MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and Safety of Varenicline for Smoking Cessation in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease

2010· article· en· W2109535127 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy A. Rigotti, Andrew Pipe, Neal L. Benowitz, Carmen Arteaga, Dahlia Garza, Serena Tonstad

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Cancer InstitutePfizer
KeywordsMedicineVareniclineSmoking cessationDiseaseIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation is a key component of secondary cardiovascular disease prevention. Varenicline, a partial alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist, is effective for smoking cessation in healthy smokers, but its efficacy and safety in smokers with cardiovascular disease are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial compared the efficacy and safety of varenicline with placebo for smoking cessation in 714 smokers with stable cardiovascular disease. Participants received varenicline (1 mg twice daily) or placebo, along with smoking-cessation counseling, for 12 weeks. Follow-up lasted 52 weeks. The primary end point was carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9 through 12 (last 4 weeks of treatment). The continuous abstinence rate was higher for varenicline than placebo during weeks 9 through 12 (47.0% versus 13.9%; odds ratio, 6.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.18 to 8.93) and weeks 9 through 52 (19.2% versus 7.2%; odds ratio, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.93 to 5.11). The varenicline and placebo groups did not differ significantly in cardiovascular mortality (0.3% versus 0.6%; difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.3 to 0.7), all-cause mortality (0.6% versus 1.4%; difference, -0.8%; 95% CI, -2.3 to 0.6), cardiovascular events (7.1% versus 5.7%; difference, 1.4%; 95% CI, -2.3 to 5.0), or serious adverse events (6.5% and 6.0%; difference, 0.5%; 95% CI, -3.1 to 4.1). As a result of adverse events, 9.6% of varenicline and 4.3% of placebo participants discontinued study drug. CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline is effective for smoking cessation in smokers with cardiovascular disease. It was well tolerated and did not increase cardiovascular events or mortality; however, trial size and duration limit definitive conclusions about safety. Clinical Trial Registration Information- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00282984. Unique identifier: NCT00282984.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations372
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207