Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Tornado chasers

Storm chasers brave danger and debris as they try to capture photos of tornadoes' destructive power.  Slideshow 

Photo

Running while blind

Blind or visually impaired students compete in blind track and field tournament.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

In real-world setting, anti-smoking aids help

Related Topics

Cigarette butts in an ashtray in Los Angeles, California, May 31, 2012. REUTERS/Jonathan Alcorn

Cigarette butts in an ashtray in Los Angeles, California, May 31, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Alcorn

NEW YORK | Tue Sep 4, 2012 3:24pm EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A large new survey across four countries has found that smokers attempting to quit have considerably more success when they use nicotine patches or prescription medications than when they go it alone without anti-smoking aids.

Past research has yielded conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of drug treatments for smoking cessation - they seem to help in clinical trials, but to make less of a difference in real-life settings.

When researchers accounted for differences between those who tried to quit with the help of medications and those who went ‘cold-turkey' - including their respective recollections of past quit attempts - the new study, published in the journal Addiction, found some quitting aids were linked to four- to six-fold higher success rates.

"This study confirms that the positive result seen in clinical trials translates into the real world," said Saul Shiffman, a psychology professor at the University of Pittsburgh, who was not involved in the research.

On the theory that there could be meaningful differences in quit attempts, including whether people even remember every time they resolved to give up cigarettes, researchers surveyed more than 7,400 adult smokers in the U.S., Canada, Australia and the UK.

Karin Kasza, a statistician at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York, who led the study, along with her colleagues, then tracked those individuals to see how many had succeeded in staying smoke-free for at least six months.

About 2,200 people used a prescription medication or nicotine replacement therapy, the rest did not.

Among those who used no medication to quit, five percent remained abstinent from cigarettes for six months.

In comparison, 16 percent of nicotine patch users, 15 percent of people who used buproprion - an antidepressant sold as Zyban - and 19 percent of people who used varenicline (Chantix) stayed off cigarettes for six months.

After taking into account factors that could affect people's success, such as how long and how heavily they had smoked, the researchers determined that buproprion and the nicotine patch were each tied to a four-fold increase in quitting success compared with those who used no medications, and varenicline to a nearly six-fold increase.

Eight percent of people who used oral nicotine replacement products, such as gum, stayed abstinent for six months - but statistically, the difference relative to those using no quitting aids was so small it could have been due to chance.

Of the high quit rates among people using drugs or patches, Kasza said that previous studies in real-world settings have not shown as much success, so her findings are not expected.

"But compared to clinical trial results, this is much closer in line with what they found," she told Reuters Health.

Kasza believes the difference between her studies and others is the reliance of this kind of investigation on memory.

Previous research has found that people who do not use medications to help them quit are less likely to remember a failed quit attempt than are people who failed to quit while using medications.

In other words, if you ask people about their past experiences in trying to quit smoking, "if they're without treatment, they forget them. If they're with treatment, they remember them," explained Dr. John Hughes, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, who was not involved in the new study.

"Since they're now current smokers, they're remembering the (attempts) that failed with treatment and not the ones that failed without," he said.

This would over-represent the times that people failed to quit while using medications, making the drugs appear less helpful.

To get around the problem, Kasza's group asked people at the outset of the study to recall past attempts to quit within the last month, to ensure the memories were fresh.

They also included only abstinence attempts that lasted longer than a day, to exclude less "serious" resolutions to give up cigarettes.

Overall, the researchers found, people who tried to quit without any aids were likely to be younger, have lower incomes, be less addicted to nicotine and have higher confidence in their ability to break the smoking habit than those who used medications.

Hughes, who, like Shiffman, has been a consultant for companies that market smoking-cessation drugs, said the current study is the best to date comparing medication users to non-users in real-world situations because it is large, it includes people from several countries and it takes into account the influence of memory.

The study does not prove that the medications are responsible for the greater success in quitting, but merely that people who use them are more likely to quit.

Shiffman said that based on the number of studies that have found a positive effect from anti-smoking drugs, it is worth it for smokers to give them a try.

"The disappointing reality is that even when people use these medications to help them quit," Kasza said, "relapse is still the norm. It's better than nothing, but it's by no means a magic bullet."

SOURCE: bit.ly/Q0U2IC Addiction, online August 14, 2012.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
JohnPolito wrote:
The title of Kerry’s article is wrong. To start, although omitted from this article, the study found that using nicotine gum or the nicotine lozenge was no more effective than quitting without it. Why leave that out?

Going deeper, this 4 nation survey did NOT find NRT effective. That conclusion was drawn after a team of researchers that included a Pfizer speaker’s bureau salesman cherry picked and adjusted data (see 8/21/12 study review by Dr. Michael Siegel entitled “New Study Reports Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Medication But is Biased Towards Finding an Effect; Financial Conflict of Interest Present,” which I’ve heavily relied upon below).

Most notable, the final conclusions exclude from analysis all surveyed medication quitters who retrospectively declared that they had not used NRT, bupropion or varenicline to quit “completely.” The total number excluded was greater than the total number of successful medication quitters.

Additionally, in creating a medication comparison standard (“no medication”) the authors lumped abrupt cessation (cold turkey) with gradual weaning/tapering quitters when two recent studies found abrupt cessation twice as effective as weaning (including a study using this exact same survey – see Cheong Y, 2007 Nicotine and Tobacco Research), thus watering down the comparison standard.

Also, due to different survey questions asked during Wave 5 and earlier, successful non-medication quitters may have been wrongly classified as medication quitters.

Also noted by Professor Siegel, “The study finds that the effectiveness of medication greatly increases among subjects who report having made their most recent quit attempt in the past month or two. When all quit attempts are considered, there is no significant effect of nicotine gum, the nicotine patch, or bupropion.”

Truth is, while meds clobber placebo inside clinical trials, in all truly independent population level quitting method studies since 2000 NRT has been found to be worse or no better than quitting without it. The pharma industry understandably wants for nothing more than to put a dent in real-world ineffectiveness science-base.

Even Shiffman and Hughes will openly admit that more 2012 ex-smokers will succeed in quitting long-term by going king cold turkey than by all other methods combined. Paid pharma consultants such as Shiffman and Hughes (two of the industry’s very best) cannot point to a single independent study where any approved quitting product defeats cold turkey. Have them try to explain Doran May 2006 (Addictive Behaviors), which followed the smoking patients of 1,000 Australian family practice physicians, where “cold turkey” doubled success rates for NRT and Zyban.

Sadly, U.S. cessation has ground to near standstill. Hundreds of thousands of needless deaths, it’s my opinion that the pharma industry’s unwillingness to engage in and promote intellectually honest quitting product research has left it with blood on its hands.

John R. Polito
Nicotine Cessation Educator

Sep 05, 2012 8:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.