Dataset Information

Non-inferiority trial comparing cigarette consumption, adoption rates, acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential in smokers switching to Heated Tobacco Products or electronic cigarettes: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Background:Despite the introduction of tobacco control measures, smoking remains highly prevalent in most EU countries. In Italy, one in four adults were still regular smokers in 2017. Increasing use of combustion-free delivering nicotine technologies for cigarette substitution may accelerate the current downward trends in smoking prevalence. Whether Heated Tobacco Products (HTPs) are more effective tobacco smoking substitutes that may potentially facilitate adoption and full conversion compared to e-cigarettes (ECs) is not known.We have designed a prospective study to compare changes in cigarette consumption and adoption rates among smokers randomized to either HTPs or ECs. Product acceptability, tolerability, and their tobacco harm reduction potential will be also compared. Methods:220 healthy smokers, not motivated to quit, will be randomized into a 12-weeks single-center, open label, non-inferiority trial comparing study outcomes from HTPs vs. ECs use. The primary outcome will be biochemically verified self-reported continuous abstinence at 12-weeks from the previous visit. Secondary outcomes will include: smoking reduction from baseline, adoption rates and product acceptability, tolerability, changes in step test values and in the level of selected biomarkers of exposure in exhaled breath (i.e. eCO) and in spot urine samples. A follow-up visit will be also included at 24-weeks to review product usage and smoking behavior under naturalistic condition of use.Recruitment of participants started in May 2019 and enrolment is expected to be completed in November 2019. Discussion:This will be the first study directly comparing Heated Tobacco Products with Electronic Cigarettes in term of reduction in cigarette consumption, adoption rates, product acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential. This knowledge can contribute to a better understanding of the potential role of this new technology in the evolving nicotine consumer market. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03569748.Registered June 25, 2018.https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/LoginUser?ts=1&cx=-jg9qo4.

SUBMITTER: Caponnetto P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6962654 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Non-inferiority trial comparing cigarette consumption, adoption rates, acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential in smokers switching to Heated Tobacco Products or electronic cigarettes: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Caponnetto Pasquale P Caruso Massimo M Maglia Marilena M Emma Rosalia R Saitta Daniela D Busà Barbara B Polosa Riccardo R Prosperini Umberto U Pennisi Alfio A Benfatto Francesca F Sartorio Carlo C Guastella Matteo M Mondati Enrico E

Contemporary clinical trials communications 20200108

<h4>Background</h4>Despite the introduction of tobacco control measures, smoking remains highly prevalent in most EU countries. In Italy, one in four adults were still regular smokers in 2017. Increasing use of combustion-free delivering nicotine technologies for cigarette substitution may accelerate the current downward trends in smoking prevalence. Whether Heated Tobacco Products (HTPs) are more effective tobacco smoking substitutes that may potentially facilitate adoption and full conversion ...[more]

PMID: 31956726

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAlternative nicotine delivery products, including electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and heated tobacco products (HTPs), contain fewer toxicants than combustible cigarettes and offer a potential for harm reduction. Research on the substitutability of e-cigarettes and HTPs is crucial for understanding their impact on public health. This study examined subjective and behavioral preferences for an e-cigarette and HTP relative to participants' usual brand combustible cigarette (UBC) in African American and White smokers naïve to alternative products.Aims and methodsTwenty-two adult African American (n = 12) and White (n = 10) smokers completed randomized study sessions with their UBC and study provided e-cigarette and HTP. A concurrent choice task allowed participants to earn puffs of the products but placed UBC on a progressive ratio schedule, making puffs harder to earn, and e-cigarette and HTP on a fixed ratio schedule to assess behavioral preference for the products. Behavioral preference was then compared to self-reported subjective preference.ResultsMost participants had a subjective preference for UBC (n = 11, 52.4%), followed by an equal preference for e-cigarette (n = 5, 23.8%) and HTP (n = 5, 23.8%). During the concurrent choice task, participants showed a behavioral preference (i.e., more earned puffs) for the e-cigarette (n = 9, 42.9%), followed by HTP (n = 8, 38.1%), and UBC (n = 4, 19.1%). Participants earned significantly more puffs of the alternative products compared to UBC (p = .011) with no difference in earned puffs between e-cigarettes and HTP (p = .806).ConclusionsIn a simulated lab setting, African American and White smokers were willing to substitute UBC for an e-cigarette or HTP when the attainment of UBC became more difficult.Trial registrationNCT04646668.ImplicationsFindings suggest that African American and White smokers are willing to substitute their UBC for an alternative nicotine delivery product (e-cigarette or HTP) when the attainment of cigarettes became more difficult in a simulated lab setting. Findings require confirmation among a larger sample under real-world conditions but add to growing evidence suggesting the acceptability of alternative nicotine delivery products among racially diverse smokers. These data are important as policies that limit the availability or appeal of combustible cigarettes are considered or enacted.

Project description:IntroductionReduced-risk nicotine products are more likely to replace smoking if they match cigarettes in nicotine delivery and user satisfaction.Aims and methodsWe examined the nicotine delivery profile and user ratings of IQOS heated tobacco system and compared it with own brand cigarettes (OBC), Juul, and refillable e-cigarettes (EC).Participants (N = 22) who were daily vapers smoking <1 cigarette per day on average, attended after overnight abstinence from smoking and vaping, to test at separate sessions OBC, IQOS, and Juul. Eight participants also tested two refillable EC using e-liquid with 20 mg/mL nicotine. At each session, a baseline blood sample was taken before participants used the product ad libitum for 5 minutes. Further samples were taken at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 30 minutes. Maximum nicotine concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (Tmax), and nicotine delivered over 30 minutes (AUC0->30) were calculated. Participants rated their urge to smoke and product characteristics.ResultsIQOS delivered less nicotine than OBC (AUC0->30: z = -2.73, p = .006), and than Juul (AUC0->30: z = -3.08, p = .002; Cmax: z = -2.65, p = .008), and received less favorable ratings than Juul (effect on urges to smoke: z = -3.23, p = .001; speed of urge relief: z = -2.75, p = .006; recommendation to friends: z = -2.45, p = .014). Compared with refillable EC, IQOS delivered nicotine faster (Tmax: z = -2.37, p = .018), but received less favorable overall ratings (recommended to friends: z = -2.32, p = .021).ConclusionsIQOS' pharmacokinetic profile suggests that it may be less effective than Juul for smoking cessation, but at least as effective as refillable EC; although participants, who were experienced vapers rather than IQOS users, preferred refillable EC.ImplicationsBecause IQOS provided less efficient nicotine delivery than cigarettes and Juul in this sample, and also had a weaker effect on urges to smoke than Juul, it could be less helpful than Juul in assisting such dual users, and possibly smokers generally, to switch to an alternative product. IQOS, however, provided nicotine faster than refillable EC products, although participants preferred EC.

Project description:According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 45 million Americans continue to smoke, even after one of the most intense public health campaigns in history, now over 40 years old. Each year some 438,000 smokers die from smoking-related diseases, including lung and other cancers, cardiovascular disorders and pulmonary diseases. Many smokers are unable--or at least unwilling--to achieve cessation through complete nicotine and tobacco abstinence; they continue smoking despite the very real and obvious adverse health consequences. Conventional smoking cessation policies and programs generally present smokers with two unpleasant alternatives: quit, or die. A third approach to smoking cessation, tobacco harm reduction, involves the use of alternative sources of nicotine, including modern smokeless tobacco products. A substantial body of research, much of it produced over the past decade, establishes the scientific and medical foundation for tobacco harm reduction using smokeless tobacco products. This report provides a description of traditional and modern smokeless tobacco products, and of the prevalence of their use in the United States and Sweden. It reviews the epidemiologic evidence for low health risks associated with smokeless use, both in absolute terms and in comparison to the much higher risks of smoking. The report also describes evidence that smokeless tobacco has served as an effective substitute for cigarettes among Swedish men, who consequently have among the lowest smoking-related mortality rates in the developed world. The report documents the fact that extensive misinformation about ST products is widely available from ostensibly reputable sources, including governmental health agencies and major health organizations. The American Council on Science and Health believes that strong support of tobacco harm reduction is fully consistent with its mission to promote sound science in regulation and in public policy, and to assist consumers in distinguishing real health threats from spurious health claims. As this report documents, there is a strong scientific and medical foundation for tobacco harm reduction, and it shows great potential as a public health strategy to help millions of smokers.

Dataset Information

Non-inferiority trial comparing cigarette consumption, adoption rates, acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential in smokers switching to Heated Tobacco Products or electronic cigarettes: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Non-inferiority trial comparing cigarette consumption, adoption rates, acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential in smokers switching to Heated Tobacco Products or electronic cigarettes: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets