Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Tobacco consumption remains a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality and is a significant preventable health concern. Despite the known benefits of smoking cessation, many smokers face difficulties in maintaining abstinence and preventing relapse. In Germany, approximately 30% of individuals aged 14 and older are smokers, which reflects low smoking cessation rates and limited use of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions. Purpose This qualitative study aimed to explore experts’ views on smoking cessation through interviews with health practitioners. Methods Fifteen semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with professionals from diverse fields, including medical doctors, psychologists, and addiction therapists, from July to November 2022. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. A deductively developed categorization system was applied to identify sub-themes within categories and to systematically code the data. All data were thencategorized under two main categories: facilitators and barriers to smoking cessation. Results Key facilitators included the self-motivation of participants, the communication skills of the intervention leader, and the provision of knowledge about addiction mechanisms. Important barriers were smokers’ fears of quitting, external environmental pressures, and inadequate counseling structures. Conclusion The findings suggest that improving smoking cessation interventions in Germany require comprehensive strategies involving both structural adjustments in health care settings and enhanced training for tobacco treatment specialists.

Background Continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis can be associated with lower treatment tolerance, poorer outcomes, and reduced quality of life compared to non-smoking cancer patients or to those who have quit. Yet about 60% of patients continue to smoke after being diagnosed and find it difficult to quit. To address this problem, it is necessary to identify current and past smoking patterns (e.g., frequency of use, types of tobacco products) and determine whether there is motivation to quit. Similarly, factors associated with continued smoking should be identified. These data will provide the basis for the development of smoking cessation programs tailored to the needs of cancer patients. Methods A questionnaire was distributed to cancer patients older than 18 years in a German Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participating cancer patients were divided into three main groups: 1) patients who stopped smoking before being diagnosed with cancer (Ex-before); 2) patients who stopped smoking after a cancer diagnosis (Ex-after); and 3) patients who currently smoke cigarettes (CS). Sociodemographic, medical, and psychosocial data were collected, as well as smoking patterns and the motivation to quit smoking. Results About half of patients (51%) who smoked before diagnosis continue to smoke after a cancer diagnosis. Being diagnosed with a tobacco-related cancer type was associated with a decreased probability of continued smoking. Patients with tobacco-related tumors and receiving positive support in burdensome situations were more likely to have a higher cigarette dependence. Of all CS, 59.1% had intention to quit, and 22.7% reported having taken action to quit. The support by a smoking cessation program was considered important. CS were willing to spend up to €100 for support and were open to multiple sessions per week, group sessions, one-on-one sessions and/or online support. Conclusion These findings underscore the importance of educating cancer patients about the consequences of smoking and to provide them with support to quit. Identified risk factors may further help to recognize cancer patients with high risk of continued smoking after diagnosis. Trial Registration The study was registered at OSF ( https://osf.io/3c9km ) and published as a study protocol at “ https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e069570 ”.

Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide. The aim of this study was to examine if CVD affects the mortality of women after a breast cancer diagnosis and population controls differently. Methods The analysis included a total of 3,555 women, diagnosed with primary stage 1–3 breast cancer or in situ carcinoma between 2002 and 2005 and 7,334 controls breast cancer-free at recruitment, all aged 50–74 years, who were followed-up in a German breast cancer case–control study until June, 30 2020. Kaplan–Meier and cumulative incidence function were calculated for all-cause mortality and mortality from any cancer, stratified for case–control status and CVD, separately for women aged < 65 and ≥ 65 years. Cox regression and Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association between case–control-status, CVD and mortality from all causes/any cancer. Results The median follow-up was 16.1 years. In total, 1,172 cases (33.0%) and 1,401 initial controls (19.1%) died. CVD prevalence at recruitment was 15.2% in cases and controls. Cases with CVD had the highest and controls without CVD the lowest mortality during the entire observation period in both age groups (< 65 and ≥ 65 years). CVD was identified as a risk factor for all-cause mortality in both cases and controls aged < 65 years (HR 1.22, 95%CI 0.96–1.55 and HR 1.79, 95%CI 1.43–2.24) as well as at ages of ≥ 65 years (HR 1.44, 95%CI 1.20–1.73 and HR 1.59, 95%CI 1.37–1.83). A significant association of CVD and cancer mortality was found only for cases aged ≥ 65 years. Conclusion CVD was significantly associated with all-cause mortality of both cases and controls and CVD was identified as a risk factor for cancer mortality of cases aged ≥ 65 years at recruitment. Therefore, attention should be paid on monitoring and preventing CVD in breast cancer patients, especially in those diagnosed at older ages.

Background Most U.S. states have legalized cannabis for medical and/or recreational use. In a 6-month prospective observational study, we examined changes in adult cannabis use patterns and health perceptions following broadened legalization of cannabis use from medical to recreational purposes in California. Methods Respondents were part of Stanford University’s WELL for Life registry, an online adult cohort concentrated in Northern California. Surveys were administered online in the 10 days prior to state legalization of recreational use (1/1/18) and 1-month (2/1/18–2/15/18) and 6-months (7/1/2018–7/15/18) following the change in state policy. Online surveys assessed self-reported past 30-day cannabis use, exposure to others’ cannabis use, and health perceptions of cannabis use. Logistic regression models and generalized estimating equations (GEE) examined associations between participant characteristics and cannabis use pre- to 1-month and 6-months post-legalization. Results The sample ( N  = 429, 51% female, 55% non-Hispanic White, age mean = 56 ± 14.6) voted 58% in favor of state legalization of recreational cannabis use, with 26% opposed, and 16% abstained. Cannabis use in the past 30-days significantly increased from pre-legalization (17%) to 1-month post-legalization (21%; odds ratio (OR) = 1.28, p -value ( p ) = .01) and stayed elevated over pre-legalization levels at 6-months post-legalization (20%; OR = 1.28, p  = .01). Exposure to others’ cannabis use in the past 30 days did not change significantly over time: 41% pre-legalization, 44% 1-month post-legalization (OR = 1.18, p  = .11), and 42% 6-months post-legalization (OR = 1.08, p  = .61). Perceptions of health benefits of cannabis use increased from pre-legalization to 6-months post-legalization (OR = 1.19, p  = .02). Younger adults, those with fewer years of education, and those reporting histories of depression were more likely to report recent cannabis use pre- and post-legalization. Other mental illness was associated with cannabis use at post-legalization only. In a multivariate GEE adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and diagnoses, favoring legalization and the interaction of time and positive health perceptions were associated with a greater likelihood of using cannabis. Conclusions Legalized recreational cannabis use was associated with greater self-reported past 30-day use post-legalization, and with more-positive health perceptions of cannabis use. Future research is needed to examine longer-term perceptions and behavioral patterns following legalization of recreational cannabis use, especially among those with mental illness.

IntroductionPatients who continue to smoke cigarettes after a cancer diagnosis can experience poorer treatment tolerance and outcomes than those who quit immediately. Identifying risk factors specific to patients with cancer who smoke, as well as their smoking behaviours (eg, frequency of use, types of tobacco products), dependency level and quit intentions, is necessary to better inform patients and encourage quitting smoking after a cancer diagnosis. This study aims to examine the occurrence of smoking in patients with cancer treated at specialised oncology departments and outpatient clinics based within the metropolitan region of Hamburg, Germany, and presents an analysis of their smoking patterns. This understanding is the first step in developing an adequate smoking cessation intervention and shall contribute to a sustainable improvement in the treatment results, long-term survival and quality of life of patients with cancer.Methods and analysisA questionnaire will be administered to patients with cancer (N=865) aged 18 years and above in the catchment area of Hamburg, Germany. Data acquisition includes sociodemographic, medical and psychosocial data as well as information on current smoking patterns. To identify the associations between smoking patterns and sociodemographic characteristics, disease-related variables, and psychological risk factors, descriptive statistics and multiple logistic as well as multinomial regressions will be performed.Ethics and disseminationThis study was registered at Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PGBY8). It was approved by the ethics committee of the local psychological Ethic committee at the centre of psychosocial medicine Hamburg, Germany (LPEK) (tracking number: LPEK-0212). The study will be carried out in accordance with the Code of Ethics of the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The relationships between neighborhood factors (i.e., neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) and ethnic enclave) and histologic subtypes of lung cancer for racial/ethnic groups, particularly Hispanics and Asian American/Pacific Islanders (AAPIs), are poorly understood. We conducted a population-based study of 75,631 Californians diagnosed with lung cancer from 2008 through2012. We report incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for lung cancer histologic cell-types by nSES among racial/ethnic groups (non-Hispanic (NH) Whites, NH Blacks, Hispanics and AAPIs) and according to Hispanic or Asian neighborhood ethnic enclave status among Hispanics and AAPIs, respectively. In addition, we examined incidence jointly by nSES and ethnic enclave. Patterns of lung cancer incidence by nSES and ethnic enclave differed across race/ethnicity, sex, and histologic cell-type. For adenocarcinoma, Hispanic males and females, residing in both low nSES and high nSES neighborhoods that were low enclave, had higher incidence rates compared to those residing in low nSES, high enclave neighborhoods; males (IRR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.04-1.32] and IRR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.29], respectively) and females (IRR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.15-1.44] and IRR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.36-1.67], respectively). However, AAPI males residing in both low and high SES neighborhoods that were also low enclave had lower adenocarcinoma incidence. Neighborhood factors differentially influence the incidence of lung cancer histologic cell-types with heterogeneity in these associations by race/ethnicity and sex. For Hispanic males and females and AAPI males, neighborhood ethnic enclave status is strongly associated with lung adenocarcinoma incidence.

Background Drastic life events, such as a cancer diagnosis, do not necessarily lead to a reduction in unhealthy and dysfunctional behaviors like smoking. Continued smoking among cancer survivors significantly increases the risk of recurrence and worsens treatment outcomes. While evidence-based smoking cessation treatments have demonstrated their effectiveness in acute cancer care, their impact among long-term cancer survivors remains limited, and overall quit rates remain low. To cessation outcome and improve long-term support strategies, it is essential to better understand the experiences, attitudes, and perceived barriers of both current and former smoking cancer survivors. Materials and Methods This qualitative study included semi-structured interviews with six cancer survivors (50% female), aged 34 to 81 years, with different cancer types (breast, skin, lung, urinary bladder cancer, and GIST). At the time of the interview, three participants were still smoking, two had quit at the time of their diagnosis, and one had quit beforehand. All had completed cancer treatment at least four years prior without relapse. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative content analysis, applying an inductive approach to identify recurring themes and categorize the data using computer-assisted analysis software. Results Four main categories emerged from the interviews: (1) motivations for quitting, (2) perceived barriers, (3) facilitators of cessation, and (4) contextual influences. Key motives for continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis included managing nicotine cravings and stress, experiencing pleasure and boredom relief, and a perceived lack of negative health consequences. Some participants reported smoking to cope with treatment-related discomfort. A general lack of knowledge regarding the link between smoking and cancer contributed to low motivation to quit and limited risk awareness. Participants who had successfully quit cited improvements in health and well-being as primary reasons for cessation, alongside external factors such as financial savings and the aversion to cigarette odor. Medical advice and support from healthcare providers were mentioned frequently – both as motivating factors and, in cases where such support was absent or discouraging, as barriers. Barriers to quitting included a persistent smoking environment, negative emotions during cessation attempts, poor timing related to the cancer experience, and previous failed quit attempts. Conversely, facilitators of cessation included external regulations (eg, smoking bans, legal restrictions), a tobacco-free environment, strong internal motivation, individual coping strategies for withdrawal symptoms and craving, medical recommendations, and support from family or peers. Discussion/Conclusion The results highlight the need for a better adaptation of smoking cessation interventions to the specific needs of cancer survivors. This has significant implications for oncology professionals and healthcare providers in cancer care. The inconsistency in smoking cessation advice from healthcare providers, ranging from discouragement to strong encouragement, points to the necessity of re-evaluating current policies and establishing more standardized communication within oncology settings. Cancer survivors require improved education about the health risks associated with continued smoking, as well as information about available cessation aids and pharmacological support options. The “teachable moment” following a cancer diagnosis presents an opportunity to integrate smoking cessation support into routine oncological care. Practical strategies for cancer survivors who wish to quit include the development of alternative behaviors, effective stress management techniques, and further enhancement of legal restrictions to promote a smoke-free environment. Such measures would not only support individual cessation efforts but also contribute to broader public health goals, protecting cancer survivors and the general population from smoking-related harm. The insights from this study provide a foundation for the development of more tailored cessation interventions for cancer survivors.

We examined the long-term relationship of psychosocial risk and health behaviors on clinical events in patients awaiting heart transplantation (HTx). Psychosocial characteristics (e.g., depression), health behaviors (e.g., dietary habits, smoking), medical factors (e.g., creatinine), and demographics (e.g., age, sex) were collected at the time of listing in 318 patients (82% male, mean age = 53 years) enrolled in the Waiting for a New Heart Study. Clinical events were death/delisting due to deterioration, high-urgency status transplantation (HU-HTx), elective transplantation, and delisting due to clinical improvement. Within 7 years of follow-up, 92 patients died or were delisted due to deterioration, 121 received HU-HTx, 43 received elective transplantation, and 39 were delisted due to improvement. Adjusting for demographic and medical characteristics, the results indicated that frequent consumption of healthy foods (i.e., foods high in unsaturated fats) and being physically active increased the likelihood of delisting due improvement, while smoking and depressive symptoms were related to death/delisting due to clinical deterioration while awaiting HTx. In conclusion, psychosocial and behavioral characteristics are clearly associated with clinical outcomes in this population. Interventions that target psychosocial risk, smoking, dietary habits, and physical activity may be beneficial for patients with advanced heart failure waiting for a cardiac transplant.

As part of a National Cancer Institute Moonshot P30 Supplement, the Stanford Cancer Center piloted and integrated tobacco treatment into cancer care. This quality improvement (QI) project reports on the process from initial pilot to adoption within 14 clinics. The Head and Neck Oncology Clinic was engaged first in January 2019 as a pilot site given staff receptivity, elevated smoking prevalence, and a high tobacco screening rate (95%) yet low levels of tobacco cessation treatment referrals (<10%) and patient engagement (<1% of smokers treated). To improve referrals and engagement, system changes included an automated “opt-out” referral process and provision of tobacco cessation treatment as a covered benefit with flexible delivery options that included phone and telemedicine. Screening rates increased to 99%, referrals to 100%, 74% of patients were reached by counselors, and 33% of those reached engaged in treatment. Patient-reported abstinence from all tobacco products at 6-month follow-up is 20%. In July 2019, two additional oncology clinics were added. In December 2019, less than one year from initiating the QI pilot, with demonstrated feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy, the tobacco treatment services were integrated into 14 clinics at Stanford Cancer Center.