Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Lung Cancer Screening Decision-Making by Persons Who Smoke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography lowers lung cancer mortality but has potential harms. Current guidelines support patients receiving information about the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening during decision-making. Objective: To examine the effect of a patient decision aid (PDA) about lung cancer screening compared with a standard educational material (EDU) on decision-making outcomes among smokers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted using 13 state tobacco quitlines. Current and recent tobacco quitline clients who met age and smoking history eligibility for lung cancer screening were enrolled from March 30, 2015, to September 12, 2016, and followed up for 6 months until May 5, 2017. Data analysis was conducted between May 5, 2017, and September 30, 2018. Interventions: Participants were randomized to the PDA video Lung Cancer Screening: Is It Right for Me? (n = 259) or to EDU (n = 257). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were preparation for decision-making and decisional conflict measured at 1 week. Secondary outcomes included knowledge, intentions, and completion of screening within 6 months of receiving the intervention measured by patient report. Results: Of 516 quit line clients enrolled, 370 (71.7%) were younger than 65 years, 320 (62.0%) were female, 138 (26.7%) identified as black, 47 (9.1%) did not have health insurance, and 226 (43.8%) had a high school or lower educational level. Of participants using the PDA, 153 of 227 (67.4%) were well prepared to make a screening decision compared with 108 of 224 participants (48.2%) using EDU (odds ratio [OR], 2.31; 95% CI, 1.56-3.44; P < .001). Feeling informed about their screening choice was reported by 117 of 234 participants (50.0%) using a PDA compared with 66 of 233 participants (28.3%) using EDU (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.72-3.79; P < .001); 159 of 234 participants (68.0%) using a PDA compared with 110 of 232 (47.4%) participants using EDU reported being clear about their values related to the harms and benefits of screening (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.60-3.51; P < .001). Participants using a PDA were more knowledgeable about lung cancer screening than participants using EDU at each follow-up assessment. Intentions to be screened and screening behaviors did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a PDA delivered to clients of tobacco quit lines improved informed decision-making about lung cancer screening. Many smokers eligible for lung cancer screening can be reached through tobacco quit lines. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02286713.

Association of a Comprehensive Smoking Cessation Program With Smoking Abstinence Among Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Patients with cancer who smoke after diagnosis risk experiencing reductions in treatment effectiveness, survival rates, and quality of life, and increases in complications, cancer recurrence, and second primary cancers. Smoking cessation can significantly affect these outcomes, but to date comprehensive treatment is not widely implemented in the oncologic setting. Objectives: To describe a potential model tobacco treatment program (TTP) implemented in a cancer setting, report on its long-term outcomes, and highlight its importance to quality patient care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort of smokers was treated in the TTP at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 2006, to August 31, 2015. Data analysis was performed from November 2017 to December 2018. Participants included 3245 patients (2343 with current cancer; 309 with previous cancer; 593 with no cancer history) drawn from a population of 5061 smokers referred for treatment in the TTP. Reasons for exclusion included follow-up for a noncancerous disease, no medical consultation, smoked less than 1 cigarette per day; or died before the 9-month follow-up. Exposures: Treatment consisted of an in-person medical consultation, 6 to 8 in-person and telephone follow-up counseling sessions, and 10 to 12 weeks of pharmacotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was 9-month 7-day point-prevalence abstinence evaluated using time-specific (3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-ups) and longitudinal covariate-adjusted and unadjusted regression models with multiple imputation, intention-to-treat, and respondent-only approaches to missing data. The Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence was used as a measure of dependence (possible range, 0-10; higher numbers indicate greater dependence). Results: Of the 3245 smokers, 1588 (48.9%) were men, 322 (9.9%) were of black race/ethnicity, 172 (5.3%) were of Hispanic race/ethnicity, and 2498 (76.0%) were of white race/ethnicity. Mean (SD) age was 54 (11.4) years; Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence score, 4.41 (2.2), number of cigarettes smoked per day, 17.1 (10.7); years smoked, 33 (13.2); and 1393 patients (42.9%) had at least 1 psychiatric comorbidity. Overall self-reported abstinence was 45.1% at 3 months, 45.8% at 6 months, and 43.7% at 9 months in the multiply imputed sample. Results across all models were consistent, suggesting that, in comparison with smokers with no cancer history, abstinence rates within this TTP program did not differ appreciably whether smokers had current cancer, were a cancer survivor, or had smoking-related cancers, with the exception of patients with head and neck cancer; the rates were higher at 9 months (relative risk, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11-1.56; P = .001) and in longitudinal models (relative risk, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.42; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, mean smoking abstinence rates did not differ significantly between patients with cancer and those without cancer. These findings suggest that providing comprehensive tobacco treatment in the oncologic setting can result in sustained high abstinence rates for all patients with cancer and survivors and should be included as standard of care to ensure the best possible cancer treatment outcomes.

Impact of Adding Telephone-Based Care Coordination to Standard Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Counseling Post-hospital Discharge: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy are recommended for hospitalized smokers, but better coordination between cessation counselors and providers might improve utilization of pharmacotherapy and enhance smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: To compare smoking cessation counseling combined with care coordination post-hospitalization to counseling alone on uptake of pharmacotherapy and smoking cessation. DESIGN: Unblinded, randomized clinical trial PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized smokers referred from primarily rural hospitals INTERVENTIONS: Counseling only (C) consisted of telephone counseling provided during the hospitalization and post-discharge. Counseling with care coordination (CCC) provided similar counseling supplemented by feedback to the smoker's health care team and help for the smoker in obtaining pharmacotherapy. At 6 months post-hospitalization, persistent smokers were re-engaged with either CCC or C. MAIN MEASURES: Utilization of pharmacotherapy and smoking cessation at 3, 6, and 12 months post-discharge. KEY RESULTS: Among 606 smokers randomized, 429 (70.8%) completed the 12-month assessment and 580 (95.7%) were included in the primary analysis. Use of any cessation pharmacotherapy between 0 and 6 months (55.2%) and between 6 and 12 months (47.1%) post-discharge was similar across treatment arms though use of prescription-only pharmacotherapy between months 6-12 was significantly higher in the CCC group (30.1%) compared with the C group (18.6%) (RR, 1.61 (95% CI, 1.08, 2.41)). Self-reported abstinence rates of 26.2%, 20.3%, and 23.4% at months 3, 6, and 12, respectively, were comparable across the two treatment arms. Of those smoking at month 6, 12.5% reported abstinence at month 12. Validated smoking cessation at 12 months was 19.3% versus 16.9% in the CCC and C groups, respectively (RR, 1.13 (95% CI, 0.80, 1.61)). CONCLUSION: Supplemental care coordination, provided by counselors outside of the health care team, failed to improve smoking cessation beyond that achieved by cessation counseling alone. Re-engagement of smokers 6 months post-discharge can lead to new quitters, at which time care coordination might facilitate use of prescription medications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01063972.

Randomized trial of a patient-centered decision aid for promoting informed decisions about lung cancer screening: Implementation of a PCORI study protocol and lessons learned.

PURPOSE: We describe the methods, stakeholder engagement, and lessons learned from a study comparing a video decision aid to standard educational materials on lung cancer screening decisions. METHODS: The study followed rigorous methodology standards from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. The importance of patient-centeredness and patient/stakeholder engagement are reflected across the study's conceptualization, execution, interpretation, and dissemination efforts. Advisory groups of current and former smokers, quitline service providers, clinicians, and patient advocates were formed for the project. The study used both retrospective and prospective recruitment strategies. Randomization of patients occurred within state-based quitlines, with aggressive tracking of participants. We collected data at baseline and 1-week, 3-month and 6-months after receiving the intervention. The patient-centered outcomes included whether patients' receiving the decision aid a) felt better prepared to make a decision, b) felt more informed about the screening decision, c) had more clarity on their values regarding the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening, and d) were more knowledgeable about lung cancer screening than patients receiving the standard education materials. Exploratory outcomes included making an appointment with a health care provider to discuss screening, scheduling and completing lung cancer screening. RESULTS: We have enrolled and randomized 516 quitline patients and learned many lessons about executing the trial based on significant patient and stakeholder engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting patient-centered outcomes research requires new ways of thinking and continuously checking-in with patients/stakeholders. The engagement of quitline service providers and patient advisors has been key to successful recruitment and dissemination planning. PCORI- CER-1306-03385 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT ID: NCT02286713.

Improvement of Smoking Abstinence Rates With Increased Varenicline Dosage: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether increasing the dose of varenicline beyond the standard dose of 2 mg/d would improve smoking abstinence. METHODS: We examined the effect of 3 mg/d of varenicline on smoking abstinence among smokers who had reduced their smoking by 50% or more in response to 2 mg/d for at least 6 weeks but had not quit smoking. Of 2833 patients treated with varenicline, dosage of a subset of 73 smokers was increased to 3 mg/d after 6 weeks. We used a propensity score analysis involving multiple baseline covariates to create a comparative sample of 356 smokers who remained on 2 mg/d. All smokers received concurrent and similar smoking-cessation counseling. RESULTS: At 3 months, we found higher 7-day point prevalence smoking-abstinence rate in the 3-mg group (26%) than in the 2-mg group (11.5%, χ = 10.60, P < 0.001; risk ratio [RR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.6). The difference in abstinence rates remained significant at the 6-month (P < 0.001; RR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.6-3.9) and 9-month follow-up (P < 0.001; RR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.3). CONCLUSIONS: A relatively small increase in the daily dose of varenicline seems to offer a benefit for those who are not able to achieve total abstinence after approximately 6 weeks of 2 mg/d.

Tobacco still a major killer-will we achieve the end game?

The game of tobacco use began in Europe in 1560 when the first tobacco seeds were sent from Lisbon to the king of France, by Jean Nicot. From kings' and nobles' exclusive use, it gradually and progressively became popular among the public, as a new player. Eighty-eight years ago (1929), Fritz Linkint, an extraordinary researcher in Germany, while reviewing existing evidence regarding a wide range of cancers potentially caused by smoking, indicated that smoking was a cause of respiratory disease. Despite the overwhelming accumulated evidence of the negative effects of nicotine intake, the prevalence of tobacco use is not expected to decline in the near future. What have we missed thus far in the game that claims more than seven million deaths annually worldwide? Although tobacco use is recognized as a major health problem, the persistent habit creates a dissonance between public health initiatives to reduce tobacco consumption and the choices citizens are making. To understand this dissonance, consideration first must be given to the social meaning attributed to smoking. Second, the political dissonance between health imperatives and social agendas is discussed with regard to relevant theory. Third, health promotion strategies can make a strong contribution to win the game from a negentropic perspective, that is to say, a public health vision that is structured towards an overarching goal.

Tobacco Cessation Treatment Pathways for Patients With Cancer: 10 Years in the Making.

Tobacco use is the most common cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States; it accounts for one-third of all cancer deaths and is thought to account for half of preventable cancer deaths. This article describes the Tobacco Treatment Program at a major academic cancer center. Patients and employees may access these services in a number of ways. All current smokers and recent quitters are proactively contacted and invited to participate. Services provided are tailored to the motivational level of individual patients and their immediate medical needs. The treatment pathways we present are based on our experience from the last 10 years in treating more than 5,000 unique patients with around 60,000 patient visits. These pathways include behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy, including first-line, second-line, and off-label medication use. This article describes the program with the goal of providing guidance and ideas to others who are developing treatment programs and providing treatment to tobacco users.

Panic attacks and smoking cessation among cancer patients receiving smoking cessation treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about factors associated with smoking cessation in cancer patients. This study examined the impact of panic attacks on smoking abstinence likelihood among cancer patients receiving tobacco cessation treatment. METHOD: The relationship of panic attacks to 7-day point-prevalence abstinence at mid-treatment, end of treatment, and 6-month post-end of treatment were examined among cancer patients (N=2255 patients; 50.1% female; Mage=54.9, SD=11.0) who received counseling and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. Panic attack history indexed by two questions from the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). Point-prevalence abstinence was assessed via the Timeline Follow-Back. RESULTS: Cancer patients with a history of panic attacks, (n=493, 21.9%) relative to those without, were less likely to be abstinent at mid-treatment (OR=0.79, CI95%=0.64-0.98) and end of treatment (OR=0.72, CI95%=0.58-0.89). After adjusting for significant covariates, panic attack history remained predictive of decreased abstinence likelihood at end of treatment (OR =0.78, CI95%=0.62-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Panic attacks may be related to poorer cessation outcome during smoking treatment among cancer patients, and may be usefully assessed and targeted for intervention.

Feasibility of a patient decision aid about lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography.

OBJECTIVE: New clinical guidelines endorse the use of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening among selected heavy smokers while recommending patients be counseled about the potential benefits and harms. We developed and field tested a brief, video-based patient decision aid about lung cancer screening. METHODS: Smokers in a cancer center tobacco treatment program aged 45 to 75 years viewed the video online between November 2011 and September 2012. Acceptability, knowledge, and clarity of values related to the decision were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients completed the study (mean age=58.5 years; mean duration smoking=34.8 years). Acceptability of the aid was high. Most patients (78.8%) indicated greater interest in screening after viewing the aid. Knowledge about lung cancer screening increased significantly as a result of viewing the aid (25.5% of questions answered correctly before the aid, and 74.8% after; P<.01) although understanding of screening eligibility remained poor. Patients reported being clear about which benefits and harms of screening mattered most to them (94.1% and 86.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients have high information needs related to lung cancer screening. A video-based decision aid may be helpful in promoting informed decision-making, but its impact on lung cancer screening decisions needs to be explored.

The Ask-Advise-Connect approach for smokers in a safety net healthcare system: a group-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Because smoking has a profound impact on socioeconomic disparities in illness and death, it is crucial that vulnerable populations of smokers be targeted with treatment. The U.S. Public Health Service recommends that all patients be asked about their smoking at every visit and that smokers be given brief advice to quit and referred to treatment. PURPOSE: Initiatives to facilitate these practices include the 5A's (ask, advise, assess, assist, arrange) and Ask-Advise-Refer (AAR). Unfortunately, primary care referrals are low, and most smokers referred fail to enroll. This study evaluated the efficacy of the Ask-Advise-Connect (AAC) approach to linking smokers with treatment in a large, safety net public healthcare system. DESIGN: The study design was a pair-matched group-randomized trial with two treatment arms. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Ten safety net clinics in Houston TX. INTERVENTION: Clinics were randomized to AAC (n=5; intervention) or AAR (n=5; control). Licensed vocational nurses (LVNs) were trained to assess and record the smoking status of all patients at all visits in the electronic health record. Smokers were given brief advice to quit. In AAC, the names and phone numbers of smokers who agreed to be connected were sent electronically to the Texas quitline daily, and patients were proactively called by the quitline within 48 hours. In AAR, smokers were offered a quitline referral card and encouraged to call on their own. Data were collected between June 2010 and March 2012 and analyzed in 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was impact, defined here as the proportion of identified smokers that enrolled in treatment. RESULTS: The impact (proportion of identified smokers who enrolled in treatment) of AAC (14.7%) was significantly greater than the impact of AAR (0.5%), t(4)=14.61, p=0.0001, OR=32.10 (95% CI=16.60, 62.06). CONCLUSIONS: The AAC approach to aiding smoking cessation has tremendous potential to reduce tobacco-related health disparities.

Telephone smoking cessation quitline use among pregnant and non-pregnant women.

To describe characteristics, referrals, service utilization, and self-reported quit rates among pregnant and non-pregnant women enrolled in a smoking cessation quitline. This information can be used to improve strategies to increase pregnant and non-pregnant smokers' use of quitlines. We examined tobacco use characteristics, referral sources, and use of services among 1,718 pregnant and 24,321 non-pregnant women aged 18-44 years enrolled in quitline services in 10 states during 2006-2008. We examined self-reported 30-day quit rates 7 months after enrollment among 246 pregnant and 4,123 non-pregnant women and, within groups, used Chi-square tests to compare quit rates by type of service received. The majority of pregnant and non-pregnant callers, respectively, smoked ≥10 cigarettes per day (62 %; 83 %), had recently attempted to quit (55 %; 58 %), smoked 5 or minutes after waking (59 %; 55 %), and lived with a smoker (63 %; 48 %). Of callers, 24.3 % of pregnant and 36.4 % of non-pregnant women were uninsured. Pregnant callers heard about the quitline most often from a health care provider (50 %) and non-pregnant callers most often through mass media (59 %). Over half of pregnant (52 %) and non-pregnant (57 %) women received self-help materials only, the remainder received counseling. Self-reported quit rates at 7 months after enrollment in the subsample were 26.4 % for pregnant women and 22.6 % for non-pregnant women. Quitlines provide needed services for pregnant and non-pregnant smokers, many of whom are uninsured. Smokers should be encouraged to access counseling services.

African American participation and success in telephone counseling for smoking cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Quitlines that provide telephone counseling for smoking cessation have been proved to be effective. All 50 states currently provide free quitline access to their residents; however, little research has been published on African American utilization of quitlines or their success rates. METHODS: This study evaluated how effectively African Americans are served by telephone counseling (quitline) for smoking cessation based on empirical data from 45,510 callers from Texas, Louisiana, Washington, and District of Columbia and randomized clinical trial data from 3,522 participants. RESULTS: African Americans tended to use a quitline in proportions greater than their proportional representation in the smoking communities in both states and the District. African American quit rates were equivalent to those of non-Hispanic "Whites" as were their levels of satisfaction with the service and the number of counseling sessions they completed. African Americans were more likely to request counseling than non-Hispanic Whites. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that telephone counseling is a promising tool for addressing health disparities related to smoking among African Americans.

Dyadic efficacy for smoking cessation: preliminary assessment of a new instrument.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation research has demonstrated a link between social support and quitting, but interventions designed to enhance partner support have often failed. We adapted and tested a measure of dyadic efficacy to assess smokers' confidence in their abilities to work together as a team with their partners to quit smoking and cope with quitting challenges. Our goal was to establish the psychometric properties of the dyadic efficacy instrument, including its associations with cessation outcomes. METHODS: We recruited partnered smokers who called the American Cancer Society's Quitline and administered telephone interviews (N = 634, 59% female, average age = 40 years). Interviews included 8 dyadic efficacy items and a variety of sociodemographic, smoking history, and relationship variables at baseline and quit outcomes at 4 months. RESULTS: Factor analysis of the dyadic efficacy items yielded a 1-factor scale with strong internal consistency (α = .92). Dyadic efficacy was positively associated (p < .0001) with smoking-specific support (r = .51), relationship satisfaction (r = .44), and dyadic coping (r = .54). Dyadic efficacy was not associated with age, gender, race, relationship length, smoking quantity, or previous quit attempts. Respondents with smoking partners who were willing to quit with them had higher dyadic efficacy than those whose smoking partners were not (p < .0001). Higher baseline dyadic efficacy was predictive of 7-day point prevalence quit rates at follow-up (odds ratio = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.02-1.53). CONCLUSIONS: With further study, dyadic efficacy may enhance our understanding of the role of partner relationships in smoking cessation.

Promoting primary care smoking-cessation support with quitlines: the QuitLink Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Counseling by clinicians promotes smoking cessation, but in most U.S. primary care practices, it is difficult to provide more than brief advice to quit in the course of routine work. Telephone quitlines can deliver effective intensive counseling, but few collaborate closely with clinicians. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine whether cessation support in practices is enhanced by a systems approach, in partnership with quitlines. DESIGN: A cluster RCT was used. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 1817 adult smokers from 16 primary care practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network. INTERVENTION: An expanded tobacco-use "vital sign" intervention (identify smokers, advise cessation, and assess readiness to quit) that was combined with fax referral of preparation-stage smokers to a quitline providing feedback to practices was compared to a traditional tobacco-use vital sign alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of cessation support (in-office discussion of methods to quit or quitline referral) reported by patients in an exit survey (September 2005-July 2006, analyzed in 2008) was measured. RESULTS: The adjusted percentage of smokers who reported receiving cessation support differed by 12.5% in intervention and control practices (40.7% vs 28.2%, respectively; p<0.001). Both in-office discussion of methods to quit and quitline referral increased significantly with the intervention. Post hoc analysis revealed that the increase in cessation was stable for both patient gender and visit type and was more pronounced with patients aged 35-54 years and with male and more experienced clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: A systems approach to identifying smokers, advising and assessing readiness to quit, combined with a partnership with a quitline, increases delivery of cessation support for primary care patients beyond that accomplished by traditional tobacco-use vital sign screening alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00112268.

Randomized controlled trial of an interactive internet smoking cessation program with long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Internet programs for smoking cessation are widely available but few controlled studies demonstrate long-term efficacy. PURPOSE: To determine the 13-month effectiveness of an Internet program presenting a set sequence of interactive steps, and the role of depressed affect. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial sponsored by the American Cancer Society, a treatment condition (n = 1,106) was compared to a control site (n = 1,047). RESULTS: More treatment condition participants were abstinent (30-day point prevalence) than control site participants (12.9% vs. 10.1%, p < .05) at 13 months. This effect was greater among participants not reporting depressed affect (15.0% vs. 10.1%, p < .01). Among smokers who reported depressed affect, there was no difference in abstinence between the treatment and control conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Data support the long-term efficacy of an Internet intervention for cessation modeled on a structured, in-person treatment approach, especially for participants not experiencing daily depressed affect.

Comparing internet assistance for smoking cessation: 13-month follow-up of a six-arm randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although many smokers seek Internet-based cessation assistance, few studies have experimentally evaluated long-term cessation rates among cigarette smokers who receive Internet assistance in quitting. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to describe long-term smoking cessation rates associated with 6 different Internet-based cessation services and the variation among them, to test the hypothesis that interactive and tailored Internet services yield higher long-term quit rates than more static Web-posted assistance, and to explore the possible effects of level of site utilization and a self-reported indicator of depression on long-term cessation rates. METHOD: In 2004-05, a link was placed on the American Cancer Society (ACS) website for smokers who wanted help in quitting via the Internet. The link led smokers to the QuitLink study website, where they could answer eligibility questions, provide informed consent, and complete the baseline survey. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned to receive emailed access to one of five tailored interactive sites provided by cooperating research partners or to a targeted, minimally interactive ACS site with text, photographs, and graphics providing stage-based quitting advice and peer modeling. RESULTS: 6451 of the visitors met eligibility requirements and completed consent procedures and the baseline survey. All of these smokers were randomly assigned to one of the six experimental groups. Follow-up surveys done online and via telephone interviews at approximately 13 months after randomization yielded 2468 respondents (38%) and found no significant overall quit rate differences among those assigned to the different websites (P = .15). At baseline, 1961 participants (30%) reported an indicator of depression. Post hoc analyses found that this group had significantly lower 13-month quit rates than those who did not report the indicator (all enrolled, 8% vs 12%, P < .001; followed only, 25% vs 31%, P = .003). When the 4490 participants (70%) who did not report an indicator of depression at baseline were separated for analysis, the more interactive, tailored sites, as a whole, were associated with higher quitting rates than the less interactive ACS site: 13% vs 10% (P = .04) among 4490 enrolled and 32% vs 26% (P = .06) among 1798 followed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that Internet assistance is attractive and potentially cost-effective and suggest that tailored, interactive websites may help cigarette smokers who do not report an indicator of depression at baseline to quit and maintain cessation.

Weight Gain After Quitting: Attitudes, Beliefs and Counselling Strategies of Cessation Counsellors.

Postcessation weight gain is common and a frequent cause of relapse. Although interventions to address weight gain and weight gain concerns exist, the experience of telephone cessation coun- sellors in addressing weight concerns is unknown. We surveyed 134 cessation counsellors providing quitlines for 30 states regarding their experiences and attitudes about how to address weight gain concerns among smokers trying to quit. Counsellors estimated they discuss weight in 40% of their calls, primarily discussing concerns about gaining weight. Counsellors estimated that smokers gain about 4.1 kg after quitting and about 48% gain more than 2.3 kg. Most counsellors believed that exercise, education about weight gain and preparing smokers for weight gain would help people quit, which is consistent with current science. A total of 51% of counsellors believed that dieting while quitting would reduce weight gain and only 35% correctly identified that dieting reduces a smokers' ability to quit. Some counsellors believed they needed more training in weight management and may need to be reassured that they are currently following treatment guidelines when confronted with smokers who have concerns about postcessation weight gain.

American Cancer Society's QuitLink: randomized trial of Internet assistance.

Eligible smokers (N = 6,451) visiting the American Cancer Society's Internet site offering cessation assistance were, with informed consent, randomized to receive access either to a static Internet site with quitting advice or to one of five interactive sites provided by cooperating research partners. Three-month follow-up surveys were conducted via online survey with E-mail prompts, or telephone calls, to assess quitting success; 54% of participants provided follow-up data. Results showed no significant overall difference in cessation rates among participants assigned to the interactive or static sites. We found large differences in the utilization of the five interactive sites. When sites were grouped by level of use, a significantly higher reported 3-month cessation rate was observed among participants assigned to the more highly utilized sites than among those assigned to the less utilized sites (12.2% vs. 10.2% of all randomized participants, 26.0% vs. 22.1% of followed participants). These findings show that interactive Internet sites yielding high levels of utilization can increase quitting success among smokers seeking assistance via the Internet.