Smoking Cessation Interventions and Cessation Rates in the Oncology Population: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate tobacco smoking cessation interventions and cessation rates in the oncology population through a systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: The literature was searched using PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception to October 2012) by 3 independent review authors. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort (PCs) studies evaluating tobacco smoking cessation interventions with patients assigned to a usual care or an intervention group. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation rates. Two authors extracted data independently for each study. When applicable, disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 10 RCTs and 3 PCs. Statistical analysis was conducted using StatsDirect software (Cheshire, UK). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for smoking cessation interventions were calculated in 2 groups based on follow-up duration. The therapeutic interventions included counseling, nicotine replacement therapy, buproprion, and varenicline. Smoking cessation interventions had a pooled odds ratio of 1.54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.909-2.64) for patients in the shorter follow-up group and 1.31 (95% CI, 0.931-1.84) in the longer follow-up group. Smoking cessation interventions in the perioperative period had a pooled odds ratio of 2.31 (95% CI, 1.32-4.07). CONCLUSION: Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that tobacco cessation interventions in the oncology population, in both the short-term and long-term follow-up groups, do not significantly affect cessation rates. The perioperative period, though, may represent an important teachable moment with regard to smoking cessation.