Search

Background: The mechanisms by which cigarette smoking increases the risk of respiratory disease have been studied. However, less is known about risks of respiratory symptoms and outcomes associated with smoking cigars, and risks by cigar types have not been previously explored. The aim of this study was to examine associations between cigar use, including traditional cigars, cigarillos, filtered cigars, and dual cigar and cigarette use, and functionally important respiratory symptoms (FIRS), lifetime asthma diagnosis, uncontrolled asthma, and new cases of FIRS. Methods: Data from Waves 2–5 (2014–19) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative longitudinal study, were analyzed in two ways. For cross-sectional analysis, the analytic sample included adults 18 and older at each wave, resulting in 44,040 observations. Separately, longitudinal analyses were assessed among adults 18 and older at Wave 2, resulting in 7,930 individuals. Both analyses excluded adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or non-asthma respiratory disease. Results: Current established cigarillo smokers had higher odds of having FIRS (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.72; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.74) compared to never smokers of cigarillos and cigarettes, after adjusting for covariates. Current established filtered cigar smokers had higher odds of asthma diagnosis (AOR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.66) while current established dual smokers of filtered cigars and cigarettes had higher odds of uncontrolled asthma (AOR: 5.13; 95% CI: 1.75, 15.02) compared to never smokers of filtered cigars or cigarettes. Both current established cigar smokers and current established dual smokers of cigarettes and cigars had higher odds of new FIRS compared to never cigar or cigarette smokers (AORs: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.60 for exclusive cigars and 2.55; 95% CI 1.57, 4.14 for dual smokers). Conclusions: This study provides evidence that cigar smokers or dual smokers of cigars and cigarettes have greater odds of FIRS, asthma, and uncontrolled asthma and that new incidence of FIRS is higher among any cigar smokers compared to never cigar or cigarette smokers. Understanding health impacts associated with cigar use provides information for supporting policy development, as well as for designing clinical interventions focused on smoking cessation for cigars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Cannabis use may introduce risks and/or benefits among people living with cancer, depending on product type, composition, and nature of its use. Patient knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) concentration could provide information for providers about cannabis use during and after treatment that may aide in risk and benefit assessments. This study aimed to examine knowledge of THC or CBD concentration among patients living with cancer who consume cannabis, and factors associated with knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations. Methods: People living with cancer who consumed cannabis since their diagnosis (n = 343) completed an anonymous, mixed-mode survey. Questions assessed usual mode of delivery (MOD), knowledge of THC/CBD concentration, and how source of acquisition, current cannabis use, and source of instruction are associated with knowledge of THC/CBD concentration. Chi-square and separate binary logistic regression analyses were examined and weighted to reflect the Roswell Park patient population. Results: Less than 20% of people living with cancer had knowledge of THC and CBD concentration for the cannabis products they consumed across all MOD (smoking- combustible products, vaping- vaporized products (e-cigarettes), edibles-eating or drinking it, and oral- taking by mouth (pills)). Source of acquisition (smoking-AOR:4.6, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR:5.8, p < 0.00, edibles-AOR:2.6, p < 0.04), current cannabis use (edibles-AOR:5.4, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR: 11.2, p < 0.00, and oral-AOR:9.3, p < 0.00), and source of instruction (vaping only AOR:4.2, p < 0.05) were found to be variables associated with higher knowledge of THC concentration. Conclusion: Self-reported knowledge of THC and CBD concentration statistically differed according to MOD, source of acquisition, source of instruction, and current cannabis use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of a reduced risk claim about lung cancer, presented in various formats, on smokers' and non-smokers' interest in trying Camel Snus and intention to purchase Camel Snus. We varied claim formats by varying advertising messages for Camel Snus in 4 ways (1) text only; (2) bar chart; (3) text/testimonial; and (4) bar chart/testimonial. 3001 participants were recruited from a web-based consumer specialty panel via an email invitation. In 2015, a second study was conducted, using similar methods, where 3001 additional participants were recruited. Overall, controlling for other factors, the presence of an MRTP claim was not significantly related to interest in trying snus [X2 (4) = 8.567, P =.073], or purchase intentions [X2 (4) = 1.148, P =.887]. Relative to a control ad where no explicit health risk claim was made, the Graphic + testimonial [OR = 1.29] or Text only [OR = 1.41] claims did significantly increase interest in trying Camel Snus. However, the adverting format did not impact interest in purchasing Camel Snus. While current smokeless tobacco users (95%) and smokers (59%) expressed interest in trying Camel Snus, non-tobacco users (7%) showed low interest in trying or purchasing Camel Snus (P <.001). Interest in trying Camel Snus was stronger in younger smokers compared to older smokers. Among current smokers, worry about lung cancer (the key focus of the reduced risk claim) was not associated with interest in trying Camel Snus or with purchase intention [OR =.91, 95% CI:.72, 1.14] or intention to purchase snus [OR = 1.07, 95% CI:.86, 1.32]. Future research should evaluate how claim and messaging formats influence perceived truthfulness and whether this effect differs among sub-groups of consumers, such as adolescents, those with tobacco-related disease, and former smokers. It will also be helpful to understand whether perceptions of ad truthfulness result in changes in product use patterns over time. In sum, giving people truthful, credible information about relative product risks, such as through authorized MRTP claims, is important, but such information is likely insufficient to get smokers to switch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Heated tobacco products (HTPs) and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) both are legal consumer products in the Republic of Korea. Little is known about perceptions of harmfulness of HTPs and NVPs relative to cigarettes in South Korea among adults who smoke, and how exposure to marketing may be associated with harmfulness perceptions. METHODS This study used data from the 2020 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Korea Survey, and included 3713 adult (aged 19 years) cigarette smokers who were: 1) exclusive smokers (n=1845); 2) dual HTP + cigarette consumers (n=1130); 3) dual NVP + cigarette consumers (n=224); and 4) triple consumers (all three products, n=514). Weighted multinomial regression models were conducted to estimate smokers' perceptions of harmfulness of HTPs and NVPs compared to cigarettes, NVPs to HTPs, and self-reported exposure to HTP/NVP advertising. Analyses compared the perceptions of harmfulness between the four different consumer groups, and tested whether exposure to HTP/NVP advertising was associated with perceptions of lower relative harm. RESULTS Among all respondents, 27.5% believe that HTPs are less harmful than cigarettes and 23.4% believe that NVPs are less harmful than cigarettes. Exclusive cigarettes smokers were significantly less likely to perceive that HTPs and NVPs are less harmful than cigarettes compared to dual HTP + cigarette consumers, dual NVP + cigarette consumers, and triple consumers (all p<0.001). Half of respondents perceive NVPs as equally harmful as HTPs (14.1% perceive NVPs as more harmful than HTPs). Exposure to HTP/NVP advertising was associated with perceiving these products as less harmful than cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS About one-quarter of Korean cigarette smokers perceive HTPs and NVPs as less harmful than cigarettes. Further investigation is required to understand how harm perceptions and HTP/NVP advertising are related to changes in product use, such as switching between products, using multiple products, or discontinuing all product use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Understanding the characteristics of premium cigar use patterns is essential for minimizing public health harms. Typically, premium cigars are handmade, larger, more expensive, and without the characterizing flavors that are present in other cigar types: Nonpremium traditional cigars, cigarillos, and filtered cigars. Aims and Methods Self-reported brand and price data were used from Wave 6 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study to define and estimate premium versus nonpremium cigar use among U.S. adults, as well as to explore cigar smoking patterns, purchasing behavior, and reasons for use by cigar type. Results In 2021, 0.9% (95% CI = 0.7–1.0) of adults were premium cigar users, compared to 0.4% of nonpremium traditional cigar users (95% CI = 0.3–0.5), 1.1% of cigarillo users (95% CI = 1.0–1.2), and 0.6% filtered cigar users (95% CI = 0.5–0.7). Premium cigar users were overwhelmingly male (97.7%), and 35.8% were aged ≥55 years. The average premium cigar price/stick was $8.67, $5.50–7.00 more than other cigar types. Compared to other cigar types, significantly fewer premium cigar users had a regular brand with a flavor other than tobacco (~15% vs. 38%–53%). Though flavors remained the top reason for premium cigar use, they were less likely to endorse flavors as a reason for use than other cigar users (~40% vs. 68–74%). Premium cigar users had a lower prevalence (aRR: 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25–0.55) of dual use of cigars and cigarettes. Conclusions Although <1% of U.S. adults use premium cigars, their use and purchasing characteristics continue to differ from other cigar types, highlighting the importance of capturing data specific to premium cigar use. Implications This manuscript extends previous research from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report, "Premium cigars: Patterns of use, marketing, and health effects" by utilizing the most recent PATH Study data (Wave 6) to examine patterns of cigar use, including purchasing behavior and reasons for use, by cigar type (eg, premium traditional cigars, nonpremium traditional cigars, cigarillos, and filtered cigars). The findings support continued research on patterns of premium cigar use, which differ from use patterns of other cigar types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few eligible patients receive lung cancer screening. We developed the Lung AIR (awareness, information, and resources) intervention to increase community education regarding lung cancer screening. The intervention was designed as an in-person group intervention; however, the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated adapting the mode of delivery. In this study we examined intervention feasibility and efficacy overall and by mode of delivery (in-person group vs. one-on-one phone) to understand the impact of adapting community outreach and engagement strategies. Feasibility was examined through participant demographics. Efficacy was measured through pre/post knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about lung cancer screening, and intention to complete screening. We reached N = 292 participants. Forty percent had a household income below $35,000, 58% had a high school degree or less, 40% were Hispanic, 57% were Black, and 84% reported current or past smoking. One-on-one phone sessions reached participants who were older, had lower incomes, more current smoking, smoked for more years, more cigarettes per day, lower pre-intervention lung cancer screening knowledge, and higher pre-intervention fear and worry. Overall pre/post test scores show significant increases in knowledge, salience, and coherence, and reduced fear and worry. Participants in the one-on-one phone sessions had significantly higher increases in salience and coherence and intention to complete screening compared to participants in the in-person group sessions. The Lung AIR intervention is a feasible and effective community-based educational intervention for lung cancer screening. Findings point to differences in reach and efficacy of the community-based intervention by mode of delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION In March 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finalized new pictorial health warnings (PHWs), covering 50% of the front and back of the pack; however, legal challenges from cigarette manufacturers have prevented the new warnings from being implemented. About 70% of adults in the general US population support PHWs. This study assessed support for PHWs in 2016, 2018 and 2020 among US adults (aged ≥18 years) who currently smoke or formerly smoked cigarettes. We also assessed factors related to support. METHODS Respondents included adults who currently or formerly smoked cigarettes and participated in at least one wave of the US ITC Smoking and Vaping Surveys: Wave 1 (2016, n=2557); Wave 2 (2018, n=2685); and Wave 3 (2020, n=1112). We assessed changes in support for PHWs between 2016 and 2020, and assessed factors related to support (support vs oppose/don't know). Analyses were conducted on weighted data. RESULTS Overall, 38.0% of respondents supported PHWs in 2016, with a significant increase to 44.7% in 2018 (p<0.001), and leveling off to 45.0% in 2020 (2018 vs 2020, p=0.91). Support was highest among former smokers and lowest among daily smokers in all three survey years. Support for PHWs at all survey years was significantly higher among those who formerly smoked, were younger (aged 18-39 vs ≥40 years), those who identified as Black (vs White), and planned to quit smoking (vs not planning to quit). There were no differences by income level, education level, or sex. CONCLUSIONS Nearly half of US adults who smoke cigarettes or quit smoking supported PHWs in 2020, with support being higher among younger adults, ethnic minorities, and those who formerly smoked. Support increased between 2016 and 2018, but not between 2018 and 2020. Similar to other studies, fewer current and former smokers supported PHWs compared to the US adult general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction This study examines predictors of trajectories of cigarette and e-cigarette use among a cohort of US adolescents transitioning into young adulthood. Comparing trajectories of each tobacco product is important to determine if different intervention targets are needed to prevent progression to daily use. Methods Latent trajectory class analyses identified cigarette and e-cigarette use (never, ever excluding past 12-month, past 12-month (excluding past 30-day (P30D)), P30D 1–5 days, P30D 6+ days) trajectory classes, separately, among US youth (12–17; N = 10,086) using the first 4 waves (2013–2017) of data from the nationally representative PATH Study. Weighted descriptive analyses described the class characteristics. Weighted multinomial logistic regression analyses examined demographic, psychosocial, and behavioral predictors of class membership. Results Younger adolescents 12–15 years had lower tobacco use compared to 16–17 year olds and less stable classes. In the 16–17 year group, there were five unique trajectories of cigarette smoking, including a Persistent High Frequency class. Four e-cigarette use trajectories were identified; but not a persistent use class. Shared predictors of class membership for cigarettes and e-cigarettes included mental health problems, other tobacco use, marijuana use, and poorer academic achievement. Male sex and household tobacco use were unique e-cigarette trajectory class predictors. Conclusions There was no evidence that initiation with e-cigarettes as the first product tried was associated with cigarette progression (nor cigarettes as first product and e-cigarette progression). Interventions should focus on well-established risk factors such as mental health and other substance use to prevent progression of use for both tobacco products. Implications Using nationally representative data and definitions of use that take into account frequency and recency of use, longitudinal 4-year trajectories of e-cigarette and cigarette use among US adolescents transitioning into young adulthood were identified. Results among 16–17-year olds revealed a class of persistent high frequency cigarette smoking that was not identified for e-cigarette use. Cigarette use progression was not associated with e-cigarettes as the first product tried. Risk factors for progression of use of both products included mental health and other substance use, which are important prevention targets for both tobacco products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and tobacco products are associated with the initiation and progression of tobacco use. With recent restrictions around flavored products, it is critical to measure both the product and the flavor being used. The Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS) Flavored Tobacco Products Measurement Subcommittee (FTPMS) was established to develop core measures to assess flavored tobacco and ENDS product usage, facilitate data harmonization, replicability, and comparisons across studies.Aims and Methods: The FTPMS used a mixed-method approach to inform the development of recommended measures (first use, current use, reasons for use) to assess tobacco and ENDS product flavors. This included reviewing existing surveys, identifying priority areas, developing new measures, cognitive testing, and finalization of recommended measures.Results: Recommended measures were selected from national surveys (e.g. PATH study) and survey items used in TCORS studies to evaluate first use, current use, and reasons for use of tobacco and ENDS products. Response options were expanded for questions about specific flavors and adapted to allow for assessments relevant to recent federal policies. Supplemental measures were developed for researchers conducting more in-depth research around flavored products.Conclusions: Using an expert consensus process supplemented with cognitive testing, the FTPMS developed recommendations for core and supplemental measures for flavored tobacco and ENDS products. Harmonizing data on these factors for flavored tobacco and ENDS products are critical for researchers and may provide actionable evidence to federal, state, and local regulators and policymakers, as well as support evaluations of policies restricting flavors in these products.Implications: The development of core measures to assess first use, current use, and reasons for use of flavored tobacco and ENDS products will facilitate data harmonization, replicability, and comparisons across studies conducted in different samples or across communities with varying levels of regulation for these products. Use of these standardized measures will allow for a greater understanding of the role of flavors and helps to build a more robust evidence base to inform regulatory decisions to reduce tobacco and ENDS use at the population level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk perceptions are key constructs in some theories of health behavior. A tripartite model of risk perception, the TRIRISK model, was developed to assess deliberative, affective, and experiential components of risk perception. The current paper attempts to replicate the factor structure of the TRIRISK measure for cancer and extend the structure to respiratory illness. Participants 18 or older were recruited using an address-based sample in New York State to participate in a Web-based survey. We employed the TRIRISK questionnaire with respect to cancer and respiratory illness. Confirmatory Factor Analyses were conducted in Mplus to validate the TRIRISK model in our sample. TRIRISK model fit across demographic and behavioral groups was tested using multiple-group models. Of the 704 people included in the analysis, the mean age of participants was 46.9, the majority reported being female (58.5%), and most were White (81.7%). For cancer and respiratory illness, items loaded on the respective constructs as expected. Overall, the TRIRISK model framework fits well across differing subgroups, suggesting that this is a valid model of risk perception to use in a general population sample. These results provide further evidence that the TRIRISK model is a good model to use for risk perceptions in tobacco control research. The TRIRISK model can be used to communicate risk to encourage positive health behaviors among most sociodemographic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Little is known about the international impact of E-cigarette or Vaping-Associated Lung Injury ('EVALI') on youth perceptions of vaping harms.Methods: Repeat cross-sectional online surveys of youth aged 16-19 years in England, Canada, and the United States before (2017, 2018), during (2019 August/September), and after (2020 February/March, 2020 August) the 'EVALI' outbreak (N = 63380). Logistic regressions assessed trends, country differences, and associations between exposure to negative news stories about vaping and vaping harm perceptions.Results: Exposure to negative news stories increased between 2017 and February-March 2020 in England (12.6% to 34.2%), Canada (16.7% to 56.9%), and the United States (18.0% to 64.6%), accelerating during (2019) and immediately after (February-March 2020) the outbreak (p < .001) before returning to 2019 levels by August 2020. Similarly, the accurate perception that vaping is less harmful than smoking declined between 2017 and February-March 2020 in England (77.3% to 62.2%), Canada (66.3% to 43.3%), and the United States (61.3% to 34.0%), again accelerating during and immediately after the outbreak (p < .001). The perception that vaping takes less than a year to harm users' health and worry that vaping will damage health also doubled over this period (p ≤ .001). Time trends were most pronounced in the United States. Exposure to negative news stories predicted the perception that vaping takes less than a year to harm health (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 1.55, 1.48-1.61) and worry that vaping will damage health (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 1.32, 1.18-1.48).Conclusions: Between 2017 and February-March 2020, youth exposure to negative news stories, and perceptions of vaping harms, increased, and increases were exacerbated during and immediately after 'EVALI'. Effects were seen in all countries but were most pronounced in the United States.Implications: This is the first study examining changes in exposure to news stories about vaping, and perceptions of vaping harms, among youth in England, Canada, and the United States before, during, and after 'EVALI'. Between 2017 and February-March 2020, youth exposure to negative news stories, and perceptions of vaping harms, increased, and increases were exacerbated during and immediately after 'EVALI'. By August 2020, exposure to negative news stories returned to 2019 levels, while perceptions of harm were sustained. Exposure to negative news stories also predicted two of the three harm perception measures. Overall, findings suggest that 'EVALI' may have exacerbated youth's perceptions of vaping harms internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examined whether smokers' harm perceptions of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) relative to cigarettes predicted their subsequent use as smoking cessation aids during their last quit attempt (LQA).Aims and Methods: We analyzed data from 1,315 current daily smokers (10+ cigarettes per day) who were recruited at Wave 1 (2016), and who reported making a quit attempt by Wave 2 (2018) of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States. We used multinomial logistic regression models to examine prospective associations between harm perceptions of (a) NRT and (b) NVPs and their use at LQA, controlling for socio-demographic and other potential confounders.Results: Smokers who perceive that (a) NRT and (b) NVPs are much less harmful than cigarettes were more likely to subsequently use the respective product as an aid than using no aid or other aids during LQA (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 3.79, 95%CI = 2.16-6.66; and aRRR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.29-3.45, respectively) compared to smokers who perceive these products as equally or more harmful. Additionally, those who perceive NVPs as much less harmful than cigarettes were less likely to use NRT as a quit aid (aRRR = 0.34, 95%CI = 0.20-0.60). No country variations for these associations were found.Conclusions: This study found that smokers' perceptions of the harmfulness of (a) NRT and (b) NVPs relative to cigarettes predicted the respective product use when trying to quit smoking. Corrective education targeting misperceptions of nicotine products' relative harmfulness may facilitate their use for smoking cessation.Implications: Nicotine replacement therapy and nicotine vaping products are two commonly used smoking cessation aids. This study demonstrates that misperceptions of the harms of nicotine products relative to cigarettes influence their use for smoking cessation. Believing that nicotine vaping products are much less harmful than cigarette smoking may lead some smokers to prefer these products over nicotine replacement therapy to aid smoking cessation. Education targeting misperceptions of nicotine products' harmfulness relative to cigarettes may enable smokers to make informed choices about which are appropriate to aid smoking cessation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To examine the impact of US restrictions implemented in February 2020 prohibiting flavors other than menthol and tobacco in cartridge-based e-cigarettes. Methods. We analyzed 5 cross-sectional waves of the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Youth Tobacco and Vaping Surveys, conducted online with youths aged 16 to 19 years in the United States, Canada, and England, for differences in usual e-cigarette flavor, device, and brand reported by past-30-day vapers (n = 9512) before (2017, 2018, 2019), during (February 2020), and after (August 2020) implementation of US flavor restrictions. Results. In August 2020, 78.7% of vapers in the United States reported using a flavor prohibited in cartridges or pods, versus 86.3% in Canada (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.73; 95% CI = 1.25, 1.40) and 79.8% in England (AOR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.78, 1.55). Disposable e-cigarettes (exempt from flavor restrictions) increased to a greater extent among vapers in the United States (13.2% to 36.8%) versus Canada (7.7% to 14.2%; AOR = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.33, 3.04) and England (10.8% to 16.4%; AOR = 2.33; 95% CI = 1.52, 3.57). Puff Bar (disposable) emerged as the most popular brand in the United States. Conclusions. Usual flavors used by youth vapers in the United States were unchanged after 2020 restrictions on cartridge-based e-cigarettes. Youths used brands and devices exempt from the restrictions. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(7):1014–1024. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306780) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examined in youth (12-17 years), young adults (18-24 years), and adults (25+ years): (1) the prevalence of the first menthol cigarette and menthol/mint cigar use among new tobacco users; (2) association between the first menthol/mint use, subsequent tobacco use, and nicotine dependence ~1 year later compared with the first non-menthol/mint use.Aims and Methods: Longitudinal analysis of data from Waves 1 to 4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study (2013-2017; 10 086 youth and 21 281 adults). Main outcome measures were past 12-month and past 30-day cigarette and cigar use, and nicotine dependence.Results: Youth and young adult new cigarette users are more likely to smoke a menthol cigarette or indicate that they do not know the flavor compared with adults aged 25+. A greater proportion of adults aged 25+ first used menthol/mint-flavored cigars (13.4%) compared with youth (8.5%) and young adults (7.4%). Among young adults, first use of a menthol cigarette is associated with past 12-month use of cigarettes at the subsequent wave and first use of any menthol/mint-flavored cigars is associated with past 30-day use of these products at the subsequent wave in both youth and young adults. In youth and adults, there were no significant relationships between first use of a menthol/mint cigarette or cigar and nicotine dependence scores at a subsequent wave in multivariable analyses.Conclusions: The first use of menthol/mint cigarettes and cigars is associated with subsequent cigarette and cigar use in young people aged 12-24.Implications: This study examined the relationship between initiation with menthol cigarettes and menthol/mint cigars, subsequent tobacco use, and nicotine dependence in US youth, young adults, and adults who participated in Waves 1-4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study. New use of menthol cigarettes was associated with greater past 12-month cigarette use in young adults and new use of menthol/mint-flavored cigars was associated with greater past 30-day cigar use in youth and young adults compared with non-menthol use. Initiation with menthol/mint cigarette and cigar products may lead to subsequent use of those products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The prevalence of hookah smoking has increased in the United States since at least 2010, especially among youth and young adults. This study assessed self‐reported reasons for hookah smoking cessation and transition to or maintenance of high‐frequency hookah smoking among current hookah smokers. Design Separately analyzed data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, a longitudinal cohort study. Frequency of and reasons for hookah smoking were ascertained at wave 1 (2013–14); frequency of hookah smoking and past‐year cessation were ascertained at wave 2 (2014–15). Weighted multivariable logistic and ordinal logistic regression models were fitted to predict hookah smoking cessation and frequency of hookah smoking at wave 2, respectively, accounting for demographic and behavioral risk factors, reasons for hookah smoking and frequency of hookah smoking at wave 1. Setting: United States. Participants: A total of 693 youth and 4400 adult past‐year hookah smokers. Measurements Self‐reported tobacco‐use patterns and associated health behaviors were measured via audio computer‐assisted self‐interviews (ACASI). Findings At wave 1, 5.9% of youth and 7.5% of adults were past‐year hookah smokers. Among all age groups, the leading reasons for hookah smoking were enjoyment of socializing while smoking, the availability of appealing flavors and believing that it was less harmful than cigarette smoking. The odds of cessation were lower for adults who liked hookah flavors [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.26–0.62] compared with adults who did not like hookah flavors. The odds of transitioning to, or maintaining, monthly or more frequent hookah smoking at wave 2, compared with cessation or less than monthly smoking, were higher for adults who liked hookah flavors [adjusted proportional odds ratio (aPOR) = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.48–2.99 and enjoyed socializing while smoking hookah (aPOR = 1.82; 95% CI =1.13–2.94) compared with adults who did not like hookah flavors or socializing. Conclusion: The availability of appealing flavors, affordability and socialization while smoking hookah in the United States are associated with reduced likelihood of cessation and increased likelihood of high‐frequency hookah smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Cigarette brand descriptors such as 'light' are banned in several countries and often replaced by alternative descriptors that continue to mislead smokers about the relative risk from those brands. The objective of this study was to evaluate perceptions from current brand descriptors when presented independently of cigarette packaging. METHODS Eighty-eight daily cigarette smokers attended semi-structured interviews at three US research laboratories in 2018-2019 to assess smokers' perceptions of cigarette brand descriptors in four classes of brand features: prestige, connotation, taste, and color. Participants ranked descriptors within each brand feature on perceived harm, attractiveness, and appeal (willingness to try). Ranked perceptions were described using median rankings and percentages. Chi-squared was used to assess demographic effects on perceptions. Spearman's correlation was used to assess the association between harm, attractiveness, and appeal rankings. RESULTS Brand descriptors influenced perceptions of harm, attractiveness, and appeal within each brand feature. Smooth was perceived as the most attractive (42.5%) and appealing (33.0%) taste descriptor. Red was perceived as the most harmful (45.4%) and least appealing (22.7%) color descriptor. Perceptions of certain descriptors differed by demographic characteristics such as sex and age. Rankings of attractiveness and appeal were more strongly correlated (r=0.63) than rankings of harm and appeal (r=0.20, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS Cigarette manufacturers replaced banned descriptors with alternative descriptors that continue to influence perceptions of cigarettes. Regulatory agencies should closely evaluate all brand descriptors and consider implications for alternative products with fewer regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The addition of tiny rows of holes in the tipping paper (filter ventilation) of cigarettes allows air to mix with the smoke, which can change risk perceptions. In this study, we examine smokers' knowledge and beliefs about filter ventilation. Methods: Web-based panel surveys conducted in 2016 and 2017 of current adult cigarette smokers (N = 2355) provided data on awareness and understanding of filter vents in their cigarettes, whether they believed blocking the holes would change the taste of their cigarettes, and their perceptions about their future risk of being diagnosed with lung cancer. The most commonly used cigarette brands reported by participants also were characterized on the presence and level of ventilation holes. Results: Approximately 40% of participants (mostly younger and male) reported awareness of the filter ventilation in their cigarettes. Only 30% of the participants were both aware of and understood the function of filter ventilation; they also were significantly more likely to worry about developing lung cancer. Conclusion: Although misleading descriptors associated with filter ventilation are prohibited, most smokers still smoked cigarettes with filter vents, and many are unaware and misunderstand the potential risks of filter ventilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In this paper, we characterize physical design features of cigarette brands sold in the United States according to the delivery method of menthol that may affect sensory perception among users. Methods: We used 12 cigarette brands, mentholated and non-mentholated, for analyses of the physical design characteristics, quantification of nicotine and menthol, and identification of flavor additives. Results: Physical design characteristics did not differ significantly between the various cigarette brands. However, we found statistically significant differences in levels of menthol. Menthol levels were greatest in products that had dual delivery methods of menthol (6.7mg/cigarette; SE = 0.27) followed by products mentholated in a filter capsule only (5.7mg/cigarette; SE = 0.25), and those mentholated in the tobacco only (3.8mg/cigarette; SE = 0.12); products that were not mentholated had the least (0.38mg/cigarette; SE = 0.31). Finally, flavor additives with a mint flavor profile other than menthol were identified, such as pulegone and limonene, and differed between cigarette brands, which are likely contributing to the menthol flavor experience associated with use of these products. Conclusions: The regulation of menthol delivery method, flavorings added to the capsule, and/or menthol concentration may be beneficial for the public health as these factors are likely creating unique sensory experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In this study, we identified differences in cessation, nicotine dependence, and quit attempts between smokers using non-menthol cigarettes and smokers using menthol cigarettes differing in menthol delivery method (eg, menthol in the tobacco only, crushable capsules only or both). Methods: We analyzed data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, Waves 1 and 2 (W1 and W2), to determine associations of delivery method of menthol with cessation, nicotine dependence, and quit attempts among current adult cigarette smokers. Results: Nearly 40% of US smokers reported using a mentholated cigarette product with most using a product mentholated in the tobacco only. Smokers included in this analysis had a moderate to low heaviness of smoking index score. The lowest average score was among those using products mentholated in a filter capsule only (1.3, SE = .10), and the highest among those using non-mentholated products (2.4, SE = .03). About 12% of smokers quit between W1 and W2. Cessation, nicotine dependence, and quit attempts at W2 were not associated with delivery method of menthol at W1. Conclusions: Method of menthol delivery did not impact cessation, nicotine dependence, and quit attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Numeracy is one's ability to use numbers in context and influence's decision making and perceptions of health risk. Worry about lung cancer is an indicator of perceived risk (PR) and is related to interest in cessation and cancer screening. Purpose: The analysis sought to explore underlying relationships among worry about lung cancer, smoking-related disease risk perceptions, and numeracy in a web-based panel. Methods: A Web-based survey, including a numeracy measure, was completed by 1,682 participants aged 18–65 recruited in 2014. Former and current smokers were asked about LC worry and current smokers were asked their PR of diseases associated with smoking. Results: Females (m = 25.64, 95% CI [24.67, 26.61]), respondents aged 45–65 (m = 26.15, 95% CI [24.89, 27.41]), those who worry "all the time" about LC (m = 27.62, 95% CI [25.66, 29.58]), and respondents perceiving a higher risk of LC compared to other smokers (m = 28.84, 95% CI [27.66, 30.01]) expressed significantly higher PR means. Higher household income (OR = 1.20, 95% CI [1.08, 1.34]), age (OR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.77, 0.98]), and comparative LC risk (OR = 2.52, 95% CI [2.01, 3.17]) were significantly associated with greater worry about LC. As PR increases by one unit, the probability of worrying increases by 4.6%. For numeracy scores, odds ratio showed that as scores increased by one unit, the probability of worrying decreased by 11.9%. Discussion: In this study, we have shown that PR has a positive association with LC worry and that numeracy has a negative association with LC worry. Translation to Health Education Practice: This information can be used to target subpopulations with low PR and numeracy about their risks for lung cancer and to develop tailored messages to educate these people. A AJHE Self-Study quiz is online for this article via the SHAPE America Online Institute (SAOI) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The regulatory environment for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) varies widely across countries and this will probably affect the devices used, nicotine content and usage, and hence the ability of NVPs to substitute for cigarettes. We aimed to describe the types of NVPs used by current vapers in four countries with varying regulatory and enforcement approaches toward the marketing and sale of NVPs. Methods: Data are from wave 1 (July–November 2016) of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (4CV1), conducted among a cohort of current and former smokers, and current NVP users (n = 5147 adults; ≥ 18 years) in Australia (AU), Canada (CA), England (EN) and the United States (US) reporting either current daily, weekly or occasional NVP use. Devices were described by type, brand, voltage variability and refill capacity. Refill solutions were described by flavour and nicotine content. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted on the overall sample and stratified by country. A multinomial logistic regression examined factors associated with device preference across the whole sample. Results: The types of NVPs used differed by pattern of use and country. Exclusive, daily vapers were more likely to use refillable pen‐shaped devices [odds ratio (OR) = 10.0] or refillable box‐shaped devices (OR = 5.4) than disposable cigalike devices, when compared with other (non‐daily/dual) users. Nearly all respondents reported using flavoured NVPs, fruit (28.3%) being the most common flavour. Refillable devices were the most popular: refillable box‐shaped devices were more commonly reported by vapers in AU (36.8%) and US (31.4%), whereas in EN (47.4%) and CA (29.7%), vapers more often reported using refillable pen‐style devices. Most users also reported that their products contained nicotine, even in CA (87.8%) and AU (91.2%), where vaping products containing nicotine were technically illegal. Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, refillable nicotine vaping products were the most common type of nicotine vaping products used by daily vapers. Most daily vapers reported using flavoured e‐liquids/refills (with variance across countries) and most reported using products that contain nicotine, even where vaping products with nicotine were banned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Debate exists about whether health professionals (HPs) should advise smokers to use nicotine vaping products (NVPs) to quit smoking. The objectives were to examine in four countries: (1) the prevalence of HP discussions and recommendations to use an NVP; (2) who initiated NVP discussions; (3) the type of HP advice received about NVPs; and (4) smoker's characteristics related to receiving advice about NVPs. Design Cross‐sectional study using multivariable logistic regression analyses on weighted data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (ITC 4CV1). Setting: Four countries with varying regulations governing the sale and marketing of NVPs: 'most restrictive' (Australia), 'restrictive' (Canada) or 'less restrictive' (England and United States). Participants: A total of 6615 adult smokers who reported having visited an HP in the last year (drawn from the total sample of 12 294 4CV1 respondents, of whom 9398 reported smoking cigarettes daily or weekly). Respondents were from the United States (n = 1518), England (n = 2116), Australia (n = 1046), and Canada (n = 1935). Measurements Participants' survey responses indicated if they were current daily or weekly smokers and had visited an HP in the past year. Among those participants, further questions asked participants to report (1) whether NVPs were discussed, (2) who raised the topic, (3) advice received on use of NVPs and (4) advice received on quitting smoking. Findings Among the 6615 smokers who visited an HP in the last year, 6.8% reported discussing NVPs with an HP and 2.1% of smokers were encouraged to use an NVP (36.1% of those who had a discussion). Compared with Australia (4.3%), discussing NVPs with an HP was more likely in the United States [8.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.41–3.29] and Canada (7.8%, OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.26–2.78). Smokers in Australia were less likely to discuss NVPs than smokers in England (6.2%), although this was not statistically significant (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.98–2.20). Overall, the prevalence of HPs recommending NVPs was three times more likely in the United States than in Australia (OR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.45–6.47), and twice as likely in Canada (OR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.06–4.87) than in Australia. Australia and England did not differ (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 0.83–3.74). Just over half (54%) of respondents brought up NVPs themselves; there were no significant differences among countries. Conclusions: Discussions in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States between smokers and health professionals about nicotine vaping products appear to be infrequent, regardless of the regulatory environment. A low percentage of health professionals recommended vaping products. This was particularly evident in Australia, which has the most restrictive regulatory environment of the four countries studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence is accumulating that youth who try Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS, e-cigarettes) may go on to try cigarettes. This analysis examines the bidirectional patterns of ENDS and cigarette use among US youth over one year and uses propensity score matching (PSM) to examine frequency of ENDS use on changes in cigarette smoking.Methods: Our analysis included 11 996 participants who had two waves of available data (Wave 1 [W1] 2013-2014; Wave 2 [W2] 2014-2015) drawn from the longitudinal Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Cross-sectional weighted prevalence estimates are reported for cigarettes and ENDS. We used PSM to estimate the likelihood of ENDS use at W1 and to draw matched analytic samples, then used regression (logistic or linear) models to examine the effect of W1 ENDS use on W2 cigarette smoking. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: In weighted analyses, 69.3% of W1 past-30-day cigarette smokers exhibited past-30-day smoking at W2; 42.2% of W1 past-30-day ENDS users were using ENDS at W2. W1 ever use of either product was similarly associated with W2 new use of the other product. Unweighted PSM models indicated W1 cigarette-naïve ENDS use was associated with W2 ever-cigarette smoking (n = 676; adjusted odds ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.95 to 5.45, P < .001); W1 ever-ENDS use did not affect change in cigarette frequency at W2 (n = 1020, beta = 0.31, 95% CI = -0.76 to 1.39, P = .57); 1-5 days ENDS use compared with ever, no past-30-day ENDS use was associated with a statistically significant decrease of W2 smoking days (n = 256, beta = -2.64, 95% CI = -4.96 to -0.32; P = .03); and W1 6+ day ENDS users did not show a decrease in frequency of cigarette smoking.Conclusions: Ever-ENDS use predicts future cigarette smoking, and frequency of ENDS use has a differential impact on subsequent cigarette smoking uptake or reduction. These results suggest that both cigarettes and ENDS should be targeted in early tobacco prevention efforts with youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In this paper, we examine the brand preferences of smokers and how that relates to cigarette brand features in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Survey Wave-1 (September 2013-December 2014). Methods: There were 32,320 adult and 13,651 youth participants in the survey. Analyses were restricted to current smokers who reported purchasing cigarettes, 10,493 adults and 282 youth. Frequencies, weighted percentages, and chi-square tests were reported. Results: Respondents reported purchasing a total of 58 brands with many more brand name line extensions with a greater diversity of brands reported by adults compared to youth. Marlboro, Newport, Camel, and American Spirit accounted for >90% of the purchasing among youth, while accounting for about 70% among adults. Mentholated cigarettes were smoked by over 39% of youth and 38% of adults, particularly Hispanics and Blacks. Longer- length cigarette use was more commonly reported by females, and discounted brands were more commonly used by older and daily smokers. Conclusions: Price discounting, cigarette length, use of menthol flavoring, age, and ethnicity were associated with cigarette brand preferences and purchases. Cigarette characteristics such as length, filtration, price, flavor, and general packaging could be regulated to limit the appeal of cigarettes to different sub-populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is one of the most lethal cancers in the USA. In 2013, new guidelines issued by the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommended lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography among a selected group of high-risk individuals. Specifically, lung cancer screening is recommended for heavy smokers between the ages of 55 to 79, with at least 30 pack-year smoking exposure. Former smokers who meet these guidelines and stopped smoking ≤ 15 years ago are also eligible. There is a need to promote lung cancer screening to increase early diagnosis rates and treatment options, thereby decreasing disease-specific mortality. This study was conducted to refine educational materials used to inform eligible high-risk individuals about the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening. Focus groups (n = 16) and in-depth telephone interviews (n = 5) were conducted among screening-eligible participants recruited from western New York. Main themes that emerged from the discussions included cost of obtaining the exam, eligibility criteria/information about the exam, apprehension regarding results, and an increased desire for discussions with their physician to learn more about the screening. The information gained from this study is vital to understanding concerns held by current and former smokers regarding lung cancer screening, as well as critical to determining which information is most valuable for decreasing barriers and correcting misperceptions about the lung cancer screening exam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To examine the awareness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening among a population of current and former smokers using a nationally representative sample from the United States.Methods: Data for this study come from Wave 9 of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) United States Survey, conducted between 2013 and 2015. Among respondents age ≥ 40 (n = 1145), a 50% random sample were asked a series of questions pertaining to lung cancer screening. This study examines awareness and screening behaviors in relationship to demographic characteristics of respondents, health beliefs, psychosocial behaviors, and smoking behaviors. Descriptive tables and χ2 tests were used to examine the association between those who were aware and unaware. Logistic regression analyses were conducted, stratified on respondents' smoking status. Data were weighed to be representative of the current smoking population in the US.Results: Overall, 52% of current and former smokers reported being aware of lung cancer screening. Among the group with no prior screening, 80.6% said they would take a lung cancer screening exam if recommended by their physician. In the multivariate models, former smokers had significantly greater awareness of lung cancer screening compared to current smokers [odds ratio 1.42 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.97)].Conclusions: Awareness of LDCT lung cancer screening was lower among current smokers compared to former smokers. Most smokers who had not ever been screened said they would have lung cancer screening if it were recommended by their physician, demonstrating the need for healthcare providers to encourage those eligible for screening to take the test. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The US cigar market is diverse, yet until recently most research studies and tobacco surveillance systems have not reported behavioral and related outcomes by cigar type.Methods: The 2013-2014 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study collected data separately for filtered cigars (FCs), cigarillos, and traditional cigars, which were further distinguished as premium or nonpremium. Descriptive statistics for adult established current smokers of each cigar type and cigarettes were calculated for demographic characteristics, tobacco use patterns, purchasing behaviors and reasons for use. Adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) using a marginal predictions approach with logistic regression assessed correlates of dual cigar and cigarette smoking.Results: Age, sex, race/ethnicity, education level, and poverty status of smokers varied according to cigar type. Daily cigar smoking prevalence and number of cigars smoked per day were higher for FCs (37.3%; median: 1.6 cigars/day, respectively), than all other cigar types (6.7%-25.3%, all p < .01; 0.1-0.4 cigars/day, all p < .01, respectively); daily smoking and cigars per day were similar for nonpremium cigars and cigarillos (p = .11; p = .33, respectively). Cigarette smoking was twice as common among smokers of nonpremium cigars, cigarillos, and FCs (58.0%-66.0%) than among premium cigars (29.9%). Among current cigar smokers, FC smokers (APR = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-1.39), other tobacco product users (APR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.15-1.41), and those with a GED/high school diploma or less (APR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.09-1.33) were more likely to also smoke cigarettes.Conclusion: User characteristics, cigar smoking patterns, and dual smoking with cigarettes varied by cigar type highlighting the importance of adequately describing the cigar type studied and, where appropriate, differentiating results by cigar type.Implications: Despite the diversity of the cigar market place, historically many research studies and tobacco surveillance systems have treated cigars as a single product type. This study describes similarities and differences in the user characteristics, tobacco use patterns, and purchasing behaviors of premium, nonpremium, cigarillo, and filtered cigar smokers. To enhance tobacco regulatory science, sufficient descriptions of the cigar type(s) studied and, where appropriate, differentiation of the particular cigar type(s) studied should be undertaken to improve the interpretation of study findings, understanding of cigar use patterns and related behaviors and future approaches to reducing cigar-attributable morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We assessed whether in-depth messaging delivered via a smoking cessation quitline results in participants: (1) speaking to their physician, or (2) insurance company regarding lung cancer screening (LCS). Methods: Eligible participants lived in New York State and met the United States Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for LCS (N = 1000). A randomized trial was conducted among New York State Smokers' Quitline participants to assess the impact of a brochure containing information on risks, benefits, and costs associated with LCS (control group) versus the brochure supplemented with phone-based in-depth messaging (treatment group). Results: After a 4-month telephone survey (N = 431), associations between the study groups were examined for: (1) speaking with a physician regarding LCS, and (2) speaking with an insurance company about LCS coverage. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, insurance status, emphysema/COPD, and past 30-day cigarObjectives: We assessed whether in-depth messaging delivered via a smoking cessation quitline results in participants: (1) speaking to their physician, or (2) insurance company regarding lung cancer screening (LCS). Methods: Eligible participants lived in New York State and met the United States Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for LCS (N = 1000). A randomized trial was conducted among New York State Smokers' Quitline participants to assess the impact of a brochure containing information on risks, benefits, and costs associated with LCS (control group) versus the brochure supplemented with phone-based in-depth messaging (treatment group). Results: After a 4-month telephone survey (N = 431), associations between the study groups were examined for: (1) speaking with a physician regarding LCS, and (2) speaking with an insurance company about LCS coverage. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, insurance status, emphysema/COPD, and past 30-day cigarette use found no significant associations. However, sensitivity analyses among control participants found significant associations, including for speaking with a physician (p < .05) by receipt of the study brochure. Analyses repeated in the treatment group also had statistically significant findings emerge, including for speaking with insurance company (p < .05). Conclusion: The educational brochure may be an effective and low-cost way to deliver information about LCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]