Dataset Information

Nicotine patches in pregnant smokers: randomised, placebo controlled, multicentre trial of efficacy.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the efficacy of 16 hour nicotine patches among pregnant smokers, with the dose individually adjusted according to saliva cotinine levels (potential range 10-30 mg/day).

Design

Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicentre trial (Study of Nicotine Patch in Pregnancy, SNIPP) between October 2007 and January 2013.

Setting

23 maternity wards in France.

Participants

476 pregnant smokers aged more than 18 years and between 12 and 20 weeks' gestation, who smoked at least five cigarettes a day. After exclusions, 402 women were randomised: 203 to nicotine patches and 199 to placebo patches. Data were available on 192 live births in each group.

Interventions

Nicotine and identical placebo patches were administered from quit day up to the time of delivery. Doses were adjusted to saliva cotinine levels when smoking to yield a substitution rate of 100%. Participants were assessed monthly and received behavioural smoking cessation support.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcomes were complete abstinence (self report confirmed by carbon monoxide level in expired air ≤ 8 ppm) from quit date to delivery, and birth weight. The secondary outcomes were point prevalence of abstinence, time to lapse (a few puffs) or relapse, and delivery and birth characteristics. All data were analysed on an intention to treat basis.

Results

Complete abstinence was achieved by 5.5% (n=11) of women in the nicotine patch group and 5.1% (n=10) in the placebo patch group (odds ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.60). The median time to the first cigarette smoked after target quit day was 15 days in both groups (interquartile range 13-18 in the nicotine patch group, 13-20 in the placebo patch group). The point prevalence abstinence ranged from 8% to 12.5% in the nicotine patch group and 8% to 9.5% in the placebo patch group without statistically significant differences. The nicotine substitution rate did not differ from 100%, and the self reported median compliance rate was 85% (interquartile range 56-99%) in the nicotine patch group and 83% (56-95%) in the placebo patch group, assessed at 1016 visits. The mean birth weight was 3065 g (SE 44 g) in the nicotine patch group and 3015 g (SE 44 g) in the placebo patch group (P=0.41). Diastolic blood pressure was significantly higher in the nicotine patch group than in the placebo patch group. The frequency of serious adverse events was similar between the groups, although more non-serious adverse reactions, mainly of skin, occurred in the nicotine patch group.

Conclusion

The nicotine patch did not increase either smoking cessation rates or birth weights despite adjustment of nicotine dose to match levels attained when smoking, and higher than usual doses.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00507975.

SUBMITTER: Berlin I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3950302 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeEpidemiologic studies have documented lower rates of active smokers compared to former or non-smokers in symptomatic patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the efficacy and safety of nicotine administered by a transdermal patch in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsIn this multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 18 intensive care units in France, we randomly assigned adult patients (non-smokers, non-vapers or who had quit smoking/vaping for at least 12 months) with proven COVID-19 pneumonia receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for up to 72 h to receive transdermal patches containing either nicotine at a daily dose of 14 mg or placebo until 48 h following successful weaning from mechanical ventilation or for a maximum of 30 days, followed by 3-week dose tapering by 3.5 mg per week. Randomization was stratified by centre, non- or former smoker status and Sequential Organ Function Assessment score (< or ≥ 7). The primary outcome was day-28 mortality. Main prespecified secondary outcomes included 60-day mortality, time to successful extubation, days alive and free from mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressor support or organ failure at day 28.ResultsBetween November 6th 2020, and April 2nd 2021, 220 patients were randomized from 18 active recruiting centers. After excluding 2 patients who withdrew consent, 218 patients (152 [70%] men) were included in the analysis: 106 patients to the nicotine group and 112 to the placebo group. Day-28 mortality did not differ between the two groups (30 [28%] of 106 patients in the nicotine group vs 31 [28%] of 112 patients in the placebo group; odds ratio 1.03 [95% confidence interval, CI 0.57-1.87]; p = 0.46). The median number of day-28 ventilator-free days was 0 (IQR 0-14) in the nicotine group and 0 (0-13) in the placebo group (with a difference estimate between the medians of 0 [95% CI -3-7]). Adverse events likely related to nicotine were rare (3%) and similar between the two groups.ConclusionIn patients having developed severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, transdermal nicotine did not significantly reduce day-28 mortality. There is no indication to use nicotine in this situation.

Project description:BackgroundBupropion is used to treat depression during pregnancy. However, its usefulness as a smoking cessation aid for pregnant women is not fully known.ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate the preliminary efficacy of bupropion sustained release for smoking cessation during pregnancy.Study designWe conducted a randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot trial. Pregnant women who smoked daily received individualized behavior counseling and were randomly assigned to a 12 week, twice-a-day treatment with 150 mg bupropion sustained release or placebo. The primary study objectives were to determine whether bupropion sustained release reduces nicotine withdrawal symptoms on the quit date and during the treatment period compared with placebo and whether it increases 7 day point prevalence abstinence at the end of the treatment period and at the end of pregnancy.ResultsSubjects in the bupropion (n = 30) and placebo (n = 35) groups were comparable in age, smoking history, number of daily smoked cigarettes, and nicotine dependence. After controlling for maternal age and race, bupropion sustained release reduced cigarette cravings (1.5 ± 1.1 vs 2.1 ± 1.2, P = .02) and total nicotine withdrawal symptoms (3.8 ± 4.3 vs 5.4 ± 5.1, P = .028) during the treatment period. Administration of bupropion sustained release reduced tobacco exposure, as determined by levels of carbon monoxide in exhaled air (7.4 ± 6.4 vs 9.1 ± 5.8, P = .053) and concentrations of cotinine in urine (348 ± 384 ng/mL vs 831 ± 727 ng/mL, P = .007) and increased overall abstinence rates during treatment (19% vs 2%, P = .003). However, there was no significant difference in 7 day point prevalence abstinence rates between the 2 groups at the end of medication treatment (17% vs 3%, P = .087) and at the end of pregnancy (10% vs 3%, P = .328).ConclusionIndividual smoking cessation counseling along with the twice-daily use of 150 mg bupropion sustained release increased smoking cessation rates and reduced cravings and total nicotine withdrawal symptoms during the treatment period. However, there was no significant difference in abstinence rates between groups at the end of medication treatment and at the end of pregnancy, likely because of the small sample size. A larger study is needed to confirm these findings and to examine the potential benefit/ risk ratio of bupropion sustained release for smoking cessation during pregnancy.

Project description:IntroductionElectronic cigarettes (EC) mainly with nicotine content are widely used worldwide. Although the number of publications about its use is increasing exponentially, evidence-based, unbiased, conclusive, head-to-head comparisons about its efficacy and safety as an aid for smoking cessation are lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Design: randomised, placebo and reference treatment-controlled, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial. Participants: smokers smoking at least 10 cigarettes/day in the past year and motivated to quit, aged 18-70 years. Interventions: (A) EC without nicotine (ECwoN) plus placebo tablets of varenicline administered by oral route: placebo condition, (B) EC with nicotine (ECwN) plus placebo tablets of varenicline: ECwN condition. Voltage regulated EC will be used with liquid containing 12 mg/mL of nicotine for ad libitum use. Flavour: blond tobacco. (C) Reference: ECwoN plus 0.5 mg varenicline tablets: varenicline condition. Varenicline administered according to the marketing authorisationauthorisation. Treatment duration: 1 week+3 months. Primary outcome: continuous smoking abstinence rate (CAR) (abstinence from conventional/combustible cigarettes) during the last 4 weeks (weeks 9-12) of the treatment period defined as self-report of no smoking during the previous 2 weeks and expired air carbon monoxide ≤8 at visit 4 at week 10 after target quit date (TQD), that is, 11 weeks after treatment initiation AND at visit 5, week 12 after TQD, that is, 13 weeks after treatment initiation. Secondary outcomes: safety profile; point prevalence abstinence rate; CAR confirmed by urinary anabasine concentration; changes in cigarettes/day consumption; craving for tobacco and withdrawal symptoms with respect of baseline.Ethics and disseminationThe ethics committee approval was obtained on 17 April 2018. All data collected about the study participants will be anonymised. Investigators will communicate trial results to participants, health authorities, healthcare professionals, the public and other relevant groups without any publication restrictions.Trial registration numberNCT03630614; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionIncreasing evidence suggests obesity has its origins prior to birth. There is clear correlation between maternal obesity, high birthweight and offspring risk of obesity in later life. It is also clear that women who are obese during pregnancy are at greater risk of adverse outcomes, including gestational diabetes and stillbirth. The mechanism(s) by which obesity causes these problems is unknown, although hyperglycaemia and insulin resistance are strongly implicated. We present a protocol for a study to test the hypothesis that metformin will improve insulin sensitivity in obese pregnant women, thereby reducing the incidence of high birthweight babies and other pregnancy complications.Methods and analysisThe Efficacy of Metformin in Pregnant Obese Women, a Randomised controlled (EMPOWaR) trial is a double-masked randomised placebo-controlled trial to determine whether metformin given to obese (body mass index >30 kg/m(2)) pregnant women from 16 weeks' gestation until delivery reduces the incidence of high birthweight babies. A secondary aim is to test the mechanism(s) of any effect. Obese women with a singleton pregnancy and normal glucose tolerance will be recruited prior to 16 weeks' gestation and prescribed study medication, metformin or placebo, to be taken until delivery. Further study visits will occur at 28 and 36 weeks' gestation for glucose tolerance testing and to record anthropometric measurements. Birth weight and other measurements will be recorded at time of delivery. Anthropometry of mother and baby will be performed at 3 months postdelivery. As of January 2014, 449 women had been randomised across the UK.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of Good Clinical Practice. A favourable ethical opinion was obtained from Scotland A Research Ethics Committee, reference number 10/MRE00/12. Results will be disseminated at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberISRCTN51279843.

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain and depression often co-occur, and pain may exacerbate depression in people with dementia.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of analgesic treatment for depression in nursing home patients with advanced dementia and clinically significant depressive symptoms.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 47 nursing homes, including 162 nursing home patients aged ≥ 60 years with dementia (Mini-Mental State Examination ≤ 20) and depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia ≥ 8). Patients were randomised to receive active analgesic treatment (paracetamol or buprenorphine transdermal system) or identical placebo for 13 weeks. The main outcome measure was the change in depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia) from baseline to 13 weeks, assessed using linear mixed models with fixed effects for time, intervention and their interaction in the models. Secondary outcomes were to assess whether any change in depression was secondary to change in pain (Mobilisation-Observation-Behaviour-Intensity-Dementia-2 Pain Scale) and adverse events.ResultsThe mean depression change was - 0.66 (95% confidence interval - 2.27 to 0.94) in the active group (n = 80) and - 3.30 (- 4.68 to -1.92) in the placebo group (n = 82). The estimated treatment effect was 2.64 (0.55-4.72, p = 0.013), indicating that analgesic treatment had no effect on depressive symptoms from baseline to 13 weeks while placebo appeared to ameliorate depressive symptoms. There was no significant reduction in pain in the active treatment group (paracetamol and buprenorphine combined) vs. placebo; however, a subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in pain for paracetamol vs. placebo [by - 1.11 (- 2.16 to - 0.06, p = 0.037)] from week 6 to 13 without a change in depression. Buprenorphine did not have significant effects on depression [3.04 (- 0.11 to 6.19), p = 0.059] or pain [0.47 (- 0.77 to 1.71), p = 0.456] from 0 to 13 weeks. Thirty-five patients were withdrawn from the study because of adverse reactions, deterioration or death: 25 (31.3%) during active treatment [23 (52.3%) who received buprenorphine], and ten (12.2%) in the placebo group. The most frequently occurring adverse events were psychiatric (17 adverse reactions) and neurological (14 adverse reactions).ConclusionAnalgesic treatment did not reduce depression while placebo appeared to improve depressive symptoms significantly by comparison, possibly owing to the adverse effects of active buprenorphine. The risk of adverse events warrants caution when prescribing buprenorphine for people with advanced dementia.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02267057 (registered 7 July, 2014) and Norwegian Medicines Agency EudraCT 2013-002226-23.