Cited by 68Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Latent class typology of nicotine withdrawal: genetic contributions and association with failed smoking cessation and psychiatric disorders

Open access
XIAN, HONG, SCHERRER, JEFFREY F., MADDEN, PAMELA A. F., LYONS, MICHAEL J., TSUANG, MING, TRUE, WILLIAM R., EISEN, SETH A.·2005·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background. Nicotine withdrawal is associated with failed smoking cessation and thus contributes to continuance of the habit and increases risk of smoking-related illnesses. Withdrawal is also associated with psychiatric disorders such as depression and alcoholism. However, relatively little is known about how to characterize the severity of withdrawal, including whether withdrawal subtypes exist in male smokers. If so, do these subtypes represent quantitative or qualitative differences? Method. Smoking and withdrawal data were obtained from 4112 male–male twin pairs of the Vietnam Era Twin Registry during a 1992 administration of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was used to derive significantly different nicotine withdrawal profiles, and their association with psychiatric disorders was assessed. Genetic and environmental contributions and the correlation between these contributions were evaluated using bivariate biometrical modeling of the withdrawal phenotype and failed smoking cessation. Results. The LCA model which best fit the data was a four-class severity continuum. Psychiatric disorders were significantly associated with more severe classes and the magnitude of the association increased as withdrawal severity increased. Genetics accounted for 31% and 51% of the variance in risk for withdrawal and failed cessation, respectively. The genetic contributions were significantly correlated (r=0·37). Conclusions. Nicotine withdrawal classes are characterized by quantitative differences. The strong association between psychiatric disorders and withdrawal severity and the significant genetic correlation between withdrawal and cessation highlight the importance of withdrawal severity. Further refinement of the DSM definition of withdrawal to incorporate severity ratings may be warranted.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291704003289

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Genetic factors may explain 29-53% of the variance in withdrawal symptoms and about half of the variance in quitting success.

    “Genetic factors may also account for 29–53 % of the variance in withdrawal symptoms and approximately 50 % of the variance in quitting success (Xian et al. 2003, 2005; Pergadia et al. 2006).”

    From Nicotine Withdrawal (2015) · cites this paper as Xian et al. 2005

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bergen, A. W. & Caporaso, N. (1999). Cigarette smoking (review). Journal of the National Cancer Institute 91, 1365-1375.
  2. Landis, S., Murray, T., Bolden, S. & Wingo, P. (1999). Cancer stat- istics. Cancer Journal for Clinicians 49, 8-31.
  3. Zhu, S., Melcer, T., Sun, J., Rosbrook, B. & Pierce, J. P. (2000). Smoking cessation with and without assistance : a population- based analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 18, 305-311.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
XIAN, H., SCHERRER, J. F., MADDEN, P. A. F., LYONS, M. J., TSUANG, M., TRUE, W. R., & EISEN, S. A.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • St. Louis VA Medical Center (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2004-09-29
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
409-419
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W1997762610
Cited by
68
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Health Services Research and Development
  • National Institutes of Health (1r03da013486-01)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA011822, AA11822)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA004604, DA-00272, K21DA000272, R03-DA13486, DA4604)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
nicotine withdrawal, withdrawal severity, smoking cessation, mental illness, depression, alcoholism, genetic correlation, heritability, male smokers, twin pairs, Vietnam Era Twin Registry, latent class analysis
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Female, Ganglionic Stimulants, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nicotine, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Tobacco Use Disorder, Smoking Cessation, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review