Search

Introduction: Cigarette smoking has declined, while electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) use has increased in the United States. Understanding the role of ENDS in adult smoking quit attempts and cessation is important for estimating their population health impact., Aims and Methods: We used data from 2018 to 2019 tobacco use supplement to the current population survey to examine demographic characteristics and ENDS use patterns among adult ENDS users who reported quitting smoking in the past year by trying to switch to ENDS ("switchers") and smokers who did or did not make a quit attempt in the past year. χ2 tests of proportions and t-tests were used to compare characteristics between groups., Results: In 2018-2019, about three-quarters of switchers reported daily use of ENDS compared to only one-third of dual users with a recent quit attempt by trying to switch to ENDS. Compared to dual users who made a quit attempt by trying to switch to ENDS, switchers were more likely to use menthol/mint-flavored ENDS exclusively (5.6% vs. 13.1%; p = .004) but less likely to use tobacco-flavored ENDS exclusively (21.2% vs. 13.7%; p = .01)., Conclusions: ENDS users who quit smoking in the past year and reported trying to quit by switching to ENDS were more likely to use menthol/mint flavors exclusively and use ENDS daily compared to dual users who made a quit attempt by trying to switch to ENDS. Longer-term prospective data may better clarify the role of ENDS in smoking quit attempts and cessation., Implications: This study provides information on patterns of ENDS use in former smokers and current smokers who tried to quit smoking by switching to ENDS in a national sample of U.S. adults. These results can inform policy actions concerning ENDS products., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco 2022.)

Background: Former smokers who currently use e-cigarettes have lower concentrations of biomarkers of tobacco toxicant exposure than current smokers. It is unclear whether tobacco toxicant exposure reductions may lead to health risk reductions., Methods: We compared inflammatory biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, IL6, fibrinogen, soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1) and an oxidative stress marker (F2-isoprostane) among 3,712 adult participants in Wave 1 (2013-2014) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study by tobacco user groups: dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes; former smokers who currently use e-cigarettes-only; current cigarette-only smokers; former smokers who do not currently use any tobacco; and never tobacco users. We calculated geometric means (GM) and estimated adjusted GM ratios (GMR)., Results: Dual users experienced greater concentration of F2-isoprostane than current cigarette-only smokers [GMR 1.09 (95% confidence interval, CI, 1.03-1.15)]. Biomarkers were similar between former smokers who currently use e-cigarettes and both former smokers who do not use any tobacco and never tobacco users, but among these groups most biomarkers were lower than those of current cigarette-only smokers. The concentration of F2-isoprostane decreased by time since smoking cessation among both exclusive e-cigarette users ( P trend = 0.03) and former smokers who do not currently use any tobacco ( P trend = 0.0001)., Conclusions: Dual users have greater concentration of F2-isoprostane than smokers. Exclusive e-cigarette users have biomarker concentrations that are similar to those of former smokers who do not currently use tobacco, and lower than those of exclusive cigarette smokers., Impact: This study contributes to an understanding of the health effects of e-cigarettes., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

The main purpose of this analysis is to quantify quality adjusted life years (QALYs) lost associated with lifetime exclusive cigarette or smokeless tobacco use among U.S. adults. Multiple waves of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data linked to death certificate records were used to define current exclusive cigarette and smokeless tobacco use and associated mortality risks. NHIS data were used to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Regression and Cox proportional hazard modeling were used to adjust HRQOL and mortality risk associated with tobacco use for age, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index, education, and household poverty level. QALYs were estimated based on adjusted HRQOL and mortality risks. All analyses were initiated in 2019 and completed in 2020. Male current exclusive cigarette smokers, aged 25 to 29 years would lose 8.1 QALYs (SE = 0.09), and male current exclusive smokeless tobacco users aged 25 to 34 would lose 4.1 QALYs (SE = 0.22), compared to never users of tobacco. Current exclusive cigarette or smokeless tobacco use is associated with QALY loss. QALYs lost can be lessened through preventing the initiation of tobacco product use or helping tobacco product users quit as early in life as possible., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Studies have shown the health benefits of cigarette smoking cessation. However, the literature remains unclear about the relationship between smoking reduction and health risks. This comprehensive review and meta-analysis updates previous reviews with the newest estimates., Aims and Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the association between smoking reduction and some health risks in observational studies. We defined the following smoking categories: heavy smokers smoked ≥15-20 cigarettes per day (CPD), moderate smokers smoked 10-19 CPD, and light smokers smoked <10 CPD. The relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effect models., Results: We identified 19 studies including four case-control and 15 cohort studies. Compared with continuing heavy smokers, we found decreased lung cancer risk for those who reduced CPD by more than 50% (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.91), from heavy to moderate (RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.85), and from heavy to light (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.72). We also found lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) for those who reduced from heavy to light smoking (RR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67, 0.89) but not those who reduced by more than 50% and reduced smoking from heavy to moderate. We did not find any significant difference in all-cause mortality, all-cancer risks, and smoking-/tobacco-related cancer risk among those who reduced., Conclusions: Substantial smoking reduction may decrease lung cancer risk but results on CVD (coronary heart disease and stroke combined) risk were mixed. The relationships between smoking reduction and other endpoints examined were not significant., Implications: This meta-analysis helps clarify our understanding of various smoking reduction levels on some health risks. While smoking reduction may decrease risks of lung cancer, the relationships between smoking reduction and other endpoints, including all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease, remain unclear. Although smoking reduction may decrease lung cancer risks, the magnitude of lung cancer risk remain high. Among smokers, complete cessation remains the most effective approach for cancer and CVD prevention., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

E-cigarette flavor preference may differ among smokers using e-cigarettes, but little information is available on preferences by menthol cigarette status. Using nationally representative data for US adults from the 2018-2019 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey, we analyzed e-cigarette flavor preference by menthol cigarette status and e-cigarette device type for dual-cigarette and e-cigarette users and e-cigarette users who had recently quit smoking by trying to switch to e-cigarettes ("switchers"). Approximately half (52.2%) of dual users of menthol cigarettes and e-cigarettes reported using menthol/mint-flavored e-cigarettes as did 41.4% of "switchers" who had smoked menthol cigarettes; exclusive menthol/mint flavor use was 13.1% for dual users and 21.3% for "switchers." A similar proportion (45.1%) of dual users who smoked nonmenthol cigarettes used tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes, but only 26.7% of "switchers" who had smoked nonmenthol cigarettes used tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes. Approximately 60% of dual users and "switchers" used fruit/other flavors, regardless of menthol cigarette use. By device type, 63.9% of dual users of cartridge-based e-cigarettes and menthol cigarettes used menthol/mint-flavored e-cigarettes. Approximately 75% of dual users and 85% of "switchers" who used tank or mod systems used fruit/other flavors. Menthol cigarette smokers may be particularly likely to use menthol/mint e-cigarettes, and a majority of dual users and "switchers" used fruit/other flavors. These results can inform policy measures concerning flavored electronic nicotine delivery system products.

Introduction: Some studies have found some reduction in tobacco exposure and tobacco-related disease risk with decreased numbers of cigarettes smoked per day (CPD), but biomarker of exposure estimates by change in CPD are generally unavailable for the US population., Methods: We analyzed biomarker of exposure data by smoking status from over 1100 adult exclusive daily cigarette smokers in Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study who were either exclusive daily smokers or had quit tobacco use entirely at Wave 2. Wave 1 smoking categories consisted of "very light" (1-4 CPD), "light" (5-9 CPD), "moderate" (10-19 CPD), and "heavy" (20+ CPD), and Wave 2 categories were "quitters" (stopped smoking entirely), exclusive cigarette "reducers" (CPD decreased ≥ 50%), "maintainers" (CPD within 50%-150% of Wave 1 value), and "increasers" (CPD increased ≥ 50%)., Results: Complete quitters had significantly lower levels of TNE-2, NNAL, NNN, 2-Fluorene, HPMA, CYMA, and MHB3 at Wave 2 for all Wave 1 CPD categories, and decreases were often large. Moderate "reducers" had lower levels of NNAL and 1-Hydroxypyrene at Wave 2, and heavy "reducers" had lower levels of NNAL, 2-Fluorene, and MHB3. Light "increasers" had higher levels of TNE-2, NNAL, 2-Fluorene, CYMA, and cadmium at Wave 2, and heavy "increasers" had higher levels of NNAL and HPMA., Conclusions: Smoking "reducers" and "increasers" had changes in some biomarker of tobacco exposure levels, but reductions were much greater and more consistent for complete quitters., Implications: PATH longitudinal cohort study data show that some exclusive daily cigarette smokers increase or decrease CPD over time. These differences may result in moderate changes in the levels of some biomarkers such as NNAL. Even so, however, reductions in biomarker levels are much greater with complete smoking cessation., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco 2020.)

Background: The dose-response relationships between number of cigarettes smoked per day (CPD) and health outcomes, such as cancer and heart disease, are well established, but much less is known about the relationships between CPD and biomarkers of exposure., Methods: We analyzed biomarker data by CPD from more than 2,700 adult daily cigarette smokers in Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Tobacco use categories consisted of exclusive cigarette smokers, dual cigarette and e-cigarette users, and dual cigarette and smokeless tobacco users., Results: Biomarker concentrations consistently increased with CPD for each tobacco user group, although concentrations tended to level off at high smoking levels, such as those at and above 20 CPD. Dual cigarette and e-cigarette users had higher levels of some biomarkers such as Total Nicotine Equivalents-2 ( P = 0.0036) than exclusive cigarette smokers, and dual cigarette and smokeless tobacco users had higher levels of 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol ( P < 0.0001) and N'-nitrosonornicotine ( P = 0.0236) than exclusive cigarette smokers., Conclusions: Among daily smokers, exposure to tobacco toxicants and constituents exhibits a dose-response relationship by number of cigarettes smoked, but the relationship is not necessarily linear in form. Dual users of cigarettes with either e-cigarettes or smokeless tobacco are exposed to higher levels of certain toxicants and carcinogens than exclusive cigarette smokers., Impact: Availability of biomarker data by CPD may aid in comparisons between cigarette smoking and use of new and potentially reduced exposure tobacco products, which may result in different levels of constituent and toxicant exposure., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: This study assessed patterns of e-cigarette and cigarette use from Wave 1 to Wave 2 among adult e-cigarette users at Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study., Methods: We examined changes in e-cigarette use frequency at Wave 2 among adult e-cigarette users at Wave 1 (unweighted n=2835). Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) were calculated using a predicted marginal probability approach to assess correlates of e-cigarette discontinuance and smoking abstinence at Wave 2., Results: Half (48.8%) of adult e-cigarette users at Wave 1 discontinued their use of e-cigarettes at Wave 2. Among dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes at Wave 1, 44.3% maintained dual use, 43.5% discontinued e-cigarette use and maintained cigarette smoking and 12.1% discontinued cigarette use at Wave 2, either by abstaining from cigarette smoking only (5.1%) or discontinuing both products (7.0%). Among dual users at Wave 1, daily e-cigarette users were more likely than non-daily users to report smoking abstinence at Wave 2 (aPR=1.40, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.91). Using a customisable device (rather than a non-customisable one) was not significantly related to smoking abstinence at Wave 2 (aPR=1.14, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60)., Conclusions: This study suggests that e-cigarette use patterns are highly variable over a 1-year period. This analysis provides the first nationally representative estimates of transitions among US adult e-cigarette users. Future research, including additional waves of the PATH Study, can provide further insight into long-term patterns of e-cigarette use critical to understanding the net population health impact of e-cigarettes in USA., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MLG receives fees for serving on an advisory board to J&J and grant support from Pfizer. RN served as an expert witness for plaintiff versus tobacco companies. JLP serves as a consultant for plaintiff versus tobacco companies. WMC reports holding stock in General Electric, and 3M Companies and Pfizer. KMC has received grant funding from the Pfizer, Inc., to study the impact of a hospital based tobacco cessation intervention. KMC also receives funding as an expert witness in litigation filed against the tobacco industry. No financial disclosures were reported by the other authors of this paper., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2019. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Introduction: Assessing the extent that cigarette smokers use or switch to e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco can help inform the population health impact of these products. This study estimated the prevalence of e-cigarette and smokeless tobacco use and switching among current and recent former adult cigarette smokers., Methods: Data from the 2012-2013 (n=8,891) and 2013-2014 (n=11,379) National Adult Tobacco Survey were analyzed in 2016. Response rates for this telephone survey were 44.9% and 36.1%, respectively. Tobacco product use was assessed by smoking status., Results: Current e-cigarette use increased for all groups, with a greater increase among recent quitters, 9.1% (95% CI=7.1%, 11.1%) in 2012-2013 and 15.8% (95% CI=13.7%, 17.9%) in 2013-2014, than smokers with an unsuccessful quit attempt, 10.4% (95% CI=9.1%, 11.7%) in 2012-2013 and 14.8% (95% CI=13.5%, 16.1%) in 2013-2014, or smokers with no quit attempt, 5.9% (95% CI=4.8%, 6.9%) in 2012-2013 and 10.7% (95% CI=9.4%, 12.0%) in 2013-2014. Between 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, current use of smokeless tobacco remained steady for recent quitters (4.6% to 4.7%, p=0.92) and smokers with no quit attempt (4.0% to 4.3%, p=0.97), and decreased in smokers with an unsuccessful quit attempt (5.7% to 3.8%, p=0.004). More recent quitters completely switched to e-cigarettes in the past year (15.3% in 2012-2013, 25.7% in 2013-2014) than to smokeless tobacco (4.6% in 2012-2013, 4.5% in 2013-2014)., Conclusions: Current and recent former adult smokers are more likely to use e-cigarettes than smokeless tobacco. Current e-cigarette use was most prevalent among unsuccessful quitters and recent quitters, who were substantially more likely to report complete switching to e-cigarettes than smokeless tobacco., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Importance: Tobacco products have changed in recent years. Contemporary mortality risk estimates of combustible tobacco product use are needed., Objective: To investigate the mortality risks associated with current and former use of cigars, pipes, and cigarettes., Design, Setting, and Participants: The National Longitudinal Mortality Study is a longitudinal population-based, nationally representative health survey with mortality follow-up that includes demographic and other information from the Current Population Survey, tobacco product use information from the Tobacco Use Supplement, and mortality data from the National Death Index. In this study, participants provided tobacco use information at baseline in surveys starting from 1985 and were followed for mortality through the end of 2011. The study includes 357 420 participants who reported exclusively using cigar, pipes, or cigarettes or reported never using any type of tobacco product., Exposures: Current or former exclusive use of any cigar (little cigar, cigarillos, large cigar), traditional pipe, or cigarette and never tobacco use. Information on current daily and nondaily use was also collected. Estimates adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and survey year., Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause and cause-specific mortality as identified as the primary cause of death from death certificate information., Results: Of the 357 420 persons included in the analysis, the majority of current and former cigar and pipe smokers were male (79.3%-98.0%), and smokers were more evenly divided by sex (46% of current daily smokers were male). There were 51 150 recorded deaths during follow-up. Exclusive current cigarette smokers (hazard ratio [HR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.93-2.02) and exclusive current cigar smokers (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03-1.38) had higher all-cause mortality risks than never tobacco users. Exclusive current cigarette smokers (HR, 4.06; 95% CI, 3.84-4.29), exclusive current cigar smokers (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.11-2.32), and exclusive current pipe smokers (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.05-2.38) had an elevated risk of dying from a tobacco-related cancer (including bladder, esophagus, larynx, lung, oral cavity, and pancreas). Among current nondaily cigarette users, statistically significant associations were observed with deaths from lung cancer (HR, 6.24; 95% CI, 5.17-7.54), oral cancer (HR, 4.62; 95% CI, 1.84-11.58), circulatory death (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.30-1.57), cardiovascular death (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11-1.39), cerebrovascular death (stroke) (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.12-1.74), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 7.66; 95% CI, 6.09-9.64) as well as for daily smokers., Conclusions and Relevance: This study provides further evidence that exclusive use of cigar, pipes, and cigarettes each confers significant mortality risks.

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]