Project phoenix: Pilot randomized controlled trial of a smartphone-delivered intervention for people who are not ready to quit smoking.

BACKGROUND: Most people who smoke cigarettes report they want to quit in the future, but only 20 % are ready to quit within the next 30 days. This 3-arm pilot randomized controlled trial examined the feasibility and initial efficacy of a novel smartphone-based intervention that aimed to induce smoking cessation attempts among adults not initially ready to quit. METHODS: Participants randomized into the two intervention groups (Group 1: Phoenix App Only; Group 2: Phoenix App + Nicotine Replacement Therapy) received daily smoking cessation messages via smartphone application that were tailored to their current readiness to quit, while the attention control group (i.e., Factoid) received messages not related to smoking cessation. All participants completed a weekly survey for 26 weeks and used the app to set quit dates when/if desired. RESULTS: Participants (N=152) were female (67.8 %), White (75.7 %), 50.0 years old (SD=12.5), and smoked 20.4 cigarettes per day (SD=10.5). Results indicated that the Phoenix interventions were feasible (e.g., participants viewed ~185 messages over 26 weeks; 74.8 % of weekly surveys were completed; 85.5 % completed the 26-week follow-up assessment). Phoenix participants set more quit dates, set quit dates sooner, were abstinent for more days, and used smoking cessation medications on more days than those assigned to the Factoid group. CONCLUSIONS: This low-burden, smartphone-based smoking cessation induction intervention may increase smoking cessation attempts, and may reduce barriers that are encountered with traditional in-person or call-based interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT03405129; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03405129.

The efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological monotherapies and e-cigarette on smoking cessation: a systemic review and network meta-analysis.

Background and aims: Several pharmacological interventions, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, and bupropion, have been approved for clinical use of smoking cessation. E-cigarettes (EC) are increasingly explored by many RCTs for their potentiality in smoking cessation. In addition, some RCTs are attempting to explore new drugs for smoking cessation, such as cytisine. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to investigate how these drugs and e-cigarettes compare regarding their efficacy and acceptability. Materials and methods: This systematic review and NMA searched all clinical studies on smoking cessation using pharmacological monotherapies or e-cigarettes published from January 2011 to May 2022 using MEDLINE, COCHRANE Library, and PsychINFO databases. NRTs were divided into transdermal (TDN) and oronasal nicotine (ONN) by administrative routes, thus 7 network nodes were set up for direct and indirect comparison. Two different indicators measured the efficacy: prevalent and continuous smoking abstinence. The drop-out rates measured the acceptability. Results: The final 40 clinical studies included in this study comprised 77 study cohorts and 25,889 participants. Varenicline is more effective intervention to assist in smoking cessation during 16-32 weeks follow-up, and is very likely to prompt dropout. Cytisine shows more effectiveness in continuous smoking cessation but may also lead to dropout. E-cigarettes and oronasal nicotine are more effective than no treatment in encouraging prevalent abstinence, but least likely to prompt dropout. Finally, transdermal nicotine delivery is more effective than no treatment in continuous abstinence, with neither significant effect on prevalent abstinence nor dropout rate. Conclusion: This review suggested and agreed that Varenicline, Cytisine and transdermal nicotine delivery, as smoking cessation intervention, have advantages and disadvantages. However, we had to have reservations about e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking in adolescents.

The effects of alcohol use on smoking cessation treatment with nicotine replacement therapy: An observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Concurrent users of tobacco and alcohol are at greater risk of harm than use of either substance alone. It remains unclear how concurrent tobacco and alcohol use affects smoking cessation across levels of alcohol use and related problems. This study assessed the relationship between smoking cessation and levels of alcohol use problems. METHODS: 59,018 participants received nicotine replacement therapy through a smoking cessation program. Alcohol use and related symptoms were assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-10) and the AUDIT-Concise (AUDIT-C). The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence cigarette abstinence (PPA) at 6-month follow-up. We evaluated the association between alcohol use (and related problems) and smoking cessation using descriptive methods and mixed-effects logistic regression. RESULTS: 7-day PPA at 6-months was lower in groups meeting hazardous alcohol consumption criteria, with the lowest probability of smoking abstinence observed in the highest risk group. The probability of successful tobacco cessation fell with increasing levels of alcohol use and related problems. Adjusted predicted probabilities were 30.3 (95 % CI = 29.4, 31.1) for non-users, 30.2 (95 % CI = 29.4, 31.0) for low-risk users, 29.0 (95 % CI = 28.1, 29.9) for those scoring below 8 on the AUDIT-10, 27.3 (95 % CI = 26.0, 28.6) for those scoring 8-14, and 24.4 (95 % CI = 22.3, 26.5) for those scoring 15 or higher. CONCLUSION: Heavy, hazardous alcohol use is associated with lower odds of successfully quitting smoking compared to low or non-use of alcohol. Targeting alcohol treatment to this group may improve tobacco cessation outcomes.

Smoking, nicotine and pregnancy 2 (SNAP2) trial: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of an intervention to improve adherence to nicotine replacement therapy during pregnancy.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking during pregnancy is harmful to unborn babies, infants and women. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is offered as the usual stop-smoking support in the UK. However, this is often used in insufficient doses, intermittently or for too short a time to be effective. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) explores whether a bespoke intervention, delivered in pregnancy, improves adherence to NRT and is effective and cost-effective for promoting smoking cessation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-arm parallel-group RCT was conducted for pregnant women aged ≥16 years and who smoke ≥1 daily cigarette (pre-pregnancy smoked ≥5) and who agree to use NRT in an attempt to quit. Recruitment is from antenatal care settings and via social media adverts. Participants are randomised using blocked randomisation with varying block sizes, stratified by gestational age (<14 or ≥14 weeks) to receive: (1) usual care (UC) for stop smoking support or (2) UC plus an intervention to increase adherence to NRT, called 'Baby, Me and NRT' (BMN), comprising adherence counselling, automated tailored text messages, a leaflet and website. The primary outcome is biochemically validated smoking abstinence at or around childbirth, measured from 36 weeks gestation. Secondary outcomes include NRT adherence, other smoking measures and birth outcomes. Questionnaires collect follow-up data augmented by medical record information. We anticipate quit rates of 10% and 16% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (risk ratio=1.6). By recruiting 1320 participants, the trial should have 90% power (alpha=5%) to detect this intervention effect. An economic analysis will use the Economics of Smoking in Pregnancy model to determine cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by Bloomsbury National Health Service's Research Ethics Committee (21/LO/0123). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated to the public, funders, relevant practice/policy representatives, researchers and participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16830506. PROTOCOL VERSION: 5.0, 10 Oct 2023.

Predictive Factors for Successful Smoking Cessation in Tunisian Smokers, Sousse-Tunisia: 2015-2020.

OBJECTIVE: Since 2009, the unit of smoking cessation at Sahloul University Hospital - Tunisia was founded. In this context, the objective of our study was to determine the factors associated with smoking cessation in Tunisian smokers. METHODS: It was a descriptive prospective study over five-years-period 2015-2020. We included all patients who willingly came to the anti-smoking consultation of the Sahloul University hospital Sousse Tunisia. Data were collected during the consultation of all patients. We proceeded to a univariate and then multivariable analysis to identify the predictive factors of smoking cessation. RESULTS: Over 5 years, we included 450 patients, mainly males (91.3%). The average age of the consultants was 46 ±15.58 years. The average age of the first cigarette among our patients was 16.83± 4.34 years. The likelihood of smoking cessation was higher among males (p=0.004, OR=9.708), patients attending minimum 3 anti-smoking consultations (p<10-3, OR=5.714), patients benefiting from nicotine replacement therapy (p=0.034, OR=2.123), with high motivation score for smoking cessation (p=0.001, OR=1.980) and with an advanced age of the first cigarette (p<10-3, OR=1.096). However, the likelihood of smoking cessation was lower among coffee and alcohol consumers (p=0.002, OR=0.252) and smokers with less than 5 years smoking habit (p=0.011, OR=0.069). CONCLUSION: Although the decision to stop smoking is a personal one, it requires medical and psychological support as highlighted by our findings. Our study showed that assiduity and medical assistance for tobacco cessation increase smokers' chances of quitting.

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge.

Current Pharmacotherapies for Smoking Cessation and Promising Emerging Drugs.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacotherapy is commonly used during quit attempts and has shown an increase in the likelihood of achieving abstinence. However, with established pharmacotherapies, abstinence rates following a quit attempt remain low, and relapse is common. This review aims to investigate the efficacy and harm profiles of current and emerging pharmacotherapies. METHODS: Literature review of current and emerging pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation and tobacco use disorder. RESULTS: Emerging pharmacotherapies include new formulations of existing therapies, drug repurposing and some new treatments. New treatments are welcome and may incorporate different mechanisms of action or different safety and tolerability profiles compared to existing treatments. However, emerging pharmacotherapies have yet to demonstrate greater efficacy compared to existing treatments. The emergence of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) or 'vaping' is a feature of the current debate around tobacco use disorder. ENDS appear to facilitate switching but not quitting and are controversial as a harm minimisation strategy. LIMITATIONS: Studies included a broad range of therapies and trial designs that should be compared with their differences taken into consideration. CONCLUSION: Strategies to successfully quit smoking vary between individuals and may extend beyond pharmacotherapy and involve complex psychosocial factors and pathways.

Puffing to Persistent Smoking Cessation.

Nicotine e-cigarettes are a safe and effective way to help patients stop smoking.

Investigating disparities in smoking cessation treatment for veterans with multiple sclerosis: A national analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking is a risk factor for multiple sclerosis (MS) development, symptom burden, decreased medication efficacy, and increased disease-related mortality. Veterans with MS (VwMS) smoke at critically high rates; however, treatment rates and possible disparities are unknown. To promote equitable treatment, we aim to investigate smoking cessation prescription practices for VwMS across social determinant factors. METHODS: We extracted data from the national Veterans Health Administration electronic health records between October 1, 2017, and September 30, 2018. To derive marginal estimates of the association of MS with receipt of smoking-cessation pharmacotherapy, we used propensity score matching through the extreme gradient boosting machine learning model. VwMS who smoke were matched with veterans without MS who smoke on factors including age, race, depression, and healthcare visits. To assess the marginal association of MS with different cessation treatments, we used logistic regression and conducted stratified analyses by sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: The matched sample achieved a good balance across most covariates, compared to the pre-match sample. VwMS (n = 3320) had decreased odds of receiving prescriptions for nicotine patches ([Odds Ratio]OR = 0.86, p < .01), non-patch nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; OR = 0.81, p < .001), and standard practice dual NRT (OR = 0.77, p < .01), compared to matches without MS (n = 13,280). Men with MS had lower odds of receiving prescriptions for nicotine patches (OR = 0.88, p = .05), non-patch NRT (OR = 0.77, p < .001), and dual NRT (OR = 0.72, p < .001). Similarly, Black VwMS had lower odds of receiving prescriptions for patches (OR = 0.62, p < .001), non-patch NRT (OR = 0.75, p < .05), and dual NRT (OR = 0.52, p < .01). The odds of receiving prescriptions for bupropion or varenicline did not differ between VwMS and matches without MS. CONCLUSION: VwMS received significantly less smoking cessation treatment, compared to matched controls without MS, showing a critical gap in health services as VwMS are not receiving dual NRT as the standard of care. Prescription rates were especially lower for male and Black VwMS, suggesting that under-represented demographic groups outside of the white female category, most often considered as the "traditional MS" group, could be under-treated regarding smoking cessation support. This foundational work will help inform future work to promote equitable treatment and implementation of cessation interventions for people living with MS.

Actívatexto: Feasibility and Acceptability of a Mobile Intervention That Promotes Smoking Cessation and Physical Activity among Latinos.

The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a mobile intervention that promotes smoking cessation and physical activity among Latinos living in the United States. Twenty Latino adults who smoked and did not meet recommended levels of physical activity were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. Participants received Actívatexto, a theory-based, culturally accommodated, 12-week text messaging intervention (available in English and Spanish) that promotes smoking cessation and physical activity. Actívatexto integrates four components: (i) a text messaging program, (ii) a wearable device, (iii) an online dashboard where the research team manages participants' incoming and outgoing data from both the text messaging program and wearable device, and (iv) nicotine replacement therapies (NRT). We assessed self-reported 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at month 3, weekly minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), pharmacotherapy adherence, and satisfaction. At baseline, participants' mean age was 47.3 years old (SD 16.0), 55% of participants were female, and 60% indicated that Spanish was their language of preference. Seventy-five percent of participants smoked 1-10 cigarettes daily and 35% smoked their first cigarette within 5 minutes after waking up. At month 3, 14 participants (70%) self-reported 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence (90% follow-up rate). Fitbit-assessed mean minutes of MVPA per week increased from 113 (SD 127; range: 0-399) at week 1 to 177 (SD 163; range: 0-513) at month 3 (P = 0.15). Sixteen participants (88.9%, 16/18) reported NRT use in the past 90 days. Most participants reported being extremely satisfied or satisfied with the intervention (88.9%, 16/18). SIGNIFICANCE: Actívatexto resulted in a noteworthy cessation rate at month 3 (70%), increased mean weekly minutes of MVPA, produced high use of NRT, and was well received by participants. Additional testing in a randomized clinical trial is warranted to assess the efficacy of the intervention.

Reducing tobacco use in substance use treatment: The California tobacco free initiative.

BACKGROUND: People in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment have a smoking prevalence that is five times higher than the national average. California funded the Tobacco Free for Recovery Initiative, designed to support programs in implementing tobacco-free grounds and increasing smoking cessation services. In the first cohort of the initiative (2018-2020) client smoking prevalence decreased from 54.2% to 26.6%. The current study examined whether similar findings would be replicated with a later cohort of programs (2020-2022). METHOD: Cross-sectional survey data were collected from clients in 11 residential SUD treatment programs at baseline (n = 185) and at post intervention (n = 227). Multivariate logistic regression assessed change over time in smoking prevalence, tobacco use behaviors, and receipt of cessation services across the two timepoints. RESULTS: Client smoking prevalence decreased from 60.3 % to 40.5 % (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 0.46, 95 % CI = 0.27, 0.78; p = 0.004). Current smokers and those who quit while in treatment reported an increase in nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)/pharmacotherapy from baseline to post intervention (31.9 % vs 45.6 %; AOR = 2.22, 95 % CI = 1.08, 4.58; p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: Like the first cohort, the Tobacco Free for Recovery initiative was associated with decreased client smoking prevalence and an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy. These findings strengthen the evidence that similar initiatives may be effective in reducing smoking prevalence among people in SUD treatment.

Efficacy and implementation of exercise-based smoking cessation treatment for adults with high anxiety sensitivity (STEP): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Anxiety sensitivity (AS), reflecting the fear of bodily sensations, is a transdiagnostic vulnerability factor that underpins both affective psychopathology and smoking. Phase II research supports the efficacy of a 15-week community-based intervention (STEP) that combines high-intensity exercise offered by the YMCA with standard smoking cessation treatment (tobacco quitline and nicotine replacement therapy) for sedentary smokers with elevated AS. This Phase III study aims to enroll 360 adults to evaluate whether STEP efficacy for achieving smoking abstinence generalizes to Black and Hispanic smokers with elevated AS.

Characterising smoking and nicotine use behaviours among women of reproductive age: a 10-year population study in England.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking affects women's fertility and is associated with substantial risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This study explored trends by socioeconomic position in patterns of smoking, use of non-combustible nicotine products, and quitting activity among women of reproductive age in England. METHODS: Data come from a nationally representative monthly cross-sectional survey. Between October 2013 and October 2023, 197,266 adults (≥ 18 years) were surveyed, of whom 44,052 were women of reproductive age (18-45 years). Main outcome measures were current smoking, vaping, and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and nicotine pouches; mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes and level of dependence among current smokers; past-year quit attempts among past-year smokers; and success of quit attempts among those who tried to quit. We modelled time trends in these outcomes, overall and by occupational social grade (ABC1 = more advantaged/C2DE = less advantaged). RESULTS: Smoking prevalence among women of reproductive age fell from 28.7% [95%CI = 26.3-31.2%] to 22.4% [19.6-25.5%] in social grades C2DE but there was an uncertain increase from 11.7% [10.2-13.5%] to 14.9% [13.4-16.6%] in ABC1. By contrast, among all adults and among men of the same age, smoking prevalence remained relatively stable in ABC1. Vaping prevalence among women of reproductive age more than tripled, from 5.1% [4.3-6.0%] to 19.7% [18.0-21.5%], with the absolute increase more pronounced among those in social grades C2DE (reaching 26.7%; 23.3-30.3%); these changes were larger than those observed among all adults but similar to those among men of the same age. The proportion of smokers mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes increased from 40.5% [36.3-44.9%] to 61.4% [56.5-66.1%] among women of reproductive age; smaller increases were observed among all adults and among men of the same age. Patterns on other outcomes were largely similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among women of reproductive age, there appears to have been a rise in smoking prevalence in the more advantaged social grades over the past decade. Across social grades, there have been substantial increases in the proportion of women of reproductive age who vape and shifts from use of manufactured to hand-rolled cigarettes among those who smoke. These changes have been more pronounced than those observed in the general adult population over the same period.

Economic Evaluation of Enhanced vs Standard Varenicline Treatment for Tobacco Cessation.

Importance: Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and illness in the US. Identifying cost-effective smoking cessation treatment may increase the likelihood that health systems deliver such treatment to their patients who smoke. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of standard vs enhanced varenicline use (extended varenicline treatment or varenicline in combination with nicotine replacement therapy) among individuals trying to quit smoking. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation assesses the Quitting Using Intensive Treatments Study (QUITS), which randomized 1251 study participants who smoked into 4 conditions: (1) 12-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 315); (2) 24-week varenicline monotherapy (n = 311); (3) 12-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 314); or (4) 24-week varenicline combination treatment with nicotine replacement therapy patch (n = 311). Study enrollment occurred in Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, between November 11, 2017, and July 2, 2020. Statistical analysis took place from May to October 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 7-day point prevalence abstinence (biochemically confirmed with exhaled carbon monoxide level ≤5 ppm) at 52 weeks. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), or cost per additional person who quit smoking, was calculated using decision tree analysis based on abstinence and cost for each arm of the trial. Results: Of the 1251 participants, mean (SD) age was 49.1 (11.9) years, 675 (54.0%) were women, and 881 (70.4%) completed the 52-week follow-up. Tobacco cessation at 52 weeks was 25.1% (79 of 315) for 12-week monotherapy, 24.4% (76 of 311) for 24-week monotherapy, 23.6% (74 of 314) for 12-week combination therapy, and 25.1% (78 of 311) for 24-week combination therapy, respectively. The total mean (SD) cost was $1175 ($365) for 12-week monotherapy, $1374 ($412) for 12-week combination therapy, $2022 ($813) for 24-week monotherapy, and $2118 ($1058) for 24-week combination therapy. The ICER for 12-week varenicline monotherapy was $4681 per individual who quit smoking and $4579 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) added. The ICER for 24-week varenicline combination therapy relative to 12-week monotherapy was $92 000 000 per additional individual who quit smoking and $90 000 000 (95% CI, $15 703 to dominated or more costly and less efficacious) per additional QALY. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic evaluation of standard vs enhanced varenicline treatment for smoking cessation suggests that 12-week varenicline monotherapy was the most cost-effective treatment option at the commonly cited threshold of $100 000/QALY. This study provides patients, health care professionals, and other stakeholders with increased understanding of the health and economic impact of more intensive varenicline treatment options.