View in EDS

Determining the impact of cannabis use on tobacco cessation: Results from a prospective non‐randomized tobacco treatment trial.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Determining the impact of cannabis use on tobacco cessation: Results from a prospective non‐randomized tobacco treatment trial.
Authors: McClure, Erin A., Baker, Nathaniel, Tomko, Rachel L., Walters, Kyle J., Chapman, Elizabeth, Carpenter, Matthew J., Gray, Kevin M.
Source: Addiction. Jul2026, Vol. 121 Issue 7, p1876-1887. 12p.
Subjects: Substance abuse treatment, Clinical drug trials, Carbon monoxide analysis, Smoking cessation, Substance abuse, Cotinine, World Wide Web, Patient compliance, Self-evaluation, Poisson distribution, Research funding, Clinical trials, Probability theory, Questionnaires, Severity of illness index, Descriptive statistics, Experimental design, Contingency management, Motivation (Psychology), Odds ratio, Research methodology, Research, Diary (Literary form), Cannabis (Genus), Tobacco products, Counseling, Application software, Data analysis software, Confidence intervals, Varenicline, Drug abstinence, Cannabinoids, Video recording, Regression analysis
Abstract: Background and aims: Tobacco‐cannabis co‐use is associated with increased psychosocial and health harms; however, the treatment literature assessing the impact of co‐use has been mixed and suffers from critical limitations. To date, no prospective studies have evaluated the degree to which cannabis co‐use affects tobacco cessation, nor are there treatment recommendations for those who co‐use. The goal of this study was to evaluate and quantify the impact of cannabis co‐use on tobacco cessation through a 12‐week prospective tobacco cessation trial. Design: This was a multi‐site, non‐randomized trial. Inverse probability weighted modified Poisson regression models were used to assess the probability of tobacco abstinence between tobacco‐only and tobacco‐cannabis co‐use cohorts. Setting: Enrollment occurred at three sites across South Carolina, USA: The Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) Charleston, Behavioral Health Services of Pickens County and MUSC Florence. Participants: Enrolled participants were adults (n = 181; ages 18–40) who (1) smoked tobacco cigarettes and used cannabis regularly (co‐use cohort; oversampled) or (2) smoked tobacco cigarettes daily (tobacco‐only cohort). Across 3 sites, 181 adults (110 co‐using cannabis; 71 tobacco‐only) were enrolled (49% female; 19% Black/African American; 6% Hispanic/LatinX). Interventions: All participants received 12 weeks of first‐line tobacco treatment (varenicline, incentives for tobacco abstinence, counseling), while cannabis use was not addressed as part of treatment. Measurements: The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7‐day point prevalence tobacco abstinence (PPA) at end of treatment (EOT; Week 12 post‐enrollment). Findings: Average baseline reported cigarettes per day were not different between tobacco‐only or cannabis co‐use cohorts [14.9, (standard deviation, SD = 7.2) versus 13.4 (SD = 7.8); P = 0.25]. Among the co‐use cohort, days of cannabis use in the past month at baseline was 23.7 (SD = 9.5). In imputed analyses, EOT 7‐day PPA tobacco abstinence was achieved in 59% of tobacco‐only participants and 33% of the cannabis co‐use cohort [Imputed data: relative risk (RR) = 1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.14–2.33]. Neither baseline daily cannabis use [adjusted relative risk (RRadj) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.63–1.77] nor within‐treatment cannabis use frequency (RRadj = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.25, 1.06) was associated with EOT PPA for tobacco in the cannabis co‐use cohort. Conclusions: This is the first prospective study designed to compare tobacco cessation outcomes by cannabis co‐use status. Regular cannabis co‐use had a negative impact on tobacco abstinence among younger to middle‐aged adults. Addressing cannabis use should be incorporated into standard tobacco treatment to improve cessation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Addiction is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Background and aims: Tobacco‐cannabis co‐use is associated with increased psychosocial and health harms; however, the treatment literature assessing the impact of co‐use has been mixed and suffers from critical limitations. To date, no prospective studies have evaluated the degree to which cannabis co‐use affects tobacco cessation, nor are there treatment recommendations for those who co‐use. The goal of this study was to evaluate and quantify the impact of cannabis co‐use on tobacco cessation through a 12‐week prospective tobacco cessation trial. Design: This was a multi‐site, non‐randomized trial. Inverse probability weighted modified Poisson regression models were used to assess the probability of tobacco abstinence between tobacco‐only and tobacco‐cannabis co‐use cohorts. Setting: Enrollment occurred at three sites across South Carolina, USA: The Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) Charleston, Behavioral Health Services of Pickens County and MUSC Florence. Participants: Enrolled participants were adults (n = 181; ages 18–40) who (1) smoked tobacco cigarettes and used cannabis regularly (co‐use cohort; oversampled) or (2) smoked tobacco cigarettes daily (tobacco‐only cohort). Across 3 sites, 181 adults (110 co‐using cannabis; 71 tobacco‐only) were enrolled (49% female; 19% Black/African American; 6% Hispanic/LatinX). Interventions: All participants received 12 weeks of first‐line tobacco treatment (varenicline, incentives for tobacco abstinence, counseling), while cannabis use was not addressed as part of treatment. Measurements: The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7‐day point prevalence tobacco abstinence (PPA) at end of treatment (EOT; Week 12 post‐enrollment). Findings: Average baseline reported cigarettes per day were not different between tobacco‐only or cannabis co‐use cohorts [14.9, (standard deviation, SD = 7.2) versus 13.4 (SD = 7.8); P = 0.25]. Among the co‐use cohort, days of cannabis use in the past month at baseline was 23.7 (SD = 9.5). In imputed analyses, EOT 7‐day PPA tobacco abstinence was achieved in 59% of tobacco‐only participants and 33% of the cannabis co‐use cohort [Imputed data: relative risk (RR) = 1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.14–2.33]. Neither baseline daily cannabis use [adjusted relative risk (RRadj) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.63–1.77] nor within‐treatment cannabis use frequency (RRadj = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.25, 1.06) was associated with EOT PPA for tobacco in the cannabis co‐use cohort. Conclusions: This is the first prospective study designed to compare tobacco cessation outcomes by cannabis co‐use status. Regular cannabis co‐use had a negative impact on tobacco abstinence among younger to middle‐aged adults. Addressing cannabis use should be incorporated into standard tobacco treatment to improve cessation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:09652140
DOI:10.1111/add.70382