90 likes | 103 Views
This outline from Robert West of University College London discusses the rationale behind changes in NRT licensing in the UK. It covers extended use, concurrent use, usage by different groups, and the effectiveness of different NRT forms. The evidence from clinical trials, safety concerns, and potential benefits to public health are outlined, along with the need for monitoring post-implementation. The document aims to promote smoking cessation and reduce death and disability from smoking-related illnesses.
E N D
Changes to the UK licence for NRT: rationale Robert West University College London WCTOH July 2006 Washington
Outline • Review of licensing changes and their rationale • Extended use • Concurrent use of different forms of NRT • Use by cardiac patients • Use by pregnant smokers • Use by young smokers • ‘Cut Down Then Stop’
Extended use • Evidence from clinical trials has not supported the effectiveness of extending use of nicotine patch beyond 8 weeks but … • a substantial minority of users of gum and other products feel vulnerable to relapse after 8-12 weeks • there is evidence for an increase in relapse rate on termination of use • there are no major safety concerns about extended use
Concurrent use • Evidence from clinical trials indicates that combinations are more effective on average than single forms but … • the evidence is not completely conclusive • it is not clear whether some combinations are better than others or than specific individual forms of NRT • there are no significant safety concerns
Use by cardiac patients • NRT has not been shown specifically to be effective in this patient group and the pharmacology of nicotine suggests a theoretical risk but … • there is a reasonable presumption of efficacy given data from healthy smokers • it appears to have been safe to use in cardiac patients • the imperative to stop smoking in this group is high
Use by pregnant smokers • NRT has not been shown to be specifically effective in this group and nicotine has been shown to be teratogenic but … • there is a reasonable presumption of efficacy given data from healthy smokers • there is a reasonable presumption that NRT is much safer than smoking • the imperative to stop smoking in this group is high
Use by young smokers • NRT has not been shown to be specifically effective in this group but … • there is a presumption that it may have some effect in young smokers that are clearly nicotine dependent • there are no major safety concerns
Cut Down Then Stop • Clinical trials have shown that gum or inhalator use in smokers wanting to stop but who do not feel ready or able to make a quit attempt in the near future results in approximately 4% more of them stopping smoking within the next 12 months but … • it is not clear what the effect this will have when rolled out to the smoking population as a whole
Conclusions • Extending the indications and usage of NRT is likely to have a net public health benefit and to prevent death and disability in the case of individual smokers • It is important to monitor the effect of the changes in the population to ensure that the benefit and cost-benefit are maximised and to allay possible safety concerns in some cases http://www.ash.org.uk/html/cessation/Smoking reduction/NRT051229.pdf