Predicting the population health effects of changing tobacco exposures: Statistical models for regulatory compliance

Similar documents
Modeling the Population Health Effects of Camel Snus with Reduced Risk Information

Annette M. Bachand, 1, Sandra I. Sulsky, 1 and Geoffrey M. Curtin 2

TMA Annual Conference, Williamsburg, May 20-22, Public Health. The Swedish Experience

Modeling of E-cigarette Use. David Levy, PhD Georgetown University

Communicating the Risk of Nicotine Delivery Products

Peter G. Shields, MD Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) August 16, 2013

Dissolvable Tobacco Products: Population-Level Effects

Reducing Tobacco Use and Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Interventions to Increase the Unit Price for Tobacco Products

Modified Risk Tobacco Product Applications A Succinct ENDS Industry Perspective

Tobacco-related risk perceptions in the regulation of tobacco products at the FDA Center for Tobacco Products

Submission to FDA on the MRTP application of Swedish Match Docket: FDA 2014 N November 2014

BASIC SKILLS FOR WORKING WITH SMOKERS

Population impacts of snus tobacco initiation and cessation

Menthol Cigarettes, Smoking Cessation, Atherosclerosis and Pulmonary Function

MODIFIED RISK TOBACCO PRODUCT MARKETING DECISIONS

The Evidence on E-cigarettes: Evaluating What We Have and Identifying What We Need

SMOKELESS TOBACCO IN THE CONTEXT OF TOBACCO HARM REDUCTION

Health gains of smoking cessation: accounting for age and time since smoking cessation

A systematic review of transitions between cigarette and smokeless tobacco product use in the United States

BASIC SKILLS FOR WORKING WITH SMOKERS

Problem Which option Additional option Additional comments definition Yes No change No further observations.

Smoking Rates and Tobacco Cessation Coverage in Medicaid Expansion

TOBACCO PRODUCT OR MEDICAL PRODUCT?

Present value cost-savings to Medicaid over 25 years

Quitline in smoking cessation: a cost-effectiveness analysis Tomson T, Helgason A R, Gilljam H

Electronic Cigarettes, Nicotine and Policy Implications

Should FDA try to move smokers to e-cigarettes or other less harmful tobacco-nicotine products and, if so, how?

Nicotine Reduction: Harm Reduction not Prohibition

The cost-effectiveness of raising the legal smoking age in California Ahmad S

How to Regulate E-Cigarettes? Are we asking the right questions?

OVERALL HEALTH EFFECTS OF SWEDISH MATCH SNUS PRODUCTS

FDLI Annual Conference

Epidemiological evidence on snus (Swedish moist snuff) and health in adults. By Peter Lee

Mitch Zeller, Director, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA September 19, 2013 Kansas Public Health Association

Evolving patterns of tobacco use in northern Sweden

E.cigarettes. An alternative to a uniquely deadly product that kills one in two of its regular users? Paul Lambert Public Health, Leeds City Council

dependnece in comparison with Karl Fagerstrom Ph.D. Fagerstrom Consulting

Case 1:99-cv GK Document Filed 01/10/14 Page 1 of 11. Exhibit D. Online newspaper exemplars

Public Health England s Independent Expert E-Cigarettes Evidence Review

9/16/2016. I would feel comfortable dispensing/prescribing varenicline to a patient with a mental health disorder. Learning Objectives

Reframing the E-cigarette Debate To Address Genuine Harm Reduction

The State of Smoking 2018 Global Survey Findings and Insights. Monday, March 19, 2018

Rationale for Establishing Tobacco Product Regulation

Epidemiology of Hardcore Smoking: The Need to Advance the Field

How Might Medicinal Regulators Evolve in their Expectations for ENDS? David M Graham Chief Impact Officer - NJOY

Electronic Cigarettes: What They Are, How They re Marketed, & How We Can Protect Our Youth

Assessing Consumer Responses to RRP: Experience at PMI in Developing Fit-for-Purpose Self-Report Instruments

Reducing Tobacco Use and Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Smoke- Free Policies

Dawn S. Berkowitz, MPH, CHES Director, DHMH Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control 10 th Annual MDQuit Best Practices

Exploring five common claims about e-cigarette use. Lion Shahab, PhD University College

Introduction. Principles

FDLI Tobacco Products Regulation and Policy Conference Joe Murillo Vice President, Regulatory Affairs October 27, 2017

COMMENT PREPARED AFTER THE TPSAC MEETIING ON CAMEL SNUS. significantly reduce harm to individuals or benefit population health.

Quick Reference: Logic Models for Goal Areas 1-4

Stop Smoking Cigarettes With The Token Economy Method [Kindle Edition] By Vince McLeod

HUD Smoke-Free Initiative

Reducing Tobacco Use and Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Reducing Out-of-Pocket Costs for Evidence Based Tobacco Cessation Treatments

Cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation in Australia with varenicline, a novel pharmacotherapy

Analysis and Evaluation of a Cross-Sectional Study IEA World Congress of Epidemiology 20 th August Saitama, Japan

Presentation to the Committee on Assessment of Agent-Based Models to Inform Tobacco Product Regulation

The importance of offering adult smokers a portfolio of potentially less harmful products

RADM Patrick O Carroll, MD, MPH Senior Advisor, Assistant Secretary for Health, US DHSS

First Amendment Issues in Advertising and Product Packaging

The cost utility of bupropion in smoking cessation health programs: simulation model results for Sweden Bolin K, Lindgren B, Willers S

Is the AAA screening of any value in women?

Impact of excise tax on price, consumption and revenue

Non-Industry Voices on Tobacco Harm Reduction and Vaping Products

Medical management of abdominal aortic aneurysms

The Modified Risk Products. or Protectionism?

Swedish snus: Nicotine, Prevalence, Gateway, Epidemiology of harm and Use for smoking cessation

The gateway theory. Pr Jean-François ETTER PhD (political science) E-cigarette Summit London, November 17, Competing interests: none

E-Cigarette Use Transitions: a Case Study from Waves 1 & 2 of the PATH Study

FDA Center for Tobacco Products: Tobacco Research and the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study

The Voice of Local Public Health in New York State. May 12, 2014

The State of Smoking 2018 Global Survey Findings and Insights. Monday, March 19, 2018

Quitline Activity in the Republic of Korea

Criteria USPSTF CMS. Frequency Annual screening Annual screening. No signs or symptoms of lung cancer

Pharmacotherapy for Tobacco Dependence Treatment

SMOKING AND CANCER RISK

ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES WHAT S THE BOTTOM LINE?

RE: Docket No. FDA-2014-N , Electronic Cigarettes and the Public Health

Wayne Hall and Coral Gartner University of Queensland

Re: Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0521, Menthol in Cigarettes, Tobacco Products; Request for Comments

Mats Nilsson, PhD, Epidemiologist February 28, 2013

Why Tobacco Cessation?

Towards a Smokefree Generation: A Tobacco Control Plan for England. Tim Baxter, Department of Health, England

Tobacco Control Small Community Incentive Scheme

Exposure to secondhand smoke in cars and homes, and e-cigarette use among year old children in Wales

University of California San Francisco TCORS. Georgia State University 2. Stanford University. January 16, 2019

The potential impact of smoking interventions on HLY in France. W. Nusselder, D. Wapperom, C. Looman, H. Boshuizen for JA EHLEIS

Collaborating to help Oregon tobacco users quit

QUIT TODAY. It s EASIER than you think. DON T LET TOBACCO CONTROL YOUR LIFE. WE CAN HELP.

Comprehensive approach to Nicotine: Misperceptions, Regulation and Science

Science = Solutions For Substance Use Disorders and Infant Outcomes. Wilson M. Compton, M.D., M.P.E. Deputy Director National Institute on Drug Abuse

The health economics of calcium and vitamin D3 for the prevention of osteoporotic hip fractures in Sweden Willis M S

SAFETY E-CIGS: CLINICAL STUDIES

The Maine Lung Cancer Coalition. Working Together to Reduce Lung Cancer in Maine

Providing a Science Base for the Evaluation of. Tobacco Products

Tobacco endgames in Australia

Transcription:

Predicting the population health effects of changing tobacco exposures: Statistical models for regulatory compliance NASEM ENDS Workshop February 2017 Annette M. Bachand, Ph.D.

Goal of Statistical Models: Predict population health effects of alternative tobacco products (ATPs) in the absence of sufficient empirical data Relevant to FSPTCA: Must demonstrate that a reduction in morbidity or mortality is reasonably likely

WEIGHING RISKS AND BENEFITS Base case Cigarettes only Counterfactual Cigarettes and ATP Baseline population health effect Harmful changes in exposure patterns Beneficial changes in exposure patterns

INTRODUCTION OF AN ATP TO NEVER TOBACCO USERS No tobacco use Smoking Expected beneficial transition ATP use No tobacco use No tobacco use Potential harmful transition ATP use Smoking

INTRODUCTION OF AN ATP TO CURRENT SMOKERS Smoking Smoking Expected beneficial transition ATP use Smoking Smoking cessation Potential harmful transition ATP use

Following a hypothetical birth cohort over time: Data requirements

Age-specific probability of Initiation, cessation, and relapse (smoking & ATP use) Switching between products Adding a product (dual use) Age range Age interval width Study population, population size DYNAMIC POPULATION MODEL Mortality rates (by age, years of smoking, years since quitting) ERR (ATP vs. smoking) Entered as fixed values or with a degree of uncertainty

Illustrative Example

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE 3% of base case never tobacco users initiate ATP Of them, 50% switch to smoking Some base case continuing smokers switch to ATP How many are needed to offset harm? Is this realistic?

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE: RESULTS FOR AGE 68-72 Tipping point Benefit due to switching to ATP Deficit due to ATP initiation and gateway effect ATP

Challenges

Age-specific probability of Current Initiation, data for cessation, future predictions and relapse (smoking & ATP use) Lack Switching of data for between a new products Adding a product (dual use) Age range Age interval width Birth Study cohort vs. cross-section population, population size DYNAMIC POPULATION MODEL Mortality rates (by Hard age, to years find of smoking, years since quitting) ERR (ATP vs. Lack of data for smoking) a new product

BIRTH COHORT VS. CROSS-SECTION Same age, followed until all cohort members have died Relatively few input values Assumptions clearly defined Complete follow-up Exposure histories known All deaths accounted for Mixed ages, followed over a predetermined time interval Many input values o Many birth cohorts, new members o Two time variables, age and year Assumptions difficult to assess Shorter, incomplete follow-up o Partial exposure histories o Tobacco-related mortality missed?

BIRTH COHORT VS. CROSS-SECTION Flexible o Tipping point analyses o Easy expansion to >2 products Less flexible o No direct estimates of tipping points o More difficult to expand Limitations o No direct predictions for crosssectional populations o However, does provide evidence of the effects of introducing a MRTP to a cross-sectional population Other limitations o In theory, direct predictions are possible for the modeled crosssectional population; but o Validity and generalizability? o Tipping points? See: Bachand, A.M. and Sulsky, S.I., Predicting the population health effects of changing tobacco exposures: statistical models for regulatory compliance. Recent Advances in Tobacco Science, 2016. 42:p. 9-22

THANK YOU

CONTACT INFORMATION Annette Bachand, Ph.D. abachand@ramboll.com Major support: RAI Services Company (Winston-Salem, NC) Additional support: Swedish Match (Stockholm, Sweden) The dynamic population modeler described here was developed independently of the sponsors.