Smoking reduction promotes smoking cessation: results from a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nicotine gum with 2-year follow-up
Abstract
Aim To test the effect of nicotine gum and placebo in smokers not motivated or not able to quit smoking with regard to smoking reduction and smoking cessation. Design This randomized study evaluated nicotine gum versus placebo for up to 1 year in 411 healthy smokers highly motivated to reduce cigarette use. Smoking reduction was defined as self‐reported daily smoking less than 50% of baseline and any decrease (1 p.p.m. or more) in carbon monoxide. Setting Pulmonary department, Copenhagen, Denmark. Findings The overall success rate for sustained smoking reduction was significantly higher at all time‐points for active versus placebo gum (6.3% versus 0.5% after 24 months). Nicotine gum achieved significantly higher point prevalence cessation rates than placebo at 12 and 24 months [11.2% versus 3.9% (odds ratio = 3.1; 95% CI, 1.4–7.2 and 9.3% versus 3.4% (odds ratio = 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2–7.1), respectively]. There was a linear relationship between decrease in number of daily cigarettes and decrease in plasma cotinine, exhaled carbon monoxide and plasma thiocyanate, with significantly greater reduction in the nicotine gum group after 4 and 12 months (maximum treatment duration) but not after 24 months. The decrease in toxin intake was smaller than the decline in daily cigarette consumption, suggesting that compensatory smoking occurred. Conclusions Nicotine gum promoted cessation in this population of smokers unwilling to quit. Among reducers, the toxin intake correlated with reduced cigarette consumption although some compensatory smoking occurred.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Clinical trials suggest that permanent replacement of cigarettes with NRT among ex-smokers can result in 40% of baseline levels of nicotine being substituted by nicotine-replacement products.
“Clinical trials suggest that permanent replacement of cigarettes with NRT among ex-smokers can result in 40% of baseline levels of nicotine being substituted by nicotine-replacement products.110,111”
From Evaluating Long-term Outcomes of NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS): a prospective cohort study (2015) · cites this paper as [111]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 163
- Authors
- Wennike, P., Danielsson, T., Landfeldt, B., Westin, Å., & Tønnesen, P.
- Affiliations
- Gentofte Hospital (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Tønnesen, Philip
- Venue
- Addiction
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-10
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1395-1402
- ISSN
- 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
- 1360-0443
- OpenAlex
- W2114205614
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 6.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Addiction (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Keywords
- nicotine gum, smoking reduction, smoking cessation, nicotine replacement therapy, compensatory smoking, carbon monoxide, plasma cotinine, plasma thiocyanate, cigarettes per day
- MeSH terms
- Smoking Prevention, Adult, Attitude to Health, Chewing Gum, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Nicotine, Smoking Cessation, Nicotinic Agonists
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