Feasibility of precision smoking treatment in a low-income community setting: results of a pilot randomized controlled trial in The Southern Community Cohort Study.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Scott S Lee, Nicole Senft Everson, Maureen Sanderson, Rebecca Selove, William J Blot, Stephen King, Karen Gilliam, Suman Kundu, Mark Steinwandel, Sarah J Sternlieb, Qiuyin Cai, Shaneda Warren Andersen, Debra L Friedman, Erin Connors Kelly, Mary Kay Fadden, Matthew S Freiberg, Quinn S Wells, Juan Canedo, Rachel F Tyndale, Robert P Young, Raewyn J Hopkins, Hilary A Tindle
{"title":"Feasibility of precision smoking treatment in a low-income community setting: results of a pilot randomized controlled trial in The Southern Community Cohort Study.","authors":"Scott S Lee, Nicole Senft Everson, Maureen Sanderson, Rebecca Selove, William J Blot, Stephen King, Karen Gilliam, Suman Kundu, Mark Steinwandel, Sarah J Sternlieb, Qiuyin Cai, Shaneda Warren Andersen, Debra L Friedman, Erin Connors Kelly, Mary Kay Fadden, Matthew S Freiberg, Quinn S Wells, Juan Canedo, Rachel F Tyndale, Robert P Young, Raewyn J Hopkins, Hilary A Tindle","doi":"10.1186/s13722-024-00441-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The feasibility of precision smoking treatment in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities has not been studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants in the Southern Community Cohort Study who smoked daily were invited to join a pilot randomized controlled trial of three smoking cessation interventions: guideline-based care (GBC), GBC plus nicotine metabolism-informed care (MIC), and GBC plus counseling guided by a polygenic risk score (PRS) for lung cancer. Feasibility was assessed by rates of study enrollment, engagement, and retention, targeting > 70% for each. Using logistic regression, we also assessed whether feasibility varied by age, sex, race, income, education, and attitudes toward precision smoking treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 92 eligible individuals (79.3% Black; 68.2% with household income < $15,000), 67 (72.8%; 95% CI 63.0-80.9%) enrolled and were randomized. Of these, 58 (86.6%; 95% CI 76.4-92.8%) engaged with the intervention, and of these engaged participants, 43 (74.1%; 95% CI 61.6-83.7%) were retained at 6-month follow-up. Conditional on enrollment, older age was associated with lower engagement (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95, p = 0.008). Conditional on engagement, retention was significantly lower in the PRS arm than in the GBC arm (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-1.00, p = 0.050). No other selection effects were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Genetically informed precision smoking cessation interventions are feasible in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, exhibiting high enrollment, engagement, and retention irrespective of race, sex, income, education, or attitudes toward precision smoking treatment. Future smoking cessation interventions in this population should take steps to engage older people and to sustain participation in interventions that include genetic risk counseling.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT03521141, Registered 27 April 2018, https://www.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov/study/NCT03521141.</p>","PeriodicalId":54223,"journal":{"name":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","volume":"19 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10941447/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00441-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The feasibility of precision smoking treatment in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities has not been studied.

Methods: Participants in the Southern Community Cohort Study who smoked daily were invited to join a pilot randomized controlled trial of three smoking cessation interventions: guideline-based care (GBC), GBC plus nicotine metabolism-informed care (MIC), and GBC plus counseling guided by a polygenic risk score (PRS) for lung cancer. Feasibility was assessed by rates of study enrollment, engagement, and retention, targeting > 70% for each. Using logistic regression, we also assessed whether feasibility varied by age, sex, race, income, education, and attitudes toward precision smoking treatment.

Results: Of 92 eligible individuals (79.3% Black; 68.2% with household income < $15,000), 67 (72.8%; 95% CI 63.0-80.9%) enrolled and were randomized. Of these, 58 (86.6%; 95% CI 76.4-92.8%) engaged with the intervention, and of these engaged participants, 43 (74.1%; 95% CI 61.6-83.7%) were retained at 6-month follow-up. Conditional on enrollment, older age was associated with lower engagement (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95, p = 0.008). Conditional on engagement, retention was significantly lower in the PRS arm than in the GBC arm (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-1.00, p = 0.050). No other selection effects were observed.

Conclusions: Genetically informed precision smoking cessation interventions are feasible in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, exhibiting high enrollment, engagement, and retention irrespective of race, sex, income, education, or attitudes toward precision smoking treatment. Future smoking cessation interventions in this population should take steps to engage older people and to sustain participation in interventions that include genetic risk counseling.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT03521141, Registered 27 April 2018, https://www.

Clinicaltrials: gov/study/NCT03521141.

在低收入社区环境中开展精准吸烟治疗的可行性:南方社区队列研究随机对照试验的结果。
背景:在社会经济条件较差的社区开展精准戒烟治疗的可行性尚未得到研究:方法:邀请南方社区队列研究中每天吸烟的参与者参加三项戒烟干预措施的试点随机对照试验:基于指南的护理(GBC)、GBC加尼古丁代谢信息护理(MIC)和GBC加以肺癌多基因风险评分(PRS)为指导的咨询。可行性通过研究的注册率、参与率和保留率进行评估,目标是每项研究的注册率、参与率和保留率均大于 70%。通过逻辑回归,我们还评估了可行性是否因年龄、性别、种族、收入、教育程度以及对精准吸烟治疗的态度而有所不同:结果:在 92 名符合条件的个体中(79.3% 为黑人;68.2% 的家庭收入得出了以下结论:"我们的研究结果表明,精准戒烟是可行的":无论种族、性别、收入、教育程度或对精准戒烟治疗的态度如何,基于基因的精准戒烟干预在社会经济条件较差的社区都是可行的,并表现出较高的注册率、参与率和保持率。未来在这一人群中开展戒烟干预时,应采取措施让老年人参与进来,并持续参与包括遗传风险咨询在内的干预:ClinicalTrials.gov No.NCT03521141,2018年4月27日注册,https://www.Clinicaltrials: gov/study/NCT03521141。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
64
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice provides a forum for clinically relevant research and perspectives that contribute to improving the quality of care for people with unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, or other drug use and addictive behaviours across a spectrum of clinical settings. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice accepts articles of clinical relevance related to the prevention and treatment of unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use across the spectrum of clinical settings. Topics of interest address issues related to the following: the spectrum of unhealthy use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs among the range of affected persons (e.g., not limited by age, race/ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation); the array of clinical prevention and treatment practices (from health messages, to identification and early intervention, to more extensive interventions including counseling and pharmacotherapy and other management strategies); and identification and management of medical, psychiatric, social, and other health consequences of substance use. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is particularly interested in articles that address how to improve the quality of care for people with unhealthy substance use and related conditions as described in the (US) Institute of Medicine report, Improving the Quality of Healthcare for Mental Health and Substance Use Conditions (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006). Such articles address the quality of care and of health services. Although the journal also welcomes submissions that address these conditions in addiction speciality-treatment settings, the journal is particularly interested in including articles that address unhealthy use outside these settings, including experience with novel models of care and outcomes, and outcomes of research-practice collaborations. Although Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is generally not an outlet for basic science research, we will accept basic science research manuscripts that have clearly described potential clinical relevance and are accessible to audiences outside a narrow laboratory research field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信