Comparing the Effectiveness, Tolerability, and Acceptability of Heated Tobacco Products and Refillable Electronic Cigarettes for Cigarette Substitution (CEASEFIRE): Randomized Controlled Trial.
e-cigarette
electronic cigarettes
harm reduction
heat not burn
psychological well-being
public health
smoking cessation
smoking reduction
Journal
JMIR public health and surveillance
ISSN: 2369-2960
Titre abrégé: JMIR Public Health Surveill
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101669345
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 04 2023
04 04 2023
Historique:
received:
12
09
2022
accepted:
04
02
2023
revised:
07
12
2022
medline:
6
4
2023
entrez:
4
4
2023
pubmed:
5
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
People who smoke and who face challenges trying to quit or wish to continue to smoke may benefit by switching from traditional cigarettes to noncombustible nicotine delivery alternatives, such as heated tobacco products (HTPs) and electronic cigarettes (ECs). HTPs and ECs are being increasingly used to quit smoking, but there are limited data about their effectiveness. We conducted the first randomized controlled trial comparing quit rates between HTPs and ECs among people who smoke and do not intend to quit. We conducted a 12-week randomized noninferiority switching trial to compare effectiveness, tolerability, and product satisfaction between HTPs (IQOS 2.4 Plus) and refillable ECs (JustFog Q16) among people who do not intend to quit. The cessation intervention included motivational counseling. The primary endpoint of the study was the carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rate from week 4 to week 12 (CAR weeks 4-12). The secondary endpoints included the continuous self-reported ≥50% reduction in cigarette consumption rate (continuous reduction rate) from week 4 to week 12 (CRR weeks 4-12) and 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence. A total of 211 participants completed the study. High quit rates (CAR weeks 4-12) of 39.1% (43/110) and 30.8% (33/107) were observed for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC, respectively. The between-group difference for the CAR weeks 4-12 was not significant (P=.20). The CRR weeks 4-12 values for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC were 46.4% (51/110) and 39.3% (42/107), respectively, and the between-group difference was not significant (P=.24). At week 12, the 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence values for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC were 54.5% (60/110) and 41.1% (44/107), respectively. The most frequent adverse events were cough and reduced physical fitness. Both study products elicited a moderately pleasant user experience, and the between-group difference was not significant. A clinically relevant improvement in exercise tolerance was observed after switching to the combustion-free products under investigation. Risk perception for conventional cigarettes was consistently higher than that for the combustion-free study products under investigation. Switching to HTPs elicited a marked reduction in cigarette consumption among people who smoke and do not intend to quit, which was comparable to refillable ECs. User experience and risk perception were similar between the HTPs and ECs under investigation. HTPs may be a useful addition to the arsenal of reduced-risk alternatives for tobacco cigarettes and may contribute to smoking cessation. However, longer follow-up studies are required to confirm significant and prolonged abstinence from smoking and to determine whether our results can be generalized outside smoking cessation services offering high levels of support. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03569748; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03569748.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
People who smoke and who face challenges trying to quit or wish to continue to smoke may benefit by switching from traditional cigarettes to noncombustible nicotine delivery alternatives, such as heated tobacco products (HTPs) and electronic cigarettes (ECs). HTPs and ECs are being increasingly used to quit smoking, but there are limited data about their effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted the first randomized controlled trial comparing quit rates between HTPs and ECs among people who smoke and do not intend to quit.
METHODS
We conducted a 12-week randomized noninferiority switching trial to compare effectiveness, tolerability, and product satisfaction between HTPs (IQOS 2.4 Plus) and refillable ECs (JustFog Q16) among people who do not intend to quit. The cessation intervention included motivational counseling. The primary endpoint of the study was the carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rate from week 4 to week 12 (CAR weeks 4-12). The secondary endpoints included the continuous self-reported ≥50% reduction in cigarette consumption rate (continuous reduction rate) from week 4 to week 12 (CRR weeks 4-12) and 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence.
RESULTS
A total of 211 participants completed the study. High quit rates (CAR weeks 4-12) of 39.1% (43/110) and 30.8% (33/107) were observed for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC, respectively. The between-group difference for the CAR weeks 4-12 was not significant (P=.20). The CRR weeks 4-12 values for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC were 46.4% (51/110) and 39.3% (42/107), respectively, and the between-group difference was not significant (P=.24). At week 12, the 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence values for IQOS-HTP and JustFog-EC were 54.5% (60/110) and 41.1% (44/107), respectively. The most frequent adverse events were cough and reduced physical fitness. Both study products elicited a moderately pleasant user experience, and the between-group difference was not significant. A clinically relevant improvement in exercise tolerance was observed after switching to the combustion-free products under investigation. Risk perception for conventional cigarettes was consistently higher than that for the combustion-free study products under investigation.
CONCLUSIONS
Switching to HTPs elicited a marked reduction in cigarette consumption among people who smoke and do not intend to quit, which was comparable to refillable ECs. User experience and risk perception were similar between the HTPs and ECs under investigation. HTPs may be a useful addition to the arsenal of reduced-risk alternatives for tobacco cigarettes and may contribute to smoking cessation. However, longer follow-up studies are required to confirm significant and prolonged abstinence from smoking and to determine whether our results can be generalized outside smoking cessation services offering high levels of support.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03569748; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03569748.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37014673
pii: v9i1e42628
doi: 10.2196/42628
pmc: PMC10131829
doi:
Substances chimiques
Nicotine
6M3C89ZY6R
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03569748']
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e42628Informations de copyright
©Pasquale Caponnetto, Davide Campagna, Marilena Maglia, Francesca Benfatto, Rosalia Emma, Massimo Caruso, Grazia Caci, Barbara Busà, Alfio Pennisi, Maurizio Ceracchi, Marcello Migliore, Maria Signorelli. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 04.04.2023.
Références
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 May;17(5):573-581
pubmed: 31978316
Addiction. 2004 Jan;99(1):29-38
pubmed: 14678060
Respir Res. 2018 Aug 31;19(1):164
pubmed: 30170593
Subst Use Misuse. 2010 Nov;45(13):2152-61
pubmed: 20469971
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 15;16(20):
pubmed: 31618949
Tob Control. 2021 Jan;30(1):16-23
pubmed: 31941822
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 10;18(12):
pubmed: 34200773
Prev Med Rep. 2019 May 23;15:100891
pubmed: 31193919
Harm Reduct J. 2020 Oct 15;17(1):75
pubmed: 33059666
Intern Emerg Med. 2021 Apr;16(3):687-696
pubmed: 33754228
Intern Emerg Med. 2021 Nov;16(8):2201-2212
pubmed: 34196886
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020 Jan 08;17:100518
pubmed: 31956726
Nicotine Tob Res. 2012 Jan;14(1):75-8
pubmed: 22025545
Addict Behav. 2007 May;32(5):912-23
pubmed: 16875787
PLoS One. 2021 May 7;16(5):e0251243
pubmed: 33961641
Tob Control. 2020 Nov 16;:
pubmed: 33199541
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2022 Mar;239(3):977-988
pubmed: 35184228
Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2014 Apr;5(2):67-86
pubmed: 25083263
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jan 6;1:CD013790
pubmed: 34988969
Addiction. 2013 Jun;108(6):1115-25
pubmed: 23551515
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Apr 22;11(4):4356-73
pubmed: 24758891
BMJ. 2004 Jun 26;328(7455):1519
pubmed: 15213107
Tob Induc Dis. 2020 Sep 21;18:81
pubmed: 33013277
Intern Emerg Med. 2019 Sep;14(6):817-820
pubmed: 31414334
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Dec 17;10(12):7272-82
pubmed: 24351746
Open J Prev Med. 2014 Oct;4(10):789-800
pubmed: 25621193
N Engl J Med. 2010 Jun 17;362(24):2295-303
pubmed: 20554984
Harm Reduct J. 2013 Oct 04;10:19
pubmed: 24090432
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 31;17(21):
pubmed: 33142757
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 14;10:CD010216
pubmed: 33052602
Intern Emerg Med. 2019 Sep;14(6):843-851
pubmed: 30635832
Nicotine Tob Res. 2021 Oct 7;23(11):1889-1894
pubmed: 33983450
Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 17;11(1):24182
pubmed: 34921164
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0260154
pubmed: 34793517
Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-208
pubmed: 10109801
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Sep 21;16(1):192
pubmed: 30241527
Tob Control. 2020 Jul;29(4):381-387
pubmed: 31209129
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016 Nov;81:489-499
pubmed: 27693654
Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2020 Oct 10;11:2040622320961617
pubmed: 33101622
Harm Reduct J. 2021 Apr 13;18(1):42
pubmed: 33849549