A scoping review of smoking cessation pharmacogenetic studies to advance future research across racial, ethnic, and ancestral populations

Abstinence rates among smokers attempting to quit remain low despite the wide availability and accessibility of pharmacological smoking cessation treatments. In addition, the prevalence of cessation attempts and abstinence differs by individual-level social factors such as race and ethnicity. Clinical treatment of nicotine dependence also continues to be challenged by individual-level variability in effectiveness to promote abstinence. The use of tailored smoking cessation strategies that incorporate information on individual-level social and genetic factors hold promise, although additional pharmacogenomic knowledge is still needed. In particular, genetic variants associated with pharmacological responses to smoking cessation treatment have generally been conducted in populations with participants that self-identify as White race or who are determined to be of European genetic ancestry. These results may not adequately capture the variability across all smokers as a result of understudied differences in allele frequencies across genetic ancestry populations. This suggests that much of the current pharmacogenetic study results for smoking cessation may not apply to all populations. Therefore, clinical application of pharmacogenetic results may exacerbate health inequities by racial and ethnic groups. This scoping review examines the extent to which racial, ethnic, and ancestral groups that experience differences in smoking rates and smoking cessation are represented in the existing body of published pharmacogenetic studies of smoking cessation. We will summarize results by race, ethnicity, and ancestry across pharmacological treatments and study designs. We will also explore current opportunities and challenges in conducting pharmacogenomic research on smoking cessation that encourages greater participant diversity, including practical barriers to clinical utilization of pharmacological smoking cessation treatment and clinical implementation of pharmacogenetic knowledge

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Population Risk Factors for Severe Disease and Mortality in COVID-19 in the United States during the Pre-Vaccine Era: A Retrospective Cohort Study of National Inpatient Sample

Background-Previous studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were limited to specific geographical locations and small sample sizes. Therefore, we used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020 database to determine the risk factors for severe outcomes and mortality in COVID-19. Methods-We included adult patients with COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the predictors of severe outcomes and mortality in COVID-19. Results-1,608,980 (95% CI 1,570,803–1,647,156) hospitalizations with COVID-19 were included. Severe complications occurred in 78.3% of COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and 25% of COVID-19 pneumonia patients. The mortality rate for COVID-19 ARDS was 54% and for COVID-19 pneumonia was 16.6%. On multivariate analysis, age > 65 years, male sex, government insurance or no insurance, residence in low-income areas, non-white races, stroke, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, malnutrition, primary immunodeficiency, long-term steroid/immunomodulatory use, complicated diabetes mellitus, and liver disease were associated with COVID-19 related complications and mortality. Cardiac arrest, septic shock, and intubation had the highest odds of mortality. Conclusions-Socioeconomic disparities and medical comorbidities were significant determinants of mortality in the US in the pre-vaccine era. Therefore, aggressive vaccination of high-risk patients and healthcare policies to address socioeconomic disparities are necessary to reduce death rates in future pandemics