, 2005). Therefore, even though our study was stopped early selleck chem inhibitor and not definitive, our findings suggest that with the doses explored, the dosing regimen provided and in the smoking population studied, gabapentin has little clinical utility for the treatment of tobacco dependence. Funding The project described was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA; DA 021583). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIDA or the National Institutes of Health. Declaration of Interests None to declare. Supplementary Material [Article Summary] Click here to view. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the participants in this study and the staff of the Nicotine Research Program.
Recent years have seen a significant increase in the development and marketing of potentially reduced exposure products (PREPs), the most recent of which include a number of noncombustible products that provide tobacco in a spitless pouch (such as snus) or lozenge (such as Ariva or Stonewall; Hickman et al., 2004). Many researchers and public health officials question the overall population impact of PREPs (for reviews, see Hatsukami, Benowitz, Rennard, Oncken, & Hecht, 2006; Hatsukami et al., 2008; Pederson & Nelson, 2007). Whether PREPs are a viable or an unacceptable form of tobacco control is not yet known and is of crucial public health significance. Depending on how PREPs are used in the real world, they could either promote or undermine public health (Warner, 2005). On the one hand, smokers may view these products as an alternative to cessation.
This hypothesis is not without parallel, as most evidence has shown that switching to low-tar/low-nicotine cigarettes undermined cessation (Hughes, 2001; Shiffman, Pillitteri, Burton, Rohay, & Gitchell, 2001a, 2001b). Whether the history of low-tar/low-nicotine cigarettes serves as proxy for PREPs is unclear, but there is sufficient cause for concern given the comparable marketing strategies between these products (Hamilton et al., 2004). PREPs could also deter quitting if they are used to circumvent smoking restrictions, and many noncombustible products are marketed with this appeal. Smoking restrictions increase quitting (Farkas, Gilpin, Distefan, & Pierce, 1999; Norman, Ribisl, Howard-Pitney, Howard, & Unger, 2000), and using a PREP to avoid the necessity of going outside or to avoid the experience of withdrawal could maintain nicotine dependence and undermine the beneficial effect of restrictions.
On the other hand, PREPs could promote ultimate cessation if smokers view these products as a step toward quitting. In a population-based sample of more than 450 current smokers, 35% said they AV-951 would use a cigarette-like PREP device to reduce the risks of smoking, and 28% said they would use it to help them quit (Shiffman, Jarvis, et al., 2007).