quitting; and (3) categorical variable for age at quitting.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary cancer was ascertained using the cancer registry data: all-site cancer (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] codes C00-43, C45-96, or D45-D47), lung cancer (ICD-10 code C34), liver cancer (ICD-10 code C22), stomach cancer (ICD-10 code C16), and colorectal cancer (ICD-10 codes C18-20). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model with follow-up years as the timescale.ResultsOf the 2 974 820 participants, 1 727 340 (58.1%) were men (mean [SD] age, 43.1 [10.0] years), and 1 247 480 (41.9%) were women (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [9.9] years). Over a mean (SD) follow-up of 13.4 (0.1) years, 196 829 cancer cases were confirmed. Compared with continuous smokers, complete quitters had a lower risk of cancer, with HRs of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80-0.86) for all cancer sites, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.62) for lung, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82) for liver, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93) for stomach, and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.72-0.89) for colorectum. The cancer risk exhibited a slightly higher value for 10 years after quitting compared with continued smoking and then it decreased over time, reaching 50% of the risk associated with continued smoking after 15 or more years. Lung cancer risk decreased 3 years earlier than that of other cancer types, with a larger relative reduction. Regardless of quitting age, a significant reduction in the cancer risk was observed. Quitting before the age of 50 years was associated with a greater reduction in lung cancer risk (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53) compared with quitting at age 50 years or later (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.56-0.66).Conclusions and relevanceIn this population-based retrospective cohort study, sustained smoking cessation was associated with significantly reduced risk of cancer after 10 years since quitting. Quitting at any age helped reduce the cancer risk, and especially for lung cancer, early cessation before middle age exhibited a substantial risk reduction.

Project description:BackgroundRapid advancements in eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) technologies have driven researchers to design and evaluate numerous technology-based interventions to promote smoking cessation. The evolving nature of cessation interventions emphasizes a strong need for knowledge synthesis.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize recent evidence from randomized controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of eHealth-based smoking cessation interventions in promoting abstinence and assess nonabstinence outcome indicators, such as cigarette consumption and user satisfaction, via narrative synthesis.MethodsWe searched for studies published in English between 2017 and June 30, 2022, in 4 databases: PubMed (including MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework. We pooled comparable studies based on the population, follow-up time, intervention, and control characteristics. Two researchers performed an independent meta-analysis on smoking abstinence using the Sidik-Jonkman random-effects model and log risk ratio (RR) as the effect measurement. For studies not included in the meta-analysis, the outcomes were narratively synthesized.ResultsA total of 464 studies were identified through an initial database search after removing duplicates. Following screening and full-text assessments, we deemed 39 studies (n=37,341 participants) eligible for this review. Of these, 28 studies were shortlisted for meta-analysis. According to the meta-analysis, SMS or app text messaging can significantly increase both short-term (3 months) abstinence (log RR=0.50, 95% CI 0.25-0.75; I2=0.72%) and long-term (6 months) abstinence (log RR=0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.04; I2=8.65%), relative to minimal cessation support. The frequency of texting did not significantly influence treatment outcomes. mHealth apps may significantly increase abstinence in the short term (log RR=0.76, 95% CI 0.09-1.42; I2=88.02%) but not in the long term (log RR=0.15, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.48; I2=80.06%), in contrast to less intensive cessation support. In addition, personalized or interactive interventions showed a moderate increase in cessation for both the short term (log RR=0.62, 95% CI 0.30-0.94; I2=66.50%) and long term (log RR=0.28, 95% CI 0.04-0.53; I2=73.42%). In contrast, studies without any personalized or interactive features had no significant impact. Finally, the treatment effect was similar between trials that used biochemically verified or self-reported abstinence. Among studies reporting outcomes besides abstinence (n=20), a total of 11 studies reported significantly improved nonabstinence outcomes in cigarette consumption (3/14, 21%) or user satisfaction (8/19, 42%).ConclusionsOur review of 39 randomized controlled trials found that recent eHealth interventions might promote smoking cessation, with mHealth being the dominant approach. Despite their success, the effectiveness of such interventions may diminish with time. The design of more personalized interventions could potentially benefit future studies.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022347104; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=347104.

Dataset Information

Reduction of head and neck cancer risk following smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Method

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Reduction of head and neck cancer risk following smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets