Article

Clinical Strategies to Enhance the Efficacy of Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smoking Cessation: A Review of the Literature.

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), Charleston, SC, USA, .
Drugs (Impact Factor: 4.13). 04/2013; DOI: 10.1007/s40265-013-0038-y
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A number of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies have led to increases in quitting and thus to significant benefits to public health. Among existing medications, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has been available the longest, has the largest literature base in support, and is the only option for over-the-counter access. While the short-term efficacy of NRT is well documented in clinical trials, long-term abstinence rates associated with using NRT are modest, as most smokers will relapse. This literature review examines emerging clinical strategies to improve NRT efficacy. After an initial overview of NRT and its FDA-approved indications for use, we review randomized trials in which clinical delivery of NRT was manipulated and tested, in an attempt to enhance efficacy, through (1) duration of use (pre-quit and extended use), (2) amount of use (high-dose and combination NRT), (3) tailoring to specific smoker groups (genotype and phenotype), or (4) use of NRT for novel purposes (relapse prevention, temporary abstinence, cessation induction). Outcomes vary within and across topic area, and we highlight areas that offer stronger promise. Combination NRT likely represents the most promising strategy moving forward; other clinical strategies offer conflicting evidence but deserve further testing (pre-quit NRT or tailored treatment) or offer potential utility but are in need of further, direct tests. Some areas, though based on a limited set of studies, do not offer great promise (high-dose and extended treatment NRT). We conclude with a brief discussion of emergent NRT products (e.g., oral nicotine spray, among others), which may ultimately offer greater efficacy than current formulations. In order to further lower the prevalence of smoking, novel strategies designed to optimize NRT efficacy are needed.

3 Followers
 · 
98 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tobacco addiction represents one of the largest public health problems in the world and is the leading cause of cancer and heart disease, resulting in millions of deaths a year. Vaccines for smoking cessation have shown considerable promise in preclinical models, although functional antibody responses induced in humans are only modestly effective in preventing nicotine entry into the brain. The challenge in generating serum antibodies with a large nicotine binding capacity is made difficult by the fact that this drug is non-immunogenic and must be conjugated as a hapten to a protein carrier. To circumvent the limitations of traditional carriers like keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH), we have synthesized a short trimeric coiled-coil peptide (TCC) that creates a series of B and T cell epitopes with uniform stoichiometry and high density. Here we compared the relative activities of a TCC-nic vaccine and two control KLH-nic vaccines using Alum as an adjuvant or GLA-SE, which contains a synthetic TLR4 agonist formulated in a stable oil-in-water emulsion. The results showed that the TCC's high hapten density correlated with a better immune response in mice as measured by anti-nicotine Ab titer, affinity, and specificity, and was responsible for a reduction in anti-carrier immunogenicity. The Ab responses achieved with this synthetic vaccine resulted in a nicotine binding capacity in serum that could prevent >90% of a nicotine dose equivalent to three smoked cigarettes (0.05 mg/kg) from reaching the brain.
    PLoS ONE 12/2014; 9(12):e114366. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0114366 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The US Food and Drug Administration adopted labeling for nicotine patches to allow use beyond the standard 8 weeks. This decision was based in part on data showing increased efficacy for 24 weeks of treatment. Few studies have examined whether the use of nicotine patches beyond 24 weeks provides additional therapeutic benefit. To compare 8 (standard), 24 (extended), and 52 (maintenance) weeks of nicotine patch treatment for promoting tobacco abstinence. We recruited 525 treatment-seeking smokers for a randomized clinical trial conducted from June 22, 2009, through April 15, 2014, through 2 universities. Smokers received 12 smoking cessation behavioral counseling sessions and were randomized to 8, 24, or 52 weeks of nicotine patch treatment. The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence, confirmed with breath levels of carbon monoxide at 6 and 12 months (intention to treat). At 24 weeks, 21.7% of participants in the standard treatment arm were abstinent, compared with 27.2% of participants in the extended and maintenance treatment arms (χ21 = 1.98; P = .17). In a multivariate model controlled for covariates, participants in the extended and maintenance treatment arms reported significantly greater abstinence rates at 24 weeks compared with participants in the standard treatment arm (odds ratio [OR], 1.70 [95% CI, 1.03-2.81]; P = .04), had a longer duration of abstinence until relapse (β = 21.30 [95% CI, 10.30-32.25]; P < .001), reported smoking fewer cigarettes per day if not abstinent (mean [SD], 5.8 [5.3] vs 6.4 [5.1] cigarettes per day; β = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.06-0.82]; P = .02), and reported more abstinent days (mean [SD], 80.5 [38.1] vs 68.2 [43.7] days; OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.06-2.26]; P = .02). At 52 weeks, participants in the maintenance treatment arm did not report significantly greater abstinence rates compared with participants in the standard and extended treatment arms (20.3% vs 23.8%; OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.69-1.98]; P = .57). Similarly, we found no difference in week 52 abstinence rates between participants in the extended and standard treatment arms (26.0% vs 21.7%; OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 0.72-2.45]; P = .36). Treatment duration was not associated with any adverse effects or adherence to the counseling regimen, but participants in the maintenance treatment arm reported lower adherence to the nicotine patch regimen compared with those in the standard and extended treatment arms (mean [SD], 3.94 [2.5], 4.61 [2.0], and 4.7 [2.4] patches/wk, respectively; F2,522 = 6.03; P = .003). The findings support the safety of long-term use of nicotine patch treatment, although they do not support efficacy beyond 24 weeks of treatment in a broad group of smokers. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01047527.
    JAMA Internal Medicine 02/2015; 175(4). DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.8313 · 13.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Drug abuse is an increasing social and public health issue, putting the onus on drug developers and regulatory agencies to ensure that the abuse potential of novel drugs is adequately assessed prior to product launch. Areas covered: This review summarizes the core preclinical data that frequently contribute to building an understanding of abuse potential for a new molecular entity, in addition to highlighting models that can provide increased resolution regarding the level of risk. Second, an important distinction between abuse potential and addiction potential is drawn, with comments on how preclinical models can inform on each. Expert opinion: While the currently adopted preclinical models possess strong predictive validity, there are areas for future refinement and research. These areas include a more refined use of self-administration models to assess relative reinforcement; and the need for open innovation in pursuing improvements. There is also the need for careful scientifically driven application of models rather than a standardization of methodologies, and the need to explore the opportunities that may exist for enhancing the value of physical dependence and withdrawal studies by focusing on withdrawal-induced drug seeking, rather than broad symptomology.
    Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 09/2014; 9(11):1-11. DOI:10.1517/17460441.2014.956077 · 3.47 Impact Factor