Efficacy and safety of combination behavioral activation for smoking cessation and varenicline for treating tobacco dependence among individuals with current or past major depressive disorder: A 2 × 2 factorial, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Treatment of depression-related psychological factors related to smoking behavior may improve rates of cessation among adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). This study measured the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks of behavioral activation for smoking cessation (BASC), varenicline and their combination. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: This study used a randomized, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial design comparing BASC versus standard behavioral treatment (ST) and varenicline versus placebo, taking place in research clinics at two urban universities in the United States. Participants comprised 300 hundred adult smokers with current or past MDD. INTERVENTIONS: BASC integrated behavioral activation therapy and ST to increase engagement in rewarding activities by reducing avoidance, withdrawal and inactivity associated with depression. ST was based on the 2008 PHS Clinical Practice Guideline. Both treatments consisted of eight 45-min sessions delivered between weeks 1 and 12. Varenicline and placebo were administered for 12 weeks between weeks 2 and 14. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were bioverified intent-to-treat (ITT) 7-day point-prevalence abstinence at 27 weeks and adverse events (AEs). FINDINGS: No significant interaction was detected between behavioral treatment and pharmacotherapy at 27 weeks (χ2 (1) = 0.19, P = 0.67). BASC and ST did not differ (χ2 (1) = 0.43, P = 0.51). Significant differences in ITT abstinence rates (χ2 (1) = 4.84, P = 0.03) emerged among pharmacotherapy arms (16.2% for varenicline, 7.5% for placebo), with results favoring varenicline over placebo (rate ratio = 2.16, 95% confidence interval = 1.08, 4.30). All significant differences in AE rates after start of medication were higher for placebo than varenicline. CONCLUSION: A randomized trial in smokers with major depressive disorder found that varenicline improved smoking abstinence versus placebo at 27 weeks without elevating rates of adverse events. Behavioral activation for smoking cessation did not outperform standard behavioral treatment, with or without adjunctive varenicline therapy.

History and Correlates of Smoking Cessation Behaviors Among Individuals With Current or Past Major Depressive Disorder Enrolled in a Smoking Cessation Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking among adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) is at least double that of the general US population. More effective smoking cessation interventions for depressed smokers may be facilitated through a better understanding of the smoking and depression-related characteristics of this population. METHODS: We used baseline data from 300 participants enrolled in randomized clinical trial for smokers with current or past MDD. We described history of smoking cessation behaviors (ie, quit attempts, quit motivation, and cessation treatment utilization) and used multivariate regression to identify demographic and depression-related correlates of these behaviors. RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent of participants reported at least one quit attempt in the past year, nearly 51% reported motivation to quit in the subsequent 30 days, and 83% reported prior use of a nicotine replacement therapy. A greater readiness to quit smoking was associated with increased age (p = .04) and lower cigarettes per day (p = .01). Greater use of smoking cessation medication was associated with greater education and nicotine dependence, minority race, and greater use of complementary reinforcers (eg, activities associated with increased reinforcing value of smoking; p's < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that smokers with current or past MDD are highly motivated to quit smoking and have a history of engaging in efforts to quit. Interventions to promote smoking cessation behaviors should address younger and lighter smokers, who may perceive less risk from tobacco use, and efforts to promote smoking cessation medications and counseling should address minority smokers who are engaging in complementary reinforcers. IMPLICATIONS: These data are inconsistent with the assumption that smokers with serious mental illness are not willing to quit smoking and suggest the need for studies that test behavioral interventions that address complementary reinforcers to treat tobacco use in this community.

Effectiveness and Ethics of Incentives for Research Participation: 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Incentivizing research participation is controversial and variably regulated because of uncertainty regarding whether financial incentives serve as undue inducements by diminishing peoples' sensitivity to research risks or unjust inducements by preferentially increasing enrollment among underserved individuals. Objective: To determine whether incentives improve enrollment in real randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or serve as undue or unjust inducements. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two RCTs of incentives that were embedded in 2 parent RCTs, 1 comparing smoking cessation interventions (conducted at smoking cessation clinics in 2 health systems) and 1 evaluating an ambulation intervention (conducted across wards of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania) included all persons eligible for the parent trials who did not have prior knowledge of the incentives trials. Recruitment occurred from September 2017 to August 2019 for the smoking trial and January 2018 through May 2019 for the ambulation trial; data were analyzed from January 2020 to July 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to incentives of $0, $200, or $500 for participating in the smoking cessation trial and $0, $100, or $300 for the ambulation trial. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of each incentive trial was the proportion of people assigned to each recruitment strategy that consented to participate. Each trial was powered to test the hypotheses that incentives served neither as undue inducements (based on the interaction between incentive size and perceived research risk, as measured using a 10-point scale, on the primary outcome), nor unjust inducements (based on the interaction between incentive size and participants' self-reported income). Noninferiority methods were used to test whether the data were compatible with these 2 effects of incentives and superiority methods to compare the primary and other secondary outcomes. Results: There were a total of 654 participants (327 women [50.0%]; mean [SD] age, 50.6 [12.1] years; 394 Black/African American [60.2%], 214 White [32.7%], and 24 multiracial individuals [3.7%]) in the smoking trial, and 642 participants (364 women [56.7%]; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.6] years; 224 Black/African American [34.9%], 335 White [52.2%], and 5 multiracial individuals [0.8%]) in the ambulation trial. Incentives significantly increased consent rates among those in the smoking trial in 47 of 216 (21.8%), 78 of 217 (35.9%), and 104 of 221 (47.1%) in the $0, $200, and $500 groups, respectively (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for each increase in incentive, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.34-2.17; P < .001). Incentives did not increase consent among those in the ambulation trial: 98 of 216 (45.4%), 102 of 212 (48.1%), and 92 of 214 (43.0%) in the $0, $100, and $300 groups, respectively (aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.64-1.22; P = .45). In neither trial was there evidence of undue or unjust inducement (upper confidence limits of ORs for undue inducement, 1.15 and 0.99; P < .001 showing noninferiority; upper confidence limits of ORs for unjust inducement, 1.21 and 1.26; P = .01 and P < .001, respectively). There were no significant effects of incentive size on the secondary outcomes in either trial, including time spent reviewing the risk sections of consent forms, perceived research risks, trial understanding, perceived coercion, or therapeutic misconceptions. Conclusions and Relevance: In these 2 randomized clinical trials, financial incentives increased trial enrollment in 1 of 2 trials and did not produce undue or unjust inducement or other unintended consequences in either trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02697799.

A State Financial Incentive Policy to Improve Emergency Department Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, Pennsylvania established a voluntary financial incentive program designed to increase the engagement in addiction treatment for Medicaid patients with opioid use disorder after emergency department (ED) encounters. In this qualitative study involving hospital leaders, the authors examined decisions leading to participation in this program as well as barriers and facilitators that influenced its implementation. METHODS: Twenty semistructured interviews were conducted with leaders from a diverse sample of hospitals and health systems across Pennsylvania. Interviews were planned and analyzed following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. An iterative approach was used to analyze the interviews and determine key themes and patterns regarding implementation of this policy initiative in hospitals. RESULTS: The authors identified six key themes that reflected barriers and facilitators to hospital participation in the program. Participation in the program was facilitated by community partners capable of arranging outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder, incentive payments focusing hospital leadership on opioid treatment pathways, multidisciplinary planning, and flexibility in adapting pathways for local needs. Barriers to program participation concerned the implementation of buprenorphine prescribing and the measurement of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A financial incentive policy encouraged hospitals to enact rapid system and practice changes to support treatment for opioid use disorder, although challenges remained in implementing evidence-based treatment-specifically, initiation of buprenorphine-for patients visiting the ED. Analysis of treatment outcomes is needed to further evaluate this policy initiative, but new delivery and payment models may improve systems to treat patients who have an opioid use disorder.

Medication adherence and rate of nicotine metabolism are associated with response to treatment with varenicline among smokers with HIV.

INTRODUCTION: PLWHA who smoke have shown lower cessation rates within placebo-controlled randomized trials of varenicline. Adherence and rate of nicotine metabolism may be associated with quit rates in such clinical trials. METHODS: This secondary analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial of varenicline for smoking among PLWHA (N = 179) examined the relationship between varenicline adherence (pill count, ≥80% of pills), nicotine metabolism (based on the nicotine metabolite ratio; NMR) and end-of-treatment smoking cessation (self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence, confirmed with carbon monoxide of ≤ 8 ppm, at the end of treatment; EOT). RESULTS: Combining varenicline and placebo arms, greater adherence (OR = 1.011, 95% CI:1.00-1.02, p = 0.051) and faster nicotine metabolism (OR = 3.08, 95% CI:1.01-9.37, p = 0.047) were related to higher quit rates. In separate models, adherence (OR = 1.009, 95% CI:1.004-1.01, p < 0.001) and nicotine metabolism rate (OR = 2.04, 95% CI:1.19-3.49, p = 0.009) interacted with treatment arm to effect quit rates. The quit rate for varenicline vs. placebo was higher for both non-adherent (19% vs. 5%; χ2[1] = 2.80, p = 0.09) and adherent (35% vs. 15%; χ2[1] = 6.51, p = 0.01) participants, but the difference between treatment arms was statistically significant only for adherent participants. Likewise, among slow metabolizers (NMR < 0.31), the varenicline quit rate was not significantly higher vs. placebo (14% vs. 5%; χ2[1] = 1.17, p = 0.28) but, among fast metabolizers (NMR ≥ 0.31), the quit rate for varenicline was significantly higher vs. placebo (33% vs. 14%; χ2[1] = 4.43, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing varenicline adherence and ensuring that fast nicotine metabolizers receive varenicline may increase quit rates for PLWHA.

Patterns of lapses and recoveries during a quit attempt using varenicline and behavioral counseling among smokers with and without HIV.

Addressing tobacco use among HIV+ smokers is a priority. Lack of knowledge about how HIV+ smokers respond to tobacco use treatments limits our ability to effectively treat this population of smokers. Using data from 2 clinical trials that provided 12 weeks of varenicline and behavioral counseling, 1 with smokers with HIV (n = 89) and 1 with smokers without HIV (n = 179), we used mixed logistic regression modeling to compare point-prevalence abstinence rates and adherence to the initial target quit date (TQD) and Cox regression for repeated outcomes to evaluate lapse and recovery dynamics between the groups. Sixty percent of HIV- smokers refrained from smoking at the TQD while only 33% of HIV+ smokers did (odds ratio [OR] = 0.32, 95% CI [0.18, 0.56], p < .001). The point-prevalence abstinence rates at Week 12 were 31% (HIV-) and 28% (HIV+; OR = 0.7, 95% CI [0.42, 1.16], p = .16) and the point prevalence abstinence rates at Week 24 were 22% (HIV-) and 15% (HIV+; OR = 0.87, 95% CI [0.49, 1.57], p = .65). Although there was no interaction between HIV status and lapse risk, χ2(3) < 1, there was a significant interaction for the recovery model, (χ2(3) = 20.4, p < 0.001): as the number of events increased, the time to the next recovery became longer among smokers with HIV, compared to smokers without HIV. Although HIV+ smokers were treated effectively with varenicline, compared to HIV- smokers, they showed significantly lower initial cessation at the TQD and took increasingly longer to recover following lapses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

History and Correlates of Smoking Cessation Behaviors Among Smokers With Serious Mental Illness.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) smoke at rates two to three times greater than the general population but are less likely to receive treatment. Increasing our understanding of correlates of smoking cessation behaviors in this group can guide intervention development. AIMS AND METHODS: Baseline data from an ongoing trial involving smokers with SMI (N = 482) were used to describe smoking cessation behaviors (ie, quit attempts, quit motivation, and smoking cessation treatment) and correlates of these behaviors (ie, demographics, attitudinal and systems-related variables). RESULTS: Forty-three percent of the sample did not report making a quit attempt in the last year, but 44% reported making one to six quit attempts; 43% and 20%, respectively, reported wanting to quit within the next 6 months or the next 30 days. Sixty-one percent used a smoking cessation medication during their quit attempt, while 13% utilized counseling. More quit attempts were associated with lower nicotine dependence and carbon monoxide and greater beliefs about the harms of smoking. Greater quit motivation was associated with lower carbon monoxide, minority race, benefits of cessation counseling, and importance of counseling within the clinic. A greater likelihood of using smoking cessation medications was associated with being female, smoking more cigarettes, and receiving smoking cessation advice. A greater likelihood of using smoking cessation counseling was associated with being male, greater academic achievement, and receiving smoking cessation advice. CONCLUSIONS: Many smokers with SMI are engaged in efforts to quit smoking. Measures of smoking cessation behavior are associated with tobacco use indicators, beliefs about smoking, race and gender, and receiving cessation advice. IMPLICATIONS: Consideration of factors related to cessation behaviors among smokers with SMI continues to be warranted, due to their high smoking rates compared to the general population. Increasing our understanding of these predictive characteristics can help promote higher engagement in evidence-based smoking cessation treatments among this subpopulation.

Improved clinical outcomes among persons with HIV who quit smoking.

Quitting smoking among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) is a priority. However, PLWHA and clinicians working with PLWHA are reluctant to use tobacco use treatments out of concern that smoking cessation can diminish anti-retroviral therapy (ART) adherence and quality of life (QoL) and increase psychiatric symptoms. This secondary analysis from a placebo-controlled varenicline trial for tobacco dependence among PLWHA (N = 179) examined if smoking cessation at the end of treatment (EOT) was associated with changes in ART adherence, QoL, anxiety and depression symptoms, and varenicline side effects. ART adherence was not affected by smoking cessation (p > 0.05), remaining ≥98% for all participants. Across 8 QoL subscales, 7 remained unchanged over time across smokers and abstainers; side effects were not associated with cessation. Controlling for baseline smoking rate, adherence to varenicline/placebo and counseling, and treatment arm, participants who had quit smoking at EOT reported a significant reduction in depression (ß = -1.657, 95% CI: -2.893, -0.422, p = .009) and anxiety (ß = -1.434, 95% CI: -2.812, -0.56, p = .041) and increased life satisfaction (ß = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.21, 3.275, p = .027). When PLWHA quit smoking they may not experience adverse clinical outcomes including ART non-adherence and may experience beneficial psychological effects, supporting the use of FDA-approved smoking cessation treatments among PLWHA.

Correlates of varenicline adherence among smokers with HIV and its association with smoking cessation.

INTRODUCTION: With medical advances, the life expectancy of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) has improved; however, tobacco use remains a prominent risk for mortality. Although studies have examined the efficacy of varenicline for treating smoking among PLWHA, the relationship between varenicline adherence and cessation and correlates of varenicline adherence remain under-studied. METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses from a randomized placebo-controlled trial of varenicline for smoking among PLWHA, using data from participants who received varenicline (N = 89). The relationship between varenicline adherence (based on pill count) and end-of-treatment smoking cessation was assessed, as were correlates of varenicline adherence. RESULTS: Those who were abstinent took an average of 137.1 pills (SD = 39.3), or 83% of pills prescribed, vs. 105.3 pills (SD = 64.1), or 64%, for those who were smoking (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.001-1.021, p = 0.03); 52/89 (58%) participants were adherent based on taking ≥80% of pills. The quit rate for adherent participants was 35% (18/52) vs. 19% (7/37) for non-adherent participants. Adherent participants were older, smoked fewer cigarettes each day, started smoking at an older age, and had lower baseline creatinine vs. non-adherent participants (p < 0.05). There was a significant time-by-group interaction effect for anxiety (F[1,72] = 6.24, p = 0.02), depression (F[1,72] = 4.2, p = 0.04), and insomnia (F[1,72] = 7.73, p = 0.007), indicating that adherent participants had less depression, anxiety, and insomnia during the initial weeks of treatment, vs. non-adherent participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the importance of varenicline adherence for determining cessation and highlight the role of early changes in anxiety, depression, and insomnia determining varenicline adherence.

A randomized controlled trial of 24 weeks of varenicline for tobacco use among cancer patients: Efficacy, safety, and adherence.

OBJECTIVE: Continuing to smoke after a cancer diagnosis undermines prognosis. Yet few trials have tested Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved tobacco use medications in this population. Extended use varenicline may represent an effective treatment for cancer patients who smoke given barriers to cessation including a prolonged time line for relapse. METHODS: A placebo-controlled randomized trial tested 12 weeks of varenicline plus 12 weeks of placebo (standard [ST]) vs 24 weeks of varenicline (extended [ET]) with seven counseling sessions for treatment-seeking cancer patients who smoke (N = 207). Primary outcomes were 7-day biochemically confirmed abstinence at weeks 24 and 52. Treatment adherence and side effects, adverse and serious adverse events, and blood pressure were assessed. RESULTS: Point prevalence and continuous abstinence quit rates at weeks 24 and 52 were not significantly different across treatment arms (P's > 0.05). Adherence (43% of sample) significantly interacted with treatment arm for week 24 point prevalence (odds ratio [OR] = 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-4.63; P = 0.02) and continuous (OR = 5.82; 95% CI, 2.66-12.71; P < 0.001) abstinence. For both outcomes, adherent participants who received ET reported higher abstinence (60.5% and 44.2%) vs ST (44.7% and 27.7%), but differences in quit rates between arms were not significant for nonadherent participants (ET: 9.7% and 4.8%; ST: 12.7% and 10.9%). There were no significant differences between treatment arms on side effects, adverse and serious adverse events, and rates of high blood pressure (P's > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ST, ET varenicline does not increase patient risk and increases smoking cessation rates among patients who adhere to treatment. Studies are needed to identify effective methods to increase medication adherence to treat patient tobacco use effectively.

A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial Testing the Effectiveness of the Addressing Tobacco Through Organizational Change Model for Improving the Treatment of Tobacco Use in Community Mental Health Care: Preliminary Study Feasibility and Baseline Findings.

INTRODUCTION: People with mental illness are more likely to smoke and less likely to receive tobacco treatment than the general population. The Addressing Tobacco Through Organizational Change (ATTOC) approach supports organizational change to increase tobacco treatment in this population. We describe preliminary study feasibility and baseline behaviors and attitudes among clients and staff regarding tobacco treatment, and assesse correlates of treatment of smoking. METHODS: Preliminary accrual, engagement, and baseline data are reported from a cluster-randomized trial comparing ATTOC to usual care. Feasibility, thus far, was the rate of site and participant accrual and engagement (eg, participants remaining in the trial). Correlates of assessing smoking, advising cessation, and providing treatment were assessed. RESULTS: Site and participant accrual is 80% (8/10) and 86% (456/533), and engagement is 100% and 82%. "Staff asking about smoking" was reported by 63% of clients and 38% of staff; "staff advising cessation" was reported by 57% of clients and 46% of staff; staff report "assisting clients with any medication" at most 22% of the time, whereas at most 18% of clients report receiving a cessation medication; 59% of clients want tobacco treatment, but 36% of staff think that it is part of their job. "Staff assisting with medications" is related to more training, believing treating smoking is part of their job, and believing patients are concerned about smoking (ps < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This trial of training in tobacco treatment within mental health care is feasible thus far; self-reported rates of tobacco treatment are low and associated with clinician attitudes and barriers. IMPLICATIONS: Evaluation of ways to help address tobacco use treatment in community mental health care is feasible and needed, including the use of technical assistance and training guided by an organizational change approach.

Randomized evaluation of trial acceptability by INcentive (RETAIN): Study protocol for two embedded randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: The most common and conceptually sound ethical concerns with financial incentives for research participation are that they may (1) represent undue inducements by blunting peoples' perceptions of research risks, thereby preventing fully informed consent; or (2) represent unjust inducements by encouraging enrollment preferentially among the poor. Neither of these concerns has been shown to manifest in studies testing the effects of incentives on decisions to participate in hypothetical randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but neither has been assessed in real RCTs. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We are conducting randomized trials of real incentives embedded within two parent RCTs. In each of two trials conducted in parallel, we are randomizing 576 participants to one of three incentive groups. Following preliminary determination of patients' eligibility in the parent RCT, we assess patients' research attitudes, demographic characteristics, perceived research risks, time spent reviewing consent documents, ability to distinguish research from patient care, and comprehension of key trial features. These quantitative assessments will be supplemented by semi-structured interviews for a selected group of participants that more deeply explore patients' motivations for trial participation. The trials are each designed to have adequate power to rule out undue and unjust inducement. We are also exploring potential benefits of incentives, including possible increased attention to research risks and cost-effectiveness.