Dataset Information

Randomised clinical trial of snus versus medicinal nicotine among smokers interested in product switching.

ABSTRACT:

Background

An essential component of evaluating potential modified risk tobacco products is to determine how consumers use the product and resulting effects on biomarkers of toxicant exposure.

Study design

Cigarette smokers (n=391) recruited in Minnesota and Oregon were randomised to either snus or 4 mg nicotine gum for 12 weeks. Participants were instructed to completely switch from cigarettes to these products. Urine samples were collected to analyse for carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamine metabolites (4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and N'-nitrosonornicotine and their glucuronides) and nicotine metabolites (total cotinine and nicotine equivalents) levels.

Results

Of the 391 participants randomised, 52.9% were male, the mean±SD age was 43.9±12.5 years, baseline number of cigarettes/day was 18.0±6.5 and Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence score was 5.1±2.0. The mean±SD number of snus pouches used/week at week 6 prior to tapering was 39.1±24.0 and nicotine gum pieces used was 37.6±26.3. Dual use of cigarettes and these products were observed in 52.9% and 58.2% of those assigned to snus and nicotine gum, respectively, at week 12. The end of treatment biochemically verified (carbon monoxide, CO<6 ppm) 7-day avoidance of cigarettes was 21.9% in the snus group and 24.6% in the nicotine gum group. Toxicant exposure in the nicotine gum group was significantly less when compared to snus.

Conclusions

Snus performed similarly to nicotine gum in cigarette smokers who were interested in completely switching to these products, but was associated with less satisfaction and greater toxicant exposure than nicotine gum.

Trial registration number

NCT: 00710034.

SUBMITTER: Hatsukami DK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4785094 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo 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).DesignRandomised, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicentre trial (Study of Nicotine Patch in Pregnancy, SNIPP) between October 2007 and January 2013.Setting23 maternity wards in France.Participants476 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.InterventionsNicotine 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 measuresThe 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.ResultsComplete 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.ConclusionThe 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 registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00507975.

Project description:IntroductionReducing exposure to cigarette smoke is an imperative for public health and for patients with diabetes. Increasingly, combustion-free nicotine delivery systems (C-F NDS) such as e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products are substituting conventional cigarettes and accelerating the downward trends in smoking prevalence. However, there is limited information about the long-term health impact in patients with diabetes who use C-F NDS. This randomised trial of type 2 diabetic cigarette smokers will test the hypothesis that following a switch from conventional cigarettes to C-F NDS a measurable improvement in metabolic syndrome (MetS) factors will be shown over the course of 2 years.Methods and analysisThe study is multicentre and thus will take place in five locations in four countries in an ambulatory setting. A total of 576 patients with diabetes will be randomised (1:2 ratio) to either a control arm (Study Arm A), in which they will be offered referral to smoking cessation programmes or to an intervention arm (Study Arm B) assigned to C-F NDS use. Participants will be at least 23 years old and of any gender. Patient recruitment will start in February 2021 and is expected to be completed by December 2021. Primary outcome measures include fasting plasma glucose, blood pressure, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein and waist circumference, while secondary feature absolute change in the sum of the individual factors of MetS and change in each individual factor of MetS measured at each study time point.Ethics and disseminationThe approval of research ethics committee (REC) regarding the trial protocol, informed consent forms and other relevant documents is required to commence the study. Substantial amendments to the study protocol cannot be implemented until the REC grants a favourable opinion. The results of the study are intended to be published as articles in high quality peer-reviewed journals and disseminated through conference papers.Trial registration numberNCT04231838. Pre-results stage.

Project description:Evidenced-based tobacco cessation treatments are underused, especially by socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers. This contributes to widening socioeconomic disparities in tobacco-related morbidity and mortality.The Offering Proactive Treatment Intervention trial tested the effects of a proactive outreach tobacco treatment intervention on population-level smoking abstinence and tobacco treatment use among a population-based sample of socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers. Current smokers (n=2406), regardless of interest in quitting, who were enrolled in the Minnesota Health Care Programs, the state's publicly funded healthcare programmes for low-income populations, were randomly assigned to proactive outreach or usual care. The intervention comprised proactive outreach (tailored mailings and telephone calls) and free cessation treatment (nicotine replacement therapy and intensive, telephone counselling). Usual care comprised access to a primary care physician, insurance coverage of Food and Drug Administration-approved smoking cessation medications, and the state's telephone quitline. The primary outcome was self-reported 6-month prolonged smoking abstinence at 1 year and was assessed by follow-up survey.The proactive intervention group had a higher prolonged abstinence rate at 1 year than usual care (16.5% vs 12.1%, OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.93). The effect of the proactive intervention on prolonged abstinence persisted in selection models accounting for non-response. In analysis of secondary outcomes, use of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments were significantly greater among proactive outreach participants compared with usual care, particularly combination counselling and medications (17.4% vs 3.6%, OR 5.69, 95% CI 3.85 to 8.40).Population-based proactive tobacco treatment increases engagement in evidence-based treatment and is effective in long-term smoking cessation among socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers. Findings suggest that dissemination of population-based proactive treatment approaches is an effective strategy to reduce the prevalence of smoking and socioeconomic disparities in tobacco use.NCT01123967.

Project description:IntroductionThe Food and Drug Administration issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking for setting a product standard for nicotine levels in cigarettes, with an emphasis on minimally or non-addicting very low nicotine content (VLNC).MethodsA 33 week, two-arm, double-blind randomized trial conducted in Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA and Washington, DC, USA included adult daily cigarette smokers (≥5 cigarettes per day) with less than a college degree, and who had no plans to quit within the next six months. Participants were randomized to either reduced nicotine content (RNC) study cigarettes tapered every three weeks to a final VLNC (0.2 mg/cigarette) for six weeks or to usual nicotine content (UNC) study cigarettes (11.6 mg/cigarette). Outcomes included acceptability of study cigarettes measured by attrition (primary outcome), compliance, reduction in cigarette dependence and tobacco biomarkers, and post-intervention cessation.ResultsThe RNC (n = 122) versus UNC (n = 123) group had higher attrition (adjusted Hazard Ratio 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.99 to 5.81). At the end of the intervention, cotinine levels were 50% lower in the RNC group (mean group difference -137 ng/mL; 95% CI -172, -102). The RNC group smoked fewer CPD (-4.1; 95% CI -6.44, -1.75) and had lower carbon monoxide levels (-4.0 ppm; 95% CI -7.7, -0.4). Forty seven percent (29/62) of the RNC group were biochemically-confirmed compliant with smoking VLNC cigarettes (mean cotinine = 8.9 ng/ml). At three month follow-up, only compliant VLNC smokers quit with an assisted quit attempt (N = 6/22, 27%).ConclusionsThis study supports a VLNC standard in cigarettes.ImplicationsDifferential dropout and noncompliance indicate some smokers had difficulty transitioning to cigarettes with reduced nicotine. These smokers will benefit from supplemental nicotine in medicinal or noncombustible tobacco products if a nicotine reduction standard is established. Other smokers successfully transitioned to very low nicotine content cigarettes exclusively and substantially reduced their exposure to nicotine.

Project description:Electronic cigarette (EC) use is growing dramatically with use highest among young adults and current smokers. One of the most common reasons for using ECs is interest in quitting or reducing cigarettes per day (CPD); however there are few randomized controlled trials (RCT) on the effect of ECs on smoking abstinence and reduction.We conducted a two-arm; double-blind RCT. Subjects were randomized to receive 3-weeks of either disposable 4.5% nicotine EC (intervention) or placebo EC. The primary outcome was self-reported reduction of at least 50% in the number of CPDs smoked at week 3 (end of treatment) compared to baseline. Study subjects (n = 99) were young adult (21-35), current smokers (smoked ? 10 CPDs) living in NYC.Compared with baseline, a significant reduction in CPDs was observed at both study time periods (1 and 3 weeks) for intervention (P < .001) and placebo (P < .001) groups. Between-group analyses showed significantly fewer CPDs in the intervention group compared to the placebo group at week 3 (P = .03), but not at any other follow-up periods. The logistic regression analysis showed that using a greater number of ECs, treatment condition and higher baseline readiness to quit were significantly associated with achieving at least 50% reduction in CPDs at the end of treatment.A diverse young adult sample of current everyday smokers, who were not ready to quit, was able to reduce smoking with the help of ECs. Further study is needed to establish the role of both placebo and nicotine containing ECs in increasing both reduction and subsequent cessation.Despite the critical need for well-designed clinical trials on the effect of ECs on cessation and cigarette reduction, the majority of studies have been observational or noncomparative intervention designs. Only three RCTs studying ECs as a cessation or reduction intervention have been published, and none were conducted in the United States. The current study adds knowledge to current literature on the feasibility of using ECs to aid smoking reduction among young smokers in US urban populations.