Elsevier

Cancer Epidemiology

Volume 34, Issue 1, February 2010, Pages 96-100
Cancer Epidemiology

Efficacy of genotype notification to Japanese smokers on smoking cessation—An intervention study at workplace

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2009.11.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives: It is well-known that smoking causes many diseases including cancers. Informing smokers of their genotypes associated with the vulnerability to the harms of smoking may be effective measures for smoking cessation. The present study examined the effects of genotype notification of an oncogene (L-myc) genotype to smokers on their behavior to quit smoking. Methods: Subjects were 562 employees of a bank who answered to be a smoker for a questionnaire used at annual health checkup at workplace from July to December 2002. Those enrolled on August, October, and December were allocated into the genotype notification group (intervention group), and the rest into the controls. Among 286 smokers allocated into the intervention group, 257 participants (89.9%) agreed to genotype testing. One year after the enrollment, a follow-up questionnaire survey was conducted for all smokers including controls. Results: Those who stated to have quitted smoking were 22 (8.0%) among the 276 controls and 15 (5.8%) among the 257 genotype notified participants, providing that the odds ratio (OR) of cessation for the intervention was 0.64 (95% confidence interval, 0.32–1.28). No psychological problems associated with genotype notification were observed. Conclusion: The present study did not show positive effects of genotype notification on smoking cessation rate. To elevate the cessation rate, methods to explain and notify genotypes should be improved.

Introduction

Smoking is well known as a leading cause of many diseases. Globally, an 85% of male lung cancer and 47% of female lung cancer was estimated to be attributable to tobacco smoking [1]. Cigarette smoking is also a primary cause of deaths from other human cancers [2], [3], [4], [5], coronary heart disease, chronic pulmonary disease and stroke [6]. In addition to educating smokers about the harmfulness of tobacco smoking, informing smokers of their genotypes associated with the vulnerability to the harms of smoking might be effective measures to induce them to quit smoking. The effects were hypothesized due to the recognition of disease risk as well as health consciousness elevated with genotype testing. According to Health Belief Model, behavior change (e.g. smoking cessation) is dependent on the people's recognition of themselves to be at risk of severe health consequences resulting from their behavior (e.g. they believe that smoking damages their health) [7]. As explained in Expanded Parallel-Process Model, the more people believe they are susceptible to a serious threat (e.g. high perceived risk or harboring high risk genotype), the more they are motivated to initial the evaluation of the recommended response (e.g. smoking cessation) [8], [9].

To date, there are a few randomized intervention studies to examine the efficacy of genotype notification. A study in the United States evaluated the long-term impact of genetic susceptibility biomarker (CYP2D6 genotype) feedback on smoking behavior change, resulting that the genetic susceptibility feedback did not improve the cessation rate [10], [11]. Another study reported that smokers notified to have GSTM1 genotype had a high cessation rate compared with the control group [12]. Since telephone counseling was provided only for the notified group, the contribution of genotype notification to the higher cessation rate was undetermined. A study in the United Kingdom to examine the psychological impact of GSTM1 genotype testing for smokers were found that those with GSTM1 null type had greater motivation to quit smoking, and that the depression among the genotype notified group was significantly low one week after the notification and not different two months after [13].

In Japan, there were also several reports evaluating the efficacy of genotype notification on smoking cessation [14], [15], [16], [17]. In those studies, genotypes of the genes possibly modifying smoking-related disease risks, L-myc, GSTM1, GSTT1, NQO1, and CYP1A1, were applied. In our previous studies, smoking elevated markedly the risk of lung cancer among those with L-myc SS (odds ratio, OR = 3.19; 95% CI 0.92–11.06) and LS (OR = 2.30; 95% CI 1.05–5.04) genotypes relative to among those with LL genotype (OR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.32–2.68) [18], and for the risk of esophageal cancer, OR = 7.57 (95% CI 1.91–30.03), 6.40 (2.74–14.95), and 1.77 (0.54–5.75), respectively [19]. This L-myc polymorphism is also reported to affect the prognosis of lung cancer [20], [21]. The L-myc polymorphism examined here is a T to A variation located in the second intron of the L-myc gene that produces short (S) and long (L) fragments after digestion by EcoRI, the precise biological influence of which is not yet fully clarified [20], [21]. Among those studies, one at a cancer hospital showed a significantly higher cessation rate in 100 female smokers notified of L-myc genotype (p = 0.024), but not in 145 male smokers, compared with the controls (119 female smokers and 130 male smokers). The insignificant result among the males could be due to the limited effect or due to the small statistical power. This study aimed to re-examine the effects of L-myc genotype notification to smokers on their smoking behavior in a male-dominant workplace with larger number of male subjects, and also to re-evaluate the efficacy of genotype notification on smoking behaviors, which is currently still under controversy worldwide. The participants were enrolled at an annual health checkup, although the situation differed from the previous study whose participants were first-visit outpatients.

Section snippets

Design and participants

Subjects were employees of a bank, who answered to be a smoker for a questionnaire used at annual health checkup at workplace from July to December in 2002. Informed consent of genotype notification was obtained individually from each smoker after handing the participants a booklet named “Smoking and genetic polymorphism: what is the genetic traits to cause tobacco-related diseases. Hi smokers! Can your genes bear tobacco?”. The booklet was made of eight colored pages including information on

Results

Table 1 shows sex and age distributions of the 562 participants (527 males and 35 females). In the intervention group, 89.9% (243 males and 14 females) agreed the genotype testing. There were no differences in sex and age distributions between those who agreed and those who refused.

Table 2 shows the stage of smokers at one year after the enrollment. Those who stated to have quitted smoking were 22 (8.0%) among the 276 controls and 15 (5.8%) among the 257 genotype notified participants. The

Discussion

This study based on the questionnaire found that the cessation rate was 5.8% among the genotype notified participants, and 8.0% in the controls. The rate was not significantly different according to the L-myc genotype. There were no such severe substantial psychological/social problems as to require counseling relating with the genotype notification, although the percentage who stated to “relieved” was significantly low among those with LS or SS relative to those with LL, and that of “anxious”

Conflict of interests

The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.

References (39)

  • N.K. Janz et al.

    The Health Belief Model: a decade later

    Health Educ Q

    (1984)
  • K. Witte

    Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel process model

    Comm Mono

    (1992)
  • H. Etchegary et al.

    Information processing in the context of genetic risk: implications for genetic-risk communication

    J Genet Couns

    (2007)
  • C. Lerman et al.

    Incorporating biomarkers of exposure and genetic susceptibility into smoking cessation treatment: effects on smoking-related cognitions, emotions, and behavior change

    Health Psychol

    (1997)
  • C.M. McBride et al.

    Incorporating genetic susceptibility feedback into a smoking cessation program for African-American smokers with low income

    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev

    (2002)
  • S.C. Sanderson et al.

    Psycological and behavioural impact of genetic testing smokers for lung cancer risk: a phase II exploratory trial

    J Health Psychol

    (2008)
  • N. Hamajima et al.

    Genotype announcement to Japanese smokers who attended a health checkup examination

    J Epidemiol

    (2006)
  • N. Hamajima et al.

    A pilot study on genotype announcement to induce smoking cessation by Japanese smokers

    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev

    (2004)
  • M. Kano et al.

    Smoking cessation after genotype announcement: pilot studies for smokers employed by a municipal government and for smokers in Nagoya University medical campus

    Nagoya J Med Sci

    (2007)
  • Cited by (23)

    • Personalized medicine and tobacco-related health disparities: Is there a role for genetics?

      2011, Annals of Family Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Another study examining the impact of genetic testing for alpha-1 antitrypsin on smokers' behavior similarly noted increased attempts to quit but no effect on sustained abstinence.25 A study of knowledge about L-myc polymorphisms to motivate smoking cessation showed no effect.26 In contrast, a recent study showed that simply informing a patient of his or her lung age, a low-cost technique requiring only a spirometer, more than doubled the 12-month quitting rate compared with conventional treatment.27

    • Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation

      2019, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This work was performed at the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ (former Tokai Bank) and Division of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan. AH was a former resident, and NH were former staffs of Division of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan.

    View full text