Skip to main content
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2019 Jan 29;114(5):787–797. doi: 10.1111/add.14549

Modelling continuous abstinence rates over time from clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation

Sarah E Jackson 1,, Jennifer A McGowan 1, Harveen Kaur Ubhi 1, Hannah Proudfoot 1, Lion Shahab 1, Jamie Brown 1, Robert West 1
PMCID: PMC6492005  PMID: 30614586

Abstract

Background and aim

It is useful, for theoretical and practical reasons, to be able to specify functions for continuous abstinence over time in smoking cessation attempts. This study aimed to find the best‐fitting models of mean proportion abstinent with different smoking cessation pharmacotherapies up to 52 weeks from the quit date.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological treatments to aid smoking cessation. For comparability, we selected trials that provided 12 weeks of treatment. Continuous abstinence rates for each treatment at each follow‐up point in trials were extracted along with methodological details of the trial. Data points for each pharmacotherapy at each follow‐up point were aggregated where the total across contributing studies included at least 1000 participants per data point. Continuous abstinence curves were modelled using a range of different functions from the quit date to 52‐week follow‐up. Models were compared for fit using R 2 and Bayesian information criterion (BIC).

Results

Studies meeting our selection criteria covered three pharmacotherapies [varenicline, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion] and placebo. Power functions provided the best fit (R 2 > 0.99, BIC < 17.0) to continuous abstinence curves from the target quit date in all cases except for varenicline, where a logarithmic function described the curve best (R 2 = 0.99, BIC = 21.2). At 52 weeks, abstinence rates were 22.5% (23.0% modelled) for varenicline, 16.7% (16.0% modelled) for bupropion, 13.0% (12.4% modelled) for NRT and 8.3% (8.9% modelled) for placebo. For varenicline, bupropion, NRT and placebo, respectively, 55.9, 65.0, 62.3 and 56.5% of participants who were abstinent at the end of treatment were still abstinent at 52 weeks.

Conclusions

Mean continuous abstinence rates up to 52 weeks from initiation of smoking cessation attempts in clinical trials can be modelled using simple power functions for placebo, nicotine replacement therapy and bupropion and a logarithmic function for varenicline. This allows accurate prediction of abstinence rates from any time point to any other time point up to 52 weeks.

Keywords: Bupropion, continuous abstinence, nicotine replacement therapy, pharmacological interventions, relapse, smoking cessation, smoking cessation aids, varenicline

Introduction

Continuous abstinence rates after initiation of a smoking quit attempt follow a negatively decelerating curve over time 1. This is a common pattern with attempts to stop engaging in addictive behaviours 2. It is useful to be able to model the curve relating continuous abstinence to time from quit attempt initiation in order to understand the processes underlying smoking relapse and the impact of treatments on these processes, as well as for the more practical goal of predicting long‐term abstinence rates from short‐term outcomes. This paper synthesizes evidence from clinical trials of pharmacotherapies in smoking cessation to derive best‐fitting, up‐to‐date models of mean continuous abstinence rates as a function of time since the quit attempt started.

Results of clinical trials and cohort studies suggest that with unaided quit attempts, only approximately a quarter of those trying to quit remain abstinent for a week, fewer than one in 10 remain abstinent for 6 months and fewer than one in 20 remain abstinent at 1 year 1. Continuous abstinence curves for smokers receiving support for quitting can be derived for a number of individual studies with multiple follow‐up points 3, 4, 5, but functions describing the shape of the continuous abstinence curve over time have not been specified thus far.

Some studies have specifically addressed the question of whether relapse rates increase when treatment is terminated. A recent synthesis of evidence from trials of varenicline showed a higher relapse rate from the end of 12 weeks of treatment to 24‐week follow‐up than for placebo 6, but the difference had disappeared by 52‐week follow‐up. Studies exploring the long‐term impact of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) have found diminishing efficacy in terms of absolute percentage differences from placebo with increased time since quit attempt initiation 7, 8. None of these studies sought to model the shape of the relapse curve, however.

Modelling the shape of continuous abstinence curves in smoking cessation is important for several reasons: (1) if the continuous abstinence curves follow a well‐defined and relatively simple mathematical formula, it would allow for prediction of abstinence rates from any time‐point to any future time‐point, which is important clinically and when assessing health impact 9. (2) The shape of the curve may help in understanding what drives resumption of smoking at different time‐points. It has been suggested that factors affecting early resumption of smoking may differ in kind from those driving later resumption 10. This, in turn, has implications for interventions that may be effective at different time‐points. (3) If the curves follow different shapes with different pharmacotherapies, it suggests that these may operate differentially on factors influencing resumption of smoking. For example, if the curve shows an inflection downwards post‐treatment for a given pharmacotherapy, it suggests either that it is not adequately addressing chronic factors that lead to smoking resumption or that the treatment duration was too short.

When seeking to study continuous abstinence curves it is important to have high‐quality data with high follow‐up rates. Prospective cohort studies can provide valuable information, but often there are limitations with regard to loss to follow‐up and inconsistencies in treatment duration that make it difficult to make meaningful comparisons. With greater control over treatment conditions, higher retention rates and data collection occurring at multiple time‐points, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide an opportunity to examine continuous abstinence following pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in greater detail. This study therefore aggregated data from high‐quality RCTs to describe the shape and parameters of mean continuous abstinence curves associated with different smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Specifically, we aimed to address the following research questions:

  1. What functions best characterize the shape of mean continuous abstinence curves over the first year following quit attempts in smoking cessation RCTs?

  2. Do these differ with different pharmacotherapies?

Method

Search strategy and study selection

Details of our study search and selection procedure are provided in Fig. 1. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library (from 1990 to March 2017) for reviews with ‘smoking’ in the title, abstract or keyword fields. The results were assessed by three authors (J.M., H.U., R.W.) in order to identify reviews focusing on pharmacological treatments for smoking cessation; seven were identified as being appropriate for this study 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. The reference lists of these reviews provided a pool of potential studies for inclusion in the present study. Supporting information, Appendix S1 contains an Excel file providing details of all studies considered in case readers wish to undertake their own analyses.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of search strategy and study selection

We included RCTs that compared continuous abstinence rates between pharmacological interventions, between one intervention and a placebo or between different pharmacotherapy doses and a placebo. We limited our search to articles published since 1990 because we considered trial reporting and conduct to have improved since then, with agreed reporting criteria for trials such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) being more widely used 18. Trials that compared a pharmacological intervention with ‘standard care’ were excluded, as were studies that focused on a reduction in cigarette consumption, or setting of quit dates rather than abstinence. We also excluded trials of combinations of different pharmacotherapies. Trials that reported only point prevalence (as opposed to continuous) abstinence rates were excluded, because it was not possible to determine whether abstinence was the result of the initial quit attempt. Trials with a sample size < 10 participants were also excluded, because it was judged that these would have been pilot or feasibility trials. We did not exclude any studies by virtue of heaviness of smoking or other smoker characteristics, but the large majority of studies set a minimum of 10 or more cigarettes per day for inclusion.

Due to the stringent criteria of Cochrane Reviews, all included RCTs were considered to be of acceptable standard. Studies awaiting assessments and ongoing studies were included where results were available.

Data extraction

RCTs that met the criteria detailed above were extracted from the relevant Cochrane Reviews. From these trials we extracted information on sample size, pharmacotherapies used, length of pharmacotherapy intervention, start point of follow‐up, duration of follow‐up and the percentage of participants who were continuously abstinent over time in each condition from a given start point to each follow‐up point. Other data extracted from the trials included year of publication, year of trial start and country of origin.

Analyses

There was significant heterogeneity across study samples, methods and presentation of results. In order to standardize results for comparison across different pharmacotherapies while maximizing data available for the estimation of continuous abstinence curves, we selected studies that had used a 12‐week treatment programme; this was the modal and median duration of treatments in the 98 studies 4, 5, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115 from which we extracted data. We used Microsoft Excel 2013 to plot the mean continuous abstinence rates weighted by sample size for follow‐up points where there were aggregated data from a minimum of 1000 participants for all treatment groups. The resulting graphs describe the mean continuous abstinence rates associated with the different pharmacotherapies, displaying curves from the start of treatment to 52 weeks (the longest follow‐up for which the required data were available). For each treatment group, we compared four function classes (linear, exponential, logarithmic, and power) and fitted the one with the highest R 2. To handle zero values in the case of power functions, the starting time‐point was 0.1 week, representing less than 1 day of abstinence. Model selection was confirmed by comparing the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) of each curve (calculated in Stata version 15), with lower BIC values indicating better model fit.

To check how far the relapse curves from the aggregated data matched within‐study changes in continuous abstinence rates over time, we superimposed lines between consecutive pairs of time‐points with each of the three largest studies, including where there were data available for additional time‐points for each pharmacotherapy, onto our continuous abstinence curves to assess whether the curves were a reasonable fit.

Results

Our search and selection procedure (Fig. 1) identified 43 trials eligible for inclusion in the present analysis. Their characteristics are summarized in Table 1. A total of 23 trials used varenicline 4, 69, 70, 71, 74, 77, 78, 80, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 101, 103, 109, 110, 115, 12 used bupropion 4, 50, 56, 63, 64, 66, 69, 70, 85, 90, 95, 101 and 15 used NRT 4, 22, 25, 28, 29, 30, 32, 48, 49, 72, 88, 90, 100, 105, 113, with some studies using more than one of these pharmacotherapies in different treatment groups. A placebo was used as a control in 38 of these trials 4, 22, 25, 28, 29, 30, 32, 48, 49, 50, 56, 63, 64, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 77, 78, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 100, 101, 103, 105, 109, 110, 113, 115, and a further two trials provided only placebo data due to the active comparator failing to meet criteria for inclusion 45, 104.

Table 1.

Characteristics of included studies.

 
Authors
Year Country of origin Special samples Pharmacotherapies (italics indicate those not included in modelling) n (in order of stated pharmacotherapies) Follow‐up points (weeks)
Sachs et al. 22 1993 Sweden NRT patch, placebo 110, 110 6, 12, 18, 26, 52
Imperial Cancer Research fund General practice research group 25 1994 UK NRT patch, placebo 842, 844 12, 52
Gourlay et al. 29 1995 Australia NRT patch, placebo 315, 314 4, 8, 12, 26
Stapleton et al. 28 1995 UK NRT patch, placebo 800, 400 3, 6, 12, 26, 52
Campbell et al. 30 1996 UK Hospital patients NRT patch, placebo 115, 119 12, 52
Sønderskov et al. 32 1997 Denmark NRT patch, placebo 251, 142 4, 8, 12, 26
Wong et al. 45 1999 USA Naltrexone, placebo 23, 26 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24
Tønnesen et al. 49 2000 Denmark Lung clinic attenders NRT patch, NRT inhaler, placebo 104, 118, 109 2, 6, 12, 36, 52
Wallström et al. 48 2000 Sweden NRT sublingual tablet, placebo 123, 124 6, 12, 24, 52
Tashkin et al. 50 2001 USA Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Bupropion, placebo 129, 149 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 26
Trial ZYB40001 56 2003 Canada Bupropion, placebo 141, 143 7, 12
Evins et al. 64 2005 USA Schizophrenics Bupropion, placebo 25, 28 12
Wagena et al. 63 2005 Netherlands At risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Bupropion, nortriptyline, placebo 86, 80, 89 12, 26
Gonzales et al. 69 2006 USA Varenicline, bupropion, placebo 352, 329, 344 12, 24, 52
Jorenby et al. 70 2006 USA Varenicline, bupropion, placebo 344, 342, 341 12, 24, 52
Oncken et al. 71 2006 USA Varenicline, placebo 518, 129 7, 12, 24, 52
Rigotti et al. 66 2006 USA Hospitalized with acute cardiovascular disease Bupropion, placebo 124, 123 12, 52
David et al. 72 2007 UK NRT patch, placebo 370, 371 12, 24
Nakamura et al. 74 2007 Japan Varenicline, placebo 465, 154 12, 24, 52
Tsai et al. 77 2007 Korea, Taiwan Varenicline, placebo 126, 124 12, 24
Aubin et al. 80 2008 UK, USA, Belgium, France, Netherlands Varenicline, NRT patch a 376, 370 12, 52
Niaura et al. 78 2008 USA Varenicline, placebo 157, 155 7, 12, 24, 52
Wang et al. 84 2009 China, Singapore, Thailand Varenicline, placebo 158, 161 12, 24
Fagerström et al. 87 2010 Norway, Sweden Varenicline, placebo 213, 218 12, 26
Fagerström et al. 89 2010 6 Asian countries Varenicline, placebo 447, 446 12, 24
Hays et al. 85 2010 USA Varenicline, bupropion, placebo 692, 669, 684 12
Rigotti et al. 86 2010 15 countries Stable cardiovascular disease Varenicline, placebo 355, 359 12, 24, 52
Tsukahara et al. 88 2010 Japan Varenicline, NRT patch 16, 16 12, 24
Bolliger et al. 93 2011 11 countries Varenicline, placebo 390, 198 12, 24
Tashkin et al. 91 2011 USA, Spain, France, Italy Mild/moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Varenicline, placebo 250, 254 12, 24, 52
Wittchen et al. 90 2011 Germany Bupropion, NRT 108, 105 52
Xenakis et al. 95 2011 USA Varenicline, bupropion, placebo 696, 671, 685 12, 52
Rennard et al. 98 2012 14 countries Varenicline, placebo 493, 166 12, 24
Tønnesen et al. 100 2012 Denmark, Germany NRT mouth spray, placebo 318, 161 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 52
Anthenelli et al. 103 2013 8 countries Major depression Varenicline, placebo 256, 269 12, 24, 52
Bullen et al. 105 2013 New Zealand NRT patch, e‐cigarettes, placebo 295, 289, 73 4, 12, 24
Caponnetto et al. 104 2013 Italy E‐cigarettes, placebo 200, 100 12, 52
Cinciripini et al. 101 2013 USA Varenicline, bupropion, placebo 86, 102, 106 12, 24, 36
Gonzales et al. 110 2014 8 countries Varenicline, placebo 249, 245 12, 24, 52
Trial NCT01347112 109 2014 USA Alcoholics Varenicline, placebo 16, 17 12, 24
O'Brien et al. 113 2015 New Zealand With and without mental illness NRT patch, e‐cigarettes, placebo 260, 250, 61 24
Anthenelli et al. 4 2016 16 countries With and without psychiatric disorders Varenicline, bupropion, NRT patch, placebo 2037, 2034, 2038, 2035 12, 24
Eisenberg et al. 115 2016 Canada Hospitalized patients with acute coronary syndrome Varenicline, placebo 151, 151 4, 12, 24

All studies involved 12 weeks of pharmacotherapy.

a

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) patch was administered for 10 weeks. so results were not included in analyses.

Figure 2 shows the continuous abstinence curves from the quit date to 52‐week follow‐up for varenicline, bupropion, NRT and placebo. An interactive version of this graph is available in Supporting information, Appendix S2. The shape of the continuous abstinence curve was similar throughout the different pharmacotherapies (including placebo), with relapse rates highest in the initial 3–4 weeks and slowly tapering off after the end of treatment. Comparison of model selection statistics (Table 2) indicated that continuous abstinence data for bupropion, NRT and placebo could best be described by a power function (all R 2 > 0.99), while the best‐fitting curve for varenicline was logarithmic (R 2 = 0.99). Equations for the best‐fitting curve for each pharmacotherapy are shown in Fig. 2. The power function for varenicline also fitted well (Supporting information, Fig. S1: R 2 = 0.94), but it overestimated the 52‐week abstinence rate.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Continuous abstinence rates with best‐fitting curves estimated from continuous abstinence rates from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 12‐week treatment with smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Table 2.

Model selection statistics for continuous abstinence curves from 0 to 52 weeks.

Varenicline Bupropion NRT Placebo
R 2 BIC R 2 BIC R 2 BIC R 2 BIC
Linear 0.669 37.01 0.516 39.60 0.499 40.12 0.503 40.44
Exponential 0.817 31.53 0.619 31.97 0.613 30.73 0.678 28.78
Logarithmic 0.994 21.16 0.984 25.88 0.980 27.23 0.980 27.55
Power 0.940 26.69 0.991 16.92 0.996 11.75 0.998 7.29

BIC = Bayesian information criterion; NRT = nicotine replacement therapy.

At the end of treatment, 45.1% (41.2% modelled; logarithmic curve) of participants treated with varenicline, 26.3% (24.6% modelled) of those treated with bupropion, 20.8% (20.2% modelled) of those treated with NRT and 16.2% (15.7% modelled) of those treated with placebo were still abstinent. By 52 weeks, abstinence rates had fallen to 22.5% (23.0% modelled) for varenicline, 16.7% (16.0% modelled) for bupropion, 13.0% (12.4% modelled) for NRT and 8.3% (8.9% modelled) for placebo. A total of 49.8% (55.9% modelled) of those treated with varenicline, 63.4% (65.0% modelled) of those treated with bupropion, 62.5% (61.3% modelled) of those treated with NRT and 51.5% (56.5% modelled) of those treated with placebo who were abstinent at the end of treatment were still abstinent at 52 weeks.

Superimposing lines drawn between continuous abstinence rates from consecutive follow‐up points within the three largest studies for each pharmacotherapy showed a good fit to the modelled curves (Supporting information, Fig. S2).

Discussion

There were sufficient data to enable reliable estimation of mean continuous abstinence rates for end of treatment (12‐week post‐quit date), 26‐ and 52‐week time‐points. The shape of the function relating these to time could best be modelled by power functions for placebo, NRT and bupropion and a logarithmic function for varenicline.

Being able to describe continuous abstinence curves using a simple function, in theory, provides a basis for predicting relapse from one time‐point to any other time‐point. This is useful when one only has short‐term follow‐up data available, or when interpolating back from long‐term data. In UK stop‐smoking services, for example, it is common to use 4‐ or 12‐week abstinence rates in targets because limited resources make it impracticable to collect accurate longer‐term data. Unfortunately, there were not sufficient data to estimate continuous abstinence rates prior to 12 weeks, so it is possible that more complex functions during the treatment period may have been missed. However, we were able to provide precise estimates of mean relapse rates following end of treatment for the different pharmacotherapies.

The finding that a single function starting at the quit date was able to capture abstinence rates at the end of treatment, as well as 26‐ and 52‐week abstinence rates, suggests that a single relapse process is in operation during and after treatment. This appears to conflict with studies suggesting that different processes may be in operation. However, it remains possible that different processes are in operation, but their combined effects remain the same. This is a topic that merits further investigation.

We did not see evidence for a point of inflection in the curves at the end of treatment with the active pharmacotherapies, which also suggests that by 12 weeks from the quit date these pharmacotherapies have had whatever effect they are going to have. This accords with findings from trials with NRT which have not found clear evidence for a benefit of extending treatment beyond 12 weeks 5, 7. It conflicts with findings from a large RCT with varenicline, which showed a benefit from extending treatment for a further 12 weeks 116. However, this benefit appeared to occur with participants who had not managed to attain abstinence early on and had only been abstinent for a short while when the 12‐week course of treatment ended 117. This suggests an optimum treatment regimen for varenicline of 12 weeks if smokers are able to abstain during the first week, but 24 weeks if they only manage to abstain after a few weeks—the aim being to ensure that they receive approximately 12 weeks of pharmacotherapy from the point at which they initiate abstinence.

Of the four functions we fitted to the data, power functions provided the best fit for continuous abstinence from all treatments with the exception of varenicline, which was better described by a logarithmic curve. This difference was driven by the higher 12‐week abstinence rate observed in participants treated with varenicline. Methodological differences between trials of varenicline and other pharmacotherapies may account for at least some of this variance. Varenicline trials typically measure continuous abstinence from week 9 rather than from the target quit date, so the figure may be somewhat inflated, given that varenicline recruits smokers into abstinence for several weeks after the target quit date 118. The results suggest that there is no benefit in recruiting these additional smokers into abstinence, as they are more likely to relapse between the end of treatment and 52‐week follow‐up compared with those treated with other pharmacotherapies.

This study had several limitations. First, there was substantial heterogeneity in trial methods and study samples which may have introduced noise to the data points. Secondly, there were only sufficient data to plot abstinence rates for 12, 24 and 52 weeks after the start of treatment. It would have been useful to have data available on a greater number of time‐points to incorporate into our continuous abstinence curves, particularly in the early weeks where relapse rates were very high. Thirdly, we were only able to include three pharmacotherapies and placebo in our analysis. There were insufficient data available on combination NRT and other popular and emerging pharmacological aids to smoking cessation, such as e‐cigarettes, nortriptyline and cytisine, and it is possible that the continuous abstinence curves associated with these treatments may differ from those observed here. Fourthly, we pre‐specified a small number of functions, and it may be that another function would be more appropriate. Although the fit of the selected function was very high, there was only a small number of follow‐up points. With more follow‐up points, a better‐fitting function might emerge. Fifthly, while a power function provided a very good fit in most cases, the y value is infinite at x = 0 rather than 100%, so the starting point for time has to be a number above 0. We chose 0.1 weeks (representing less than 1 day) as a value close to 0, and this provided a very close fit to the data. However, a more mathematically sound function with a similar shape may be preferable. Finally, we limited follow‐up to 52 weeks because of the scarcity of data points after that point. Studies with longer‐term follow‐up have been conducted, and these suggest that approximately 30% of those who abstain for 52 weeks relapse at some point within the next 10 years 7. This suggests that the power function, which has a very shallow slope after 52 weeks, may be an adequate fit to the longer‐term continuous abstinence curve.

In conclusion, this study indicates that a power function, or a function very close to it in shape, provides a very close fit to mean continuous abstinence from smoking in studies of smokers trying to quit using placebo, nicotine replacement therapy or bupropion. For varenicline, a logarithmic function appears to provide a better fit.

Declaration of interests

J.B. has received unrestricted research funding from Pfizer, who manufacture smoking cessation medications. L.S. has received a research grant and honoraria for a talk and travel expenses from manufacturers of smoking cessation medications (Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson). R.W. undertakes research and consultancy for and receives travel funds and hospitality from manufacturers of smoking cessation medications (Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson and Johnson). All authors declare no financial links with tobacco companies or e‐cigarette manufacturers or their representatives.

Supporting information

Appendix S1 Excel file containing details of all studies considered for inclusion.

Appendix S2 Interactive graph showing abstinence rates with best‐fit curves estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of 12‐week treatment with smoking cessation pharmacotherapies.

Figure S1 Continuous abstinence rates with power curve for varenicline estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of smoking cessation.

Figure S2 Continuous abstinence rates with best‐fit curves estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of 12‐week treatment with (A) bupropion, (B) varenicline, (C) nicotine replacement therapy and (D) placebo, with consecutive pairs of data points from the three largest studies for each treatment.

Acknowledgements

S.E.J., H.P., J.B. and R.W. are funded by Cancer Research UK (C1417/A22962). J.M. is funded by an innovation grant from Cancer Research UK (C42785/A20811) and the National Centre for Smoking Cessation.

Jackson S. E., McGowan J. A., Ubhi H. K., Proudfoot H., Shahab L., Brown J., and West R. (2019) Modelling continuous abstinence rates over time from clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation, Addiction, 114, 787–797. 10.1111/add.14549.

References

  • 1. Hughes J. R., Keely J., Naud S. Shape of the relapse curve and long‐term abstinence among untreated smokers. Addiction 2004; 99: 29–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Kirshenbaum A. P., Olsen D. M., Bickel W. K. A quantitative review of the ubiquitous relapse curve. J Subst Abuse Treat 2009; 36: 8–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Dobbie F., Hiscock R., Leonardi‐Bee J., Murray S., Shahab L., Aveyard P. et al Evaluating long‐term outcomes of NHS stop smoking services (ELONS): a prospective cohort study NIHR Journals Library. Health Technol Assess 2015; 19: 1–156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Anthenelli R. M., Benowitz N. L., West R., Aubin L. S., McRae T., Lawrence D. et al Neuropsychiatric safety and efficacy of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine patch in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders (EAGLES): a double‐blind, randomised, placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Lancet 2016; 387: 2507–2520. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Tønnesen P., Paoletti P., Gustavsson G., Russell M. A., Saracci R., Gulsvik A. et al Higher dosage nicotine patches increase one‐year smoking cessation rates: results from the European CEASE trial. Collaborative European anti‐smoking evaluation. European Respiratory Society. Eur Respir J 1999; 13: 238–246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Agboola S. A., Coleman T., McNeill A., Leonardi‐Bee J. Abstinence and relapse among smokers who use varenicline in a quit attempt—a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials. Addiction 2015; 110: 1182–1193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Etter J.‐F., Stapleton J. A. Nicotine replacement therapy for long‐term smoking cessation: a meta‐analysis. Tob Control 2006; 15: 280–285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Rosen L. J., Galili T., Kott J., Goodman M., Freedman L. S. Diminishing benefit of smoking cessation medications during the first year: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Addiction 2018; 113: 805–816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. West R., Coyle K., Owen L., Coyle D., Pokhrel S. Estimates of effectiveness and reach for ‘return on investment’ modelling of smoking cessation interventions using data from England. Addiction 2018; 113: 19–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Herd N., Borland R., Hyland A. Predictors of smoking relapse by duration of abstinence: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Addiction 2009; 104: 2088–2099. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Hartmann‐Boyce J., Cahill K., Hatsukami D., Cornuz J. Nicotine vaccines for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 8: CD007072. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Hartmann‐Boyce J., McRobbie H., Bullen C., Begh R., Stead L. F., Hajek P. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 9: CD010216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Cahill K., Stead L. F., Lancaster T. Nicotine receptor partial agonists for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 4: CD006103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Stead L. F., Lancaster T. Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 10: CD008286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Cahill K., Ussher M. H. Cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 3: CD005353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Hughes J. R., Stead L. F., Hartmann‐Boyce J., Cahill K., Lancaster T. Antidepressants for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 1: CD000031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Stead L. F., Perera R., Bullen C., Mant D., Lancaster T. Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 1: CD000146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Begg C., Cho M., Eastwood S., Horton R., Moher D., Olkin I. et al Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Tonnesen P., Norregaard J., Simonsen K., Säwe U. A. Double‐blind trial of a 16‐hour transdermal nicotine patch in smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 311–315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Christen A., Beiswanger B., Mau M., Walker C., Hatsukami D., Allen S. et al Transdermal nicotine for smoking cessation: six‐month results from two multicenter controlled clinical trials. JAMA 1991; 266: 3133–3138. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Sutherland G., Stapleton J. A., Russell M. A., Jarvis M. J., Hajek P., Belcher M. et al Randomised controlled trial of nasal nicotine spray in smoking cessation. Lancet 1992; 340: 324–329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Sachs D. P., Säwe U., Leischow S. J. Effectiveness of a 16‐hour transdermal nicotine patch in a medical practice setting, without intensive group counseling. Arch Intern Med 1993; 153: 1881–1890. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Russell M. A., Stapleton J. A., Feyerabend C., Wiseman S. M., Gustavsson G., Sawe U. et al Targeting heavy smokers in general practice: randomised controlled trial of transdermal nicotine patches. BMJ 1993; 306: 1308–1312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Hjalmarson A., Franzon M., Westin A., Wiklund O. Effect of nicotine nasal spray on smoking cessation. A randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 2567–2572. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Group BMJP Randomised trial of nicotine patches in general practice: results at one year. BMJ 1994; 308: 1476–1477. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Herrera N., Franco R., Herrera L., Partidas A., Rolando R., Fagerström K. O. Nicotine gum, 2 and 4 mg, for nicotine dependence. A double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial within a behavior modification support program. Chest 1995; 108: 447–451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Schneider N. G., Olmstead R., Mody F. V., Doan K., Franzon M., Jarvik M. E. et al Efficacy of a nicotine nasal spray in smoking cessation: a placebo‐controlled, double‐blind trial. Addiction 1995; 90: 1671–1682. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Stapleton J. A., Russell M. A., Feyerabend C., Wiseman S. M., Gustavsson G., Sawe U. et al Dose effects and predictors of outcome in a randomized trial of transdermal nicotine patches in general practice. Addiction 1995; 90: 31–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Gourlay S. G., Forbes A., Marriner T., Pethica D., McNeil J. J. Double blind trial of repeated treatment with transdermal nicotine for relapsed smokers. BMJ 1995; 311: 363–366. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Campbell I. A., Prescott R. J., Tjeder‐Burton S. M. Transdermal nicotine plus support in patients attending hospital with smoking‐related diseases: a placebo‐controlled study. Respir Med 1996; 90: 47–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Schneider N. G., Olmstead R., Nilsson F., Mody F. V., Franzon M., Doan K. Efficacy of a nicotine inhaler in smoking cessation: a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Addiction 1996; 91: 1293–1306. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Sønderskov J., Olsen J., Sabroe S., Meillier L., Overvad K. Nicotine patches in smoking cessation: a randomized trial among over‐the‐counter customers in Denmark. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 145: 309–318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Hurt R. D., Sachs D. P., Glover E. D., Offord K. P., Johnston J. A., Dale L. C. et al A comparison of sustained‐release bupropion and placebo for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 1195–1202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Richmond R. L., Kehoe L., de Almeida Neto A. C. Effectiveness of a 24‐hour transdermal nicotine patch in conjunction with a cognitive behavioural programme: 1‐year outcome. Addiction 1997; 92: 27–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Blöndal T., Franzon M., Westin A. A double‐blind randomized trial of nicotine nasal spray as an aid in smoking cessation. Eur Respir J 1997; 10: 1585–1590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Hjalmarson A., Nilsson F., Sjöström L., Wiklund O. The nicotine inhaler in smoking cessation. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 1721–1728. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Ahluwalia J. S., McNagny S. E., Clark W. S. Smoking cessation among inner‐city African Americans using the nicotine transdermal patch. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13: 1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Stapleton J. A., Sutherland G., Russell M. A. H. How much does relapse after one year erode effectiveness of smoking cessation treatments? Long term follow up of randomised trial of nicotine nasal spray. BMJ 1998; 316: 830–831. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Davidson M., Epstein M., Burt R., Schaefer C., Whitworth G., McDonald A. Efficacy and safety of an over‐the‐counter transdermal nicotine patch as an aid for smoking cessation. Arch Fam Med 1998; 7: 569–574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Hall S. M., Reus V. I., Muñoz R. F., Sees K. L., Humfleet G., Hartz D. T. et al Nortriptyline and cognitive‐behavioral therapy in the treatment of cigarette smoking. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 683–690. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Hays J. T., Croghan I. T., Schroeder D. R., Offord K. P., Hurt R. D., Wolter T. D. et al Over‐the‐counter nicotine patch therapy for smoking cessation: results from randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, and open label trials. Am J Public Health 1999; 89: 1701–1707. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Jorenby D. E., Leischow S. J., Nides M. A., Rennard S. I., Johnston J. A., Hughes A. R. et al A controlled trial of sustained‐release bupropion, a nicotine patch, or both for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 685–691. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Daughton D. M., Fortmann S. P., Glover E. D., Hatsukami D. K., Heatley S. A., Lichtenstein E. et al The smoking cessation efficacy of varying doses of nicotine patch delivery systems 4 to 5 years post‐quit day. Prev Med 1999; 28: 113–118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Hughes J. R., Lesmes G. R., Hatsukami D. K., Richmond R. L., Lichtenstein E., Jorenby D. E. et al Are higher doses of nicotine replacement more effective for smoking cessation? Nicotine Tob Res 1999; 1: 169–174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Wong G. Y., Wolter T. D., Croghan G. A., Croghan I. T., Offord K. P., Hurt R. D. A randomized trial of naltrexone for smoking cessation. Addiction 1999; 94: 1227–1237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Wisborg K., Henriksen T. B., Jespersen L. B., Secher N. J. Nicotine patches for pregnant smokers: a randomized controlled study. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96: 967–971. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Multi‐Center, Double‐Blind, Double‐Dummy, Placebo‐Controlled, Randomized, Parallel Group , Dose response evaluation of a new chemical entity (NCE) and ZYBAN (bupropion hydrochloride) sustained release (300mg/day) versus placebo as aids to smoking cessation [internet]. Study ID SMK20001; 2000. Available at: www.gsk-clinicalstudyregister.com/study/SMK20001 (accessed 1 December 2018) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/75UsNvnm2 on 17 January 2019).
  • 48. Wallström M., Nilsson F., Hirsch J. M. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical evaluation of a nicotine sublingual tablet in smoking cessation. Addiction 2000; 95: 1161–1171. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Tønnesen P., Mikkelsen K. L. Smoking cessation with four nicotine replacement regimes in a lung clinic. Eur Respir J 2000; 16: 717–722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Tashkin D., Kanner R., Bailey W., Buist S., Anderson P., Nides M. et al Smoking cessation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomised trial. Lancet 2001; 357: 1571–1575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Gonzales D. H., Nides M. A., Ferry L. H., Kustra R. P., Jamerson B. D., Segall N. et al Bupropion SR as an aid to smoking cessation in smokers treated previously with bupropion: a randomized placebo‐controlled study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 69: 438–444. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Gonzales D., Bjornson W., Durcan M. J., White J. D., Johnston J. A., Buist A. S. et al Effects of gender on relapse prevention in smokers treated with bupropion SR. Am J Prev Med 2002; 22: 234–239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Glover E. D., Glover P. N., Franzon M., Sullivan C. R., Cerullo C. C., Howell R. M. et al A comparison of a nicotine sublingual tablet and placebo for smoking cessation. Nicotine Tob Res 2002; 4: 441–450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. George T. P., Vessicchio J. C., Termine A., Bregartner T. A., Feingold A., Rounsaville B. J. et al A placebo controlled trial of bupropion for smoking cessation in schizophrenia. Biol Psychiatry 2002; 52: 53–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Shiffman S., Dresler C. M., Hajek P., Gilburt S. J. A., Targett D. A., Strahs K. R. Efficacy of a nicotine lozenge for smoking cessation. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 1267–1276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 12‐week smoking cessation trial of Zyban (150 mg bid) in adult smokers previously treated with Zyban [internet]. Study ID ZYB40001; 2003. Available at: https://www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/ZYB40001?search=study&#rs (accessed 1 December 2018) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/75UsScUim on 17 January 2019).
  • 57. Hughes J. R., Novy P., Hatsukami D. K., Jensen J., Callas P. W. Efficacy of nicotine patch in smokers with a history of alcoholism. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2003; 27: 946–954. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Tønnesen P., Tonstad S., Hjalmarson A., Lebargy F., Van Spiegel P. I., Hider A. et al A multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 1‐year study of bupropion SR for smoking cessation. J Intern Med 2003; 254: 184–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Tonstad S., Farsang C., Klaene G., Lewis K., Manolis A., Perruchoud A. P. et al Bupropion SR for smoking cessation in smokers with cardiovascular disease: a multicentre, randomised study. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 946–955. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Lerman C., Kaufmann V., Rukstalis M., Patterson F., Perkins K., Audrain‐McGovern J. et al Individualizing nicotine replacement therapy for the treatment of tobacco dependence: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2004; 140: 426–433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Aubin H. J., Lebargy F., Berlin I., Bidaut‐Mazel C., Chemali‐Hudry J., Lagrue G. Efficacy of bupropion and predictors of successful outcome in a sample of French smokers: a randomized placebo‐controlled trial. Addiction 2004; 99: 1206–1218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Dalsgareth O. J., Hansen N.‐C. G., Søes‐Petersen U., Evald T., Høegholm A., Barber J. et al A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 6‐month trial of bupropion hydrochloride sustained‐release tablets as an aid to smoking cessation in hospital employees. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: 55–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Wagena E. J., Knipschild P. G., Huibers M. J. H., Wouters E. F. M., van Schayck C. P. Efficacy of bupropion and nortriptyline for smoking cessation among people at risk for or with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 2286–2292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Evins A. E., Cather C., Deckersbach T., Freudenreich O., Culhane M. A., Olm‐Shipman C. M. et al A double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial of bupropion sustained‐release for smoking cessation in schizophrenia. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2005; 25: 218–225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Holt S., Timu‐Parata C., Ryder‐Lewis S., Weatherall M., Beasley R. Efficacy of bupropion in the indigenous Maori population in New Zealand. Thorax 2005; 60: 120–123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Rigotti N. A., Thorndike A. N., Regan S., McKool K., Pasternak R. C., Chang Y. et al Bupropion for smokers hospitalized with acute cardiovascular disease. Am J Med 2006; 119: 1080–1087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Nides M., Oncken C., Gonzales D., Rennard S., Watsky E. J., Anziano R. et al Smoking cessation with Varenicline, a selective α4β2 nicotinic receptor partial agonist: results from a 7‐week, randomized, placebo‐ and bupropion‐controlled trial with 1‐year follow‐up. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 1561–1568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Haggsträm F. M., Chatkin J. M., Sussenbach‐Vaz E., Cesari D. H., Fam C. F., Fritscher C. C. A controlled trial of nortriptyline, sustained‐release bupropion and placebo for smoking cessation: preliminary results. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2006; 19: 205–209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Gonzales D., Rennard S. I., Nides M., Oncken C., Azoulay S., Billing C. B. et al Varenicline, an alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs sustained‐release bupropion and placebo for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 47–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Jorenby D. E., Hays J. T., Rigotti N. A., Azoulay S., Watsky E. J., Williams K. E. et al Efficacy of varenicline, an alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs placebo or sustained‐release bupropion for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 56–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Oncken C., Gonzales D., Nides M., Rennard S., Watsky E., Billing C. B. et al Efficacy and safety of the novel selective nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, varenicline, for smoking cessation. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 1571–1577. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. David S. P., Munafò M. R., Murphy M. F. G., Walton R. T., Johnstone E. C. The serotonin transporter 5‐HTTLPR polymorphism and treatment response to nicotine patch: follow‐up of a randomized controlled trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2007; 9: 225–231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Fossati R., Apolone G., Negri E., Compagnoni A., La Vecchia C., Mangano S. et al A double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized trial of bupropion for smoking cessation in primary care. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 1791–1797. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Nakamura M., Oshima A., Fujimoto Y., Maruyama N., Ishibashi T., Reeves K. R. Efficacy and tolerability of varenicline, an alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, in a 12‐week, randomized, placebo‐controlled, dose‐response study with 40‐week follow‐up for smoking cessation in Japanese smokers. Clin Ther 2007; 29: 1040–1056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Prapavessis H., Cameron L., Baldi J. C., Robinson S., Borrie K., Harper T. et al The effects of exercise and nicotine replacement therapy on smoking rates in women. Addict Behav 2007; 32: 1416–1432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. David S. P., Strong D. R., Munafò M. R., Brown R. A., Lloyd‐Richardson E. E., Wileyto P. E. et al Bupropion efficacy for smoking cessation is influenced by the DRD2 Taq1A polymorphism: analysis of pooled data from two clinical trials. Nicotine Tob Res 2007; 9: 1251–1257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Tsai S.‐T., Cho H.‐J., Cheng H.‐S., Kim C.‐H., Hsueh K.‐C., Billing C. B. Jr. et al A randomized, placebo‐controlled trial of varenicline, a selective alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, as a new therapy for smoking cessation in Asian smokers. Clin Ther 2007; 29: 1027–1039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Niaura R., Hays J. T., Jorenby D. E., Leone F. T., Pappas J. E., Reeves K. R. et al The efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation using a flexible dosing strategy in adult smokers: a randomized controlled trial. Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24: 1931–1941. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Cornuz J., Zwahlen S., Jungi W. F., Osterwalder J., Klingler K., van Melle G. et al A vaccine against nicotine for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial. PLOS ONE 2008; 3: e2547. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Aubin H.‐J., Bobak A., Britton J. R., Oncken C., Billing C. B., Gong J. et al Varenicline versus transdermal nicotine patch for smoking cessation: results from a randomised open‐label trial. Thorax 2008; 63: 717–724. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Vinnikov D., Brimkulov N., Burjubaeva A. A double‐blind, randomised, placebo‐controlled trial of Cytisine for smoking cessation in medium‐dependent workers. J Smok Cessat 2008; 3: 57–62. [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Simon J. A., Duncan C., Huggins J., Solkowitz S., Carmody T. P. Sustained‐release bupropion for hospital‐based smoking cessation: a randomized trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2009; 11: 663–669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Piper M. E., Smith S. S., Schlam T. R., Fiore M. C., Jorenby D. E., Fraser D. et al A randomized placebo‐controlled clinical trial of 5 smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009; 66: 1253–1262. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Wang C., Xiao D., Chan K. P. W., Pothirat C., Garza D., Davies S. Varenicline for smoking cessation: a placebo‐controlled, randomized study. Respirology 2009; 14: 384–392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Hays J. T., Leischow S. J., Lawrence D., Lee T. C. Adherence to treatment for tobacco dependence: association with smoking abstinence and predictors of adherence. Nicotine Tob Res 2010; 12: 574–581. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Rigotti N. A., Pipe A. L., Benowitz N. L., Arteaga C., Garza D., Tonstad S. Efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation in patients with cardiovascular disease: a randomized trial. Circulation 2010; 121: 221–229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Fagerström K., Gilljam H., Metcalfe M., Tonstad S., Messig M. Stopping smokeless tobacco with varenicline: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial. BMJ 2010; 341: c6549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Tsukahara H., Noda K., Saku K. A randomized controlled open comparative trial of varenicline vs nicotine patch in adult smokers: efficacy, safety and withdrawal symptoms (the VN‐SEESAW study). Circ J 2010; 74: 771–778. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Fagerström K., Nakamura M., Cho H.‐J., Tsai S.‐T., Wang C., Davies S. et al Varenicline treatment for smoking cessation in Asian populations: a pooled analysis of placebo‐controlled trials conducted in six Asian countries. Curr Med Res Opin 2010; 26: 2165–2173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Wittchen H.‐U., Hoch E., Klotsche J., Muehlig S. Smoking cessation in primary care ‐ a randomized controlled trial of bupropione, nicotine replacements, CBT and a minimal intervention. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2011; 20: 28–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Tashkin D. P., Rennard S., Hays J. T., Ma W., Lawrence D., Lee T. C. Effects of varenicline on smoking cessation in patients with mild to moderate COPD: a randomized controlled trial. Chest 2011; 139: 591–599. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Tonstad S., Holme I., Tønnesen P. Dianicline, a novel α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, for smoking cessation: a randomized placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2011; 13: 1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Bolliger C. T., Issa J. S., Posadas‐Valay R., Safwat T., Abreu P., Correia E. A. et al Effects of varenicline in adult smokers: a multinational, 24‐week, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. Clin Ther 2011; 33: 465–477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Hatsukami D. K., Jorenby D. E., Gonzales D., Rigotti N. A., Glover E. D., Oncken C. A. et al Immunogenicity and smoking‐cessation outcomes for a novel nicotine immunotherapeutic. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2011; 89: 392–399. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Xenakis J. G., Kinter E. T., Ishak K. J., Ward A. J., Marton J. P., Willke R. J. et al A discrete‐event simulation of smoking‐cessation strategies based on varenicline pivotal trial data. Pharmacoeconomics 2011; 29: 497–510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. West R., Zatonski W., Cedzynska M., Lewandowska D., Pazik J., Aveyard P. et al Placebo‐controlled trial of Cytisine for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1193–1200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Coleman T., Cooper S., Thornton J. G., Grainge M. J., Watts K., Britton J. et al A randomized trial of nicotine‐replacement therapy patches in pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 808–818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Rennard S., Hughes J., Cinciripini P. M., Kralikova E., Raupach T., Arteaga C. et al A randomized placebo‐controlled trial of varenicline for smoking cessation allowing flexible quit dates. Nicotine Tob Res 2012; 14: 343–350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Heydari G., Talischi F., Tafti S. F., Masjedi M. R. Quitting smoking with varenicline: parallel, randomised efficacy trial in Iran. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2012; 16: 268–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Tønnesen P., Lauri H., Perfekt R., Mann K., Batra A. Efficacy of a nicotine mouth spray in smoking cessation: a randomised, double‐blind trial. Eur Respir J 2012. Sep; 40: 548–554. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Cinciripini P. M., Robinson J. D., Karam‐Hage M., Minnix J. A., Lam C., Versace F. et al Effects of varenicline and bupropion sustained‐release use plus intensive smoking cessation counseling on prolonged abstinence from smoking and on depression, negative affect, and other symptoms of nicotine withdrawal. JAMA Psychiatry 2013; 70: 522–533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Stein M. D., Caviness C. M., Kurth M. E., Audet D., Olson J., Anderson B. J. Varenicline for smoking cessation among methadone‐maintained smokers: a randomized clinical trial. Drug Alcohol Depend 2013; 133: 486–493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Anthenelli R. M., Morris C., Ramey T. S., Dubrava S. J., Tsilkos K., Russ C. et al Effects of varenicline on smoking cessation in adults with stably treated current or past major depression: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2013; 159: 390–400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Caponnetto P., Campagna D., Cibella F., Morjaria J. B., Caruso M., Russo C. et al EffiCiency and safety of an eLectronic cigAreTte (ECLAT) as tobacco cigarettes substitute: a prospective 12‐month randomized control design study. PLOS ONE 2013; 8: e66317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Bullen C., Howe C., Laugesen M., McRobbie H., Parag V., Williman J. et al Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2013; 382: 1629–1637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Evins A. E., Cather C., Pratt S. A., Pachas G. N., Hoeppner S. S., Goff D. C. et al Maintenance treatment with varenicline for smoking cessation in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2014; 311: 145–154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. A study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Varenicline compared to placebo for smoking cessation through reduction [internet]. Study ID NCT01370356; 2014. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01370356 (accessed 1 December 2018) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/75UsW0LGZ on 17 January 2019).
  • 108. Walker N., Howe C., Glover M., McRobbie H., Barnes J., Nosa V. et al Cytisine versus nicotine for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 2353–2362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Varenicline treatment for active alcoholic smokers [internet]. Study ID NCT01347112; 2014. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01347112 (accessed 1 December 2018) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/75UsZDMTK on 17 January 2019).
  • 110. Gonzales D., Hajek P., Pliamm L., Nackaerts K., Tseng L.‐J., McRae T. D. et al Retreatment with varenicline for smoking cessation in smokers who have previously taken varenicline: a randomized, placebo‐controlled trial. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2014; 96: 390–396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Cooper S., Taggar J., Lewis S., Marlow N., Dickinson A., Whitemore R. et al Effect of nicotine patches in pregnancy on infant and maternal outcomes at 2 years: follow‐up from the randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled SNAP trial. Lancet Respir Med 2014; 2: 728–737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Ebbert J. O., Hughes J. R., West R. J., Rennard S. I., Russ C., McRae T. D. et al Effect of Varenicline on smoking cessation through smoking reduction: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2015; 313: 687–694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. O'Brien B., Knight‐West O., Walker N., Parag V., Bullen C. E‐cigarettes versus NRT for smoking reduction or cessation in people with mental illness: secondary analysis of data from the ASCEND trial. Tob Induc Dis 2015; 13: 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Selegiline for smoking cessation [internet]. Study ID NCT00439413; 2016. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00439413 (accessed 1 December 2018) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/75UsaTik3 on 17 January 2019).
  • 115. Eisenberg M. J., Windle S. B., Roy N., Old W., Grondin F. R., Bata I. et al Varenicline for smoking cessation in hospitalized patients with acute coronary syndrome. Circulation 2016; 133: 21–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Tonstad S., Tønnesen P., Hajek P., Williams K. E., Billing C. B., Reeves K. R. et al Effect of maintenance therapy with Varenicline on smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 64–71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Hajek P., Tønnesen P., Arteaga C., Russ C., Tonstad S. Varenicline in prevention of relapse to smoking: effect of quit pattern on response to extended treatment. Addiction 2009; 104: 1597–1602. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Coe J. W., Brooks P. R., Vetelino M. G., Wirtz M. C., Arnold E. P., Huang J. et al Varenicline: an alpha4beta2 nicotinic receptor partial agonist for smoking cessation. J Med Chem 2005; 48: 3474–3477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Appendix S1 Excel file containing details of all studies considered for inclusion.

Appendix S2 Interactive graph showing abstinence rates with best‐fit curves estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of 12‐week treatment with smoking cessation pharmacotherapies.

Figure S1 Continuous abstinence rates with power curve for varenicline estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of smoking cessation.

Figure S2 Continuous abstinence rates with best‐fit curves estimated from continuous abstinence rates from RCTs of 12‐week treatment with (A) bupropion, (B) varenicline, (C) nicotine replacement therapy and (D) placebo, with consecutive pairs of data points from the three largest studies for each treatment.


Articles from Addiction (Abingdon, England) are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES