Search

Background: Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has been demonstrated to be an effective pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation, and most types of NRT have been approved as over-the-counter (OTC) medications. In an effort to create a fast-acting, flexible, and discreet NRT, a nicotine mouth spray (NMS) has been developed. This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of NMS in a naturalistic setting in the United States., Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 26-week study in 1198 smokers motivated to quit. The study was designed to resemble an OTC environment, and thus included limited intervention, limited motivational screening, and no behavioral support. The primary efficacy endpoint was carbon monoxide-verified, self-reported continuous abstinence from smoking from week 2 until week 6. The safety of NMS was assessed by measuring vital signs, visual mouth inspection, and collection of subject-reported adverse events (AEs)., Results: The percentage of subjects with carbon monoxide-verified continuous abstinence from week 2 to week 6 was statistically significantly greater in the NMS group compared with the placebo group (5.0% vs. 2.5%, p = .021). Statistically significant treatment effects for the NMS were maintained throughout the 26-week period. The study medications were generally well tolerated. The severity of AEs was similar for both treatment groups, and most AEs were of mild or moderate severity., Conclusions: These study results demonstrate that the NMS is an effective and safe smoking cessation option for smokers motivated to quit, even in a naturalistic setting and without behavioral support., Implications: This study demonstrated the safety, efficacy, and acceptability of an NMS in an OTC environment with no behavioral counseling or support. It provides an additional option for smokers motivated to quit., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT02355665)., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Objectives: Environmental cues may precipitate nicotine cravings in smokers. We present 2 studies exploring the efficacy of nicotine mini lozenges to reduce nicotine craving in smokers following behavioral provocation., Methods: Healthy smokers aged ≥18 years enrolled. In Study 1, participants were stratified by number of cigarettes smoked daily; Study 2 enrolled only heavy smokers. After an abstinence period, participants engaged in behavioral provocation to induce nicotine craving before receiving a nicotine mini lozenge (Study 1: 1.5 mg or 4 mg; Study 2: 4 mg) or matching placebo. Craving was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale, and safety was monitored., Results: In Study 1, neither nicotine mini lozenge dose significantly reduced craving in smokers versus placebo. In Study 2, 4-mg nicotine mini lozenges significantly reduced craving scores 5 minutes post-treatment (least-square mean [LSM] change from baseline: -41.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -45.8, -37.7) versus placebo (-25.9; 95% CI: -30.0, -21.8; p < .001). Adverse events were infrequent, mild in intensity, and more common with the 4-mg nicotine mini lozenges., Conclusions: Behaviorally provoked nicotine craving can be significantly and safely reduced in heavy/high-dependency smokers with 4-mg nicotine mini lozenges.

Objectives: E-cigarettes could potentially play a major role in tobacco harm reduction by delivering nicotine in a vapor containing significantly fewer toxicants than cigarette smoke and may aid smoking behavior changes such as reduction or cessation., Methods: We examined blood nicotine levels in smokers who were non-accustomed to e-cigarette use (Study 1) and accustomed e-cigarette users (Study 2). We compared nicotine levels when participants used a closed modular system e-cigarette to those when participants smoked a cigarette., Results: In Study 1, Cmax (geometric mean (CV)) during a 5-minute puffing period (10 puffs, 30 seconds apart) was 13.4 (51.4) ng/ ml for a regular cigarette. The e-cigarette Cmax was significantly lower (p .05) at 2.5 (67.8) ng/ml. In Study 2, during a 5-minute ad libitum puffing period, cigarette Cmax was 7.2 (130.8) ng/mL, and it was 7.8 (108.2) ng/mL for the e-cigarette., Conclusions: Our data demonstrate heterogeneity of nicotine deliveries both between products and also with the same products used by different cohorts, eg, accustomed users versus smokers. Such differences must be taken into account when determining the likely behavioral impact, on smoking reduction and cessation, of nicotine delivery data and when planning e-cigarette nicotine pharmacokinetic studies.

Rationale: Pilot study results suggested that a new form of nicotine oral soluble film relieved smoking cue-provoked acute craving faster than nicotine lozenge or gum. The new nicotine film may provide smokers another choice to relieve acute craving., Objectives: This study compared the efficacy of the 2.5 mg nicotine oral soluble film to 2 mg nicotine lozenge for acute relief of smoking cue-provoked craving., Methods: A randomized, open label, active comparator controlled, parallel group study was conducted with 322 smokers enrolled. After 4 h of abstinence from smoking, eligible subjects were exposed to smoking cues as provocation. Immediately after the post-provocation baseline craving assessment using a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS), subjects took a randomized single dose of either the 2.5 mg nicotine film or the 2 mg nicotine lozenge. Craving assessments were completed at 50 s, 3 min, 5 min, 7 min, 15 min, 20 min, 25 min and 30 min after drug administration., Results: Both treatments reduced cue-induced craving and had similar maximum effects on craving relief. However, the 2.5 mg nicotine film relieved cue-induced craving to a greater degree than the 2 mg nicotine lozenge at 50 s (mean difference: -4.9, p = 0.014), 3 min (mean difference: -6.7, p = 0.011), and 5 min (mean difference: -5.6, p = 0.049) post-treatment., Conclusions: The study confirmed the results from the pilot study. The 2.5 mg nicotine film relieved cue-provoked craving much quicker than the 2 mg nicotine lozenge while both having similar maximum effects. Nicotine film could be useful to provide quick craving relief for low dependence smokers.

Although the proportion of the adult population in the United States that smokes has decreased steadily, the rate of successful quit attempts is still low. Smokers develop nicotine dependence that resembles other addictions, and may require multiple attempts and long-term treatment to sustain abstinence. Currently available first-line agents for smoking cessation therapy include nicotine replacement therapy, which is available in several formulations, including transdermal patch, gum, nasal spray, inhaler, and lozenge; bupropion, an atypical antidepressant; and varenicline, a partial agonist of the alpha(4)beta(2) nicotinic acetylcholine receptor that was recently developed and approved specifically for smoking cessation therapy. Second-line agents are nortriptyline, a tricyclic antidepressant agent, and clonidine, an antihypertensive drug. With the exception of varenicline, which has been shown to offer significant improvement in abstinence rates over bupropion, all of the available treatments appear similarly effective. However, the adverse event profiles of nortriptyline and clonidine make them more appropriate for second-line therapy, when first-line treatments have failed or are not tolerated. Rimonabant, a cannabinoid-1 receptor antagonist that was being developed for smoking cessation, received a nonapprovable letter from the FDA in 2006 and there is no further information as to whether development for this indication is continuing for this agent. Nicotine vaccines are under investigation and offer promise, especially for relapse prevention. Ultimately, selection of pharmacologic agent should be based on the patient's comorbidities and preferences, as well as on the agent's adverse event profile.

Background: The use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) can almost double the chances of success for smokers to quit. Nevertheless, there is still a considerable number of cessation attempts that are made without any treatment. This novel oral formulation, (lozenge containing nicotine bitartrate dihydrate) has been developed to enlarge the offer for efficient smoking cessation drug therapies, assuming that increasing treatment options will bring more smokers to find the support they personally need to stop smoking., Methods: Three pharmacokinetic (PK), one safety and two efficacy studies were carried out with Nicotinell lozenges. PK trials were: (1) a single-dose, three-way crossover study comparing 1 and 2 mg lozenges with 2 mg nicotine gum; (2) a multiple-dose, two-way crossover study comparing 1 mg lozenge with 2 mg gum; (3) a multiple-dose, three-way crossover study comparing 1 and 2 mg lozenges with 4 mg gum. Safety trial: (4) a single dose study to assess the safety of swallowing up to 12 lozenges containing 1 mg nicotine. Efficacy trials: two efficacy studies in (5) France and (6) the USA, including more than 900 smokers followed-up for up to one year, conducted with the 1 mg lozenge., Results: The results of the individual PK trials showed that the 1 mg Nicotinell lozenge is bioequivalent to 2 mg polacrilex gum, as demonstrated by similar blood PK parameters (tmax, Cmax, AUC). The 2 mg lozenge was found to deliver quantities of nicotine that were intermediate between those delivered by 2 and 4 mg polacrilex gum. The short-term efficacy of the 1 mg lozenge in comparison with placebo was also demonstrated with significantly more subjects continuously abstinent from smoking with active lozenges on week 6 in two different populations: moderate to heavy smokers (FTND between 4 and 7) OR = 1.72 [95% CI: 1.05-2.80]; heavy to very heavy smokers (FTND 6 and over) OR = 2.87 [95% CI: 1.18-6.97]. Nicotinell lozenges were found to be safe with mainly mild and reversible adverse events. The safety of the 1 mg lozenge formulation, even when misused was also demonstrated., Conclusion: The data presented in this review demonstrate high nicotine bioavailability, excellent safety profile and proven short-term efficacy of Nicotinell lozenges. At nominal equivalent doses 1 and 2 mg Nicotinell lozenges were shown to deliver larger amounts of bioavailable nicotine compared to the nicotine polacrilex gum. According to the data developed here, the systemic exposure to nicotine could be ranked: 4 mg polacrilex gum > 2 mg Nicotinell lozenge > 1 mg Nicotinell lozenge = 2 mg polacrilex gum.Adverse events observed during the clinical trials were mild or moderate in severity, transient and completely reversible. With respect to efficacy in smoking cessation, significantly higher continuous abstinence rates were achieved with lozenge compared to placebo. In conclusion, Nicotinell lozenges offer a valuable addition to the therapeutic armamentarium available for smoking cessation.

Aims: To determine the efficacy and safety of nicotine transdermal therapy co-administered with the nicotine antagonist, mecamylamine, compared to a nicotine transdermal patch alone (21 mg nicotine + 6 mg mecamylamine, 21 mg nicotine + 3 mg mecamylamine, and 21 mg nicotine + 0 mg mecamylamine)., Design: Multi-center (n = 4), double-blind, randomized, parallel group, repeat-dose study., Setting: Clinical laboratory., Participants: A total of 540 subjects were enrolled into the study-135 from each of four sites; 180 patients in each of three treatment arms., Intervention: Treatment was administered for the first 6 weeks of the 8-week study. Patients were instructed to continue smoking for the first 2 weeks of treatment., Measurements: The primary efficacy parameter was 4-week continuous abstinence after the quit date, confirmed with an expired carbon monoxide of < 10 parts per million., Findings: Analysis of the 4-week continuous abstinence for the intent-to-treat population showed overall rates of 29% (nicotine + 6 mg mecamylamine), 29% (nicotine + 3 mg mecamylamine) and 23% (nicotine only) using the slip definition which allows smoking in the first 2 weeks after the quit date. Statistical analyses revealed no significant treatment differences. Analyses using the strict definition (no smoking after the quit date) yielded similar non-significant group differences (29%, 27%, 26%)., Conclusion: If adding mecamylamine to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) improves the chances of success at stopping smoking, the results of this study suggest that the effect is very small.

Aims: Most relapse episodes occur when smokers are confronted with craving provoked by situational cues. Current nicotine gum can help relieve cue-provoked cravings, but faster effects may result in more rapid relief. We tested a prototype formulation of a new rapid-release nicotine gum (RRNG) that provides more rapid release and absorption of nicotine, for its ability to provide faster and better craving relief compared to current nicotine polacrilex gum (NPG)., Design: Random assignment to RRNG or NPG, used during a smoking cue provocation procedure. Participants and setting A total of 319 smokers were exposed to a smoking cue in the laboratory by being asked to light but not smoke a cigarette of their preferred brand. Subjects then chewed a piece of 2 mg RRNG (n = 159) or 2 mg NPG (n = 160) according to randomized assignment., Measurements: Craving assessments were completed at regular intervals before and after cue exposure (baseline, pre-cue, and 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 25, 30 and 35 minutes after the cue)., Findings: Smokers chewing RRNG showed significantly lower craving than NPG subjects starting with the first assessment at 3 minutes (P < 0.025). Repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a significant treatment x time interaction (P < 0.05)-craving scores dropped more rapidly in RRNG subjects compared to NPG subjects. Survival analyses also indicated superiority of RRNG in achieving more rapid self-reported meaningful relief (P < 0.05) and complete relief (P < 0.05) of craving., Conclusions: Rapid-release nicotine gum reduced cue-provoked craving more rapidly compared to NPG, and thus merits further study in cessation efficacy trials.

We examined the ability of smokers who failed to quit smoking in the Lung Health Study to reduce the number of cigarettes per day and maintain this reduction and whether reduction predicted increased or decreased future cessation. In the Lung Health Study, among smokers with early lung disease who wished to stop smoking, 3923 were randomized to a special intervention of counseling and nicotine gum for smoking cessation and to bronchodilator therapy or placebo. Among the 1722 who were still smoking at the first year follow-up, 27% smoked the same, 43% smoked 1%-49% fewer, and 30% smoked at least 50% fewer cigarettes per day. Reduction in cigarettes per day was accompanied by reduction in expired-air carbon monoxide. About half of the less-than-50% reducers and one-fifth of the at-least-50% reducers maintained or exceeded this reduction over the next 4 years. Reduction was associated with nicotine gum use. Greater reduction at year 1 predicted more quit attempts in year 2 but not more point prevalence abstinence at year 2 nor more quits or abstinence between years 2 and 5. We conclude that reduction can be maintained but such reduction neither predicts an increased nor decreased probability of future cessation.

Objective: To test initial reactions to 5 nicotine treatments (NRTs: 2 and 4 mg gum, inhaler, nasal spray, tablet) in a crossover study (n=41)., Methods: Subjects used each medication on arising (1/2 day) and resumed smoking each afternoon. Subjects rated (individually) and ranked (comparatively) treatments on use, reinforcement, withdrawal, craving, and preferences., Results: Overall preferences: inhaler (49%), 4 mg gum (24%), 2 mg gum (10%), 2 mg tablet (10%), nasal spray (7%). Overall results were consistent with ratings and rankings of individual characteristics of drugs., Conclusion: Subjects had varied reactions to NRTs that may affect initiation of cessation.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of long-term use of bupropion sustained release (SR), the nicotine patch, and the combination of these 2 treatments in patients who initially failed treatment., Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in 893 smokers. Patients were randomly assigned to 9 weeks of treatment with placebo (n = 160), bupropion SR (n = 244), nicotine patch (n = 244), or a combination of nicotine patch and bupropion SR (n = 245). The study was originally designed with a follow-up period of 52 weeks. In this analysis, short-term success was defined as smoking cessation after 14 or 21 days of therapy and long-term success was defined as smoking cessation after >21 days of therapy. Patients who did not achieve short-term success were evaluated for long-term success at week 9 (end of treatment), 6 months, and 1 year after the start of the study., Results: The mean age of the smokers was 44 years. The majority (93%) of patients were white, and 52% were female. The study subjects smoked an average of 27 cigarettes per day. Among the 467 patients who initially failed treatment in the first 3 weeks, treatment with bupropion SR alone and in combination with the nicotine patch produced significant increases in successful smoking cessation rates from weeks 4 to 9 (19% bupropion SR or combination, 7% nicotine patch, 7% placebo), at month 6 (11% bupropion SR, 13% combination, 2% nicotine patch, 3% placebo), and at month 12 (10% bupropion SR, 7% combination, 2% nicotine patch, 1% placebo) (P < 0.05 for bupropion SR and combination vs nicotine patch or placebo)., Conclusion: Among patients who initially failed treatment, continued therapy with bupropion SR, either alone or in combination with the nicotine patch, resulted in significantly higher short- and long-term smoking cessation rates than treatment with the nicotine patch alone or placebo.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the nicotine patch for smoking cessation in an over-the-counter environment. The years of study were 1994 to 1995., Methods: Parallel 6-week trials were conducted: a placebo-controlled trial of no-cost 22-mg, 24-hour nicotine patch therapy and an open label trial of the same therapy with patches purchased by subjects. Participants (n = 958) were 18 years or older, had smoked at least 15 cigarettes daily for at least 6 months, and were enrolled at 3 study sites. The main outcome measure was self-reported smoking abstinence confirmed by expired carbon monoxide measurements., Results: Smoking cessation rates in the placebo-controlled trial were 16.8% and 9.6% at week 6 and 8.7% and 4.3% at week 24 for the active patch and placebo groups, respectively. Smoking cessation rates in the open label-pay trial were 19.0% and 10.8% at weeks 6 and 24, respectively. A slight increase in adverse cardiovascular events was noted only in the open label-pay group in comparison with the placebo group., Conclusions: In an over-the-counter environment, the 22-mg, 24-hour nicotine patch is effective and safe for smoking cessation treatment.

Background and Methods: Use of nicotine-replacement therapies and the antidepressant bupropion helps people stop smoking. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of sustained-release bupropion (244 subjects), a nicotine patch (244 subjects), bupropion and a nicotine patch (245 subjects), and placebo (160 subjects) for smoking cessation. Smokers with clinical depression were excluded. Treatment consisted of nine weeks of bupropion (150 mg a day for the first three days, and then 150 mg twice daily) or placebo, as well as eight weeks of nicotine-patch therapy (21 mg per day during weeks 2 through 7, 14 mg per day during week 8, and 7 mg per day during week 9) or placebo. The target day for quitting smoking was usually day 8., Results: The abstinence rates at 12 months were 15.6 percent in the placebo group, as compared with 16.4 percent in the nicotine-patch group, 30.3 percent in the bupropion group (P<0.001), and 35.5 percent in the group given bupropion and the nicotine patch (P<0.001). By week 7, subjects in the placebo group had gained an average of 2.1 kg, as compared with a gain of 1.6 kg in the nicotine-patch group, a gain of 1.7 kg in the bupropion group, and a gain of 1.1 kg in the combined-treatment group (P<0.05). Weight gain at seven weeks was significantly less in the combined-treatment group than in the bupropion group and the placebo group (P<0.05 for both comparisons). A total of 311 subjects (34.8 percent) discontinued one or both medications. Seventy-nine subjects stopped treatment because of adverse events: 6 in the placebo group (3.8 percent), 16 in the nicotine-patch group (6.6 percent), 29 in the bupropion group (11.9 percent), and 28 in the combined-treatment group (11.4 percent). The most common adverse events were insomnia and headache., Conclusions: Treatment with sustained-release bupropion alone or in combination with a nicotine patch resulted in significantly higher long-term rates of smoking cessation than use of either the nicotine patch alone or placebo. Abstinence rates were higher with combination therapy than with bupropion alone, but the difference was not statistically significant.

Studies of nicotine replacement by 2 mg nicotine polacrilex gum (NG) have typically found that one half to one third of plasma nicotine in recent smokers is replaced. This 5-year study sought to find the extent of nicotine replacement among ex-smokers in the longer term and to identify a mechanism for this relationship. The sample was the special intervention group (N = 3923) in the Lung Health Study, a controlled clinical trial involving smoking cessation. The extent of nicotine replacement was assessed by levels of salivary cotinine. Cotinine levels of ex-smokers using NG after 1 year (219 +/- 149 ng/ml) were similar to those in continuing smokers (290 +/- 159 ng/ml). After 5 years, cotinine levels were the same for NG-using ex-smokers (316 +/- 276 ng/ml), NG-using smokers (309 +/- 240 ng/ml), and NG-non-using smokers (311 +/- 198 ng/ml). Salivary cotinine among NG users at 1 year was only weakly correlated with baseline cotinine levels prior to smoking cessation. Although NG users appear to re-establish cotinine levels characteristic of their smoking, the mechanism by which this occurs remains unclear.

Study Objective: To assess cardiovascular conditions and other side effects associated with the use of nicotine polacrilex (NP), 2 mg., Design: A multicentered randomized control trial of early intervention for the prevention of COPD., Setting: Ten university medical centers in the United States and Canada., Participants: Adult smoking volunteers with evidence of early COPD; 3,923 in intervention and 1,964 controls., Intervention: Smoking cessation program, including NP., Measurements: Data on hospitalizations were collected annually. Data on reported NP side effects were collected at 4-month intervals for intervention participants., Results: The rates of hospitalization for cardiovascular conditions and cardiovascular deaths during the 5 years of the study were not related to use of NP, to dose of NP, or to concomitant use of NP and cigarettes. About 25% of NP users reported at least one side effect, but most were very minor and transient. Side effects associated with discontinuance of NP in 5% or more of users included headache, indigestion, mouth irritation, mouth ulcers, and nausea. There was no evidence that concomitant use of NP and cigarettes was associated with elevated rates of reported side effects. Participants in the smoking cessation intervention who received intensive levels of instruction and monitoring of NP use (initially at 12 meetings during 3 months) appeared to report significantly lower rates of side effects (dizziness, headache, and throat irritation) than control participants, presumed to have less instruction and monitoring., Conclusions: NP, as used in the Lung Health Study, appears to be safe and unrelated to any cardiovascular illnesses or other serous side effects.

The extent and predictors of weight change were assessed among sustained nonsmoking special intervention participants in the Lung Health Study. The intervention included a 12-session group program and 2-mg nicotine gum. At 12 months, female sustained quitters (SQs; n = 248) had gained a mean of 8.4% (5.3 kg) of their baseline weight, whereas male SQs (n = 443) had gained 6.7% (5.5 kg). By 24 months, female SQs had gained 9.8% of their baseline weight compared with 6.9% for men. Nicotine gum usage delayed a portion of the weight gain. Multiple regression analysis showed that weight gain at 12 months was associated with a higher baseline salivary cotinine level, a lower baseline body mass index, drinking less alcohol per week, and a lower cotinine level at 12 months (indicating less or no nicotine gum use). We conclude that moderate weight gain is a long-term consequence of smoking cessation--a portion of which can be delayed with 2-mg nicotine gum.

Of 3,923 special intervention participants in the Lung Health Study who were offered nicotine gum to help them quit smoking, 1,080 (28.9%) were using nicotine gum 12 months after entry into the study. This group is comprised of 33.6% sustained nonsmokers, 54.5% intermittent smokers, and 19.2% continuing smokers. The average use of gum at 12 months is 7.3 pieces per day. At 12 months, men were significantly more likely to be nonsmokers than women, but women were significantly more likely to use gum than men. Among the sustained nonsmokers, continuous gum users reported significantly more mild side effects than those who used gum intermittently, although there were no differences in moderate or severe side effects between the two groups. Overall, the rate of observed side effects was small. Factors associated with nicotine dependence were related to the use and amount of gum use at 12 months.