Seeing Through the Blind: Belief About Treatment Randomization and Smoking Cessation Outcome Among People With Current or Past Major Depressive Disorder Who Smoke in a Placebo-Controlled Trial of Varenicline

Author:

Schnoll Robert1ORCID,Wileyto E Paul2,Bauer Anna-Marika3,Fox Erica N4,Blumenthal Daniel3,Hosie Quinn Mackenzie3,Leone Frank5,Huffman Mark D467,Khan Sadiya S4,Gollan Jacqueline K8ORCID,Papandonatos George D9,Hitsman Brian4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychiatry and Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , United States

2. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , United States

3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , United States

4. Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University , Chicago, IL , United States

5. Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Division, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , United States

6. Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis , St. Louis, MO , United States

7. The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales , Sydney , Australia

8. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University , Chicago, IL , United States

9. Department of Biostatistics and Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health , Providence, RI , United States

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Blinding participants to randomization is a cornerstone of science. However, participant beliefs about their allocation can influence outcomes. We examined blind integrity, the association between trial arm belief and cessation, and potential mechanisms linking treatment arm and treatment arm belief among people with major depressive disorder (MDD) who smoke receiving varenicline in a placebo-controlled trial. Aims and Methods 175 participants were asked at the end of treatment (EOT) if they thought they received placebo, varenicline, or were not sure. We assessed the relationship between treatment arm belief and actual treatment allocation, examined the association between treatment arm belief and EOT cessation, and evaluated changes in craving, withdrawal, side effects, depression symptoms, and smoking reward as mediators through which treatment arm was believed. Results Treatment arm belief was significantly associated with actual arm assignment (χ2(2) = 13.0, p = .002). Participants in the varenicline arm were >3 times as likely to believe they were taking varenicline, versus “not sure” (RR = 3.05 [1.41–6.60], p = .005). Participants in the placebo arm were just as likely to believe they were taking placebo versus “not sure” (χ2[2] = 0.75, p = .69). Controlling for treatment arm, belief that one received varenicline was significantly associated with an increase in cessation rate (OR = 5.91 [2.06–16.92], p = .001). Change in the rewarding experience of smoking may mediate participant ability to discern getting varenicline (B = 0.077 [0.002–0.192], p < .05). Conclusions Participants receiving varenicline can discern that they received varenicline and this belief is associated with higher cessation rates. Research is needed to continue to examine how participants correctly identify their allocation to varenicline. Trial Registration Data come from the trial NCT02378714. Implications The present study adds to the sparse literature on blind integrity, particularly in the field of tobacco cessation. Randomized clinical trial participants can discern their assignment to varenicline, and believing that one received varenicline was associated with significantly higher cessation rates. Identifying treatment arm allocation may be associated with changes in the rewarding aspects of smoking that have been well documented with varenicline use. Masking allocation to varenicline is challenging. The effects of this medication in clinical trials may represent both pharmacological effects and participants’ abilities to recognize that they are receiving the medication.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3