New Pharmacological Agents to Aid Smoking Cessation and Tobacco Harm Reduction: What has been Investigated and What is in the Pipeline?

A wide range of support is available to help smokers to quit and aid attempts at harm reduction, including three first-line smoking cessation medications: nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline and bupropion. Despite the efficacy of these, there is a continual need to diversify the range of medications so that the needs of tobacco users are met. This paper compares the first-line smoking cessation medications to: 1) two variants of these existing products: new galenic formulations of varenicline and novel nicotine delivery devices; and 2) twenty-four alternative products: cytisine (novel outside of central and eastern Europe), nortriptyline, other tricyclic antidepressants, electronic cigarettes, clonidine (an anxiolytic), other anxiolytics (e.g. buspirone), selective 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors, supplements (e.g. St John’s wort), silver acetate, nicobrevin, modafinil, venlafaxine, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI), opioid antagonist, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) antagonists, glucose tablets, selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists, nicotine vaccines, drugs that affect gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmission, drugs that affect N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDA), dopamine agonists (e.g. levodopa), pioglitazone (Actos; OMS405), noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, and the weight management drug lorcaserin. Six criteria are used: relative efficacy, relative safety, relative cost, relative use (overall impact of effective medication use), relative scope (ability to serve new groups of patients), and relative ease of use (ESCUSE). Many of these products are in the early stages of clinical trials, however, cytisine looks most promising in having established efficacy and safety and being of low cost. Electronic cigarettes have become very popular, appear to be efficacious and are safer than smoking, but issues of continued dependence and possible harms need to be considered

The contribution of rare variation to prostate cancer heritability

We report targeted sequencing of 63 known prostate cancer risk regions in a multi-ancestry study of 9,237 men and use the data to explore the contribution of low-frequency variation to disease risk. We show that SNPs with minor allele frequencies (MAFs) of 0.1-1% explain a substantial fraction of prostate cancer risk in men of African ancestry. We estimate that these SNPs account for 0.12 (standard error (s.e.) = 0.05) of variance in risk (∼42% of the variance contributed by SNPs with MAF of 0.1-50%). This contribution is much larger than the fraction of neutral variation due to SNPs in this class, implying that natural selection has driven down the frequency of many prostate cancer risk alleles; we estimate the coupling between selection and allelic effects at 0.48 (95% confidence interval [0.19, 0.78]) under the Eyre-Walker model. Our results indicate that rare variants make a disproportionate contribution to genetic risk for prostate cancer and suggest the possibility that rare variants may also have an outsize effect on other common traits