Data from treatment studies tends to show women are less likely to quit smoking than men, but these findings have been disputed, typically based on contradictory evidence from epidemiological investigations. The purpose of this review was to shed light on this conflict. We conducted a qualitative review in January, 2016 to examine sources of variation in sex/gender differences for smoking cessation. We identified 214 sex/gender difference tests from 190 studies through Medline and studies were categorized into efficacy trials (k=37), effectiveness trials (k=77), prospective observational studies of cessation (k=40; current smokers transitioning to former smokers), prospective observational studies of relapse (k=6; former smokers transitioning to current smokers), cross-sectional investigations of former smoker prevalence (k=32), and community-based interventions (k=4). We also summarized evidence across time periods, countries, outcome assessments, study sample, and treatment. Evidence from efficacy and effectiveness trials, as well as prospective observational studies of relapse, demonstrated that women have more difficulty maintaining long-term abstinence than men. Findings from prospective observational studies and cross-sectional investigations were mixed and demonstrated that bio-psycho-social variation in samples across place and time may determine whether or not women or men are less likely to quit smoking. Based on these findings, we consider whether sex/gender differences in quitting meet criteria for a disparity and outline directions for further research.

Tobacco use disproportionately affects lower socioeconomic status (SES) groups. Current explanations as to why lower SES groups respond less robustly to tobacco control efforts and tobacco dependence treatment do not fully account for this disparity. The identification of factors that predict relapse in this population might help to clarify these differences. Good candidates for novel prognostic factors include the constellation of behaviors associated with executive function including self-control/impulsiveness, the propensity to delay reward, and consideration and planning of future events. This study examined the ability of several measures of executive function and other key clinical, psychological, and cognitive factors to predict abstinence for highly dependent lower SES participants enrolled in intensive cognitive-behavioral treatment for tobacco dependence. Consistent with predictions, increased discounting and impulsiveness, an external locus of control as well as greater levels of nicotine dependence, stress, and smoking for negative affect reduction predicted relapse. These findings suggest that these novel factors are clinically relevant in predicting treatment outcomes and suggest new targets for therapeutic assessment and treatment approaches.

There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) as a novel treatment option for substance-use disorders (SUDs). Recent momentum stems from a foundation of preclinical neuroscience demonstrating links between neural circuits and drug consuming behavior, as well as recent FDA-approval of NIBS treatments for mental health disorders that share overlapping pathology with SUDs. As with any emerging field, enthusiasm must be tempered by reason; lessons learned from the past should be prudently applied to future therapies. Here, an international ensemble of experts provides an overview of the state of transcranial-electrical (tES) and transcranial-magnetic (TMS) stimulation applied in SUDs. This consensus paper provides a systematic literature review on published data-emphasizing the heterogeneity of methods and outcome measures while suggesting strategies to help bridge knowledge gaps. The goal of this effort is to provide the community with guidelines for best practices in tES/TMS SUD research. We hope this will accelerate the speed at which the community translates basic neuroscience into advanced neuromodulation tools for clinical practice in addiction medicine.

Background Given that continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis increases the risk for adverse health outcomes, cancer patients are strongly advised to quit. Despite a current lack of evidence regarding their safety and effectiveness as a cessation tool, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are becoming increasingly popular. In order to guide oncologists’ communication with their patients about e-cigarette use, this paper provides the first published clinical data about e-cigarette use and cessation outcomes among cancer patients. Methods Participants (n=1074) included smokers (cancer patients) who recently enrolled in a tobacco treatment program at a comprehensive cancer center. Standard demographic, tobacco use history and follow-up cessation outcomes were assessed. Results A threefold increase in e-cigarette use was observed from 2012 to 2013 (10.6% vs. 38.5%). E-cigarette users were more nicotine dependent than non-users, had more prior quit attempts, and were more likely to be diagnosed with thoracic and head or neck cancers. Using a complete case analysis, e-cigarette users were as likely to be smoking at follow-up as non-users, (OR: 1.0; 95%CI 0.5–1.7). Using an intention to treat analysis, e-cigarette users were twice as likely to be smoking at follow-up as non-users, (OR: 2.0; 95%CI 1.2–3.3). Conclusions The high rate of e-cigarette use observed is consistent with recent papers highlighting increased e-cigarette use in the general population. Our longitudinal findings raise doubt about the utility of e-cigarettes for facilitating smoking cessation among cancer patients. Further research is needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of e-cigarettes as a cessation treatment for cancer patients.

Recent evidence suggests that several dimensions of impulsivity and locus of control are likely to be significant prognostic indicators of relapse. We compared the relative strengths of associations among delay discounting rates, dimensions of trait impulsiveness from the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale - 11, locus of control, nicotine dependence, and stress level with days to relapse among smokers after an intensive multicomponent cognitive-behavioral treatment for tobacco dependence. We used Cox proportional hazard regressions to model days to relapse with each of the following: delay discounting of $100, delay discounting of $1,000, six subscales of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS), Rotter’s Locus of Control (RLOC), Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Standardized regression coefficients and hazard ratios (HRs) were used to assess the relative strength and direction of the associations along with a bootstrap method to determine 95% confidence intervals. We then examined the extent to which the measures retained associations with days to relapse while accounting for nicotine dependence and stress level. Our findings indicate that the $100 delay discounting rate had the strongest association with days to relapse, but was only significantly stronger than nicotine dependence. Discounting rates maintained significant associations with days to relapse when combined with the FTND and the PSS, but the BIS subscales and the RLOC did not. These findings indicate that delay discounting is independently associated with relapse and adds to what is already accounted for by nicotine dependence and stress level. These findings signify that delay discounting is a productive new target for enhancing treatment for tobacco dependence. Adding an intervention designed to decrease discounting rates to a comprehensive treatment for tobacco dependence has the potential to decrease relapse rates.