胞二磷胆碱与去甲替林的戒烟疗效和安全性对比:一项多中心、随机、双盲和安慰剂对照试验。

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Respirology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-14 DOI:10.1111/resp.14787
Suthat Rungruanghiranya, Sirapat Tulatamakit, Kaweesak Chittawatanarat, Kanokwan Preedapornpakorn, Thanawat Wongphan, Narueporn Sutanthavibul, Sunida Preechawong, Pichaya Petborom
{"title":"胞二磷胆碱与去甲替林的戒烟疗效和安全性对比:一项多中心、随机、双盲和安慰剂对照试验。","authors":"Suthat Rungruanghiranya, Sirapat Tulatamakit, Kaweesak Chittawatanarat, Kanokwan Preedapornpakorn, Thanawat Wongphan, Narueporn Sutanthavibul, Sunida Preechawong, Pichaya Petborom","doi":"10.1111/resp.14787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Cytisine serves as an affordable smoking cessation aid with acceptable safety profile. However, data comparing its efficacy and safety to standard therapies are limited. We aimed to examine efficacy and safety of cytisine compared to nortriptyline, which is the only approved smoking-cessation medication in Thailand.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 12-month, multicentre, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Participants aged ≥20 years who smoked ≥10 cigarettes/day were randomly assigned to receive a 25-day cytisine or a 12-week nortriptyline treatment course. Brief interventions (BI) for smoking cessation were provided to all participants. The primary outcome was biochemically verified continuous abstinence rate (CAR) at 12 months. Additionally, self-reported abstinence, verified by exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) ≤ 10 ppm, was collected at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months to assess both CAR and 7-day point prevalence abstinence rate (PAR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1086 participants were recruited and randomized into cytisine (n = 540) and nortriptyline (n = 546) groups. The 12-month CAR was 12.22% for cytisine and 9.52% for nortriptyline. The relative difference was 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.01 to 0.06) and the relative risk was 1.28 (95% CI; 0.91-1.81). No differences were observed in secondary outcomes between both groups. The incidence of adverse effects from cytisine appeared to be lower than that of nortriptyline.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At 12 months, cytisine plus BI was as effective as nortriptyline plus BI for smoking cessation. The adverse events for both cytisine and nortriptyline were minimal and well-tolerated.</p>","PeriodicalId":21129,"journal":{"name":"Respirology","volume":" ","pages":"880-887"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of cytisine versus nortriptyline for smoking cessation: A multicentre, randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Suthat Rungruanghiranya, Sirapat Tulatamakit, Kaweesak Chittawatanarat, Kanokwan Preedapornpakorn, Thanawat Wongphan, Narueporn Sutanthavibul, Sunida Preechawong, Pichaya Petborom\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/resp.14787\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Cytisine serves as an affordable smoking cessation aid with acceptable safety profile. However, data comparing its efficacy and safety to standard therapies are limited. We aimed to examine efficacy and safety of cytisine compared to nortriptyline, which is the only approved smoking-cessation medication in Thailand.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 12-month, multicentre, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Participants aged ≥20 years who smoked ≥10 cigarettes/day were randomly assigned to receive a 25-day cytisine or a 12-week nortriptyline treatment course. Brief interventions (BI) for smoking cessation were provided to all participants. The primary outcome was biochemically verified continuous abstinence rate (CAR) at 12 months. Additionally, self-reported abstinence, verified by exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) ≤ 10 ppm, was collected at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months to assess both CAR and 7-day point prevalence abstinence rate (PAR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1086 participants were recruited and randomized into cytisine (n = 540) and nortriptyline (n = 546) groups. The 12-month CAR was 12.22% for cytisine and 9.52% for nortriptyline. The relative difference was 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.01 to 0.06) and the relative risk was 1.28 (95% CI; 0.91-1.81). No differences were observed in secondary outcomes between both groups. The incidence of adverse effects from cytisine appeared to be lower than that of nortriptyline.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At 12 months, cytisine plus BI was as effective as nortriptyline plus BI for smoking cessation. The adverse events for both cytisine and nortriptyline were minimal and well-tolerated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respirology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"880-887\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respirology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.14787\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respirology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.14787","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:Cytisine 是一种经济实惠且安全性可接受的戒烟辅助药物。然而,将其疗效和安全性与标准疗法进行比较的数据十分有限。我们旨在研究胞二辛与去甲替林(泰国唯一获批的戒烟药物)相比的疗效和安全性:方法:我们进行了一项为期 12 个月的多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验。年龄≥20岁、每天吸烟≥10支的参与者被随机分配接受为期25天的胞二磷胆碱或为期12周的去甲替林治疗。所有参与者均接受了简短的戒烟干预(BI)。主要结果是12个月后的生化验证连续戒烟率(CAR)。此外,还收集了2周、1、3、6和12个月时一氧化碳呼出量(CO)≤10 ppm的自我戒烟报告,以评估CAR和7天点戒烟率(PAR):共招募了 1086 名参与者,并随机分为胞二磷胆碱组(n = 540)和去甲替林组(n = 546)。12个月的CAR为:胞二磷胆碱组12.22%,去甲替林组9.52%。相对差异为 0.03(95% 置信区间 [CI];-0.01 至 0.06),相对风险为 1.28(95% CI;0.91-1.81)。两组患者的次要结果无差异。胞二磷胆碱的不良反应发生率似乎低于去甲替林:12个月后,胞二磷胆碱与去甲替林加去甲替林的戒烟效果相同。胞二磷胆碱和去甲替林的不良反应都很小,且耐受性良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of cytisine versus nortriptyline for smoking cessation: A multicentre, randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled trial.

Background and objective: Cytisine serves as an affordable smoking cessation aid with acceptable safety profile. However, data comparing its efficacy and safety to standard therapies are limited. We aimed to examine efficacy and safety of cytisine compared to nortriptyline, which is the only approved smoking-cessation medication in Thailand.

Methods: A 12-month, multicentre, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Participants aged ≥20 years who smoked ≥10 cigarettes/day were randomly assigned to receive a 25-day cytisine or a 12-week nortriptyline treatment course. Brief interventions (BI) for smoking cessation were provided to all participants. The primary outcome was biochemically verified continuous abstinence rate (CAR) at 12 months. Additionally, self-reported abstinence, verified by exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) ≤ 10 ppm, was collected at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months to assess both CAR and 7-day point prevalence abstinence rate (PAR).

Results: A total of 1086 participants were recruited and randomized into cytisine (n = 540) and nortriptyline (n = 546) groups. The 12-month CAR was 12.22% for cytisine and 9.52% for nortriptyline. The relative difference was 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.01 to 0.06) and the relative risk was 1.28 (95% CI; 0.91-1.81). No differences were observed in secondary outcomes between both groups. The incidence of adverse effects from cytisine appeared to be lower than that of nortriptyline.

Conclusion: At 12 months, cytisine plus BI was as effective as nortriptyline plus BI for smoking cessation. The adverse events for both cytisine and nortriptyline were minimal and well-tolerated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Respirology
Respirology 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
5.80%
发文量
225
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Respirology is a journal of international standing, publishing peer-reviewed articles of scientific excellence in clinical and clinically-relevant experimental respiratory biology and disease. Fields of research include immunology, intensive and critical care, epidemiology, cell and molecular biology, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, paediatric respiratory medicine, clinical trials, interventional pulmonology and thoracic surgery. The Journal aims to encourage the international exchange of results and publishes papers in the following categories: Original Articles, Editorials, Reviews, and Correspondences. Respirology is the preferred journal of the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand, has been adopted as the preferred English journal of the Japanese Respiratory Society and the Taiwan Society of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and is an official journal of the World Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology.
×
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