Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 85, No. 4, 2010
Issue release date: April 2010
Section title: Original Paper
Pharmacology 2010;85:234–240
(DOI:10.1159/000280435)

Comparable Sensitivities of Urine Cotinine and Breath Carbon Monoxide at Follow-Up Time Points of Three Months or More in a Smoking Cessation Trial

Fritz M. · Wallner R. · Grohs U. · Kemmler G. · Saria A. · Zernig G.
aExperimental Psychiatry Unit, Department of General Psychiatry and Social Psychiatry, and bDepartment of General Psychiatry and Social Psychiatry, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, and cbraindesign GmbH, Graz, Austria

Do you have an account?

Register and profit from personalized services (MyKarger) Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information









I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

Register and profit from personalized services (MyKarger) Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information









I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger (new!)
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
  • Reduced rates with a PPV account
read more

Direct: USD 38.00
Account: USD 26.50

Select

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply

Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00

Select

Subscribe

  • Automatic perpetual access to all articles of the subscribed year(s)
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates


Select


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: 1/21/2010
Accepted: 1/22/2010
Published online: 3/17/2010

Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 5

ISSN: 0031-7012 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0313 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/PHA

Abstract

To control for likely overreporting of abstinence in clinical trials of smoking cessation aids, field convention demands the corroboration of subjects’ self-reports by a biochemical/pharmacological marker. It is, however, currently debated if urinary cotinine (UC), a metabolite of nicotine, should be preferred because of its higher sensitivity, although sample collection for and analysis of cotinine are much more expensive and work intensive than carbon monoxide (CO) measurements in exhaled air. In the present study, it turned out that UC was of only moderately higher sensitivity than CO (99.4% vs. 96.3%; p = 0.02), the difference being significant only at group sizes of >164. UC identified participants as smokers who escaped CO detection in 4.9% of the cases, whereas CO identified smokers who escaped UC detection in 2.7% of the cases (p = 0.014). Our findings suggest that the costs/disadvantages of using UC instead of CO may outweigh its benefit as a pharmacological marker of (non)smoking status.


  

Author Contacts

Dr. Gerald Zernig
Experimental Psychiatry Unit
Department of General Psychiatry and Social Psychiatry
Medical University of Innsbruck, Innrain 66a, AT–6020 Innsbruck (Austria)
Tel. +43 512 504 23711, Fax +43 512 504 25866, E-Mail gerald.zernig@i-med.ac.at

  

Article Information

Received: January 21, 2010
Accepted: January 22, 2010
Published online: March 17, 2010
Number of Print Pages : 7
Number of Figures : 0, Number of Tables : 5, Number of References : 18

  

Publication Details

Pharmacology (International Journal of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology)

Vol. 85, No. 4, Year 2010 (Cover Date: April 2010)

Journal Editor: Donnerer J. (Graz), Billingsley M.L. (Hershey, Pa.), Maeyama K. (Matsuyama)
ISSN: 0031-7012 (Print), eISSN: 1423-0313 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/PHA


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: 1/21/2010
Accepted: 1/22/2010
Published online: 3/17/2010

Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 5

ISSN: 0031-7012 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0313 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/PHA


Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.