Search

Objectives: Some people who stop smoking experience improved mood, but few studies have examined this relationship after hospitalization or accounted for concomitant substance use and psychological factors. We examined associations between smoking abstinence after a hospital discharge and change in depression and anxiety symptoms., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the Helping HAND 4 smoking cessation trial, which enrolled people who used tobacco when admitted to three academic medical center general hospitals. Participants (n = 986) were categorized as continuously abstinent (CA) or not. We used linear and logistic regression to model continuous and binary measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-8] ≥/<10), and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment [GAD-7], ≥/<8) over 6 months, adjusting for baseline mood, psychological factors, and substance use. Binary outcomes were defined using established clinical thresholds to aid in the clinical interpretation of the results., Results: Mean age was 52.3 years, 56.5% were female, and the baseline mean cigarettes/day was 16.2 (SD: 3.2). In the adjusted analyses, depression and anxiety scores improved more in CA than non-CA participants over 6 months (difference-in-improvement, 2.43 [95% CI: 1.50-3.36] for PHQ-8; 3.04 [95% CI: 2.16-3.93] for GAD-7). At 6 months, CA participants were more likely to have a PHQ-8 score <10 (aOR = 2.07 [95% CI: 1.36-3.16]) and a GAD-7 score <8 (aOR = 2.90 [95% CI: 1.91-4.39])., Conclusions: Individuals who were CA, compared to those who were not, had fewer depression and anxiety symptoms at 6 months, and were twice as likely to score below the population screening thresholds for major depression and anxiety disorders. Clinicians should emphasize the association between continuous abstinence and improved mood symptoms after hospital discharge., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interests: Dr. Rigotti reported receiving personal fees from Achieve Life Sciences, UpToDate (Wolters Kluwer), and grants from Achieve Life Sciences outside the submitted work. Dr. Tindle reported serving as a PI of studies funded by the National Institutes of Health in which smoking cessation medications were donated by the manufacturer and as an unpaid consultant for Achieve Life Sciences., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Objective: Few national estimates are available on the prevalence of tobacco use disorder (TUD) in the United States (US), and most trials exclusively assess daily smoking rather than TUD. We examined the prevalence and trends in cigarette smoking with vs without TUD among adults., Methods: Data came from the 2010-2021 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (n = 483,982), a cross sectional, US representative dataset. A TUD composite variable was created based on established definitions (eg, DSM-5 symptoms). Weighted prevalence of past 30-day cigarette smoking, daily smoking (30/30 days) and nondaily smoking (<30/30 days) with and without TUD, was calculated annually., Results: In 2021, the prevalence of past 30- day overall cigarette smoking was 17%; 11% reported daily cigarette smoking, whereas 6% reported nondaily cigarette smoking. Only 1% of the population reported daily smoking without TUD, whereas 10% reported daily smoking with TUD. Two percent of the population reported nondaily smoking without TUD, and 4% of the population reported nondaily smoking with TUD. Daily smoking with TUD and nondaily smoking with and without TUD decreased significantly from 2010 to 2021 (all P 's < .001). US adults reporting TUD symptoms (vs not) were more likely to be older, identify as White, have lower income and less education, and have a substance use disorder., Conclusions: The prevalence of daily cigarette smoking with TUD was 10× higher than the prevalence of daily cigarette smoking without TUD. Twice as many US adults with nondaily smoking reported TUD than no TUD, illustrating that daily smoking is not necessary for TUD., (© Copyright 2024 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers., Objectives: To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital., Search Methods: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022., Selection Criteria: We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence., Main Results: We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants)., Authors' Conclusions: Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge., (Copyright © 2024 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Nicotine abstinence leads to weight gain, which could be an unintended consequence of a nicotine reduction policy. This secondary analysis used weekly assessments of weight and ratings of "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" collected in three 12-week, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of cigarettes differing in nicotine dose (15.8, 2.4, or 0.4 mg/g) among individuals with affective disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD), and socioeconomically disadvantaged women. Linear mixed models tested differences by dose and time. Analyses first collapsed across populations and then separated out individuals with OUD because biomarkers suggested they used substantially more noncombusted nicotine. Across populations, weight increased significantly over time, averaging 1.03 kg ( p < .001), but did not vary by dose nor was there any interaction of dose/time. "Increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly as a function of dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.95 and 1.73, respectively, p = .01), but not by time nor any interaction. In the combined group of individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women, weight and "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly by dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.43 vs. 0.73 kg, p = .003 and 2.00 vs. 1.76, p = .02, respectively). Among individuals with OUD, there were no significant effects of any kind on either outcome. Individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women gained weight and reported more subjective appetite/weight gain when given 0.4, but not 2.4 mg/g cigarettes, despite comparable decreases in nicotine exposure. However, neither change was clinically significant, suggesting minimal short-term adverse consequences of a nicotine reduction policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Background: It is important to identify interventions that reduce harm in youth not motivated to change their cannabis use. This study evaluated how short-duration contingency management (CM) impacts cannabis use attitudes and behavior after abstinence incentives are discontinued among non-treatment seeking youth., Methods: Participants (N=220) were randomized to 4 weeks of abstinence-based CM (CB-Abst; n=126) or monitoring (CB-Mon; n=94). Participants completed self-report and provided biochemical measures of cannabis exposure at baseline, end-of-intervention, and 4-week follow-up. Changes in self-reported cannabis use frequency (days/week; times/week) and biochemically verified creatinine-adjusted 11-nor-9-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol concentrations (CN-THCCOOH) were analyzed between groups from baseline to follow-up. In CB-Abst, cannabis use goals at end-of-intervention were described and changes in cannabis use at follow-up were explored by goals and cannabis use disorder (CUD) diagnosis., Results: There was a group by visit interaction on cannabis use (days: beta=0.93, p=0.005; times: beta=0.71, p<0.001; CN-THCCOOH: beta=0.26, p=0.004), with reductions at follow-up detected only in CB-Abst. Following 4 weeks of abstinence, 68.4% of CB-Abst participants wanted to reduce or abstain from cannabis use following completion of CM. Those in CB-Abst who set end-of-intervention reduction goals and were without CUD had greater decreases in cannabis use frequency at follow-up (Goals*time on days/week: beta=-2.27, p<0.001; CUD*time on times/week: beta=0.48, SE=0.24, t=2.01, p=0.048)., Conclusions: Findings support the utility of brief incentivized abstinence for generating motivation to reduce cannabis use and behavior change even after incentives end. This study supports CM as a potentially viable harm reduction strategy for those not yet ready to quit., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest There are no interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Tobacco use is associated with adverse outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer. Socioeconomic determinants influence access and utilization of tobacco treatment; little is known about the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (NSD) and tobacco assessment, assistance, and cessation among patients diagnosed with cancer., Methods: A modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) was administered to patients enrolled in nine ECOG-ACRIN clinical trials. We examined associations of NSD with (1) smoking status, (2) receiving tobacco cessation assessment and support, and (3) cessation behaviors. NSD was classified by tertiles of the Area Deprivation Index. Associations between NSD and tobacco variables were evaluated using logistic regression., Results: A total of 740 patients completing the C-TUQ were 70% male, 94% White, 3% Hispanic, mean age 58.8 years. Cancer diagnoses included leukemia 263 (36%), lymphoma 141 (19%), prostate 131 (18%), breast 79 (11%), melanoma 69 (9%), myeloma 53 (7%), and head and neck 4 (0.5%). A total of 402 (54%) never smoked, 257 (35%) had formerly smoked, and 81 (11%) were currently smoking. Patients in high disadvantaged neighborhoods were approximately four times more likely to report current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% CI, 1.69-7.54; p = .0009), and more likely to report being asked about smoking (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.64-10.98; p = .0029), but less likely to report receiving counseling (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.58; p = .0086) versus those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods., Conclusions: Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with smoking but less cessation support. Increased cessation support in cancer care is needed, particularly for patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Objective: Use of combustible alternative tobacco products (ATPs; e.g., little cigars, loose tobacco, multiple tobacco product types [TPTs]) is increasingly common. Inexpensive, combusted ATPs (e.g little cigars) are predominantly marketed to lower-income communities. Prevalence of combusted ATP use among those with serious mental illness (SMI) is unknown., Methods: We examined rates and correlates of combusted ATP use and association with tobacco abstinence in a secondary analysis of a single-cohort (N = 1007) trial of tobacco-smoking adults with SMI and severe SMI-related functional impairment. The parent study aimed to test a community-health worker-delivered intervention for promoting smoking cessation among adults with SMI. Participants were surveyed at baseline on demographic and smoking characteristics including combusted TPT (cigarettes, cigars/little cigars, loose tobacco), and breath carbon-monoxide (CO). CO-verified 7-day point-prevalence tobacco abstinence was assessed at Year 2., Results: At baseline, 59% of participants reported using cigarettes only, 25% multiple (>1) combusted TPTs, 12% cigars/little cigars only, and 4% loose tobacco (e.g., "rollies", pipes) only. Those reporting any ATP use at baseline had higher expired CO concentration and reported using more tobacco products per day than exclusive cigarette users (p's < 0.05). ATP use was not associated with abstinence in adjusted logistic regression models (p's > 0.05)., Conclusions: Use of ATPs was associated with use of more tobacco products per day and greater tobacco toxicant exposure than exclusive cigarette use in this population. Future policy efforts work to change preferential taxation policies (e.g., lower taxation for cigar products) and disproportionate marketing of ATPs to lower-income communities., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This work was funded by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Large Pragmatic Trial #1504-30472 (“Integrated Smoking Cessation Treatment for Smokers with Serious Mental Illnesses”; PI: Evins). Additional support for JMS was provided by NIDA K12 DA043490 (MPIs: Evins/Rigotti). PCORI and NIDA had no rolein the study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, writing the manuscript, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr. Evins has served as a consultant to Charles River Analytics (NIDA SBIR grant) and Karuna Pharmaceuticals (Chair Data Monitoring Board) and is a founder of NirVue Technologies. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The combination of opioid misuse and cigarette smoking contributes to increased morbidity and mortality compared to each substance use alone. We estimated the incidence of opioid misuse for persons who currently or formerly smoked versus never smoked., Methods: Data came from the 2015-2020 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health cross-sectional surveys of US civilians aged 12+ (n = 315,661). Weighted opioid misuse incidence and average time between cigarette use initiation and opioid misuse initiation were calculated annually by smoking status. Logistic regression models tested time trends in incidence by smoking status., Results: Overall, 0.75% of persons initiated opioid misuse per year; opioid misuse incidence was 1.35% for those who currently smoked cigarettes, 0.54% for those who formerly smoked, and 0.67% for those who never smoked. For persons who currently smoked and misused opioids (1.50%), 95.08% smoked prior to opioid use. The average time between smoking followed by opioid misuse was 12.93 years and for opioid misuse followed by smoking was 4.36 years. Persons who currently smoked were more likely to initiate opioid misuse than those who had never smoked (AOR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.60, 2.06). There was a decrease in the opioid misuse incidence over time (AOR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.85, 0.92), which did not differ by smoking status., Conclusions: Persons who currently smoked cigarettes, relative to those who never smoked, were more likely to initiate opioid misuse. As most individuals smoked before opioid misuse, it may be useful for primary prevention efforts to decrease opioid misuse initiation by focusing on smoking status., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: While cigarette smoking has declined among the U.S. general population, sale and use of non-cigarette alternative tobacco products (ATP; e.g., e-cigarettes, cigars) and dual use of cigarettes/ATPs are rising. Little is known about ATP use patterns in cancer survivors enrolled in clinical trials. We investigated prevalence of tobacco product use, and factors associated with past 30-day use, among patients with cancer in national trials., Methods: Cancer survivors (N = 756) enrolled in 9 ECOG-ACRIN clinical trials (2017-2021) completed a modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) which assessed baseline cigarette and ATP use since cancer diagnosis and in the past 30 days., Results: Patients were on average 59 years old, 70% male, and the mean time since cancer diagnosis was 26 months. Since diagnosis, cigarettes (21%) were the most common tobacco product used, followed by smokeless tobacco use (5%), cigars (4%), and e-cigarettes (2%). In the past 30 days, 12% of patients reported smoking cigarettes, 4% cigars, 4% using smokeless tobacco, and 2% e-cigarettes. Since cancer diagnosis, 5.5% of the sample reported multiple tobacco product use, and 3.0% reported multiple product use in the past 30 days. Males (vs. females; OR 4.33; P = 0 < 0.01) and individuals not living with another person who smokes (vs. living with; OR, 8.07; P = 0 < 0.01) were more likely to use ATPs only versus cigarettes only in the past 30 days., Conclusions: Among patients with cancer, cigarettes were the most prevalent tobacco product reported., Impact: Regardless, ATPs and multiple tobacco product use should be routinely assessed in cancer care settings., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: Pain catastrophizing, a measure of an individual's negative emotional and cognitive appraisals of pain, has been included as a key treatment target in many psychological interventions for pain. However, the neural correlates of pain catastrophizing have been understudied. Prior neuroimaging evidence suggests that adults with pain show altered reward processing throughout the mesocorticolimbic reward circuitry., Methods: In this study, we tested the association between Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) scores and neural activation to the Monetary Incentive Delay (MID) reward neuroimaging task in 94 adults reporting a range of pain, insomnia, and mood symptoms., Results: Results indicated that PCS score but not pain intensity was significantly associated with blunted activation in the caudate and putamen in response to feedback of successful vs. unsuccessful trials on the MID task. Mediation analyses indicated that PCS score fully mediated the relationship between depression symptoms and reward activation., Discussion: These findings provide evidence that pain catastrophizing is independently associated with altered striatal function apart from depression symptoms and pain intensity. Thus, in individuals experiencing pain and/or co- morbid conditions, reward dysfunction is directly related to pain catastrophizing., Competing Interests: AE has received research grant support to her institution from Pfizer Inc, Forum Pharmaceuticals, and GK, consultation fees from Charles River Analytics, and honoraria for advisory work from Pfizer, and Kaurna Pharmaceuticals in the past 5 years for work unrelated to this project. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Cooke, Edwards, Wheeler, Schmitt, Nielsen, Streck, Schuster, Potter, Evins and Gilman.)

Objectives: In the United States, the number of overdose deaths related to opioids in combination with stimulants has increased; however, the Northeast has typically been less impacted by stimulant overdose. Injection drug use (IDU) results in high mortality from overdose and infectious disease and there are racial disparities observed in overdose death rates. We examined trends in stimulant and opioid IDU, including trends stratified by race, using 5 waves of cross-sectional state surveillance data., Methods: Data came from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National HIV Behavioral Surveillance system Boston, Massachusetts site, which includes 5 waves of data (2005-2018) among adults in the Boston metropolitan area reporting IDU (N = 2550). Outcome measures were type of substance injected in the past 12 months (heroin, prescription opioids, "speedball," cocaine, crack, and/or methamphetamine)., Results: Participants were 70% male, 58% non-Hispanic White, and injected a mean of 3 different drugs in the past 12 months. From 2015 to 2018, there was a more than 2-fold increase in injection of methamphetamine (15% vs 38%, P < 0.001), a pattern which held across racial groups. Combination heroin and methamphetamine injection increased from 2015 (15%) to 2018 (35%, P < 0.001). Multiple drug injection (injecting >1 drug) increased significantly across years compared with single drug injection ( P = 0.03)., Conclusions: Findings suggest that increased use of methamphetamine and opioids extends to Boston. There is an urgent need for enhanced screening of methamphetamine use among those using opioids and increased access and payor coverage of efficacious treatments for stimulant and opioid use disorders (eg, contingency management and medication treatment for opioid use disorder)., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) have high prevalence of cigarette smoking and difficulty quitting. Peer recovery coaches (PRCs; individuals with lived SUD experience) facilitate SUD behavior change in recoverees but it is unknown if/how they address tobacco treatment in SUD recovery coaching. We assessed PRC's tobacco-related practices and attitudes about tobacco treatment in SUD recovery., Methods: The Tobacco use In Peer-recovery Study (TIPS) was a cross-sectional mixed-methods pilot survey (January-March 2022) of the 26 PRCs employed by a Massachusetts-based healthcare system's 12 SUD treatment clinics/programs. PRCs completed a quantitative survey (n = 23/26; 88%) and a telephone-based qualitative interview (n = 20/26; 77%)., Results: One-third of PRCs reported current smoking, 50% reported former smoking, and 18% never smoked. Among PRCs, 61% reported accompanying recoverees outdoors to smoke, 26% smoked with recoverees, 17% had provided cigarettes to recoverees, 32% used smoking to help build peer-relationships, and 74% rated smoking as socially acceptable in SUD treatment. PRCs reported regularly talking to recoverees about tobacco treatment (65%), believed they should have a role in helping recoverees quit smoking (52%), and were interested in tobacco treatment training (65%). A majority of both nonsmoking and current smoking PRCs (73% vs. 57%) regularly talked to recoverees about quitting smoking., Conclusion: PRCs' attitudes about integrating tobacco treatment into SUD recovery coaching were generally positive and PRCs reported they could have a role in helping recoverees with tobacco treatment. Barriers to integrating tobacco treatment into SUD recovery include use of cigarettes as a peer-recovery tool and high prevalence and social acceptability of smoking in SUD recovery., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The prevalence of past-year smoking cessation remains below 10% in the U.S. Most who smoke are not ready to quit in the near future. Cessation requires both (a) initiating a quit attempt (QA) and (b) maintaining abstinence. Most research has focused on abstinence among people already motivated to quit. We systematically reviewed interventions to promote QAs among people not motivated to quit tobacco. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Embase, and our personal libraries for randomized trials of tobacco interventions that reported QAs as an outcome among adults not ready to quit. We screened studies and extracted data in duplicate. We pooled findings of the 25 included studies using Mantel-Haenszel random effects meta-analyses when ≥ 2 studies tested the same intervention. Most (24) trials addressed cigarettes and one addressed smokeless tobacco. Substantial heterogeneity among trials resulted in a series of small meta-analyses. Findings indicate varenicline may increase QAs more than no varenicline, n = 320; RR = 1.4, 95% CI [1.1, 1.7]; I ² = 0%, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) may increase QAs more than no NRT, n = 2,568; RR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.02, 1.3]; I ² = 0%. Pooled effects for motivational counseling, reduction counseling, and very low nicotine content cigarettes showed no clear evidence of benefit or harm. The evidence was judged to be of medium to very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias, suggesting that further research is likely to change interpretation of our results. Findings demonstrate the need for more high-quality research on interventions to induce QAs among adults not ready to quit tobacco. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Purpose: More than half of individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) smoke, contributing to premature cancer mortality. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist with smoking cessation; however, supportive oncology trials frequently exclude patients with SMI. To fill this gap, we examined differences in engagement and tobacco cessation in a pragmatic clinical trial., Methods: We recruited 303 participants from two National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, of which 10% had prior diagnoses of SMI (major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia spectrum disorders). We compared self-reported smoking behaviors, patient attitudes and beliefs about cessation, and rates of trial completion, engagement, and smoking abstinence among recently diagnosed patients with cancer with and without SMI. Six months after trial completion, we completed qualitative interviews on barriers and facilitators to tobacco cessation in a random sample of participants with SMI., Results: Trial participants with SMI had similar motivation to quit smoking as those without SMI. Additionally, participants with SMI had a similar ability to engage in a tobacco treatment trial (6.5 counseling sessions completed v 7.3 sessions) and benefit from tobacco treatment as those without SMI (32.3% v 27.8% 6-month quit rates)., Conclusion: Patients with cancer and SMI were able to engage in and benefit from a tobacco cessation trial integrated into cancer care. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist patients with SMI with smoking cessation referrals and treatment. Pragmatic supportive oncology trials that include a diverse population of adults with SMI are needed to inform care delivery and improve cancer outcomes for patients with SMI and cancer.

Cigarette smoking is overrepresented in populations with psychiatric conditions and socioeconomic disadvantage. Greater understanding of the role of reinforcement and nicotine dependence in smoking among vulnerable populations may facilitate development of better targeted interventions to reduce smoking. Prior research demonstrated that individual differences in the reinforcing value of smoking and nicotine-dependence severity predicted total nicotine-exposure in vulnerable populations. The present study uses multivariate regression to address two aims: (1) Quantify the degree to which the reinforcing value of smoking, assessed using the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), and dependence severity assessed using the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence and Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (B-WISDM) each account for individual differences in cotinine-plus-3'-hydroxycotinine (COT+3HC) levels. (2) Explore whether there is overlap in the variance accounted for by the CTP, FTND, and B-WISDM. Participants were 628 adults with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage who smoked daily. The CPT, FTND, and B-WISDM models accounted for 23.76%, 32.45%, and 29.61% of the variance in COT+3HC levels, respectively. Adding CPT to the FTND model failed to increase the variance accounted for and adding it to the B-WISDM model did so by only 1.2% demonstrating considerable overlap in the variance in nicotine exposure levels accounted for by these three instruments. These results provide new knowledge on the relationship between individual differences in the reinforcing value of smoking and nicotine-exposure levels and suggest differences in reinforcing value may underpin a considerable portion of the variance in nicotine exposure accounted for by dependence severity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Many cancer patients who smoke report concurrent e-cigarette use. Using a mixed-methods approach, we aimed to (1) describe longitudinal e-cigarette use over 6 months after a cancer diagnosis and (2) assess the association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation, among cancer patients in a smoking cessation trial., Aims and Methods: Data were from a 2-site randomized controlled trial of Standard (brief counseling) versus Intensive treatment (sustained counseling plus smoking cessation medication) in individuals who smoke recently diagnosed with cancer. Participants (n = 303) reported e-cigarette use at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Biochemically-verified past 7-day cigarette abstinence was collected at 6 months. Qualitative interviews at 6 months explored factors related to e-cigarette use., Results: E-cigarette use prevalence was highest between baseline and 3 months (16%) and declined over time. Participants using e-cigarettes at follow-up had higher baseline cigarette dependence and smoked more heavily. Multivariable analyses found no significant association between follow-up e-cigarette use and 6-month cigarette abstinence. E-cigarette use at follow-up was higher in the Standard versus Intensive treatment group (p = .003 and .001 at 3 and 6 mo, respectively). Smoking cessation and health concerns were primary reasons for using e-cigarettes., Conclusions: Among individuals who smoke recently diagnosed with cancer and enrolled in a smoking cessation intervention trial, e-cigarette use during trial participation was not associated with smoking abstinence. Individuals who chose to use e-cigarettes were less likely to be receiving intensive cessation support as part of the trial. Further studies are needed to evaluate the association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation in cancer patients., Implications: E-cigarette use was not associated with cigarette abstinence at 6 months among adults who smoke recently diagnosed with cancer enrolled in a smoking cessation trial. Individuals with easier access to evidence-based smoking cessation treatment may be less likely to use e-cigarettes., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Individuals in treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have high smoking rates and limited success with Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved cessation aids, suggesting need for novel approaches. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) might benefit this population, but e-cigarettes' acceptability for tobacco reduction or cessation among smokers in OUD treatment is not known., Methods: A cross-sectional mixed-methods study of 222 adults in OUD treatment with buprenorphine in the Boston, Massachusetts metropolitan area was conducted in 2020. We used quantitative and qualitative data to investigate individuals' experience with and interest in e-cigarettes and other methods for smoking cessation and assessed factors associated with interest in e-cigarette use., Results: One hundred sixty (72%) of the 222 participants were past 30-day cigarette smokers. They most frequently reported having ever used nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; 83%) and e-cigarettes (71%) for smoking cessation and most often indicated interest in using NRT (71%) and e-cigarettes (44%) for future smoking cessation. In multiple logistic regression analysis, interest in using e-cigarettes for future smoking cessation was independently associated with having ever used e-cigarettes for smoking cessation, current e-cigarette use, and perceiving e-cigarettes to be less harmful than cigarettes (ps < .05). In qualitative data, many current vapers/former smokers reported that e-cigarettes had been helpful for quitting cigarettes. For current smokers who currently or formerly vaped, frequently reported challenges in switching to e-cigarettes were concerns about replacing one addiction with another and e-cigarettes not adequately substituting for cigarettes., Conclusions: E-cigarettes had a moderate level of acceptability for smoking cessation among cigarette smokers in OUD treatment. More research is warranted to test the efficacy of this approach., Implications: Individuals in treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have high smoking rates and limited success with existing smoking cessation tools, suggesting a need for novel cessation treatment approaches. In this mixed-methods study of individuals receiving medication treatment for OUD with buprenorphine in Massachusetts in 2020, we found a moderate level of acceptability of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Little is known about non-tobacco substance use (SU) and its treatment in cancer patients. National guidelines address tobacco only, and assessment of SU in cancer patients is not standardized. It is not clear how oncology clinicians assess, document, and follow-up on SU., Methods: We conducted an electronic health record review of patients enrolled in a smoking cessation trial at one large hospital site (N = 176). Chart review of oncology treatment notes assessed whether SU assessment was documented, the content of the documentation/assessment (e.g., frequency of use), and details about documentation (e.g., where/who documented)., Results: Sixty-nine percent (121/176) of cancer patients had SU documented. Many patients (42%, 74/176) had only one substance documented; 66% (116/176) had alcohol use documented. For a substantial minority of patients (43/176; 24%), the provider did not specify the substance assessed (e.g., "drug use," "illicits"). SU was primarily documented by physicians (84%, 102/121), in routine progress notes (56%, 68/121), in the "social history" section of the note (84%, 102/121). Only 4 patients had a documented SU follow-up plan. When examining the subset of patients who reported problematic alcohol use (N = 27), the content of documentation was inconsistent (e.g., number of drinks/day vs. qualitative descriptors of use)., Conclusions: About 1/3 of oncology patients did not have SU assessment documented. SU other than alcohol use was infrequently documented, many clinicians documented SU but did not specify substance type, and few clinicians documented a follow-up plan for problematic SU. Oncology settings should utilize standardized assessment and referral for SU treatment., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) have a high prevalence of smoking and limited success quitting smoking with existing tools. There is ongoing debate about whether electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) may be a viable harm reduction strategy. We sought to determine the potential acceptability of e-cigarettes for cigarette harm reduction among individuals receiving medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with buprenorphine. Among individuals receiving MOUD we investigated health harm perceptions of cigarettes, nicotine e-cigarettes, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and perceptions of the helpfulness of e-cigarettes and NRT for quitting cigarettes., Methods: Cross-sectional telephone survey conducted among adults in buprenorphine treatment at five community health centers in the Boston, MA metropolitan area from February to July 2020., Results: 93% and 63% of participants rated cigarettes and e-cigarettes, respectively, as very or extremely harmful to health, and 62% rated NRT as not to slightly harmful to health. Over half (58%) rated cigarettes as more harmful than e-cigarettes; 65% and 83% perceived e-cigarettes and NRT, respectively, to be helpful for reducing/quitting cigarette use. In bivariate analyses, nicotine e-cigarette users, compared to nonusers, perceived e-cigarettes to be less harmful to health and more often rated e-cigarettes as helpful for reducing/quitting cigarette use (both p <0.05)., Conclusions: This study suggests that Massachusetts patients receiving MOUD with buprenorphine have concerns about the health harms of e-cigarettes yet rate them as helpful tools for reducing or quitting cigarette smoking. Future research is needed to test the efficacy of e-cigarettes for cigarette harm reduction., Competing Interests: Dr. Rigotti receives royalties from UpToDate, has consulted for Achieve Life Sciences, and consulted (without pay) for Pfizer. Dr. Kalkhoran received royalties from UpToDate. Dr. Wakeman receives royalties from UpToDate and has received salary support from OptumLabs, Celero Systems, and Alosa Health. No other authors have conflicts of interest to disclose., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Introduction: Suicide thoughts and behavior (STB) are associated with premature mortality and is disproportionately represented among those with opioid use disorder (OUD). Recent trends in STB among those with OUD are lacking. We investigated trends in STB among US adults with versus without OUD using six waves of cross-sectional, nationally-representative, epidemiological data., Methods: Data came from the 2015-2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (combined n  = 241,675). We compared past-year STB outcomes (i.e., thoughts of seriously considering killing self (SI), suicide plan (SP), suicide attempt (SA)) among adults with versus without past-year OUD. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression tested the association between survey-year and past-year STB outcomes (i.e., SI, SP/SA) stratified by OUD status., Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 26% versus 4% of those with and without OUD, respectively, reported SI, 10% versus 1% reported a SP, and 6% versus 1% reported SA (all p s < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, across survey years, no changes in the prevalence of SI were observed for adults with or without OUD, and no changes were observed over time for SP/SA in adults with or without OUD. OUD severity and treatment status did not moderate the relationship between OUD and STB outcomes., Conclusions: Among US adults, OUD was associated with thoughts of suicide and suicide behavior. The heightened prevalence of STB in adults with OUD has not changed in recent years. Screening for SI is needed among those reporting opioid misuse and should be routinely integrated into OUD prevention and treatment.

Introduction: This study examined whether exposure to reduced-nicotine-content cigarettes (RNCCs) for 12 weeks alters respiratory health using Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO), a validated biomarker of respiratory epithelial health, and the Respiratory Health Questionnaire (RHQ), a subject-rated questionnaire on respiratory symptoms. Participants were 747 adult daily smokers enrolled in three double-blind, randomized clinical trials evaluating effects of cigarette nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) in people with affective disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD), or socioeconomic disadvantage., Aims and Methods: FeNO levels and RHQ ratings were collected at baseline and Weeks 6 and 12 following randomization. Multiple regression was used to assess associations of FeNO and RHQ with smoking characteristics. Mixed-model repeated-measures ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of nicotine content on FeNO and RHQ outcomes over the 12-week study period., Results: FeNO levels but not RHQ ratings varied inversely with smoking characteristics at baseline (Ps < 0.0001) in smokers with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage but less so in those with OUD. Participants with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage, but not those with OUD, who were assigned to RNCCs had higher FeNO levels at Week 12 than those assigned to the 15.8 mg/g dose [F(2,423) = 4.51, p = .01, Cohen's d = 0.21]. No significant dose-related changes in RHQ scores were identified., Conclusions: Use of RNCCs across a 12-week period attenuates smoking-related reductions in FeNO levels in smokers with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage although not those with OUD. FeNO changes were not accompanied by changes in respiratory-health ratings., Trial Registration: Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample and experimental manipulation of the nicotine content of assigned cigarettes are registered: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534. The FeNO measure reported in this manuscript is an exploratory outcome that was not registered., Implications: Should a reduced nicotine content standard be implemented; these results suggest that reduced nicotine content in cigarettes will not exacerbate and instead may attenuate smoking-related decreases in FeNO. This is significant as NO is an important component in maintaining a healthy respiratory system and necessary to defend against infection. Furthermore, the results of the current study demonstrate that the adoption of the reduced nicotine content standard may result in beneficial impacts on respiratory epithelial health among vulnerable populations that are disproportionally affected by the adverse health outcomes precipitated by combustible tobacco use., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Recent prevalence estimates of cannabis use among individuals receiving medication treatment for OUD (MOUD) are lacking, and no study has characterized cannabis route of administration (cROA) in this population. These knowledge gaps are relevant because cannabis' effects and health outcomes vary by cROA and the availability and perceptions of cROA (e.g., vaping devices) are changing., Methods: The Vaping In Buprenorphine-treated patients Evaluation (VIBE) cross-sectional survey assessed the prevalence and correlates of cannabis use and cROA among adults receiving buprenorphine MOUD from 02/20 to 07/20 at five community health centers in Massachusetts, a state with legal recreational and medical cannabis use., Results: Among the 92/222 (41%) respondents reporting past 30-day cannabis use, smoking was the most common cROA (75%), followed by vaping (38%), and eating (26%). Smoking was more often used as a single cROA vs. in combination others (p = 0.01), whereas vaping, eating, and dabbing were more often used in combination with another cROA (all p < 0.05). Of the 39% of participants reporting multiple cROA, smoking and vaping (61%), and smoking and eating (50%), were the most prevalent combinations. Nonwhite race (vs. white) and current cigarette smoking (vs. no nicotine use) were associated with past 30-day cannabis use in multiple logistic regression., Conclusions: Prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use among individuals receiving buprenorphine MOUD in Massachusetts in 2020 was nearly double the prevalence of cannabis use in Massachusetts' adult general population in 2019 (21%). Our data are consistent with state and national data showing smoking as the most common cROA.

Risk for smoking increases in a summative manner corresponding to the number of co-occurring vulnerabilities present (cumulative vulnerability). We examined whether cumulative vulnerabilities moderate response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes in a secondary analysis of results from 775 participants in three 12-week randomized clinical trials examining research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco). Participants were categorized as having 0-1, 2-3, or ≥ 4 cumulative vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities included: rural residence, current substance use disorder, current affective disorder, low educational attainment, poverty, unemployment, physical disability. The primary outcome was total cigarettes per day (CPD) during Week 12; secondary outcomes included CPD across weeks, toxin exposure, dependence severity, craving/withdrawal (17 dependent measures). Results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of covariance and growth-curve modeling. Total CPD during Week 12 increased as cumulative-vulnerability increased (P = 0.004), and decreased as nicotine content decreased (P < 0.001), with no significant interaction of cumulative vulnerability and dose (P = 0.67). Effects on other outcomes generally followed that same pattern. The only exception across the other outcomes was on Questionnaire-on-Smoking-Urges Factor-2 ratings for usual-brand cigarettes where cumulative vulnerability, dose, and time interacted (P = 0.007), with craving at the 0.4 and 2.4 mg/g doses decreasing over time, but inconsistently across vulnerability categories. Overall, we saw little evidence that cumulative vulnerabilities moderate response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes suggesting that a policy reducing nicotine content in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels could benefit even highly vulnerable smokers including those residing in rural or other regions with overrepresentation of co-occurring vulnerabilities. Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Serious psychological distress (SPD) is common among adults who smoke cigarettes and among adults with substance use disorders (SUD). It is unknown whether the burden of SPD is even greater among individuals with both cigarette smoking and SUDs. This study examined the intersectionality of SPD, cigarette smoking, and SUD over time., Methods: Data came from annual, cross-sectional, nationally representative samples of the United States (US) National Survey on Drug Use and Health (individuals age 12+). Past-month SPD prevalences were estimated each year from 2008 to 2018 for adults age 18+ with current daily, current non-daily, former, and never cigarette smoking by SUD status (combined n = 441,286). Logistic regression models examined linear time trends of SPD., Results: In 2018, SPD was significantly more prevalent among adults in each smoking group with SUD versus those without SUD (daily 29.1% vs. 9.0%, non-daily 23.2% vs. 8.6%, former 19.5% vs. 3.2%, never 16.4% vs. 4.3%). After adjusting for sociodemographics, SPD prevalence increased over time across smoking statuses with a larger change for persons with SUD (AOR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.09) vs. no SUD (AOR=1.03; 95% CI: 1.02. 1.04)., Conclusions: SPD was more than twice as common among adults with SUD who smoke cigarettes compared to those without SUD who do not smoke cigarettes, with the highest prevalence among adults with both SUD and daily smoking. While SPD has increased over time, differences depended on SUD status beyond the effect of cigarette smoking. These results provide further evidence for treating smoking and mental health problems together., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: To mitigate the psychological burdens of COVID-19 for frontline clinicians (FCs), we adapted an existing evidence-based resiliency program, Stress Management and Resilience Training Relaxation Response Program (SMART-3RP), for FCs. This analysis explores moderators of stress coping to determine which subgroups of FCs benefited most from SMART-3RP., Methods: 102 FCs from Mass General Brigham hospitals engaged in the adapted SMART-3RP. Assessments were completed at group entry (Week 0) and completion (Week 4). The primary outcome was stress coping, and we examined 15 possible baseline moderators. We fit linear mixed effects regression models and assessed potential baseline moderators using a likelihood ratio test. We report model-based estimates and confidence intervals for each moderator-by-time interaction (i.e., differential effect), where positive/negative values indicate more/less improvement in average perceived stress coping., Results: Stress coping improved from Week 0 to Week 4 (mean improvement [95% CI] = 0.9 [0.6 to 1.2]). FCs with higher anxiety (differential effect [95% CI] = 0.3 [0.1 to 0.4]), depression (0.4 [0.2 to 0.6]), and loneliness (0.4 [0.1 to 0.6]), but lower levels of mindfulness (CAMS-R focus : 1.0 [0.4 to 1.6]; CAMS-R accept : 1.3 [0.7 to 2.0]) and self-compassion (0.4, [0.1 to 0.8]) at baseline experienced greater benefits in perceived stress coping from the SMART-3RP. Baseline health uncertainty along with sociodemographic and work characteristics did not moderate stress coping., Discussion: Results highlight particular sub-populations of FCs that may benefit more from a stress management intervention, especially during emergency responses (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic)., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is prevalent among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, the impact of CNCP on buprenorphine treatment outcomes is largely unknown. In this secondary analysis, we examined treatment outcomes among individuals with and without CNCP who received a low-barrier buprenorphine maintenance regimen during waitlist delays to more comprehensive opioid treatment., Methods: Participants were 28 adults with OUD who received 12 weeks of buprenorphine treatment involving bimonthly clinic visits, computerized medication dispensing, and phone-based monitoring. At intake and monthly follow-up assessments, participants completed the Brief Pain Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), Addiction Severity Index, and staff-observed urinalysis., Results: Participants with CNCP (n = 10) achieved comparable rates of illicit opioid abstinence as those without CNCP (n = 18) at weeks 4 (90% vs 94%), 8 (80% vs 83%), and 12 (70% vs 67%) (P = 0.99). Study retention was also similar, with 90% and 83% of participants with and without CNCP completing the 12-week study, respectively (P = 0.99). Furthermore, individuals with CNCP demonstrated significant improvements on the BDI-II and Global Severity Index subscale of the BSI (P < 0.05). However, those with CNCP reported more severe medical problems and smaller reductions in legal problems relative to those without CNCP (P = 0.03)., Conclusions: Despite research suggesting that chronic pain may influence OUD treatment outcomes, participants with and without CNCP achieved similar rates of treatment retention and significant reductions in illicit opioid use and psychiatric symptomatology during low-barrier buprenorphine treatment., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine.All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Cancer patients who smoke report more stress and psychological distress than patients who do not smoke. It is unclear how these emotional symptoms may modify smoking behavior in cancer patients. We examined the influence of a smoking cessation intervention for cancer patients on stress and distress, and the effects of these symptoms on smoking abstinence., Methods: Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Smokefree Support Study, a two-site randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of Intensive (IT; n = 153) vs. Standard Treatment (ST; n = 150) for smoking cessation in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Stress coping, perceived stress, distress, and anxiety were self-reported at baseline, 3, and 6 months. Abstinence was biochemically-confirmed at 6 months. A subset of patients (n = 72) completed qualitative exit-interviews., Results: Patients were on average, 58 years old, 56% female, and smoked a median of 10 cigarettes/day. There were no significant treatment group × time interactions or main effects of treatment group on stress or distress measures (p's > 0.05), however there were significant main effects of time suggesting symptom improvements on each measure in both study groups (p's < 0.05). In adjusted logistic regression models, lower levels anxiety at 3 months predicted confirmed smoking abstinence at 6 months (p = .03). Qualitatively, at 6 months, patients reported their stress and smoking were connected and that the cessation counseling was helpful., Conclusions: Cancer patients enrolled in a smoking cessation trial report decreases in stress, distress and anxiety over time, and anxiety symptoms may impact smoking cessation success at follow-up resulting in an important intervention target., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: Among people with cancer, dual alcohol and tobacco use increases risk for morbidity and mortality. Most smoking cessation clinical trials with this patient population have excluded individuals with problematic alcohol use. This investigation examined whether problematic alcohol use affects smoking cessation in cancer patients., Methods: Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Smokefree Support Study, a randomized-controlled trial examining the efficacy of Intensive (IT; n = 153) vs. Standard Treatment (ST; n = 150) for smoking cessation in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Problematic alcohol use was assessed at enrollment using the Cut-Down-Annoyed-Guilty-Eye-Opener (CAGE), weekly frequency of alcohol use and binge drinking measures. Alcohol use was categorized as: no current alcohol use, moderate and problematic use. The primary outcome was biochemically-confirmed cigarette abstinence at 6-months. A subset of patients (n = 72) completed qualitative exit-interviews., Results: Among all participants, biochemically-confirmed cigarette abstinence rates were 25% (n = 32), 28% (n = 27), and 36% (n = 20) for participants reporting no current alcohol use, moderate use, and problematic use, respectively (p = 0.33). In logistic regression analysis, neither problematic alcohol use (AOR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.35-2.67, p = .94) nor the problematic use by study arm interaction (AOR = 2.22, 95% CI = 0.59-8.39, p = .24) were associated with biochemically-confirmed 6-month abstinence. Qualitatively, participants reported that drinking alcohol triggers urges to smoke., Conclusion: Newly diagnosed cancer patients reporting problematic alcohol use were not less likely to quit smoking than those without. Additional research is needed to investigate whether problematic alcohol users may benefit from smoking and alcohol behavior change interventions at the time of cancer diagnosis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Most descriptions of tobacco withdrawal have not changed in >30 years despite new research. This meta-analysis tested whether abstinence leads to decreased positive affect (PA) because abstinence-induced symptom changes are a core feature of the tobacco withdrawal syndrome. In addition, we examined whether reduced PA was due to withdrawal (ie, temporary decrease in a "U-shaped" curve) or offset (ie, return to baseline) effect., Methods: Our main inclusion criterion was a prospective within-participant test of change in PA during abstinence conditions among people who smoke cigarettes daily who were not using a cessation medication. Our search of PubMed, PsycINFO, and personal libraries yielded a total of 32 tests with 2054 participants., Results: There was a medium effect size indicating an overall decrease in PA following abstinence from cigarettes (Cohen's d = -0.40, 95% CI = -0.30 to -0.49). There was large heterogeneity (I2 = 70.7%). Most (79%) of the 24 trials that conducted significance tests reported that reduction in PA was significant. Seven tests were adequately designed to detect a withdrawal versus offset effect. Over half (57%) displayed a U-shaped curve for abstinence-induced change in PA indicative of a withdrawal symptom rather than offset effect., Conclusions: Abstinence from cigarettes is associated with a decrease in PA. Whether low PA should be added to withdrawal measures and diagnostic criteria requires replication of the time-course of change in PA and tests of whether abstinence-induced changes in PA and negative affect occur independently., Implications: Though there was substantial heterogeneity among trials, our findings suggest that (1) abstinence from cigarettes decreases positive affect and (2) this decrease may represent a withdrawal effect (vs. an offset effect). However, it is unclear whether abstinence-induced losses in positive affect are independent from increased negative affect., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Cigarette smoking may increase the risk of COVID-19 complications, reinforcing the urgency of smoking cessation in populations with high smoking prevalence such as individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). Whether the COVID-19 pandemic has altered perceptions, motivation to quit, or tobacco use among cigarette smokers and nicotine e-cigarette vapers with OUD is unknown., Methods: A telephone survey was conducted in March-July 2020 of current cigarette smokers or nicotine vapers with OUD who were stable on buprenorphine treatment at five Boston (MA) area community health centers. The survey assessed respondents' perceived risk of COVID-19 due to smoking or vaping, interest in quitting, quit attempts and change in tobacco consumption during the pandemic., Results: 222/520 patients (43 %) completed the survey, and 145 were asked questions related to COVID-19. Of these, 61 % smoked cigarettes only, 13 % vaped nicotine only, and 26 % were dual users. Nearly 80 % of participants believed that smoking and vaping increased their risk of COVID-19 infection or complications. Smokers with this belief reported an increased interest in quitting (AOR 4.6, 95 % CI:1.7-12.4). Overall, 49 % of smokers and 42 % of vapers reported increased interest in quitting due to the pandemic; 24 % and 20 %, respectively, reported attempting to quit since the pandemic. However, 35 % of smokers and 27 % of vapers reported increasing smoking and vaping, respectively, during the pandemic., Conclusions: Most patients with OUD believed that smoking and vaping increased their vulnerability to COVID-19, half reported increased interest in quitting, but others reported increasing smoking and vaping during the COVID-19 pandemic., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Few studies have examined substance use disorders (SUDs) in cancer patients and it is unclear whether SUDs differentially impact cigarette smoking in patients with vs. without cancer. This study used epidemiological data to estimate current cigarette smoking prevalence and quit ratios among US adults with and without SUDs by cancer status., Methods: Data were drawn from the 2015-2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health ( n = 170,111). Weighted current smoking prevalence and quit ratios were estimated across survey years by SUDs (with vs. without) and by cancer status (with vs. without)., Results: Among those with cancer, current smoking prevalence was higher for those with vs. without SUDs (47% vs. 13%, p < 0.001) and quit ratios lower for those with vs. without SUDs (45% vs. 71%, p = 0.002). A similar pattern was observed in adults without cancer, with higher smoking prevalence (56% vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and lower quit ratios (23% vs. 51%, p < 0.001) observed for those with vs. without SUDs, respectively. In adjusted logistic regressions, the SUD × cancer status interaction was not significant for smoking prevalence or quit ratios (AOR = 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7, 2.1, p = 0.56; AOR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.5, 2.0, p = 0.91, respectively), though smoking prevalence was lower and quit ratios higher for adults with vs. without cancer ( ps < 0.05)., Conclusions: Among US adults with and without cancer, individuals with SUDs evidenced higher cigarette smoking and lower quit ratios than those without SUDs. Addressing SUDs and their impact on smoking cessation is critical in cancer patients with implications for improving health and treatment outcomes.

Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) have high prevalence of smoking and poor cessation outcomes. Data suggest that smokers with OUD may experience heightened nicotine reinforcement and more severe tobacco withdrawal compared to smokers without OUD. The Food and Drug Administration is currently considering reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes to reduce smoking prevalence and smoking-related disease. It is critical to understand the effects of reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCCs) on tobacco withdrawal in this subgroup. In this secondary analysis, we investigated the ability of RNCCs to attenuate acute tobacco withdrawal and craving severity in smokers with OUD versus those without substance use disorders (SUDs). Smokers maintained on methadone or buprenorphine (opioid-maintained [OM]; n = 65) versus without other SUDs (i.e., non-SUD; n = 135) completed 5 laboratory sessions wherein they smoked their usual brand (UB) or a research cigarette varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g of tobacco) under double-blind, acute abstinence conditions. Participants completed the Minnesota Tobacco Withdrawal Scale, including a desire to smoke (craving) item, before and every 15 min for 1 hr following smoking each cigarette. Tobacco withdrawal and craving did not differ significantly by OM status in response to UB or RNCCs. In addition to the Dose × Time interaction, greater depression and cigarette dependence consistently predicted withdrawal and craving (ps < .05). Across all cigarettes, tobacco withdrawal and craving did not significantly differ by OM status, suggesting that smokers receiving opioid agonist treatment may respond favorably to RNCCs. Additional studies with larger and more diverse samples are needed to address this question more definitively. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Accumulating evidence suggests that the hypothetical Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), especially its demand Intensity index (i.e., estimated cigarettes participants would smoke if free), is associated with individual differences in smoking risk. Nevertheless, few studies have examined the extent to which hypothetical CPT demand Intensity may differ from consumption when participants are provided with free cigarettes. That topic is the overarching focus of the present study. Participants were 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. CPT was administered for usual-brand cigarettes prior to providing participants with seven days of their usual-brand cigarettes free of cost and consumption was recorded daily via an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System. Demand Intensity was correlated with IVR smoking rate (rs 0.670-0.696, ps < 0.001) but estimates consistently exceeded IVR smoking rates by an average of 4.4 cigarettes per day (ps < 0.001). Importantly, both measures were comparably sensitive to discerning well-established differences in smoking risk, including greater cigarettes per day among men versus women (F(1,732) = 18.74, p < 0.001), those with versus without opioid-dependence (F(1,732) = 168.37, p < 0.001), younger versus older adults (F(2,730) = 32.93, p < 0.001), and those with lower versus greater educational attainment (F(1,732) = 38.26, p < 0.001). Overall, CPT demand Intensity appears to overestimate consumption rates relative to those observed when participants are provided with free cigarettes, but those deviations are systematic (i.e., consistent in magnitude and direction, Fs all <1.63; ps > 0.19 for all interactions with subgroups). This suggests that demand Intensity was sensitive to established group differences in smoking rate, supporting its utility as an important measure of addiction potential., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We examined whether elucidating underpinning smoking motivation and related pharmacological processes enhances understanding of nicotine dependence among smokers from vulnerable populations. Data were obtained between Oct, 2016 and Sept, 2019 from 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage at University of Vermont, Brown University, Johns Hopkins University. Smoking motivation was assessed using the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), a behavioral-economic task that models the relative reinforcing value of smoking under varying monetary constraint. Dependence severity was measured using the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI), Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence total scores (FTND), and FTND total scores minus items 1 and 4 (FTND 2,3,5,6 ). We also assessed associations between dependence severity and smoking motivation with nicotine levels and metabolism rate. Principal Component Analysis was used to examine the latent structure of the conventional five CPT indices; bivariate and multivariable modeling was used to test associations. Factor analysis resulted in a two-factor solution, Amplitude (demand unconstrained by price) and Persistence (price sensitivity). CPT latent factors were associated with each dependence-severity measure (ps ≤ 0.0001), with associations stronger for Amplitude than Persistence across each, especially HSI which was exclusively associated with Amplitude . Amplitude and each dependence measure were associated with nicotine intake (ps ≤ 0.0002); Persistence was not (p = .19). Demand Amplitude more than Persistence appears key to understanding individual differences in dependence severity. Regarding potential application, the results suggest a need for interventions that more effectively target demand Amplitude to make greater headway in reducing smoking in vulnerable populations. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: This study is part of a programmatic effort evaluating the effects of reducing nicotine content of cigarettes to minimally addictive levels., Objective: To examine whether very low-nicotine-content (VLNC) cigarettes decrease smoking rates and dependence severity among smokers with psychiatric disorders or socioeconomic disadvantage., Design, Setting, and Participants: These 3 randomized clinical trials were performed at the University of Vermont, Brown University, and Johns Hopkins University between October 2016 and September 2019. Participants received 12 weeks of exposure to study cigarettes with nicotine content ranging from levels representative of commercial cigarettes (15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) to less than a hypothesized addiction threshold (2.4 mg/g and 0.4 mg/g). Daily smokers from 3 at-risk populations participated: individuals with affective disorders, exemplifying smokers with mental illness; individuals with opioid use disorder, exemplifying smokers with substance use disorders; and women with high school educations or less, exemplifying smokers with socioeconomic disadvantage. Data were analyzed from September 2019 to July 2020., Interventions: Random assignment to 1 of 3 study cigarettes provided weekly at no cost for 12 weeks., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was between-group differences in mean total cigarettes smoked daily (CPD) during week 12; secondary outcomes included CPD for study and nonstudy cigarettes and dependence severity across weeks analyzed using analysis of covariance, random coefficients growth modeling, or repeated measures analysis of variance., Results: A total of 775 participants were included (mean [SD] age, 35.59 [11.05] years; 551 [71.10%] women [owing to 1 population being exclusively women]); participants smoked a mean (SD) of 17.79 (9.18) CPD at study intake. A total of 286 participants were randomized to 0.4 mg/g, 235 participants were randomized to 2.4 mg/g, and 254 participants were randomized to 15.8 mg/g. Participants randomized to VLNC cigarettes had decreased mean [SEM] total CPD during week 12 across populations (Cohen d = 0.61; P < .001). At week 12, mean (SEM) CPD decreased to 17.96 (0.98) CPD in the 0.4 mg/g group and to 19.53 (1.07) CPD in the 2.4 mg/g group, both of which were significantly different from the 15.8 mg/g group (25.08 [1.08] CPD at week 12) but not each other (0.4 mg/g adjusted mean difference: -7.54 [95%CI, -9.51 to -5.57]; 2.4 mg/g adjusted mean difference: -5.34 [95% CI, 7.41 to -3.26]). Several secondary outcomes differed across populations randomized to VLNCs, including mean total CPD across weeks, with linear trends lower in participants receiving 0.4 mg/g (-0.28 [95%CI, -0.39 to -0.18]; P < .001) and 2.4 mg/g (-0.13 [95%CI, -0.25 to -0.01]; P < .001) doses compared with those receiving the 15.8 mg/g dose (0.30 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.41]). Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence mean total scores were significantly lower in participants who received VLNCs (Cohen d = 0.12; P < .001), with those who received the 0.4 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 3.99 [0.06]; P < .001 vs 15.8 mg/g) or 2.4 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 4.07 [0.06]; P = .01 vs 15.8 mg/g) differing from those who received the 15.8 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 4.31 [0.06]) but not from each other., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings demonstrate that decreasing the nicotine content of cigarettes to very low levels reduced smoking rate and nicotine-dependence severity in these high-risk populations, effects that may facilitate successful cessation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534.

Background: Changes in tobacco products, use patterns, and assessment technology in the last 15 years led the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) Treatment Research Network to call for an update to the 2003 SRNT recommendations for assessing abstinence in clinical trials of smoking cessation interventions., Methods: The SRNT Treatment Research Network convened a group of investigators with decades of experience in conducting tobacco treatment clinical trials. To arrive at the updated recommendations, the authors reviewed the recommendations of the prior SRNT Workgroup as well as current literature. Ten additional experts in the field provided feedback on this paper and these recommendations., Results: With respect to defining abstinence, the authors recommend: (1) continuing to use the definition of no use of combustible tobacco products (regardless of use of noncombustible tobacco products [e.g., snus] and alternative products [e.g., e-cigarettes]) and collecting additional data to permit alternate abstinence definitions; (2) no use of combustible or smokeless tobacco products; and (3) no use of combustible or smokeless tobacco products or alternative products, as appropriate for the research question being addressed. The authors also recommend reporting point prevalence and prolonged abstinence at multiple timepoints (end of treatment, ≥3 months after the end of treatment, and ≥6 months postquit or posttreatment initiation)., Conclusions: Defining abstinence requires specification of which products a user must abstain from using, the type of abstinence (i.e., point prevalence or continuous), and the duration of abstinence. These recommendations are intended to serve as guidelines for investigators as they collect the necessary data to accurately describe participants' abstinence during smoking cessation clinical trials., Implications: This paper provides updated recommendations for defining abstinence in the context of smoking cessation treatment clinical trials., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Reports in relatively healthy smokers suggest men are more sensitive than women to the subjective effects of reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCCs). We know of no reports examining sex differences in the relative reinforcing effects of RNCCs, an important outcome in assessing smoking's addiction potential. The aim of the present study is to address this gap by examining sex/gender differences on reinforcing effects while examining whether sex differences in subjective effects are discernible in vulnerable populations., Methods: Secondary analysis of a within-subject, double-blinded experiment examining acute effects of cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among 169 adult smokers with psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. Effects of dose, sex, and their interaction were examined on reinforcing (concurrent-choice and Cigarette Purchase Task [CPT] testing), and subjective effects (Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire [CEQ] and craving/withdrawal ratings)., Results: Reducing nicotine content decreased the relative reinforcing effects of smoking in concurrent-choice and CPT testing (p's < .05) with no significant effects of sex nor dose × sex/gender interactions. Reducing nicotine content decreased CEQ ratings with only a single significant effect of sex (higher Psychological Reward scores among women than men, p = .02) and no significant dose × sex/gender interactions. Results on craving/withdrawal paralleled those on the CEQ., Conclusions: Reducing nicotine content decreases the addiction potential of smoking independent of sex in populations highly vulnerable to smoking and addiction, with no indication that women are less sensitive to subjective effects of RNCCs or would benefit less from a policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes., Implications: A policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes has the potential to reduce the addiction potential of smoking across men and women who are especially vulnerable to smoking, addiction, and tobacco-related adverse health impacts., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Prior work suggests that the prevalence of cigarette smoking is persistently higher among people with mental health problems, relative to those without. Lower quit rates are one factor that could contribute to higher prevalence of smoking in this group. This study estimated trends in the cigarette quit rates among people with and without past-month serious psychological distress (SPD) from 2008 to 2016 in the United States., Methods: Data were drawn from 91 739 adult participants in the 2008-2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, a repeated, cross-sectional, national survey. Linear time trends of cigarette quit rates, stratified by past-month SPD, were assessed using logistic regression models with continuous year as the predictor., Results: Cigarette quit rates among individuals with past-month SPD were lower than among those without SPD every year from 2008 to 2016. Quit rates did not change appreciably among those with past-month SPD (odds ratio = 1.02 [0.99, 1.06]) from 2008 to 2016, whereas quit rates increased among those without past-month SPD (odds ratio = 1.02 [1.01, 1.02])., Conclusions: In the United States, quit rates among individuals with past-month SPD are approximately half than quit rates of those without SPD and have not increased over the past decade. This discrepancy in quit rates may be one factor driving increasing disparities in prevalence of smoking among those with versus without mental health problems. Tobacco control efforts require effective and targeted interventions for those with mental health problems., Implications: Cigarette smoking quit rates have not increased among persons with serious mental health problems over the past decade. This work extends prior findings showing that smoking prevalence is not declining as quickly among persons with serious mental health problems. Findings suggest that diverging trends in quit rates are one possible driver of the persistent disparity in smoking by mental health status. Innovation in both tobacco control and targeted interventions for smokers with mental health problems is urgently needed., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Young adults (aged 18-24 years) have a higher smoking prevalence than younger and older age groups and young adulthood is an important developmental period during which long-term behavior patterns like cigarette smoking are established. The aim of the current study was to examine how young adult smokers with additional vulnerabilities to smoking respond to reduced nicotine content cigarettes., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a double-blind, within-subject experiment conducted with 169 cigarette smokers recruited from populations with comorbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage assessing acute effects of research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g). Participants were dichotomized by chronological age (18-24 vs. ≥25 years). Across 14 laboratory sessions effects of nicotine content were examined on measures of relative reinforcing efficacy (Cigarette Purchase Task [CPT] and Concurrent Choice testing), subjective effects, craving/withdrawal, and smoking topography. Repeated measures analysis of variances were used to examine potential moderating effects of age., Results: Young adults exhibited lower demand for reduced nicotine content cigarettes than older adults across three of five CPT indices (ps < .05). No differences by age were observed on other measures of reinforcing efficacy, subjective effects, craving/withdrawal, or smoking topography where effects generally decreased as an orderly function of decreasing nicotine content (ps <.05)., Conclusion: Overall, these findings suggest that reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes would decrease the addiction potential of cigarette smoking in young adult smokers as much or perhaps more than older adult smokers from populations at increased vulnerability to smoking, addiction, and smoking-related health consequences., Implications: Reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes to lower addiction potential of smoking has been proposed as a means to improve overall population health. It is imperative to examine how young adults may respond to a nicotine reduction policy. We saw minimal evidence that age moderates acute response and where there was evidence it was in the direction of reduced nicotine content cigarettes having less addictive potential among young versus older adults (eg, steeper decreases in demand for very low nicotine content cigarettes among young versus older adults). Overall, a nicotine reduction policy has the potential to reduce smoking across age groups., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Introduction: There is a paucity of research on modes of cannabis use (e.g., joint vs. blunt), and further, little consensus on how to accurately assess both modes of use and route of administration. This secondary analysis used a longitudinal design with data collected daily to characterize mode of cannabis use., Methods: 193 adult daily cannabis users who were considering quitting at some point enrolled in the study. No treatment was provided. Each day for 84 days, participants reported on mode of cannabis use (i.e., joints, blunts, pipes/vaporizer and food) using an interactive voice response system. We report on single and poly-use of modes across study days and weeks and examine characteristics associated with different modes of use., Results: White participants were most likely to use pipes/vaporizer, with use on 57% of study days, while Black participants were most likely to use blunts with use on 53% of days. Thus, joint use was less common in both groups. Poly-use of different modes within the same week was very common (i.e., 56% of weeks among White participants and 60% of weeks in Black participants). Age, gender, race, cannabis dependence, presence of others during cannabis use, and alcohol use were associated with different modes of use., Conclusions: The major limitation of this study was use of a convenience sample and lack of detailed data on vaporizer use. Joint use is no longer the most common mode of use in either White or Black participants and exclusive use of a single modality is uncommon., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Cigarette preference increases as a function of greater nicotine content, but manipulating cost can shift preference. The aims of the present study are to model whether (1) the behavioral-economic metric unit price (cost/reinforcer magnitude) accounts for preference shifts and (2) whether preference shifts toward reduced nicotine content are associated with smoking reductions. In a multisite study between 2015 and 2016, 169 daily smokers from vulnerable populations completed two concurrent-choice conditions examining preference for smoking normal (15.8 mg/g) and reduced (0.4 mg/g) nicotine content cigarettes. In Condition 1, both products were available at 10 responses/choice. In Condition 2, availability of the 0.4 mg/g dose remained at 10 responses/choice while the 15.8 mg/g dose was available on a progressive-ratio (PR) schedule wherein response cost increased following each choice. Unit prices were calculated by dividing dose by response requirement. Results were analyzed using ANOVA and binomial tests (p < .05). Participants preferred the 15.8 over 0.4 mg/g dose in Condition 1, but shifted preference to the 0.4 mg/g dose in Condition 2 (p < .001) immediately before the point in the PR progression where unit price for 15.8 dose exceeded unit price for the 0.4 dose (p < .001). This shift was associated with a reduction in smoking (p < .001). The unit price of nicotine appears to underpin cigarette product preference and may provide a metric for predicting preference and potentially impacting it through tobacco regulations. These results also demonstrate that reduced compared to normal nicotine content cigarettes sustain lower smoking rates discernible even under acute laboratory conditions and in vulnerable populations., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nicotine is the addictive component in cigarettes that maintain cigarette smoking that subsequently leads to morbidity and mortality. Methods for assessing the abuse liability of cigarettes are essential to inform new tobacco product standards. This secondary analysis evaluated the utility of one subjective effects measure, the modified Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire (mCEQ), and one behavioral economic task, the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), for predicting acute relative reinforcing efficacy measured by concurrent choice Self-Administration (SA)., Methods: Smokers (N = 169) belonging to one of three vulnerable populations participated in a multi-site, double-blind study evaluating research cigarettes with varying levels of nicotine (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g). Participants sampled cigarettes and completed the mCEQ and CPT. In subsequent sessions, cigarette preference was assessed using a concurrent choice SA procedure. Mixed-model repeated measures analysis of variance tests were used to evaluate the utility of the mCEQ subscales and CPT indices for predicting preference for the higher compared to lower nicotine content cigarettes. In addition, stepwise regressions were used to determine which subscales and indices independently predicted concurrent choice SA., Results: Greater increases on the Satisfaction and Enjoyment of Respiratory Tract Sensations mCEQ subscales independently predicted higher dose preference in concurrent choice testing. Elasticity was the only CPT index that predicted choice. However, its predictive utility differed by dose among opioid-maintained individuals., Conclusion: The mCEQ and CPT predict behavioral measures of relative reinforcing efficacy as assessed in concurrent choice SA, with the mCEQ Satisfaction and Enjoyment of Respiratory Tract Sensations subscales being the strongest independent predictors., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: In this study, we investigated potential effects of being a menthol smoker on response to reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes in smokers especially vulnerable to smoking., Method: Participants were 169 smokers (61 menthol and 108 non-menthol smokers) with comorbid mental illness, substance use disorder, or socioeconomic disadvantage. Participants completed a double-blind study assessing addiction potential, withdrawal/craving, and compensatory smoking across 4 research cigarettes varying in nicotine content from very low levels to commercial levels (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8mg/g of tobacco). Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to examine potential moderating effects of menthol status., Results: Statistically significant effects of nicotine dose were noted across measures, with higher doses producing greater economic demand and relief from withdrawal/craving. The relationships between nicotine dose and response to RNC cigarettes do not differ by menthol status., Conclusions: Results of this study suggest menthol does not have a differential impact on response to RNC cigarettes across measures of economic demand, withdrawal/craving, or smoking topography. These results suggest that any potential beneficial effects of RNC cigarettes should extend to menthol smokers including those especially vulnerable to smoking., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement None declared. The content herein is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the US Food and Drug Administration.

This study examines whether tobacco dependence severity moderates the acute effects of reducing nicotine content in cigarettes on the addiction potential of smoking, craving/withdrawal, or smoking topography. Participants (N = 169) were daily smokers with mild, moderate, or high tobacco-dependence severity using the Heaviness of Smoking Index. Following brief abstinence, participants smoked research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) in a within-subject design. Results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of co-variance. No main effects of dependence severity or interactions with nicotine dose were noted in relative reinforcing effects in concurrent choice testing or subjective effects on the modified Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire. Demand for smoking in the Cigarette Purchase Task was greater among more dependent smokers, but reducing nicotine content decreased demand independent of dependence severity. Dependence severity did not significantly alter response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes on the Minnesota Tobacco Withdrawal Scale nor Questionnaire of Smoking Urges-brief (QSU) Factor-2 scale; dependence severity and dose interacted significantly on the QSU-brief Factor-1 scale, with reductions dependent on dose among highly but not mildly or moderately dependent smokers. Dependence severity and dose interacted significantly on only one of six measures of smoking topography (i.e., maximum flow rate), which increased as dose increased among mildly and moderately but not highly dependent smokers. These results suggest that dependence severity has no moderating influence on the ability of reduced nicotine content cigarettes to lower the addiction potential of smoking, and minimal effects on relief from craving/withdrawal or smoking topography., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Hospitalization offers tobacco smokers an opportunity to quit smoking, but factors associated with abstinence from tobacco after hospital discharge are poorly understood. We analyzed data from a multisite, randomized controlled trial testin a smoking cessation intervention for 1,357 hospitalized cigaretts smokers who planned to quit. Using multiple logistic regression, we assessed factors identifiable in the hospital that were independently associated with biochemically confirmed tobacco abstinence 6 months after discharge. Biochemically confirmed abstinence at 6 months (n = 218, 16%) was associated with a smoking-related primary discharge diagnosis (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.41-2.77), greater confidence in the ability to quit smoking (AOR - 1.31, 95% CI: 1.07-1.60), and stronger intention to quit (plan to quit after discharge vs. try to quit; AOR = 1.68, CI: 1.19-2.38). In conclusion, smokers hospitalized with a tobacco-related illness and those with greater confidence and intention to quit after discharge are more likely to sustain abstinence in the long term. Hospital clinicians' efforts to promote smoking cessation should target smokers' confidence and motivation to quit., (© 2018 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

Individuals with chronic health conditions persist in smoking despite the presence of smoking-related illness. The aim of this study was to examine whether chronic health conditions moderate response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g of tobacco). This is a secondary analysis of a controlled clinical laboratory study that examined the acute effects of cigarettes varying in nicotine content among individuals especially vulnerable to smoking and tobacco dependence. Participants in the present study were categorized as having 0, 1-2, or ≥3 smoking-related chronic health conditions (i.e., chronic condition severity, CCS). Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine whether CCS moderated response to cigarettes across measures of addiction potential (i.e., concurrent choice testing between nicotine dose pairs, Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT) performance, positive subjective effects), tobacco withdrawal, cigarette craving, and smoking topography. No main effects of CCS or interactions of CCS and nicotine dose were observed for concurrent choice testing, positive subjective effects, tobacco withdrawal, or smoking topography. Main effects of CCS were noted on the CPT with greater CCS being associated with less persistent demand. There was an interaction of CCS and nicotine dose on Factor 1 of the Questionnaire on Smoking Urges with the effects of dose significant only among those with 1-2 chronic conditions. Overall, we see minimal evidence that chronic condition severity affects response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes. A policy that reduces the nicotine content of cigarettes to minimally addictive levels may benefit smokers already experiencing smoking-related chronic conditions.

Objective: We estimated whether recent cannabis use moderates response to cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among smokers with concurrent affective disorders, opioid dependence, or socioeconomic disadvantage. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site, double-blind, laboratory study examining acute response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCC) in 169 adult smokers with co-morbid conditions. Participants positive for recent cannabis use or self-reported past 30-day cannabis use at baseline were categorized as current cannabis users (N = 63). Repeated measures analysis of variance tests assessed whether baseline cannabis use moderated cigarette reinforcement, tobacco withdrawal, craving, smoking topography, or carbon monoxide boost. Results: Cannabis users were younger, less educated, and had more depression and anxiety than non-users (p < .05). Cannabis use status did not moderate the effects of nicotine dose on concurrent choice testing, subjective effects of RNCCs, or smoking topography. After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, cannabis users had higher ratings on Smoking Satisfaction, Enjoyment of Respiratory Tract Sensations, and Craving Reduction across all nicotine doses. Cannabis users reported longer withdrawal symptom duration and more rapid decline of carbon monoxide boost than non-users. Conclusions: Findings suggest RNCCs decrease the addiction potential of cigarettes in vulnerable populations independent of cannabis use status., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest Statement None declared.

Objective: The current study estimated trends in the prevalence of daily and nondaily cigarette smoking among United States adults with any common mental health or substance use problem (MHSUP), compared to US adults without MHSUP, from 2005 to 2014., Methods: Data were drawn from the years 2005 to 2014 from the public use data files for the annually conducted National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Linear time trends of current, daily, and nondaily cigarette smoking among adults (age 18 years and older) with and without MHSUP were assessed using logistic regression models with continuous year as the predictor., Results: In 2014, the prevalence of current cigarette smoking among those with MHSUP was more than twice that of those without MHSUP. Nondaily cigarette smoking increased significantly from 2005 to 2014 among those with MHSUP (P = .001) in contrast to a decline in nondaily cigarette smoking among those without MHSUP (P < .01). The rate of change differed significantly (P < .001). Daily cigarette smoking declined significantly from 2005 to 2014 among those with and without MHSUP (P values < .001)., Conclusions: The prevalence of nondaily cigarette smoking is increasing among US adults with common mental health and substance use problems, while it continues to decline among those without these vulnerabilities. The disparity in prevalence of daily cigarette smoking between those with and without MHSUP remains substantial. Conclusions about how to reach the tobacco endgame may need to be reconsidered to develop targeted tobacco control public health approaches that address common MHSUP., (© Copyright 2018 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)