尼古丁袋与戒烟相关的临床结果:随机试验的系统回顾。

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Addiction Pub Date : 2025-09-26 DOI:10.1111/add.70193
Javad Heshmati, Spencer Shahen, Emma Lynn Bates, Sarah Visintini, Evyanne Quirouette, Kerri-Anne Mullen, Hassan Mir
{"title":"尼古丁袋与戒烟相关的临床结果:随机试验的系统回顾。","authors":"Javad Heshmati, Spencer Shahen, Emma Lynn Bates, Sarah Visintini, Evyanne Quirouette, Kerri-Anne Mullen, Hassan Mir","doi":"10.1111/add.70193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Tobacco-free nicotine pouches (NPs) are oral nicotine products promoted by manufacturers and some researchers as tools that may reduce nicotine cravings and support smoking reduction or cessation. However, evidence regarding their actual clinical impact remains limited. This review aimed to evaluate the potential clinical effects of NPs in the context of smoking cessation, specifically focusing on user satisfaction, smoking urges and cigarette reduction compared with other nicotine and tobacco products.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review of randomized trials conducted in adult smokers or nicotine users, reported according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Studies conducted in high-income countries across Europe and North America were included, with data collected up to March 2024.</p><p><strong>Participants/cases: </strong>Seven trials involving a total of 269 adult participants (≥18 years), including current smokers and users of other nicotine products. The review focused on tobacco-free NPs containing varying nicotine strengths and flavors. NPs were compared individually to multiple specific comparators across trials, including cigarettes, snus, nicotine gum and placebo, rather than being combined into a single comparator group.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The primary outcomes were user satisfaction, urges to smoke and changes in cigarette consumption, considered the most important outcomes for assessing the potential of NPs in smoking cessation.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>NPs were rated more favorably for satisfaction and product liking than gum or placebo, but consistently less than cigarettes (e.g. intent to reuse 14-46% for NPs vs. 57% for cigarettes). In one pilot randomized controlled trial, daily cigarette use decreased from 15.0 to 8.3 cigarettes/day over 8 weeks with 4 mg NPs (P = 0.01), with dependence scores also reduced (3.1 to 2.4, P = 0.02). Across studies (n = 7, sample sizes 24-63), none demonstrated a statistically significant increase in smoking cessation compared with control, snus or gum. Adverse events were mostly mild (e.g. cough, throat irritation, headache) and more frequent at higher NP doses, but no serious adverse events were reported. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tobacco-free nicotine pouches appear to be well tolerated and may reduce cigarette consumption compared with control, with effects similar to those seen with snus or nicotine gum. However, there is currently no statistically significant evidence that NPs increase rates of smoking cessation compared with other products or control.</p>","PeriodicalId":109,"journal":{"name":"Addiction","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nicotine pouches and clinical outcomes related to smoking cessation: A systematic review of randomized trials.\",\"authors\":\"Javad Heshmati, Spencer Shahen, Emma Lynn Bates, Sarah Visintini, Evyanne Quirouette, Kerri-Anne Mullen, Hassan Mir\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/add.70193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Tobacco-free nicotine pouches (NPs) are oral nicotine products promoted by manufacturers and some researchers as tools that may reduce nicotine cravings and support smoking reduction or cessation. However, evidence regarding their actual clinical impact remains limited. This review aimed to evaluate the potential clinical effects of NPs in the context of smoking cessation, specifically focusing on user satisfaction, smoking urges and cigarette reduction compared with other nicotine and tobacco products.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review of randomized trials conducted in adult smokers or nicotine users, reported according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Studies conducted in high-income countries across Europe and North America were included, with data collected up to March 2024.</p><p><strong>Participants/cases: </strong>Seven trials involving a total of 269 adult participants (≥18 years), including current smokers and users of other nicotine products. The review focused on tobacco-free NPs containing varying nicotine strengths and flavors. NPs were compared individually to multiple specific comparators across trials, including cigarettes, snus, nicotine gum and placebo, rather than being combined into a single comparator group.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The primary outcomes were user satisfaction, urges to smoke and changes in cigarette consumption, considered the most important outcomes for assessing the potential of NPs in smoking cessation.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>NPs were rated more favorably for satisfaction and product liking than gum or placebo, but consistently less than cigarettes (e.g. intent to reuse 14-46% for NPs vs. 57% for cigarettes). In one pilot randomized controlled trial, daily cigarette use decreased from 15.0 to 8.3 cigarettes/day over 8 weeks with 4 mg NPs (P = 0.01), with dependence scores also reduced (3.1 to 2.4, P = 0.02). Across studies (n = 7, sample sizes 24-63), none demonstrated a statistically significant increase in smoking cessation compared with control, snus or gum. Adverse events were mostly mild (e.g. cough, throat irritation, headache) and more frequent at higher NP doses, but no serious adverse events were reported. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tobacco-free nicotine pouches appear to be well tolerated and may reduce cigarette consumption compared with control, with effects similar to those seen with snus or nicotine gum. However, there is currently no statistically significant evidence that NPs increase rates of smoking cessation compared with other products or control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addiction\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addiction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70193\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70193","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:无烟草尼古丁袋(NPs)是由制造商和一些研究人员推广的口服尼古丁产品,可以减少对尼古丁的渴望,帮助减少或戒烟。然而,关于其实际临床影响的证据仍然有限。本综述旨在评估NPs在戒烟方面的潜在临床效果,特别是与其他尼古丁和烟草制品相比,NPs在用户满意度、吸烟冲动和吸烟量减少方面的效果。设计:系统评价在成年吸烟者或尼古丁使用者中进行的随机试验,根据PRISMA 2020指南报告并在PROSPERO注册。环境:在欧洲和北美的高收入国家进行的研究,收集的数据截至2024年3月。参与者/病例:7项试验共涉及269名成年参与者(≥18岁),包括当前吸烟者和其他尼古丁产品使用者。这篇综述的重点是含有不同尼古丁强度和口味的无烟NPs。NPs在试验中分别与多个特定的比较物进行比较,包括香烟、鼻烟、尼古丁口香糖和安慰剂,而不是合并成一个单独的比较物组。测量:主要结果是使用者满意度、吸烟的冲动和香烟消费的变化,这被认为是评估NPs在戒烟中的潜力的最重要的结果。研究结果:NPs在满意度和产品喜好方面的评分高于口香糖或安慰剂,但始终低于香烟(例如,NPs的重复使用意图为14-46%,香烟为57%)。在一项随机对照试验中,服用4 mg NPs 8周后,每日吸烟从15.0支/天减少到8.3支/天(P = 0.01),依赖评分也降低(3.1降至2.4,P = 0.02)。在所有研究中(n = 7,样本量24-63),没有一项研究表明与对照组、鼻烟或口香糖相比,戒烟率有统计学上的显著提高。不良事件大多是轻微的(如咳嗽、喉咙刺激、头痛),在高NP剂量下更频繁,但没有严重不良事件的报道。由于研究设计和结果存在异质性,未进行meta分析。结论:与对照组相比,无烟草尼古丁袋似乎耐受性良好,可能会减少香烟消费量,其效果与鼻烟或尼古丁口香糖相似。然而,目前没有显著的统计证据表明,与其他产品或对照相比,NPs增加了戒烟率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nicotine pouches and clinical outcomes related to smoking cessation: A systematic review of randomized trials.

Background and aims: Tobacco-free nicotine pouches (NPs) are oral nicotine products promoted by manufacturers and some researchers as tools that may reduce nicotine cravings and support smoking reduction or cessation. However, evidence regarding their actual clinical impact remains limited. This review aimed to evaluate the potential clinical effects of NPs in the context of smoking cessation, specifically focusing on user satisfaction, smoking urges and cigarette reduction compared with other nicotine and tobacco products.

Design: Systematic review of randomized trials conducted in adult smokers or nicotine users, reported according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO.

Setting: Studies conducted in high-income countries across Europe and North America were included, with data collected up to March 2024.

Participants/cases: Seven trials involving a total of 269 adult participants (≥18 years), including current smokers and users of other nicotine products. The review focused on tobacco-free NPs containing varying nicotine strengths and flavors. NPs were compared individually to multiple specific comparators across trials, including cigarettes, snus, nicotine gum and placebo, rather than being combined into a single comparator group.

Measurements: The primary outcomes were user satisfaction, urges to smoke and changes in cigarette consumption, considered the most important outcomes for assessing the potential of NPs in smoking cessation.

Findings: NPs were rated more favorably for satisfaction and product liking than gum or placebo, but consistently less than cigarettes (e.g. intent to reuse 14-46% for NPs vs. 57% for cigarettes). In one pilot randomized controlled trial, daily cigarette use decreased from 15.0 to 8.3 cigarettes/day over 8 weeks with 4 mg NPs (P = 0.01), with dependence scores also reduced (3.1 to 2.4, P = 0.02). Across studies (n = 7, sample sizes 24-63), none demonstrated a statistically significant increase in smoking cessation compared with control, snus or gum. Adverse events were mostly mild (e.g. cough, throat irritation, headache) and more frequent at higher NP doses, but no serious adverse events were reported. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes.

Conclusions: Tobacco-free nicotine pouches appear to be well tolerated and may reduce cigarette consumption compared with control, with effects similar to those seen with snus or nicotine gum. However, there is currently no statistically significant evidence that NPs increase rates of smoking cessation compared with other products or control.

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
Addiction
Addiction 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
319
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Addiction publishes peer-reviewed research reports on pharmacological and behavioural addictions, bringing together research conducted within many different disciplines. Its goal is to serve international and interdisciplinary scientific and clinical communication, to strengthen links between science and policy, and to stimulate and enhance the quality of debate. We seek submissions that are not only technically competent but are also original and contain information or ideas of fresh interest to our international readership. We seek to serve low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries as well as more economically developed countries. Addiction’s scope spans human experimental, epidemiological, social science, historical, clinical and policy research relating to addiction, primarily but not exclusively in the areas of psychoactive substance use and/or gambling. In addition to original research, the journal features editorials, commentaries, reviews, letters, and book reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信