User login
Feds, drug company team up to combat bioterrorism
The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, has banded with the biopharmaceutical company AstraZeneca to “accelerate new antibiotic development,” according to a statement by the HHS.
“Multiple drugs to combat bioterrorism threats and other life-threatening bacterial infections will be developed” under the partnership, the HHS reported.
This marks BARDA’s second partnership with a private company for the purpose of developing “a portfolio of drug candidates with dual uses in treating illnesses caused by bioterrorism agents and antibiotic-resistant infections,” the statement noted.
Under the agreement, BARDA initially will provide $50 million toward product development and could provide up to $170 million for the development of additional products over 5 years. BARDA and AstraZeneca will jointly determine which drug candidates continue to be developed based on technical and financial considerations.
BARDA’s supporting of the development of multiple drug candidates “increases the likelihood that one or more” of AstraZeneca’s drugs will advance to the level of being eligible for consideration by the Food and Drug Administration for approval.
Other potential advantages to the agreement are new antibiotics becoming available in the commercial marketplace, which would diminish the federal government’s need to stockpile these products for biodefense and reduce long-term costs for taxpayers, according to the statement.
The partnership’s inaugural project is an attempt at developing a drug to treat gram-negative infections. This drug candidate combines the two antibiotics aztreonam and avibactam.
In the United States, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are responsible for 2 million infections and 23,000 deaths annually, according to an estimate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, has banded with the biopharmaceutical company AstraZeneca to “accelerate new antibiotic development,” according to a statement by the HHS.
“Multiple drugs to combat bioterrorism threats and other life-threatening bacterial infections will be developed” under the partnership, the HHS reported.
This marks BARDA’s second partnership with a private company for the purpose of developing “a portfolio of drug candidates with dual uses in treating illnesses caused by bioterrorism agents and antibiotic-resistant infections,” the statement noted.
Under the agreement, BARDA initially will provide $50 million toward product development and could provide up to $170 million for the development of additional products over 5 years. BARDA and AstraZeneca will jointly determine which drug candidates continue to be developed based on technical and financial considerations.
BARDA’s supporting of the development of multiple drug candidates “increases the likelihood that one or more” of AstraZeneca’s drugs will advance to the level of being eligible for consideration by the Food and Drug Administration for approval.
Other potential advantages to the agreement are new antibiotics becoming available in the commercial marketplace, which would diminish the federal government’s need to stockpile these products for biodefense and reduce long-term costs for taxpayers, according to the statement.
The partnership’s inaugural project is an attempt at developing a drug to treat gram-negative infections. This drug candidate combines the two antibiotics aztreonam and avibactam.
In the United States, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are responsible for 2 million infections and 23,000 deaths annually, according to an estimate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, has banded with the biopharmaceutical company AstraZeneca to “accelerate new antibiotic development,” according to a statement by the HHS.
“Multiple drugs to combat bioterrorism threats and other life-threatening bacterial infections will be developed” under the partnership, the HHS reported.
This marks BARDA’s second partnership with a private company for the purpose of developing “a portfolio of drug candidates with dual uses in treating illnesses caused by bioterrorism agents and antibiotic-resistant infections,” the statement noted.
Under the agreement, BARDA initially will provide $50 million toward product development and could provide up to $170 million for the development of additional products over 5 years. BARDA and AstraZeneca will jointly determine which drug candidates continue to be developed based on technical and financial considerations.
BARDA’s supporting of the development of multiple drug candidates “increases the likelihood that one or more” of AstraZeneca’s drugs will advance to the level of being eligible for consideration by the Food and Drug Administration for approval.
Other potential advantages to the agreement are new antibiotics becoming available in the commercial marketplace, which would diminish the federal government’s need to stockpile these products for biodefense and reduce long-term costs for taxpayers, according to the statement.
The partnership’s inaugural project is an attempt at developing a drug to treat gram-negative infections. This drug candidate combines the two antibiotics aztreonam and avibactam.
In the United States, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are responsible for 2 million infections and 23,000 deaths annually, according to an estimate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
NIH funds research on adolescent substance use and the brain
The National Institutes of Health awarded 13 grants to research institutions in the United States to study the effects of adolescent substance use on the developing brain, according to a statement from the NIH issued Sept. 25.
The research project, known as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, will follow approximately 10,000 children beginning at ages 9-10 years, prior to their initiating drug use, through the period of highest risk for substance use and other mental health disorders. Scientists will track the research subjects’ exposure to substances (including nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana), academic achievement, cognitive skills, mental health, and brain structure and function.
One of the grants will fund a coordinating center, another will fund a data analysis and informatics center, and the other 11 grants will fund research project sites.
Among the questions the study’s researchers will seek to answer are:
• What is the impact of occasional versus regular use of marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco, and other substances – alone or in combination – on the structure and function of the developing brain?
• How does the use of specific substances affect the risk of using other substances?
• Which brain pathways link adolescent substance use and the risk for mental illnesses?
• What impact does substance use have on physical health, psychological development, information processing, learning and memory, academic achievement, social development, and other behaviors?
• What factors (such as prenatal exposure, genetics, head trauma, and demographics) influence the development of substance use and its consequences?
The requests for applications and other information about the study are available here.
The National Institutes of Health awarded 13 grants to research institutions in the United States to study the effects of adolescent substance use on the developing brain, according to a statement from the NIH issued Sept. 25.
The research project, known as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, will follow approximately 10,000 children beginning at ages 9-10 years, prior to their initiating drug use, through the period of highest risk for substance use and other mental health disorders. Scientists will track the research subjects’ exposure to substances (including nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana), academic achievement, cognitive skills, mental health, and brain structure and function.
One of the grants will fund a coordinating center, another will fund a data analysis and informatics center, and the other 11 grants will fund research project sites.
Among the questions the study’s researchers will seek to answer are:
• What is the impact of occasional versus regular use of marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco, and other substances – alone or in combination – on the structure and function of the developing brain?
• How does the use of specific substances affect the risk of using other substances?
• Which brain pathways link adolescent substance use and the risk for mental illnesses?
• What impact does substance use have on physical health, psychological development, information processing, learning and memory, academic achievement, social development, and other behaviors?
• What factors (such as prenatal exposure, genetics, head trauma, and demographics) influence the development of substance use and its consequences?
The requests for applications and other information about the study are available here.
The National Institutes of Health awarded 13 grants to research institutions in the United States to study the effects of adolescent substance use on the developing brain, according to a statement from the NIH issued Sept. 25.
The research project, known as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, will follow approximately 10,000 children beginning at ages 9-10 years, prior to their initiating drug use, through the period of highest risk for substance use and other mental health disorders. Scientists will track the research subjects’ exposure to substances (including nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana), academic achievement, cognitive skills, mental health, and brain structure and function.
One of the grants will fund a coordinating center, another will fund a data analysis and informatics center, and the other 11 grants will fund research project sites.
Among the questions the study’s researchers will seek to answer are:
• What is the impact of occasional versus regular use of marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco, and other substances – alone or in combination – on the structure and function of the developing brain?
• How does the use of specific substances affect the risk of using other substances?
• Which brain pathways link adolescent substance use and the risk for mental illnesses?
• What impact does substance use have on physical health, psychological development, information processing, learning and memory, academic achievement, social development, and other behaviors?
• What factors (such as prenatal exposure, genetics, head trauma, and demographics) influence the development of substance use and its consequences?
The requests for applications and other information about the study are available here.
Bipolar type I patients’ relatives lack brain connectivity disruptions
Anatomical connectivity in discreet frontal regions of the brain is disrupted in bipolar I disorder patients, but not in mentally healthy relatives of such patients, according to a study.
The researchers looked for connectivity abnormalities in the brains of multiply affected bipolar I disorder families “to assess the utility of dysconnectivity as a biomarker and its endophenotypic potential.” Tractography was done on magnetic resonance diffusion images of the brains of 19 bipolar I patients in remission, 21 of the patients’ first-degree relatives who did not have bipolar I, and 18 unrelated controls who also did not have bipolar I. A connectivity matrix was generated for each patient, and the Brain Connectivity Toolbox was used to extract neural network metrics.
“Whole brain analysis revealed no differences between groups,” according to Natalie J. Forde, a PhD candidate at the University Medical Centre Gronigen (the Netherlands) and her colleagues. “Analysis of specific mainly frontal regions, previously implicated as potentially endophenotypic by functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis of the same cohort, revealed a significant effect of group in the right medial superior frontal gyrus and left middle frontal gyrus driven by reduced [organization] in [bipolar I] patients, compared with controls.”
Read the full study in Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging (doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2015.08.004).
Anatomical connectivity in discreet frontal regions of the brain is disrupted in bipolar I disorder patients, but not in mentally healthy relatives of such patients, according to a study.
The researchers looked for connectivity abnormalities in the brains of multiply affected bipolar I disorder families “to assess the utility of dysconnectivity as a biomarker and its endophenotypic potential.” Tractography was done on magnetic resonance diffusion images of the brains of 19 bipolar I patients in remission, 21 of the patients’ first-degree relatives who did not have bipolar I, and 18 unrelated controls who also did not have bipolar I. A connectivity matrix was generated for each patient, and the Brain Connectivity Toolbox was used to extract neural network metrics.
“Whole brain analysis revealed no differences between groups,” according to Natalie J. Forde, a PhD candidate at the University Medical Centre Gronigen (the Netherlands) and her colleagues. “Analysis of specific mainly frontal regions, previously implicated as potentially endophenotypic by functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis of the same cohort, revealed a significant effect of group in the right medial superior frontal gyrus and left middle frontal gyrus driven by reduced [organization] in [bipolar I] patients, compared with controls.”
Read the full study in Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging (doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2015.08.004).
Anatomical connectivity in discreet frontal regions of the brain is disrupted in bipolar I disorder patients, but not in mentally healthy relatives of such patients, according to a study.
The researchers looked for connectivity abnormalities in the brains of multiply affected bipolar I disorder families “to assess the utility of dysconnectivity as a biomarker and its endophenotypic potential.” Tractography was done on magnetic resonance diffusion images of the brains of 19 bipolar I patients in remission, 21 of the patients’ first-degree relatives who did not have bipolar I, and 18 unrelated controls who also did not have bipolar I. A connectivity matrix was generated for each patient, and the Brain Connectivity Toolbox was used to extract neural network metrics.
“Whole brain analysis revealed no differences between groups,” according to Natalie J. Forde, a PhD candidate at the University Medical Centre Gronigen (the Netherlands) and her colleagues. “Analysis of specific mainly frontal regions, previously implicated as potentially endophenotypic by functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis of the same cohort, revealed a significant effect of group in the right medial superior frontal gyrus and left middle frontal gyrus driven by reduced [organization] in [bipolar I] patients, compared with controls.”
Read the full study in Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging (doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2015.08.004).
FROM PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH: NEUROIMAGING
HHS funds development of experimental Ebola drug
The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals have entered into an agreement for the purpose of advancing the development of a new experimental drug for treating the Ebola virus disease, according to a statement from the department.
The agreement represents the newest contribution of ASPR’s Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority (BARDA) toward fighting the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. BARDA has promised to pay up to $38 million for the drug’s development and manufacturing, including the filing of an investigational new drug application with the Food and Drug Administration. All of the drug produced will be used in studies. “BARDA also could provide an additional $11.3 million to manufacture alternative monoclonal antibodies,” the statement indicates.
The experimental drug is based on three fully human monoclonal antibodies, which bind to a key Ebola viral protein and neutralize the virus. This decreases the amount of virus in the body that a patient’s immune system has to fight.
The drug company’s “technology facilitated the discovery and development of this monoclonal antibody therapeutic candidate in real time in just nine months as compared to the normal development cycle of several years, and the technology may have potential applications in future public health responses,” said BARDA Director Robin Robinson, Ph.D., in the statement.
The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals have entered into an agreement for the purpose of advancing the development of a new experimental drug for treating the Ebola virus disease, according to a statement from the department.
The agreement represents the newest contribution of ASPR’s Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority (BARDA) toward fighting the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. BARDA has promised to pay up to $38 million for the drug’s development and manufacturing, including the filing of an investigational new drug application with the Food and Drug Administration. All of the drug produced will be used in studies. “BARDA also could provide an additional $11.3 million to manufacture alternative monoclonal antibodies,” the statement indicates.
The experimental drug is based on three fully human monoclonal antibodies, which bind to a key Ebola viral protein and neutralize the virus. This decreases the amount of virus in the body that a patient’s immune system has to fight.
The drug company’s “technology facilitated the discovery and development of this monoclonal antibody therapeutic candidate in real time in just nine months as compared to the normal development cycle of several years, and the technology may have potential applications in future public health responses,” said BARDA Director Robin Robinson, Ph.D., in the statement.
The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals have entered into an agreement for the purpose of advancing the development of a new experimental drug for treating the Ebola virus disease, according to a statement from the department.
The agreement represents the newest contribution of ASPR’s Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority (BARDA) toward fighting the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. BARDA has promised to pay up to $38 million for the drug’s development and manufacturing, including the filing of an investigational new drug application with the Food and Drug Administration. All of the drug produced will be used in studies. “BARDA also could provide an additional $11.3 million to manufacture alternative monoclonal antibodies,” the statement indicates.
The experimental drug is based on three fully human monoclonal antibodies, which bind to a key Ebola viral protein and neutralize the virus. This decreases the amount of virus in the body that a patient’s immune system has to fight.
The drug company’s “technology facilitated the discovery and development of this monoclonal antibody therapeutic candidate in real time in just nine months as compared to the normal development cycle of several years, and the technology may have potential applications in future public health responses,” said BARDA Director Robin Robinson, Ph.D., in the statement.
PsA, PsC do not affect total hip replacement outcomes
Neither psoriatic arthritis (PsA) nor cutaneous psoriasis (PsC) is an independent predictor of poor postoperative pain or function following a total hip arthroplasty, according to the results of a case-control study by Dr. Lisa A. Mandl and her colleagues.
The study’s participants underwent surgery between May 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2010, in a center that performs more than 4,300 THAs annually. All subjects lived for at least 2 years after their operations. The researchers compared pre- and postoperative data from patients in the following three categories: those with PsA, those with PsC without evidence of inflammatory arthritis, and those with osteoarthritis (OA). Patients with OA comprised the control group, which excluded any patient who self-reported a history of PsA, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus erythematosus, or any other systematic rheumatic disease, or who had documentation of skin psoriasis. The researchers acquired postoperative self-report data from 47 PsA patients, 106 PsC patients, and 864 OA patients. Seventeen percent of patients submitted information on their status at 1 year, 69% at 2 years, and 14% at 3-5 years.
The primary outcomes of interest were postoperative pain and function, which were assessed via the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), from which the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was derived.
There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative WOMAC pain or function scores between the three groups of patients (P = .78 and .96, respectively). The mean pain scores were 14.9, 6.1, and 15.8 for patients with PsA, PsC, and OA, respectively. These patients’ mean function scores were 16.3, 19.6, and 18.8 for the PsA, PsC and OA groups, respectively.
Overall levels of satisfaction with the surgery were similar among the three groups (P = .54). Ninety-three percent of the PsA patients, 79% of the PsC patients, and 84% of the OA patients were “very satisfied” with their total hip arthroplasty. Between 1% and 3% of each group reported being “very dissatisfied” with their surgery. The researchers found that extent of skin disease was not associated with worse postoperative pain or function.
“Further work needs to be done to better understand the interplay of disease activity and quality of life on the outcomes of [total hip arthroplasty] in PsA and PsC,” they wrote.
Read the report in Arthritis & Rheumatology (doi: 10.1002/art.39431).
Neither psoriatic arthritis (PsA) nor cutaneous psoriasis (PsC) is an independent predictor of poor postoperative pain or function following a total hip arthroplasty, according to the results of a case-control study by Dr. Lisa A. Mandl and her colleagues.
The study’s participants underwent surgery between May 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2010, in a center that performs more than 4,300 THAs annually. All subjects lived for at least 2 years after their operations. The researchers compared pre- and postoperative data from patients in the following three categories: those with PsA, those with PsC without evidence of inflammatory arthritis, and those with osteoarthritis (OA). Patients with OA comprised the control group, which excluded any patient who self-reported a history of PsA, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus erythematosus, or any other systematic rheumatic disease, or who had documentation of skin psoriasis. The researchers acquired postoperative self-report data from 47 PsA patients, 106 PsC patients, and 864 OA patients. Seventeen percent of patients submitted information on their status at 1 year, 69% at 2 years, and 14% at 3-5 years.
The primary outcomes of interest were postoperative pain and function, which were assessed via the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), from which the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was derived.
There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative WOMAC pain or function scores between the three groups of patients (P = .78 and .96, respectively). The mean pain scores were 14.9, 6.1, and 15.8 for patients with PsA, PsC, and OA, respectively. These patients’ mean function scores were 16.3, 19.6, and 18.8 for the PsA, PsC and OA groups, respectively.
Overall levels of satisfaction with the surgery were similar among the three groups (P = .54). Ninety-three percent of the PsA patients, 79% of the PsC patients, and 84% of the OA patients were “very satisfied” with their total hip arthroplasty. Between 1% and 3% of each group reported being “very dissatisfied” with their surgery. The researchers found that extent of skin disease was not associated with worse postoperative pain or function.
“Further work needs to be done to better understand the interplay of disease activity and quality of life on the outcomes of [total hip arthroplasty] in PsA and PsC,” they wrote.
Read the report in Arthritis & Rheumatology (doi: 10.1002/art.39431).
Neither psoriatic arthritis (PsA) nor cutaneous psoriasis (PsC) is an independent predictor of poor postoperative pain or function following a total hip arthroplasty, according to the results of a case-control study by Dr. Lisa A. Mandl and her colleagues.
The study’s participants underwent surgery between May 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2010, in a center that performs more than 4,300 THAs annually. All subjects lived for at least 2 years after their operations. The researchers compared pre- and postoperative data from patients in the following three categories: those with PsA, those with PsC without evidence of inflammatory arthritis, and those with osteoarthritis (OA). Patients with OA comprised the control group, which excluded any patient who self-reported a history of PsA, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus erythematosus, or any other systematic rheumatic disease, or who had documentation of skin psoriasis. The researchers acquired postoperative self-report data from 47 PsA patients, 106 PsC patients, and 864 OA patients. Seventeen percent of patients submitted information on their status at 1 year, 69% at 2 years, and 14% at 3-5 years.
The primary outcomes of interest were postoperative pain and function, which were assessed via the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), from which the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was derived.
There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative WOMAC pain or function scores between the three groups of patients (P = .78 and .96, respectively). The mean pain scores were 14.9, 6.1, and 15.8 for patients with PsA, PsC, and OA, respectively. These patients’ mean function scores were 16.3, 19.6, and 18.8 for the PsA, PsC and OA groups, respectively.
Overall levels of satisfaction with the surgery were similar among the three groups (P = .54). Ninety-three percent of the PsA patients, 79% of the PsC patients, and 84% of the OA patients were “very satisfied” with their total hip arthroplasty. Between 1% and 3% of each group reported being “very dissatisfied” with their surgery. The researchers found that extent of skin disease was not associated with worse postoperative pain or function.
“Further work needs to be done to better understand the interplay of disease activity and quality of life on the outcomes of [total hip arthroplasty] in PsA and PsC,” they wrote.
Read the report in Arthritis & Rheumatology (doi: 10.1002/art.39431).
FROM ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY
USPSTF guideline: Tell smokers to stop, and provide cessation aids
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a final grade A recommendation urging clinicians to ask all adults whether they smoke, advise them to quit if they do, and provide cessation aids to adults who use tobacco.
The guideline also includes Grade I statements, which say “the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant women and electronic nicotine delivery systems for tobacco cessation in all adults (Ann Intern Med. 2015 Sep 22. doi: 10.7326/M15-2023).
The guideline reaffirms the 2009 USPSTF recommendation, which recommends clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use and provides tobacco cessation interventions to help them quit. The new guideline differs from the 2009 recommendation in that it calls for more evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation in adults and the use of medications to help pregnant women stop smoking.
“A large body of evidence on interventions for smoking cessation already exists, and the overall benefit of pharmacotherapy and behavioral counseling to promote smoking is well established,” says the new USPSTF guideline.
“Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States,” with cigarette smoking, specifically, causing more than 480,000 premature deaths annually and accounting for one in every five deaths, according to the guideline.
“In pregnant women, smoking increases the risk of congenital anomalies; perinatal complications, such as preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, and placental abruption; miscarriage and stillbirth; and neonatal or pediatric complications, such as sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood,” the guideline says.
According to a 2013 systematic review of 28 studies, rates of smoking abstinence at 6 months or more were 8% in groups that received physician advice, compared with 5% in groups that received no advice or usual care (risk ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-1.96).
Pharmacotherapy was effective at stopping nonpregnant smokers from continuing to smoke; a 2012 systematic review of 117 nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) studies found that 17% of participants who took any form of an NRT drug abstained from smoking for 6 months or more, compared with 10% of participants who received placebo or did not take an NRT drug (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.68), the review says.
Combinations of behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation also were effective; “a 2012 good-quality systematic review” found the abstinence rate of participants who received combination pharmacotherapy and intensive behavioral counseling was 14.5%, at 6 months or more, compared with 8% among control participants who received “usual care, self-help materials, or brief advice on quitting (which was less intensive than the counseling or support given to the intervention groups)” (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.66-2.00).
For pregnant women, “a good-quality systematic review of 86 studies done in 2013” found that behavioral interventions were effective at improving rates of smoking cessation. Compared with control participants, pregnant women who received any type of behavioral intervention before the third trimester had higher cessation rates late in pregnancy (15% vs. 11%; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.27-1.64), the review says.
Responding to pubic comments, USPSTF said that “both intervention types (pharmacotherapy and behavioral intervention) are effective and recommended,” with combinations of interventions being the most effective at getting patients to stop smoking.
“Further research is still needed to elucidate specific features of complex behavioral counseling interventions, benefits of pharmacotherapy in specific populations [such as pregnant women and adults with mental health conditions], and the efficacy of newer technology-based interventions … such as Internet-based programs, mobile or smartphone applications, and text-messaging programs.” The document also called for investigations into the safety, benefits, and harms of electronic nicotine delivery systems.
The authors of the guidelines stated they had nothing to disclose.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a final grade A recommendation urging clinicians to ask all adults whether they smoke, advise them to quit if they do, and provide cessation aids to adults who use tobacco.
The guideline also includes Grade I statements, which say “the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant women and electronic nicotine delivery systems for tobacco cessation in all adults (Ann Intern Med. 2015 Sep 22. doi: 10.7326/M15-2023).
The guideline reaffirms the 2009 USPSTF recommendation, which recommends clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use and provides tobacco cessation interventions to help them quit. The new guideline differs from the 2009 recommendation in that it calls for more evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation in adults and the use of medications to help pregnant women stop smoking.
“A large body of evidence on interventions for smoking cessation already exists, and the overall benefit of pharmacotherapy and behavioral counseling to promote smoking is well established,” says the new USPSTF guideline.
“Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States,” with cigarette smoking, specifically, causing more than 480,000 premature deaths annually and accounting for one in every five deaths, according to the guideline.
“In pregnant women, smoking increases the risk of congenital anomalies; perinatal complications, such as preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, and placental abruption; miscarriage and stillbirth; and neonatal or pediatric complications, such as sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood,” the guideline says.
According to a 2013 systematic review of 28 studies, rates of smoking abstinence at 6 months or more were 8% in groups that received physician advice, compared with 5% in groups that received no advice or usual care (risk ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-1.96).
Pharmacotherapy was effective at stopping nonpregnant smokers from continuing to smoke; a 2012 systematic review of 117 nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) studies found that 17% of participants who took any form of an NRT drug abstained from smoking for 6 months or more, compared with 10% of participants who received placebo or did not take an NRT drug (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.68), the review says.
Combinations of behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation also were effective; “a 2012 good-quality systematic review” found the abstinence rate of participants who received combination pharmacotherapy and intensive behavioral counseling was 14.5%, at 6 months or more, compared with 8% among control participants who received “usual care, self-help materials, or brief advice on quitting (which was less intensive than the counseling or support given to the intervention groups)” (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.66-2.00).
For pregnant women, “a good-quality systematic review of 86 studies done in 2013” found that behavioral interventions were effective at improving rates of smoking cessation. Compared with control participants, pregnant women who received any type of behavioral intervention before the third trimester had higher cessation rates late in pregnancy (15% vs. 11%; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.27-1.64), the review says.
Responding to pubic comments, USPSTF said that “both intervention types (pharmacotherapy and behavioral intervention) are effective and recommended,” with combinations of interventions being the most effective at getting patients to stop smoking.
“Further research is still needed to elucidate specific features of complex behavioral counseling interventions, benefits of pharmacotherapy in specific populations [such as pregnant women and adults with mental health conditions], and the efficacy of newer technology-based interventions … such as Internet-based programs, mobile or smartphone applications, and text-messaging programs.” The document also called for investigations into the safety, benefits, and harms of electronic nicotine delivery systems.
The authors of the guidelines stated they had nothing to disclose.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a final grade A recommendation urging clinicians to ask all adults whether they smoke, advise them to quit if they do, and provide cessation aids to adults who use tobacco.
The guideline also includes Grade I statements, which say “the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant women and electronic nicotine delivery systems for tobacco cessation in all adults (Ann Intern Med. 2015 Sep 22. doi: 10.7326/M15-2023).
The guideline reaffirms the 2009 USPSTF recommendation, which recommends clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use and provides tobacco cessation interventions to help them quit. The new guideline differs from the 2009 recommendation in that it calls for more evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation in adults and the use of medications to help pregnant women stop smoking.
“A large body of evidence on interventions for smoking cessation already exists, and the overall benefit of pharmacotherapy and behavioral counseling to promote smoking is well established,” says the new USPSTF guideline.
“Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States,” with cigarette smoking, specifically, causing more than 480,000 premature deaths annually and accounting for one in every five deaths, according to the guideline.
“In pregnant women, smoking increases the risk of congenital anomalies; perinatal complications, such as preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, and placental abruption; miscarriage and stillbirth; and neonatal or pediatric complications, such as sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood,” the guideline says.
According to a 2013 systematic review of 28 studies, rates of smoking abstinence at 6 months or more were 8% in groups that received physician advice, compared with 5% in groups that received no advice or usual care (risk ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-1.96).
Pharmacotherapy was effective at stopping nonpregnant smokers from continuing to smoke; a 2012 systematic review of 117 nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) studies found that 17% of participants who took any form of an NRT drug abstained from smoking for 6 months or more, compared with 10% of participants who received placebo or did not take an NRT drug (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.68), the review says.
Combinations of behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation also were effective; “a 2012 good-quality systematic review” found the abstinence rate of participants who received combination pharmacotherapy and intensive behavioral counseling was 14.5%, at 6 months or more, compared with 8% among control participants who received “usual care, self-help materials, or brief advice on quitting (which was less intensive than the counseling or support given to the intervention groups)” (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.66-2.00).
For pregnant women, “a good-quality systematic review of 86 studies done in 2013” found that behavioral interventions were effective at improving rates of smoking cessation. Compared with control participants, pregnant women who received any type of behavioral intervention before the third trimester had higher cessation rates late in pregnancy (15% vs. 11%; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.27-1.64), the review says.
Responding to pubic comments, USPSTF said that “both intervention types (pharmacotherapy and behavioral intervention) are effective and recommended,” with combinations of interventions being the most effective at getting patients to stop smoking.
“Further research is still needed to elucidate specific features of complex behavioral counseling interventions, benefits of pharmacotherapy in specific populations [such as pregnant women and adults with mental health conditions], and the efficacy of newer technology-based interventions … such as Internet-based programs, mobile or smartphone applications, and text-messaging programs.” The document also called for investigations into the safety, benefits, and harms of electronic nicotine delivery systems.
The authors of the guidelines stated they had nothing to disclose.
FROM ANNALS of INTERNAL MEDICINE
Half of Pregnant Women Got the Flu Vaccine in 2014-15 Season
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
FROM THE MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY WEEKLY REPORT
Half of pregnant women got the flu vaccine in 2014-15 season
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
Half (50.3%) of women who were pregnant at any time from October 2014 through January 2015 received influenza vaccination before or during pregnancy, according to responses from 1,702 participants in an Internet panel survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccination rates for pregnant women during the 2014-15 flu season are similar to rates over the past few years, with 52.2% getting vaccinated in 2013-14 season, 50.5% in 2012-13, and 46.4% in 2011-12. Vaccination coverage, however, was substantially higher when a physician or other health care provider offered the vaccine.
Of the 64.9% of women who received a vaccination offer, 67.9% chose to get the influenza vaccination. Among the 14.8% of survey participants whose health care provider recommended vaccination but didn’t offer it, 33.5% got vaccinated. And of the 20.3% of patients who didn’t receive a recommendation for the influenza vaccination, 8.5% got the vaccine.
“Even among women who reported negative attitudes regarding influenza vaccine efficacy or safety, or were not concerned about influenza infection, coverage was higher among those whose provider recommended and offered vaccination than among women with the same belief who reported only receiving a provider recommendation or receiving no recommendation,” Dr. Helen Ding and her colleagues wrote in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (2015 Sept. 18;64[36];1000-5.).
Negative attitudes about safety and efficacy were the most common reasons that study participants rejected the flu vaccination, with 17.2% saying that they didn’t think the vaccination was effective, 14.5% saying that they were worried about the possible safety risks to their baby, and 13.6% expressing concern that the vaccination would give them the flu.
“Efforts are needed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women. Interventions should include implementing clinic-based education to ensure access to information about influenza vaccine safety and efficacy and the risk for influenza for pregnant women and their infants, and systems to ensure that providers recommend and offer influenza vaccination to all pregnant women,” the researchers wrote.
Read the full article in MMWR.
FROM THE MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY WEEKLY REPORT
1,000 patients enrolled in MMRF CoMMpass Study
The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) has achieved its goal of acquiring participation from 1,000 multiple myeloma patients in its CoMMpass study, the foundation said in a statement.
Each participant in the MMRF CoMMpass Studyprovides bone marrow samples at diagnosis and when condition changes occur over the course of at least 8 years. The study opened in July of 2011 and involves the mapping of the genomic profiles of its participants, who are from more than 100 sites in the United States, Canada, and the European Union.
The study “will provide one of the most comprehensive clinical-genomic maps of any cancer. Beyond identifying novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets, the results will help physicians make informed and customized treatment decisions for their patients through data that show which individual and combined therapies work based on a specific profile, and will also help us identify mutations. This deep understanding ultimately leads to better, more precises care, as well as the promise of a cure,” said principal investigator Dr. Sagar Lonial, professor and executive vice chair in the department of hematology and medical oncology and chief medical officer at Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta.
Outputs from the study are accessible through the MMRF Researcher Gateway, an online, open-access portal designed to make key genomic and clinical data available for additional study. Read more about the study on the foundation’s website.
The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) has achieved its goal of acquiring participation from 1,000 multiple myeloma patients in its CoMMpass study, the foundation said in a statement.
Each participant in the MMRF CoMMpass Studyprovides bone marrow samples at diagnosis and when condition changes occur over the course of at least 8 years. The study opened in July of 2011 and involves the mapping of the genomic profiles of its participants, who are from more than 100 sites in the United States, Canada, and the European Union.
The study “will provide one of the most comprehensive clinical-genomic maps of any cancer. Beyond identifying novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets, the results will help physicians make informed and customized treatment decisions for their patients through data that show which individual and combined therapies work based on a specific profile, and will also help us identify mutations. This deep understanding ultimately leads to better, more precises care, as well as the promise of a cure,” said principal investigator Dr. Sagar Lonial, professor and executive vice chair in the department of hematology and medical oncology and chief medical officer at Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta.
Outputs from the study are accessible through the MMRF Researcher Gateway, an online, open-access portal designed to make key genomic and clinical data available for additional study. Read more about the study on the foundation’s website.
The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) has achieved its goal of acquiring participation from 1,000 multiple myeloma patients in its CoMMpass study, the foundation said in a statement.
Each participant in the MMRF CoMMpass Studyprovides bone marrow samples at diagnosis and when condition changes occur over the course of at least 8 years. The study opened in July of 2011 and involves the mapping of the genomic profiles of its participants, who are from more than 100 sites in the United States, Canada, and the European Union.
The study “will provide one of the most comprehensive clinical-genomic maps of any cancer. Beyond identifying novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets, the results will help physicians make informed and customized treatment decisions for their patients through data that show which individual and combined therapies work based on a specific profile, and will also help us identify mutations. This deep understanding ultimately leads to better, more precises care, as well as the promise of a cure,” said principal investigator Dr. Sagar Lonial, professor and executive vice chair in the department of hematology and medical oncology and chief medical officer at Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta.
Outputs from the study are accessible through the MMRF Researcher Gateway, an online, open-access portal designed to make key genomic and clinical data available for additional study. Read more about the study on the foundation’s website.
Adolescents’ Unsupervised Time With Peers Correlated With Substance Use
Adolescents’ unsupervised time with peers and participation in sports were significantly associated with substance use at the end of high school, according to a study.
The researchers examined longitudinal data on 766 adolescents from 10 locations across the United States. All of the research subjects’ participation in out-of-school time (OST) activities (unsupervised time with peers, sports, and other organized activities, such as band; and paid employment) and use of alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco were measured when they were 15 years old and when they were finishing high school.
More unsupervised time was correlated with higher amounts of all three types of substance use the researchers examined; for cigarette use (r = 0.19), for alcohol use (r = 0.23), and for marijuana use (r = 0.24). More involvement in paid employment also was related to higher amounts of cigarette (r = 0.10) and alcohol use (r = 0.08), but not marijuana use. More participation in sports was positively correlated only with more alcohol use (r = 0.10). In fact, greater participation in sports actually was associated with lower amounts of cigarette (r = –0.17) and marijuana use (r = –0.08).
“Consistent with predictions of Routine Activity Theory and with prior empirical research, more unsupervised time with peers was found to increase both the odds and amount of substance use reported by adolescents at the end of high school,” according to Kenneth T.H. Lee and Deborah Lowe Vandell, Ph.D., of the University of California, Irvine. “That these relations were found, even when time in other OST contexts were controlled, suggests that lack of adult supervision, the presence of peers, and minimal structure are important processes for influencing substance use in adolescence. Other forms of OST also appeared to be linked to substance use in adolescence, suggesting that these relations were not simply artifacts of a confounding with unsupervised time.”
Among this study’s unique findings are that participation in sports appeared to be a protective factor for marijuana and tobacco use, and that participation in other organized activities did not seem to play a significant protective role against substance use, according to the researchers.
Areas that were not addressed in this study include the amount of participation in different types of OST non-sports, organized activities, and paid employment, and the efficacy of reducing the amount of unsupervised time that adolescents spend with peers at preventing substance use and abuse.
Read the full study in the Journal of Adolescent Health (doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.07.003).
Adolescents’ unsupervised time with peers and participation in sports were significantly associated with substance use at the end of high school, according to a study.
The researchers examined longitudinal data on 766 adolescents from 10 locations across the United States. All of the research subjects’ participation in out-of-school time (OST) activities (unsupervised time with peers, sports, and other organized activities, such as band; and paid employment) and use of alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco were measured when they were 15 years old and when they were finishing high school.
More unsupervised time was correlated with higher amounts of all three types of substance use the researchers examined; for cigarette use (r = 0.19), for alcohol use (r = 0.23), and for marijuana use (r = 0.24). More involvement in paid employment also was related to higher amounts of cigarette (r = 0.10) and alcohol use (r = 0.08), but not marijuana use. More participation in sports was positively correlated only with more alcohol use (r = 0.10). In fact, greater participation in sports actually was associated with lower amounts of cigarette (r = –0.17) and marijuana use (r = –0.08).
“Consistent with predictions of Routine Activity Theory and with prior empirical research, more unsupervised time with peers was found to increase both the odds and amount of substance use reported by adolescents at the end of high school,” according to Kenneth T.H. Lee and Deborah Lowe Vandell, Ph.D., of the University of California, Irvine. “That these relations were found, even when time in other OST contexts were controlled, suggests that lack of adult supervision, the presence of peers, and minimal structure are important processes for influencing substance use in adolescence. Other forms of OST also appeared to be linked to substance use in adolescence, suggesting that these relations were not simply artifacts of a confounding with unsupervised time.”
Among this study’s unique findings are that participation in sports appeared to be a protective factor for marijuana and tobacco use, and that participation in other organized activities did not seem to play a significant protective role against substance use, according to the researchers.
Areas that were not addressed in this study include the amount of participation in different types of OST non-sports, organized activities, and paid employment, and the efficacy of reducing the amount of unsupervised time that adolescents spend with peers at preventing substance use and abuse.
Read the full study in the Journal of Adolescent Health (doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.07.003).
Adolescents’ unsupervised time with peers and participation in sports were significantly associated with substance use at the end of high school, according to a study.
The researchers examined longitudinal data on 766 adolescents from 10 locations across the United States. All of the research subjects’ participation in out-of-school time (OST) activities (unsupervised time with peers, sports, and other organized activities, such as band; and paid employment) and use of alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco were measured when they were 15 years old and when they were finishing high school.
More unsupervised time was correlated with higher amounts of all three types of substance use the researchers examined; for cigarette use (r = 0.19), for alcohol use (r = 0.23), and for marijuana use (r = 0.24). More involvement in paid employment also was related to higher amounts of cigarette (r = 0.10) and alcohol use (r = 0.08), but not marijuana use. More participation in sports was positively correlated only with more alcohol use (r = 0.10). In fact, greater participation in sports actually was associated with lower amounts of cigarette (r = –0.17) and marijuana use (r = –0.08).
“Consistent with predictions of Routine Activity Theory and with prior empirical research, more unsupervised time with peers was found to increase both the odds and amount of substance use reported by adolescents at the end of high school,” according to Kenneth T.H. Lee and Deborah Lowe Vandell, Ph.D., of the University of California, Irvine. “That these relations were found, even when time in other OST contexts were controlled, suggests that lack of adult supervision, the presence of peers, and minimal structure are important processes for influencing substance use in adolescence. Other forms of OST also appeared to be linked to substance use in adolescence, suggesting that these relations were not simply artifacts of a confounding with unsupervised time.”
Among this study’s unique findings are that participation in sports appeared to be a protective factor for marijuana and tobacco use, and that participation in other organized activities did not seem to play a significant protective role against substance use, according to the researchers.
Areas that were not addressed in this study include the amount of participation in different types of OST non-sports, organized activities, and paid employment, and the efficacy of reducing the amount of unsupervised time that adolescents spend with peers at preventing substance use and abuse.
Read the full study in the Journal of Adolescent Health (doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.07.003).
FROM THE JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH
