Smoking Cessation, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Although the harmful effects of smoking after a cancer diagnosis have been clearly demonstrated, many patients continue to smoke cigarettes during treatment and beyond. The NCCN Guidelines for Smoking Cessation emphasize the importance of smoking cessation in all patients with cancer and seek to establish evidence-based recommendations tailored to the unique needs and concerns of patients with cancer. The recommendations contained herein describe interventions for cessation of all combustible tobacco products (eg, cigarettes, cigars, hookah), including smokeless tobacco products. However, recommendations are based on studies of cigarette smoking. The NCCN Smoking Cessation Panel recommends that treatment plans for all patients with cancer who smoke include the following 3 tenets that should be done concurrently: (1) evidence-based motivational strategies and behavior therapy (counseling), which can be brief; (2) evidence-based pharmacotherapy; and (3) close follow-up with retreatment as needed.

Related collections

Most cited references 196

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cancer statistics, 2019

Rebecca Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, Ahmedin Jemal (2019)

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.

0 comments Cited 7012 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Cancer statistics, 2022

Rebecca Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, Hannah Fuchs … (2022)

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence and outcomes. Incidence data (through 2018) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2019) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2022, 1,918,030 new cancer cases and 609,360 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States, including approximately 350 deaths per day from lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death. Incidence during 2014 through 2018 continued a slow increase for female breast cancer (by 0.5% annually) and remained stable for prostate cancer, despite a 4% to 6% annual increase for advanced disease since 2011. Consequently, the proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed at a distant stage increased from 3.9% to 8.2% over the past decade. In contrast, lung cancer incidence continued to decline steeply for advanced disease while rates for localized-stage increased suddenly by 4.5% annually, contributing to gains both in the proportion of localized-stage diagnoses (from 17% in 2004 to 28% in 2018) and 3-year relative survival (from 21% to 31%). Mortality patterns reflect incidence trends, with declines accelerating for lung cancer, slowing for breast cancer, and stabilizing for prostate cancer. In summary, progress has stagnated for breast and prostate cancers but strengthened for lung cancer, coinciding with changes in medical practice related to cancer screening and/or treatment. More targeted cancer control interventions and investment in improved early detection and treatment would facilitate reductions in cancer mortality.

0 comments Cited 6998 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change

James Prochaska, Wayne Velicer (1997)

The transtheoretical model posits that health behavior change involves progress through six stages of change: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and termination. Ten processes of change have been identified for producing progress along with decisional balance, self-efficacy, and temptations. Basic research has generated a rule of thumb for at-risk populations: 40% in precontemplation, 40% in contemplation, and 20% in preparation. Across 12 health behaviors, consistent patterns have been found between the pros and cons of changing and the stages of change. Applied research has demonstrated dramatic improvements in recruitment, retention, and progress using stage-matched interventions and proactive recruitment procedures. The most promising outcomes to data have been found with computer-based individualized and interactive interventions. The most promising enhancement to the computer-based programs are personalized counselors. One of the most striking results to date for stage-matched programs is the similarity between participants reactively recruited who reached us for help and those proactively recruited who we reached out to help. If results with stage-matched interventions continue to be replicated, health promotion programs will be able to produce unprecedented impacts on entire at-risk populations.

0 comments Cited 758 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Publisher: Harborside Press, LLC

ISSN (Print): 1540-1405

ISSN (Electronic): 1540-1413

Publication date Created: March 2023

Publication date (Print): March 2023

Volume: 21

Issue: 3

Pages: 297-322

Affiliations

[1 ]The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute

[2 ]Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine

[3 ]University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center

[4 ]UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center

[5 ]The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

[6 ]Duke Cancer Institute

[7 ]Fox Chase Cancer Center

[8 ]The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

[9 ]Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University

[10 ]Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center

[11 ]Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center

[12 ]Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania

[13 ]UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center

[14 ]University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center

[15 ]UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center

[16 ]Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center

[17 ]Stanford Cancer Institute

[18 ]City of Hope National Medical Center

[19 ]Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center

[20 ]O’Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB

[21 ]University of Colorado Cancer Center

[22 ]Moffitt Cancer Center

[23 ]Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center

[24 ]UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center

[25 ]Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

[26 ]UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center

[27 ]Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute

[28 ]Mayo Clinic Cancer Center

[29 ]Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

[30 ]National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Article

DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0013

PubMed ID: 36898367

SO-VID: 7c598b17-7c47-4bd7-8ac8-97ba2d0232f4

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.