Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2020 May 25;44(7):1431–1443. doi: 10.1111/acer.14352

Table 5.

Treatment Outcomes: Differences between Placebo and Varenicline during the Last Month of Treatment (Weeks 3– 6)

Placebo (n = 23)
Varenicline ( n = 22)
LSMEAN SE 95% CI LSMEAN SE 95% CI LSMEAN Δ SE d p

Drinking Outcomes
   % HDD 21.0 4.9 11.1 – 30.9 30.7 5.0 20.7 – 40.7 9.7 7.0 0.09 0.262
   % days abstinent 54.2 6.4 41.4 – 67.1 48.6 6.4 35.6 – 61.6 −5.6 9.1 −0.01 0.543
   Drinks per day 2.5 0.5 1.4 – 3.5 3.7 0.5 2.6 – 4.7 1.2 0.8 0.49 0.205
   Drinks per drinking day 4.0 0.8 2.4 – 5.6 6.8 0.8 5.2 – 8.3 2.8 1.1 0.48 0.061

% n denom % n denom % Δ aOR (95% CI) p

   % subjects with no HDD 30.4 7 23 27.3 6 22 −3.1 0.83 (0.22–3.17) 0.790
   % subjects abstinent 17.4 4 23 9.1 2 22 −8.3 0.45 (0.07–2.95) 0.405
   WHO 1-shift reduction 82.6 19 23 63.6 14 22 −19.0 0.35 (0.08–1.43) 0.148
   WHO 2-shift reduction 60.9 14 23 40.9 9 22 −20.0 0.44 (0.13–1.47) 0.182
   % subjects with very HDD 34.8 8 23 63.6 14 22 28.8 4.32(1.13–16.51) 0.032
Non-Drinking Outcomes
   % abstinent from nicotinea 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 N/A 1.000
   % abstinent from smokingb 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 N/A 1.000
    LSMEAN SE 95% CI LSMEAN SE 95% CI LSMEAN Δ SE d p

   Cigarettes per weekb 64.0 7.6 48.0 – 80.1 47.0 7.7 30.6 – 63.4 −17.0 10.9 −0.25 0.198
   Penn Alcohol Craving 10.9 1.1 8.7 – 13.0 10.8 1.1 8.7 – 13.0 0.0 1.5 0.00 0.997
   Self-report Habit Index 44.4 3.3 37.8 – 51.0 48.7 3.3 42.1 – 55.4 4.3 4.6 0.15 0.352
   Pittsburg Sleep Quality Inventory 6.0 0.4 5.1 – 6.9 5.3 0.4 4.4 – 6.2 −0.6 0.6 −0.18 0.557
   POMS 7.3 3.9 −0.6 – 15.2 2.9 3.9 −5.0 – 10.8 −4.5 5.5 −0.15 0.325

Note. HDD = heavy drinking days, LSMEANS = least squared means, SE = standard error, CI = confidence interval, Δ = varenicline - placebo difference, denom = denominator, d= Cohen’s d (varenicline-placebo), aOR = adjusted odds ratio, POMS = Profile of Mood Scale (POMS) - Total Mood Disturbance score Models were based on a mITT population that included subjects who received at least one dose of medication. No imputation was used for missing data. For continuous outcomes, LSMEANS were estimated from fully adjusted models on untransformed outcomes (for interpretive purposes); corresponding Cohen’s d and p-values were based on the same model but with the appropriately transformed outcome.

a

% subjects; model for any nicotine outcome included only 21 participants who were nicotine users at baseline and had non-missing data (varenicline n=11, placebo n=10).

b

% subjects; models for smoking outcomes included only 20 participants who were smokers at baseline and had non-missing data (varenicline n=9, placebo n=11