Abstract
This study aims to assess the association between nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline, and untreated smoking with the risk of developing eye disorders. We employed a new-user design to investigate the association between NRT use and the incidence of eye disorders by the Taiwan National Health Insurance program. This study included 8416 smokers who received NRT and 8416 smokers who did not receive NRT (control group) matched using propensity scores between 2007 and 2018. After adjustment for relevant factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that compared with untreated smokers, NRT use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of macular degeneration (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13–0.87, P = 0.024). When stratified by dose, short-term NRT use (8–28 defined daily doses) was associated with significantly lower risk of glaucoma (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.16–0.80, P = 0.012) and a trend toward reduced risk of cataract (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36–1.01, P = 0.053) compared to no treatment. However, these associations were not observed with long-term NRT use. The results of this real-world observational study indicate that NRT use, particularly short-term use, was associated with a lower risk of certain eye disorders compared to no treatment for smoking cessation. Long-term NRT use did not demonstrate the same benefits. Thus, short-term NRT may be a beneficial treatment strategy for reducing the risk of eye disorders in smokers attempting to quit. However, further evidence is required to verify these findings and determine the optimal duration of NRT use.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and varenicline (Champix) are effective treatments for smoking cessation, which work by reducing a smoker’s craving for nicotine and delaying relapse. These treatments for smoking cessation have been approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)1,2,3.
Many studies have confirmed the safety and effectiveness of NRT and varenicline as smoking cessation treatments. Therefore, they have become the most commonly used medication for smoking cessation4.
Smoking has a serious impact on ophthalmic diseases such as iritis, blindness, vision loss, cataract, conjunctivitis, and macular degeneration5,6. A large cohort study found that smokers had a higher risk of developing glaucoma compared to non-smokers7.
The smoke and toxins in cigarettes irritate the eyes and damage health as well as cause brain damage, affecting visual function8.
Several studies have examined the influence of smoking on retinal and brain diseases9,10,11. However, few studies have explored the effects of smoking cessation on ophthalmic diseases. Although many studies have confirmed the safety and efficacy of NRT and varenicline12, studies on the effects of long-term use of these treatments on ophthalmic diseases are lacking.
Most studies assessing the risks of complications associated with varenicline have been conducted over a short term. Rare side effects of varenicline are primarily emotional agitation, including restlessness, depression, and suicidal thoughts, as well as potential cardiovascular risk13. In 2011 and 2014, the FDA recommended monitoring the cardiovascular risks during varenicline use14,15,16. The adverse effects of NRT are generally mild and well tolerated compared with those of varenicline, which makes NRT a potentially safer and more effective option for use in smoking cessation treatment. However, studies examining the long-term benefits of NRT are lacking17,18,19.
In Taiwan, NRT and varenicline have been included in the National Health Insurance program since 2007 as smoking cessation treatment. Therefore, we used data from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) to investigate the impact of smoking cessation on common eye disorders.
Materials and methods
Data source
We analyzed data from Taiwan's NHIRD, a population-based claims database that covers more than 99% of Taiwan's population. The NHIRD contains comprehensive data on medical services, procedures, and prescription medications from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018, with diagnostic codes in accordance with the International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM). Because the NHIRD consists of encoded secondary data and does not allow for individual identification, the requirement for informed consent was waived in accordance with the Computer-Processed Personal Data Protection Law. The study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Show Chwan Memorial Hospital on November 4, 2021 (IRB-No: 1101002). The approval was granted with the understanding that the study utilizes de-identified data from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD), thereby negating the need for individual informed consent. The ethical review specifically addressed the study’s compliance with privacy and data protection standards, ensuring that all patient information remained confidential and secure. Our research adheres to the ethical guidelines for the use of health insurance database research, focusing on safeguarding participant privacy and the responsible use of data in accordance with national and international regulations. For additional information on ethical clearance, contact the Research Ethics Committee: irb@show.org.tw.
Study design and study participants
In this historical cohort study, we utilized real-world observational data drawn from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) to examine the outcomes of outpatients participating in smoking cessation programs between 2007 and 2018. Employing a new-user design, this approach allowed us to include all patients initiating smoking cessation treatment during the study period, with the aim of minimizing selection biases often associated with observational studies. We meticulously tracked each patient's medical history prior to their enrollment in smoking cessation programs to accurately assess comorbidities and ensure a comprehensive evaluation of baseline health status. The index date was defined as the date of the patient's first prescription for smoking cessation treatment, marking the starting point for follow-up in our analysis. This methodological framework enables a thorough investigation into the impact of smoking cessation on the progression of eye disorders, taking into account the temporal relationship between treatment initiation and health outcomes.
We identified all patients who used varenicline and NRT from the index date to the end of 2018, death, or the development of outcomes. We divided the patients into 2 groups: the treatment group, who received NRT, and the control group, which was further divided into 2 subgroups. The first subgroup included non-NRT smokers who had used varenicline, and the second subgroup included non-NRT smokers who had not attempted smoking cessation. The primary outcome assessed was the incidence of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration in all groups.
To indicate the duration of NRT exposure during the follow-up period, we calculated the total doses for each NRT prescription. The defined daily doses (DDDs) were determined according to the World Health Organization's proposal, with one DDD of NRT set at 30 mg/day20.
Potential confounders
In our study, we applied strict inclusion and exclusion criteria to minimize the influence of potential confounders and ensure the comparability of the study groups. We excluded patients who were less than 20 years of age, as this age group is less likely to develop the eye conditions of interest and may have different risk factors compared to older adults21. Furthermore, we excluded patients diagnosed with blindness, low vision, or pseudophakia, as well as those who had received a diagnosis of glaucoma, cataract, or macular degeneration before the index date. These exclusions were made to ensure that the study population was free of pre-existing eye conditions that could bias the results22.
We enrolled all users who were matched by exact age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), comorbidities (hypertensive cardiovascular disease [HCD], hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus23, and chronic kidney disease [CKD]), medications (aspirin, statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs], β-blockers, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs]), and the index date.
Covariate assessment
In our study, we adjusted for potential confounders based on the association between varenicline and nicotine. Specifically, we adjusted for sex, age, and CCI as well as comorbidities such as HCD (ICD-9 codes 401–405; ICD-10 codes I10–I15), hyperlipidemia (ICD-9 code 272; ICD-10 code E78), DM (ICD-9 code 250; ICD-10 codes E10.0, E10.1, E10.9, E11.0, E11.1, and E11.9), CKD (ICD-9 code 585; ICD-10 code N18), and medication history (including low-dose aspirin, statins, ACEIs, β-blockers, NSAIDs, spironolactone, glucocorticoids, and SSRIs) that may affect eye disease incidence. We also considered the following eye-related outcomes: blindness and low vision (ICD-9 code 369; ICD-10 code H54), and pseudophakia (ICD-9 code 379.31; ICD-10 code H27.0).
Main outcome measurements
We determined the presence of the following eye diseases in the first diagnosis: glaucoma (ICD-9 code 365; ICD-10 codes H40, H42), cataract (ICD-9 code 366; ICD-10 codes H25-H26, H28), and macular degeneration (ICD-9 codes 362.0–362.5; ICD-10 codes E11.3, H34–H35).
The diagnoses of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration were established using standardized methods that adhere to internationally recognized criteria, ensuring accuracy and consistency in diagnosis across the study population. For glaucoma, diagnostic methods included visual field assessment using automated perimetry to evaluate visual field defects, evaluation of the optic nerve and retinal nerve fiber layer using ophthalmoscopy and optical coherence tomography (OCT)24, and measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP)25. It is noteworthy that normal-tension glaucoma, characterized by progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy despite normal IOP, is prevalent among the Asian population26. For cataract, diagnostic methods included slit-lamp examination to assess the degree of lens opacity and visual acuity measurement using the Snellen chart27. For macular degeneration, diagnostic methods included fundus examination using ophthalmoscopy or fundus photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) to evaluate the retinal thickness and morphology28.
Exposure definition and follow‑up
The new-user design included a washout period of at least 2 years to mitigate the impact of external factors on patients with newly diagnosed target outcomes, including Glaucoma, Cataract, and Macular Degeneration29.
Patients who did not experience the target outcomes or who died during follow-up were censored. To avoid immortal time bias, we defined the index date as the date of the first prescription for varenicline or nicotine for each user. For each matched comparison group, the exposure period began when NRT was initiated. All patients were followed up from the index date to 2018.
We followed up every participant’s prescriptions and clinical services until December 31, 2018. The follow-up duration was defined as the interval from the index date of both groups to the date of diagnosis of target outcomes, death, or December 31, 2018.
Statistical methods
Categorical variables were assessed using the McNemar test, whereas paired t tests were used to compare some continuous variables of prescription and baseline characteristics. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate potential selection bias by balancing baseline characteristics between the varenicline and nicotine cohorts.
Propensity score matching
We performed 1:1 full matching without replacement by using the R package “MatchIt” (version 4.3.4) to conduct robust PSM. This allowed the regression model to be specific to the function of the outcome variable on the treatment variable, and addressing extreme weights through trimming was not necessary after PSM30,31. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the bootstrapping method to ensure the stability and robustness of our model32,33.
The cumulative incidence of the different study cohorts was measured using the Kaplan–Meier method, and the differences in curves were examined using the log-rank test. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 21.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and R version 3.4.3 (R Core Team, 2017). Statistical significance was determined using a 2-tailed test with a P value of < 0.05.
Institutional review board statement
In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the present study involving human subjects received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Show Chwan Memorial Hospital (IRB-No: 1080703).
Informed consent statement
Considering that the NHIRD dataset consists of encrypted secondary data, making it impossible to identify individuals, the Institutional Review Board at Show Chwan Memorial Hospital in Changhua City, Taiwan, waived the necessity for informed consent on August 30, 2019 (IRB No: 1080703).
Results
Patient characteristics
Of the 2,000,118 individuals in our database, 16,832 were sampled as smoking outpatients between 2002 and 2018 by using a new-user design. An at least 2-year washout period before the index date of treatment initiation was included for all patients. Through 1:1 matching by age, sex, CCI, comorbidities (HCD, hyperlipidemia, DM, and CKD), and medications (aspirin, statins, ACEIs, β-blockers, and SSRIs), we identified 8416 smokers who only received NRT as the NRT group and 8416 non-NRT controls (5189 received varenicline alone and 3227 received no treatment for smoking cessation), with the exact year of the first prescription considered as the index date. (Fig. 1).
We conducted a 1:1 matched cohort study without replacement that included baseline demographic, medical, and prescription information, which ensured a well-balanced and robust comparison between the NRT and non-NRT cohorts. The cohorts were matched by sex, age, CCI scores, and follow-up period. The male-to-female ratio was 84.9:15.1 (P = 1.000), with a mean age of 42.9 ± 11.9 (P = 1.000) and mean CCI value of 0.8 ± 1.3 (P = 1.000). The mean follow-up period was 3.39 ± 2.27 years for the NRT group and 3.34 ± 2.27 years for the non-NRT group, with a median follow-up duration of 3.17 years for both groups (Table 1).
Comparison of complications between the subgroups of different demographics, comorbidities, and comedications
A multiple Cox regression analysis was conducted with adjustment for various confounders, including age, sex, CCI, comedications (aspirin, statins, ACEIs, β-blockers, and SSRIs), and comorbidities (hypercholesterolemia, hyperlipidemia, DM, and CKD), to evaluate the association of NRT with the risk of progression of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration, and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were calculated.
As shown in Table 2, age was significantly associated with increased risks of glaucoma (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01–1.06, P = 0.002), cataract (aHR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.11–1.14, P < 0.001), and macular degeneration (aHR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.03–1.12, P < 0.001) in the NRT group compared with non-NRT group. Moreover, hyperlipidemia was significantly associated with the increased risks of glaucoma (aHR: 2.60, CI: 1.18–5.70, P = 0.017) and cataract (aHR: 2.46, CI: 1.39–4.35, P = 0.002) in the NRT group compared with non-NRT group. No significant associations were observed between other comorbidities and medication use and the risks of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration in the 2 groups at risk, as revealed by multiple Cox regression analysis.
The incidence rates (per 1000 person-years) of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration are presented in Table 3. The incidence rates of glaucoma (1.18 vs. 1.48 vs. 2.17) and cataract (2.51 vs. 3.17 vs. 4.23) were lower in the NRT group than in the varenicline and untreated groups. However, no significant difference in the incidence rates of macular degeneration was noted between the NRT and non-NRT groups.
Table 4 adopted multivariate Cox regression analysis to estimate the associations between various treatment modalities and the development of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration, as well as the relationship between different doses of NRT and the occurrence of these ocular diseases. Firstly, the analysis found no statistically significant association between the NRT cohort and the occurrence of glaucoma (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.49–1.22, P = 0.267), cataract (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.55–1.04, P = 0.089), or macular degeneration (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.24–1.24, P = 0.148) when compared to the non-NRT cohort. Secondly, when the non-NRT group was further stratified into untreated and varenicline subgroups, a statistically significant difference was observed between the NRT group and the untreated subgroup in terms of macular degeneration (HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13–0.87, P = 0.024).
Furthermore, no significant differences in the risks of glaucoma (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.36–1.28, P = 0.226), cataract (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.28–1.48, P = 0.303), or macular degeneration (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.14–1.16, P = 0.094) were observed between the varenicline and untreated groups. Finally, Kaplan–Meier analysis demonstrated that the NRT group had significantly lower risks of glaucoma (P = 0.025), cataract (P = 0.010), and macular degeneration (P = 0.007) compared to the varenicline or untreated cohort (Fig. 2B,D,F).
Sensitivity analyses
The sensitivity analyses performed in our study suggest that the reduction in the risks of glaucoma (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16–0.80, P = 0.012) and cataract (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36–1.01, P = 0.053) was more substantial in patients who used 8–28 DDDs of NRT compared with groups of other DDDs as well as untreated smokers. As shown in Fig. 3, Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that the 8–28 DDD group had significantly lower risks of glaucoma (P = 0.004) and cataract (P = 0.012) compared with the varenicline or untreated cohort, although no significant association was observed for the risk of macular degeneration. However, a subgroup analysis based on the smoking cessation duration revealed no significant association between the usage of 1–7 DDDs, 8–14 DDDs, or > 56 DDDs and the risks of these eye diseases in smoking patients.
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to compare the risks of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration among smokers treated with NRT, treated with varenicline, and untreated smokers for smoking cessation. No study has compared the progression of these eye disorders after smoking cessation among these groups by using a new-user design with balanced baseline characteristics.
The new-user design for balanced groups
We employed a rigorous 1:1 new-user design with PSM without replacement to compare the outcomes between NRT users and non-NRT smokers (including those using varenicline and untreated smokers) and to adjust for differences in demographics, comorbidities, and comedications30,31. To avoid immortal time bias, the participants were assigned to treatment groups based on the date of their first prescription. Multivariate analysis was also conducted to adjust for age, comorbidities, and comedications. To ensure consistency in comorbidity, we used the CCI for balancing the distribution of variables34.
Main results
Our analytical process, as detailed in Table 1, successfully neutralized baseline discrepancies between groups of NRT users and non-users, laying a foundational bedrock for equitable risk analysis pertaining to ocular ailments. Subsequent analyses, encapsulated in Table 2 via multivariate Cox regression following propensity score matching, delineate the comparative risk dynamics for glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration across diverse patient demographics, comorbid states, and concurrent medication regimes. A noteworthy revelation from this analysis is the accentuated risk of these eye diseases with advancing age within the NRT cohort, corroborating the well-documented narrative of age as a predominant risk factor35,37,37.
Additionally, our study casts hyperlipidemia into relief as a discernible risk factor for glaucoma and cataract among NRT users, thereby substantiating theories that have previously implicated hyperlipidemia as a potential precipitant for these visual impairments38,39. The mechanistic pathways linking hyperlipidemia to heightened ocular disease risk, however, remain to be fully elucidated, underscoring the imperative for continued investigative exploration.
Our investigation also revealed a comparative reduction in the incidence rates of glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration among NRT users versus those utilizing varenicline or no treatment at all, as shown in Table 3. Yet, adjustments for confounding variables via multiple Cox regression analyses tempered these observations, revealing no statistically significant correlations between NRT utilization and the onset of the aforementioned eye diseases, as depicted in Table 4 and Fig. 2A–C. Further stratification of non-NRT users into untreated and varenicline-utilizing cohorts, and their subsequent comparison with NRT users, unearthed a markedly diminished risk for glaucoma and cataract among the latter, as depicted in Fig. 2D–F.
The observed lack of a significant link between NRT use and a lowered incidence of ocular conditions might be attributable to the generally low success rates of smoking cessation treatments, where only a minor fraction (4%-7%) of individuals achieve cessation23,40. However, despite the low success rate, our study identified an effective prescription pattern for reducing the risk of eye disorders in smokers.
Differences in complications between the subgroups of different defined daily doses
Our sensitivity analyses, as presented in Table 4 and Fig. 3, shed light on the intricate relationship between nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) dosage and the risk of developing glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration among smokers. Notably, we observed a significant reduction in glaucoma risk among smokers who used moderate doses of NRT (8–28 DDDs) compared to untreated smokers, a finding corroborated by Kaplan–Meier analysis (Fig. 3A).
Regarding cataract risk, although the overall use of NRT did not achieve statistical significance compared to the untreated group, subgroup analysis revealed a trend towards reduced risk among the moderate dose (8–28 DDD) group. The Kaplan–Meier curve (Fig. 3B) also reflected this trend, showing a lower cumulative incidence of cataract in the 8–28 DDD group compared to other DDD categories and untreated smokers.
In contrast, while the overall use of NRT was significantly associated with a decreased risk of macular degeneration, dose–response analysis failed to identify a significant association between any specific NRT dosage and the risk of this condition. The Kaplan–Meier curve (Fig. 3C) also did not demonstrate significant differences in the cumulative incidence of macular degeneration across DDD groups.
Implications of smoking cessation on eye health outcomes
The reasons for this finding could be multifactorial. Successful smoking cessation during regular treatment could contribute to the observed interaction. Alternatively, older patients with certain demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and comedications may smoke a higher number of cigarettes, which could lead to a higher risk of eye complications. However, in our present study, we found no significant risk of eye complications among patients with HCD, DM, and CKD after adjustment for multiple Cox regression. Notably, studies have suggested a potential relationship between smoking cessation and a reduced rate of glaucomatous visual field progression. However, these studies have not compared the durations of smoking cessation among smokers41,43,43.
Our study findings suggest that the protective effects observed from moderate NRT use against glaucoma and the trend towards reduced cataract risk might indicate a potential dose–response relationship. These effects appear to be beneficial in the short term but may not be sustained over the long term. Research has indicated that while NRT may increase smokers' motivation to quit, it does not necessarily lead to a reduction in cigarette consumption. Furthermore, there may not be a linear relationship between NRT usage and the number of cigarettes smoked44,46,46. As a result, long-term NRT treatment may not reduce the risk of eye complications resulting from dependence on smoking cessation.
Limitations
Our study has limitations in terms of evaluation of the reversal of risk of progression of eye disorders after smoking cessation47,48.
First, the NHIRD does not include data on lifestyle factors, such as alcohol consumption and cigarette consumption, and body mass index; as a result, we could not assess the impact of these factors on the risk of the eye disorders. Second, distinguishing the participants’ socioeconomic levels was difficult in our study. Thirdly, the database does not provide information on essential clinical tests, including Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), which could offer insights into the visual outcomes of our cohort. Fourth, the use of both ICD-9 and ICD-10 classifications for aggregating data on eye diseases. The transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10 occurred during the study period, which may have introduced the possibility of misclassification. Fifth, compliance to smoking cessation medication could not be accurately measured from the NHIRD, which may have affected the estimation of prescription usage. Sixth, information on over-the-counter NRT usage was limited, which may have led to an underestimation of NRT exposure. We suggest that future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up durations should be conducted to further investigate the potential effects of NRT on the risks of glaucoma and cataract.
Conclusions
This study evidenced the potential association between short-term NRT for smoking cessation and decreased risks of glaucoma and cataract compared with long-term NRT, varenicline, or no treatment. NRT is beneficial in successful smoking cessation, which may be associated with a lower risk of eye disorders. These results may be useful for ophthalmologists and patients who smoke. However, further research is needed to confirm this finding and determine the optimal duration of NRT treatment for obtaining a beneficial effect on the reduction of eye disorder risks in smokers.
Data availability
The NHIRD enforces strict confidentiality guidelines to protect personal electronic data. Due to legal restrictions imposed by the Taiwan Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW) under the “Personal Information Protection Act,” the results presented in this study are only available from the NHIRD of Taiwan to eligible researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data. You can submit a formal proposal for access to NHIRD data by completing the application form and submitting it to the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW). (https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/dos/np-2497-113.html, accessed on 8 August 2023). The contact information for necessary data of the MOHW is as follows: 886-2-85906828; Email: sthuiying@mohw.gov.tw.
References
Wang, C. et al. Varenicline for smoking cessation: A placebo-controlled, randomized study. Respirology 14, 384–392 (2009).
Lindson-Hawley, N. et al. Interventions to reduce harm from continued tobacco use. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 10, CD005231 (2016).
Lindson, N., Klemperer, E., Hong, B., Ordóñez-Mena, J. M. & Aveyard, P. Smoking reduction interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 9, CD013183 (2019).
Niaura, R. et al. The efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation using a flexible dosing strategy in adult smokers: A randomized controlled trial. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 24, 1931–1941 (2008).
Lois, N., Abdelkader, E., Reglitz, K., Garden, C. & Ayres, J. G. Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and eye disease. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 92, 1304–1310 (2008).
Nita, M. & Grzybowski, A. Smoking and eye pathologies. A systemic review. Part II. Retina diseases, uveitis, optic neuropathies, thyroid-associated orbitopathy. Curr. Pharm. Des. 23, 639–654 (2017).
Jain, V., Jain, M., Abdull, M. M. & Bastawrous, A. The association between cigarette smoking and primary open-angle glaucoma: A systematic review. Int. Ophthalmol. 37, 291–301 (2017).
Oishi, A. et al. Effect of smoking on macular function and retinal structure in retinitis pigmentosa. Brain Commun. 2, fcaa117 (2020).
Hara, A., Nakazawa, M., Saito, M. & Suzuki, Y. The qualitative assessment of optical coherence tomography and the central retinal sensitivity in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. PLoS One 15, e0232700 (2020).
Sandberg, M. A., Brockhurst, R. J., Gaudio, A. R. & Berson, E. L. Visual acuity is related to parafoveal retinal thickness in patients with retinitis pigmentosa and macular cysts. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 49, 4568–4572 (2008).
Stefánsson, E. et al. Retinal oximetry: Metabolic imaging for diseases of the retina and brain. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 70, 1–22 (2019).
Oncken, C. et al. Efficacy and safety of the novel selective nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, varenicline, for smoking cessation. Arch. Intern. Med. 166, 1571–1577 (2006).
Benowitz, N. L. et al. Cardiovascular safety of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine patch in smokers: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern. Med. 178, 622–631 (2018).
Kotz, D. et al. Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric risks of varenicline: A retrospective cohort study. Lancet Respir. Med. 3, 761–768 (2015).
McCormack, Z. United States Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committee outcomes and agency approval analysis from 2010 to 2015. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 58, 530–533 (2018).
Anthenelli, R. M. et al. Effects of varenicline on smoking cessation in adults with stably treated current or past major depression: A randomized trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 159, 390–400 (2013).
Stead Lindsay, F. & Lancaster, T. Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 10, CD008286 (2012).
Cahill, K., Stevens, S., Perera, R. & Lancaster, T. Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: An overview and network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 5, CD009329 (2013).
Mills, E. J. et al. Comparisons of high-dose and combination nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, and bupropion for smoking cessation: A systematic review and multiple treatment meta-analysis. Ann. Med. 44, 588–597 (2012).
World Health Organization (2022/02/10).
Choi, J. A., Han, K., Park, Y.-M. & Park, C. K. Age-related association of refractive error with intraocular pressure in the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. PLoS One 9, e111879 (2014).
Rim, T. H., Nam, J. S., Choi, M., Lee, S. C. & Lee, C. S. Prevalence and risk factors of visual impairment and blindness in Korea: The Fourth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in 2008–2010. Acta Ophthalmol. 92, e317–e325 (2014).
Barboza, J. L., Patel, R., Patel, P. & Hudmon, K. S. An update on the pharmacotherapeutic interventions for smoking cessation. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 17, 1483–1496 (2016).
Cheng, H.-C. et al. Patient-reported vision-related quality of life differences between superior and inferior hemifield visual field defects in primary open-angle glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol. 133, 269–275 (2015).
Cheng, J.-W. et al. The prevalence of primary glaucoma in mainland China: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Glaucoma 22, 301–306 (2013).
Cho, H.-K. & Kee, C. Population-based glaucoma prevalence studies in Asians. Surv. Ophthalmol. 59, 434–447 (2014).
Tsai, S.-Y., Hsu, W.-M., Cheng, C.-Y., Liu, J.-H. & Chou, P. Epidemiologic study of age-related cataracts among an elderly Chinese population in Shih-Pai, Taiwan. Ophthalmology 110, 1089–1095 (2003).
Chen, S.-J. et al. Prevalence and associated risk factors of age-related macular degeneration in an elderly Chinese population in Taiwan: The Shihpai Eye Study. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 49, 3126–3133 (2008).
Lund, J. L., Richardson, D. B. & Stürmer, T. The active comparator, new user study design in pharmacoepidemiology: Historical foundations and contemporary application. Curr. Epidemiol. Rep. 2, 221–228 (2015).
Greifer, N. Estimating effects after matching. MatchIt: Nonparametric Preprocessing for Parametric Causal Inference. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MatchIt/vignettes/estimating-effects.html (accessed on 1 August 2022) (2021).
Abadie, A. & Spiess, J. Robust post-matching inference. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 117, 983–995 (2022).
Higbee, J. D. et al. Estimating long-term pollution exposure effects through inverse probability weighting methods with Cox proportional hazards models. Environ. Epidemiol. 4, e085 (2020).
Davison, A. C. & Hinkley, D. V. Bootstrap Methods and Their Application (Cambridge University Press, 1997).
Austin, S. R., Wong, Y.-N., Uzzo, R. G., Beck, J. R. & Egleston, B. L. Why summary comorbidity measures such as the Charlson comorbidity index and Elixhauser score work. Med. Care 53, e65 (2015).
Kapetanakis, V. V. et al. Global variations and time trends in the prevalence of primary open angle glaucoma (POAG): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 100, 86–93 (2016).
Liu, Y.-C., Wilkins, M., Kim, T., Malyugin, B. & Mehta, J. S. Cataracts. Lancet 390, 600–612 (2017).
Wong, W. L. et al. Global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration and disease burden projection for 2020 and 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob. Health 2, e106–e116 (2014).
Wang, S. & Bao, X. Hyperlipidemia, blood lipid level, and the risk of glaucoma: A meta-analysis. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 60, 1028–1043 (2019).
Heydari, B., Kazemi, T., Zarban, A. & Ghahramani, S. Correlation of cataract with serum lipids, glucose and antioxidant activities a case–control study. West Indian Med. J. 61, 230–234 (2012).
Mersha, A. G., Eftekhari, P., Bovill, M., Tollosa, D. N. & Gould, G. S. Evaluating level of adherence to nicotine replacement therapy and its impact on smoking cessation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Public Health 79, 1–14 (2021).
Mahmoudinezhad, G. et al. Smoking cessation may reduce risk of visual field progression in heavy smokers. J. Glaucoma 31, 796–803 (2022).
Mahmoudinezhad, G. et al. Impact of smoking on visual field progression in a long-term clinical follow-up. Ophthalmology 129, 1235–1244 (2022).
Founti, P. et al. Risk factors for visual field deterioration in the United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study. Ophthalmology 127, 1642–1651 (2020).
Beard, E., Bruguera, C., McNeill, A., Brown, J. & West, R. Association of amount and duration of NRT use in smokers with cigarette consumption and motivation to stop smoking: A national survey of smokers in England. Addict. Behav. 40, 33–38 (2015).
Haustein, K., Batra, A., Landfeldt, B. & Westin, A. The effect of short-term or long-term reduction on smoking cessation; results from a placebo controlled smoking reduction study with the nicotine gum. Nicotine Tob. Res. 5, 278 (2003).
Moore, D. et al. Effectiveness and safety of nicotine replacement therapy assisted reduction to stop smoking: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 338, b1024 (2009).
Karimi, S., Nouri, H., Mahmoudinejad-Azar, S. & Abtahi, S.-H. Smoking and environmental tobacco smoke exposure: Implications in ocular disorders. Cutan. Ocul. Toxicol. 42, 1–7 (2022).
Kai, J.-Y. et al. Smoking, dietary factors and major age-related eye disorders: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 108, 51–57 (2022).
Funding
Grant number RD-111-03 provided funding for this research, while the APC was funded by Tainan Municipal Hospital.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, Y.-T.T. and Y.-C.K.; methodology, Y.-T.T.; software, Y.-T.T.; validation, Y.-T.T.; formal analysis, Y.-T.T.; investigation, L.-Y.W. and C.-H.W. .; resources, L.-Y.W. and C.-H.W.; data curation, C.-H.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.-T.T.; writing—review and editing, Y.-T.T. and Y.-C.K; visualization, Y.-T.T.; supervision, S.-T.H.; project administration, S.-T.H.; funding acquisition, S.-T.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tseng, YT., Huang, ST., Wang, CH. et al. Association of smoking cessation patterns and untreated smoking with glaucoma, cataract, and macular degeneration: a population-based retrospective study. Sci Rep 14, 14788 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65813-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65813-8
- Springer Nature Limited