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

Immediate effects of a thoracic spine thrust manipulation on the autonomic nervous system: a randomized clinical trial

Thoracic spine manipulation has been shown to be effective for the management of neck pain. The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effect of a T3–T4 spinal thrust manipulation on autonomic nervous system activity in subjects with chronic cervical pain. An additional aim was to determine if the manipulation resulted in an immediate pain relief in patients with chronic neck pain when compared to a placebo intervention. One hundred subjects with chronic neck pain were randomly assigned to receive either a thoracic thrust manipulation or a placebo intervention. The Friedman’s test was used to evaluate the change in pupil diameter within both groups. The Wilcoxen signed-ranks test was used to explore pupil changes over time and to make paired comparisons of the pupil change between the groups. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare the change in pain perception for the chronic cervical pain group subjects receiving either the thrust manipulation or the placebo intervention. The results demonstrated that manipulation did not result in a change in sympathetic activity. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the subject’s pain perception (P = 0.961) when comparing the effects of the thrust manipulation to the placebo intervention within this group of subjects with chronic neck pain. The clinical impression of this study is that manipulation of the thoracic spine may not be effective in immediately reducing pain in patients with chronic neck pain

Prevalence of and risk for gastrointestinal bleeding and peptic ulcerative disorders in a cohort of HIV patients from a U.S. healthcare claims database

The primary study objectives were to estimate the frequencies and rates of gastrointestinal bleeding and peptic ulcerative disorder in HIV-positive patients compared with age- and sex-matched HIV-negative subjects. Data from a US insurance claims database was used for this analysis. Among 89,207 patients with HIV, 9.0% had a GI bleed, 1.0% had an upper gastrointestinal bleed, 5.6% had a lower gastrointestinal bleed, 1.9% had a peptic ulcerative disorder diagnosis, and 0.6% had both gastrointestinal/peptic ulcerative disorder. Among 267,615 HIV-negative subjects, the respective frequencies were 6.9%, 0.6%, 4.3%, 1.4%, and 0.4% (p<0.0001 for each diagnosis subcategory). After combining effect measure modifiers into comedication and comorbidity strata, gastrointestinal bleeding hazard ratios (HRs) were higher for HIV-positive patients without comedication/comorbidity, and those with comedication alone (HR, 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.62-2.84; HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.47-1.71). The rate of peptic ulcerative disorder among those without a history of ulcers and no comorbidity/comedication was also elevated (HR, 2.72; 95% CI, 2.48-2.99). Hazard ratios of gastrointestinal bleeding, and peptic ulcerative disorder without a history of ulcers were lower among patients infected with HIV with comedication/comorbidity (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56-0.73; HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.65). Rates of gastrointestinal bleeding plus peptic ulcerative disorder followed a similar pattern. In summary, the rates of gastrointestinal/peptic ulcerative disorder events comparing HIV-infected subjects to non-HIV-infected subjects were differential based on comorbidity and comedication status