ArticleAdvances in therapy2019
Healthcare Costs of Smokers Using Varenicline Versus Nicotine-Replacement Therapy Patch in the United States: Evidence from Real-World Practice.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Value Based Purchasing to Increase Tobacco Cessation Counseling and Medications in Behavioral Health Homes.Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Primary care-based smoking cessation treatment and subsequent healthcare service utilisation: a matched cohort study of smokers using linked administrative healthcare data.Tobacco control · 2023Article
- Association Between Smoking Cessation Treatment and Healthcare Costs in a Single-Payer Public Healthcare System.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Article
- The Relative Value of Anti-Obesity Medications Compared to Similar Therapies.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2023Article
- Short-term effects of national smoking cessation service on smoking-related disease prevalence and healthcare costs: Experience from the National Health Insurance Service Smoking Cessation Intervention Program in Korea.Tobacco induced diseases · 2023Article
- Varenicline and Nicotine Replacement Use Associated With US Food and Drug Administration Drug Safety Communications.JAMA network open · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVarenicline (VAR) is an effective smoking-cessation therapy compared to the commonly used nicotine-replacement therapy patch (NRT-P). However, comparative real-world evidence on smoking-cessation therapies is limited, especially for economic outcomes.
methodsUsing national claims databases (2012-2016) in the United States (US), adults initiating VAR or NRT-P without use of any other smoking-cessation products were followed for up to 1 year on a quarterly basis. Outcomes included smoking-attributable (SA) (cardiovascular, diabetes, pulmonary diseases, and smoking cessation) and all-cause costs (2017 US dollars). Adjusted mean costs were estimated from multivariable regressions, with baseline characteristics and propensity scores as covariates. Annual adjusted costs were calculated from quarterly averages.
resultsThe VAR cohort (n = 209,284) was younger (mean age 46.7 vs. 49.0 years) and had fewer comorbidities [mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI): 0.8 vs. 1.6] than the NRT-P cohort (n = 34,593). After adjustment, VAR cohort had lower SA and all-cause medical costs than NRT-P cohort in Quarters 1-4 (Q1-Q4) of follow-up, and had lower SA and all-cause total costs in Q2-Q4. Annually, VAR cohort had higher SA total costs ($307) and lower all-cause costs (- $2089) than NRT-P cohort. Annual medical costs were lower in VAR cohort (- $640 for SA and - $2876 for all-cause), and pharmacy costs were higher ($762 for SA and $777 for all-cause). In adherent patients (VAR: n = 38,744; NRT-P: n = 2702), VAR patients had lower annual medical costs (- $794 for SA and - $1636 for all-cause) and higher pharmacy costs ($1175 for SA and $1269 for all-cause); differences in SA and all-cause total costs were not statistically significant between treatment groups.
conclusionsLower SA and all-cause medical costs associated with the use of VAR versus NRT-P resulted in savings in all-cause total costs and, among adherent patients, potentially offset the high pharmacy costs of VAR.
fundingPfizer, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.