Search

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: 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]

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: 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]

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]

Introduction: Flavored e-cigarettes are enticing to new users and established cigarette smokers using e-cigarettes to quit smoking due to the wide variety of flavor options. However, specific flavor combinations that are popular among e-cigarette users are understudied. Recently, the Deeming rule extended the US Food and Drug Administration’s authority over all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes. Methods: The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study Wave 2 data were analyzed to assess the prevalence of self-reported flavor categories that are used individually and in combination with other flavor categories among past 30-day youth and adult e-cigarette users in the US. Results: Most youth and adult participants reported using a flavored e-cigarette. Reporting an individual flavor category was more common than reporting a combination of flavor categories. Fruit flavor was the most common flavor category reported among youth, and ‘menthol/mint’ was most common among adults. Fruit and candy/other sweets were the most common flavor categories reported together among both youth and adult past 30-day e-cigarette users. Conclusions: The use of flavored e-cigarettes is very popular among youth and adults. Most consumers reported using a single flavor category, although some consumers did use a combination of flavor categories. Preference for menthol/mint among adults may represent a carryover from associations with tobacco cigarettes. Typically, sweeter flavors, such as fruit, were among the most popular flavor categories reported, both individually and in combination with other flavors, while more bitter flavors (i.e.: clove/spice) were less common. Implications: This study identified predominant flavor categories among past 30-day youth and adult e-cigarette users. Findings indicate that the wide variety of flavors available and the freedom to “mix-and-match” flavors may maintain use of e-cigarettes among youth and adults, and future research should focus on the composition of the ENDS liquid/vapor to disentangle the contributions of sweeteners and flavorants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In December 2008, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action that prompted the removal of nicotine and tar listings from cigarette packs and ads. As of June 2010, the US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act prohibited the use of explicit or implicit descriptors on tobacco packaging or in advertising that convey messages of reduced risk or exposure, specifically including terms like "light," "mild," and "low" and similar descriptors. This study evaluates the effect of these two policy changes on smokers' beliefs, experiences and perceptions of different cigarettes.Methods: Using generalized estimating equations models, this study analyzed survey data collected between 2002 and 2013 by the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Study regarding US smokers' beliefs, experiences, and perceptions of different cigarettes.Results: Between 2002 and 2013, smoker misperceptions about "light" cigarettes being less harmful did not change significantly and remained substantial, especially among those who reported using lower-strength cigarettes. After the two policy changes, reported reliance on pack colors, color terms, and other product descriptors like "smooth" to determine cigarette strength style trended upward.Conclusions: Policies implemented to reduce smoker misperceptions that some cigarettes are safer than others appear to have had little impact. Because of pack colors, color terms, descriptors such as "smooth," cigarette taste or feel, and possibly other characteristics, millions of smokers continue to believe, inaccurately, that they can reduce their harms and risks by smoking one cigarette brand or sub-brand instead of another, which may be delaying or reducing smoking cessation.Implications: What this study adds: This study confirms that US policies to reduce smoker misperceptions that some cigarettes are less harmful than others have not been successful. Following the removal of light/low descriptors and tar and nicotine numbers from cigarette packs and ads, pack colors, color words, other descriptors (eg, smooth), and sensory experiences of smoother or lighter taste have helped smokers to continue to identify their preferred cigarette brand styles and otherwise distinguish between which brands and styles they consider "lighter" or lower in tar and, mistakenly, less harmful than others. These findings provide additional evidence to support new enforcement or regulatory action to stop cigarettes and their packaging from misleading smokers about relative risk, which may be reducing or delaying quit attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cigarettes are marketed in a wide array of packaging and product configurations, and these may impact consumers' perceptions of product health effects and attractiveness. Filtered cigarettes are typically perceived as less hazardous and white tipping paper (as opposed to cork) often conveys 'lightness'.Methods: This study examined cigarette-related perceptions among 1220 young adult (age 18-35) current, ever, and never smokers recruited from three eastern U.S. cities (Buffalo NY, Columbia SC, Morgantown WV). Participants rated three cigarette sticks: two filtered cigarettes 85 mm in length, differing only in tipping paper color (cork versus white), and an unfiltered 70 mm cigarette.Results: Overall, the cork-tipped cigarette was most commonly selected on taste and attractiveness, the white-tipped on least dangerous, and the unfiltered on most dangerous. Current smokers were more likely to select white-tipped (OR = 1.98) and cork-tipped (OR = 3.42) cigarettes, while ever smokers more commonly selected the cork-tipped (OR = 1.96), as most willing to try over the other products. Those willing to try the filtered white-tipped cigarette were more likely to have rated that cigarette as best tasting (OR = 11.10), attracting attention (OR = 17.91), and lowest health risk (OR = 1.94). Similarly, those willing to try cork tipped or unfiltered cigarettes rated those as best testing, attracting attention, and lowest health risk, respectively.Conclusions: Findings from this study demonstrate that consumer product perceptions can be influenced by elements of cigarette design, such as the presence and color of the filter tip. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recent studies have suggested that about 1 in 5 smokers report switching brands per year. However, these studies only report switching between brands. The current study estimated the rates of switching both within and between brand families and examining factors associated with brand and brand style switching. Methods Data for this analysis are from the International Tobacco Control 2006-2011 US adult smoker cohort survey waves 5-8 (N=3248). A switch between brands was defined as reporting two different cigarette brand names for two successive waves, while switching within brand was defined as reporting the same brand name, but a different brand style. Repeated measures regression was used to determine factors associated with both switch types. Results A total of 1475 participants reported at least two successive waves of data with complete information on brand name and style. Overall switching increased from 44.9% in 2007-2008 to 58.4% in 2010-2011. Switching between brand names increased from 16% to 29%, while switches within the same brand name to a different style ranged from 29% to 33%. Between-brand switching was associated with younger age, lower income, non-white racial group and use of a discount brand, whereas, within-brand switching was associated with younger age and the use of a premium brand cigarette. Conclusions Nearly half of smokers in the USA switched their cigarette brand or brand style within a year. Switching between brands may be more price motivated, while switching within brands may be motivated by price and other brand characteristics such as product length. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have risen in popularity in the U.S. While recent studies have described the prevalence and demographics of e-cigarette users, few studies have evaluated the impact of advertising on perceptions and interest in trial. This pilot study was conducted to assess whether exposure to ads for e-cigarettes or a comparison product (snus), elicited differences in interest to try e-cigarettes between smokers and non-smokers. Methods: A web-based survey was completed by 600 respondents, aged 18-65, recruited from an internet panel in the U.S. Respondents answered questions assessing tobacco use, and then viewed nine magazine ads for Blu e-cigarettes or Camel snus, a low-nitrosamine smokeless tobacco product, in random order. After viewing each ad, respondents were asked a series of questions about their perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, and interest in trial. At the end, respondents were asked to choose a free sample product from the following options: an e-cigarette, smokeless tobacco (SLT), pack of cigarettes, or no product. Results: Ad receptivity scores did not appear to be influenced by ad theme; differences existed between smokers and non-smokers. Participants exposed to e-cigarette ads more frequently reported favorable product attitudes compared to participants exposed to snus ads. Cigarette smokers in the e-cigarette condition were more likely to report interest in trying e-cigarettes compared to non-smokers in that condition ( -value < 0.001). Six percent of non-smokers exposed p to e-cigarette ads reported interest in trying e-cigarettes. E-cigarettes were the most popular product selected to sample (34 %), followed by cigarettes (8 %) and SLT (3 %); 331 respondents (55 %) chose no product. Participants randomized to the e-cigarette ad group were significantly more likely to choose an e-cigarette at product selection ( -value = 0.014). p Within the e-cigarette condition, 71 % of smokers selected an e-cigarette at product selection, compared to 25 % of non-smokers; smoking status was significantly associated with sample product selection ( -value <0.001). p Conclusions: These findings suggest that exposure to e-cigarette ads may be associated with interest in e-cigarette trial, particularly among smokers. Continued exposure to advertising in magazines, on television, and at the point-of-sale may have an impact on willingness to receive promotional products or intention to try e-cigarettes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The purpose of this paper was to examine trends in the use of premium and discount cigarette brands and determine correlates of type of brand used and brand switching. Methods Data from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) US adult smoker cohort survey were analysed. The total study sample included 6669 adult cigarette smokers recruited and followed from 2002 to 2011 over eight different survey waves. Each survey wave included an average of 1700 smokers per survey with replenishment of those lost to follow-up. Results Over the eight survey waves, a total of 260 different cigarette brands were reported by smokers, of which 17% were classified as premium and 83% as discount brands. Marlboro, Newport, and Camel were the most popular premium brands reported by smokers in our sample over all eight survey waves. The percentage of smokers using discount brands increased between 2002 and 2011, with a marked increase in brand switching from premium to discount cigarettes observed after 2009 corresponding to the $0.61 increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes. Cigarette brand preferences varied by age group and income levels with younger, higher income smokers more likely to report smoking premium brand cigarettes, while older, middle and lower income, heavier smokers were more likely to report using discount brands. Conclusions Our data suggest that demographic and smoking trends favour the continued growth of low priced cigarette brands. From a tobacco control perspective, the findings from this study suggest that governments should consider enacting stronger minimum pricing laws in order to keep the base price of cigarettes high, since aggressive price marketing will likely continue to be used by manufacturers to compete for the shrinking pool of remaining smokers in the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aims The US Food and Drug Administration must consider whether to ban the use of menthol in cigarettes. This study examines how current smokers might respond to such a ban on menthol cigarettes. Design Convenience sample of adolescent and adult smokers recruited from an online survey panel. Setting United States, 2010. Participants A total of 471 adolescent and adult current cigarette smokers. Measurements Respondents were asked a series of questions about how they might react if menthol cigarettes were banned. In addition, participants completed a simulation purchase task to estimate the demand for menthol and non-menthol cigarettes across a range of prices. Findings Overall, 36.1% of respondents said they always (18.9%) or usually (17.2%) smoked menthol cigarettes. When asked how they might respond to a ban on menthol cigarettes, 35% of current menthol smokers said they would stop smoking, and 25% said they would 'find a way to buy a menthol brand'. Those who reported they might quit tended to have greater current intentions to quit [odds ratio (OR) = 4.47], while those who reported that they might seek illicit menthol cigarettes were far less likely to report current intentions to quit (OR = 0.06). Estimates for demand elasticity for preferred cigarette type were similar for menthol (α = 0.0051) and non-menthol (α = 0.0049) smokers. Demand elasticity and peak consumption were related to usual cigarette type and cigarettes smoked per day, but did not appear to differ by race, gender or age. Conclusions Preliminary evidence suggests that a significant minority of smokers of menthol cigarettes in the United States would try to stop smoking altogether if such cigarettes were banned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine the relationship between a belief about Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety evaluation of cigarettes and smoking risk perceptions. Methods: A nationally representative, random-digit-dialed telephone survey of 1046 adult current cigarette smokers. Results: Smokers reporting that the FDA does not evaluate cigarettes for safety (46.1%), exhibited greater comprehension of the health risks of smoking and were more likely (48.5%) than other participants (33.6%) to report quit intentions. Risk perceptions partially mediated the relationship between FDA evaluation belief and quit intentions. Conclusions: These findings highlight the need for proactive, effective communication to the public about the aims of new tobacco product regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cigarette packaging is among the most prominent forms of tobacco marketing. This study examined the impact of cigarette pack design among young women in the United States. Method: A national sample of 18- to 19-year-old females in the United States completed an online survey in February 2010. Participants were randomized to view eight cigarette packs designed according to one of four experimental conditions: fully branded female packs, same packs without descriptors (e.g., “slims”), same packs without brand imagery or descriptors (“plain” packs), and branded non-female brands. Participants rated packs on measures of appeal and health risk and completed a behavioral pack selection task. Results: Fully branded female packs were rated significantly more appealing than the same packs without descriptors, “plain” packs, and non–female-branded packs. Female-branded packs were associated with a greater number of positive attributes including glamour, slimness, and attractiveness and were more likely to be perceived as less harmful. Approximately 40% of smokers and nonsmokers requested a pack at the end of the study; female-branded packs were 3 times more likely to be selected than plain packs. Conclusion: Plain packaging and removing descriptors such as “slims” from cigarette packs may reduce smoking susceptibility among young women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2006, a U.S. Federal Court ruled that the major domestic cigarette manufacturers were guilty of conspiring to deny, distort, and minimize the hazards of cigarette smoking to the public and ordered corrective statements to correct these deceptions. Purpose: This study evaluates the effectiveness of different versions of corrective statements that were proposed to the Court. Methods: 239 adult smokers (aged 18–65 years) were randomized to view one of five different versions of corrective statements on five topics (health risks, addiction, low-tar cigarettes, product manipulation, and secondhand smoke); change in knowledge and beliefs were measured before and after viewing the statements, as well as 1 week later. Three of the versions were text-based statements recommended by different parties in the case (Philip Morris, U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], Interveners), whereas two others were developed at Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI) for this study and utilized pictorial images (emotive and neutral). Data collection and analysis were conducted in Buffalo NY from 2008 to 2009. Results: Regardless of which corrective statement was seen, exposure resulted in a consistent pattern of increased level of knowledge and corrected misperceptions about smoking, although the effects were not large and diminished back toward baseline levels within 1 week. The DOJ, Interveners, and emotive statements elicited a stronger affective response and were rated by respondents as more persuasive (p-value<0.05). The emotive statement was better recalled and drew the respondents'' attention in the shortest amount of time. Conclusions: Each of the proposed corrective statements tested helped correct false beliefs about smoking, but sustained impact will likely require repeated exposures to the message. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: In the U.S., limited evidence exists on the impact of colors and brand imagery used in cigarette pack design. Purpose: This study examined the impact of pack design, product descriptors, and health warnings on risk perception and brand appeal. Methods: A cross-sectional mall-intercept study was conducted with 197 adult smokers and 200 nonsmokers in Buffalo NY from June to July 2009 (data analysis from July 2009 to December 2010). Participants were shown 12 sets of packs randomly; each set varied by a particular design feature (color, descriptor) or warning label style (text versus graphic, size, attribution, message framing). Packs were rated on criteria including risk perceptions, quit motivation, and purchase interest. Results: Participants selected larger, pictorial, and loss-framed warning labels as more likely to attract attention, encourage thoughts about health risks, motivate quitting, and be most effective. Participants were more likely to select packs with lighter color shading and descriptors such as light, silver, and smooth as delivering less tar, smoother taste, and lower health risk, compared to darker-shaded or full-flavor packs. Additionally, participants were more likely to select the branded compared to plain white pack when asked which delivered the most tar, smoothest taste, was more attractive, appealed to youth aged <18 years, and contained cigarettes of better quality. Conclusions: The findings support larger, graphic health warnings that convey loss-framed messages as most effective in communicating health risks to U.S. adults. The results also indicate that color and product descriptors are associated with false beliefs about risks. Plain packaging may reduce many of the erroneous misperceptions of risk communicated through pack design features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: New legislation in the U.S. prohibits tobacco companies from labeling cigarette packs with terms such as light, mild, or low after June 2010. However, experience from countries that have removed these descriptors suggests that different terms, colors, or numbers communicating the same messages may replace them. Purpose: The main purpose of this study was to examine how cigarette pack colors are perceived by smokers to correspond to different descriptive terms. Methods: Newspaper advertisements and CraigsList.org postings directed interested current smokers to a survey website. Eligible participants were shown an array of six cigarette packages (altered to remove all descriptive terms) and asked to link package images with their corresponding descriptive terms. Participants were then asked to identify which pack in the array they would choose if they were concerned with health, tar, nicotine, image, and taste. Results: A total of 193 participants completed the survey from February to March 2008 (data were analyzed from May 2008 through November 2010). Participants were more accurate in matching descriptors to pack images for Marlboro brand cigarettes than for unfamiliar Peter Jackson brand (sold in Australia). Smokers overwhelmingly chose the “whitest” pack if they were concerned about health, tar, and nicotine. Conclusions: Smokers in the U.S. associate brand descriptors with colors. Further, white packaging appears to most influence perceptions of safety. Removal of descriptor terms but not the associated colors will be insufficient in eliminating misperceptions about the risks from smoking communicated to smokers through packaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 2006, banning smoking in cars with children has become a rapidly growing tobacco control policy. However, to date, there have been few studies examining support and correlates of support for car smoking bans, and none of the existing studies have been international in nature. We conducted such a study among smokers in four countries. Methods: 6716 adult current smokers from the 2007 Wave of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey, a nationally representative, longitudinal cohort telephone survey of smokers in the USA, Canada, UK and Australia. Controlling for demographics, heaviness of smoking, smoking health knowledge/beliefs and quit intentions, we compared support and correlates of support for banning smoking in cars with children across the four countries. Results: The majority of smokers supported banning smoking in cars with children. Support was highest in Australia (83%), followed by the UK (75%) and Canada (74%); support was lower—but still high—in the USA (60%). Support was highest among smokers who: had stronger quit intentions, were lighter smokers, had lower education, had no children in the home, believed that cigarette smoke is dangerous to non-smokers and could cause asthma in children, and were concerned about modelling smoking to children. Conclusions: These findings indicate that a majority of smokers in the four countries support banning smoking in cars with children, and lend support to banning smoking in cars with children. Additionally, they suggest that support may be increased by educating smokers about the dangers of cigarette smoke exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It has been suggested that cigarette smokers will switch to alternative oral nicotine delivery products to reduce their health risks if informed of the relative risk difference. However, it is important to assess how smokers are likely to use cigarette alternatives before making predictions about their potential to promote individual or population harm reduction. Objectives: This study examines smokers' interest in using a smokeless tobacco or a nicotine replacement product as a substitute for their cigarettes. Methods: The study included 67 adult cigarette smokers, not currently interested in quitting, who were given an opportunity to sample four alternative oral nicotine products: 1) Camel Snus, 2) Marlboro Snus, 3) Stonewall dissolvable tobacco tablets, and 4) Commit nicotine lozenges. At visit 1, subjects were presented information about the relative benefits/risks of oral nicotine delivery compared to cigarettes. At visit 2, subjects were given a supply of each of the four products to sample at home for a week. At visit 3, subjects received a one-week supply of their preferred product to see if using such products reduced or eliminated cigarette use. Results: After multiple product sampling, participants preferred the Commit lozenges over the three smokeless tobacco products (p = 0.011). Following the one week single-product trial experience, GEE models controlling for gender, age, level of education, baseline cigarettes use, and alternative product chosen, indicated a significant decline in cigarettes smoked per day across one week of single-product sampling (p < 0.01, from 11.8 to 8.7 cigarettes per day), but no change in alternative product use (approximately 4.5 units per day). Biomarkers of exposure showed no change in cotinine, but a 19% reduction in exhaled CO (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Findings from this study show that smokers, who are currently unwilling to make a quit attempt, may be willing to use alternative products in the short term as a temporary substitute for smoking. However, this use is more likely to be for partial substitution (i.e. they will continue to smoke, albeit at a lower rate) rather than complete substitution. Of the various substitutes offered, smokers were more willing to use a nicotine replacement product over a tobacco-based product. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has become increasingly prevalent among US youth and young adults in recent years. Exposure to e-cigarette marketing may stimulate e-cigarette use. In this study, we estimated the longitudinal association between e-cigarette marketing exposure and e-cigarette experimentation among US youth and young adult never tobacco users. METHODS: The analysis included nationally representative samples of youth (ages 12-17; n = 8121) and young adult (ages 18-24; n = 1683) never tobacco users from wave 2 (2014-2015) and wave 3 (2015-2016) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. In the study, researchers measured past-month exposure to e-cigarette marketing through various places (eg, Web sites and events) at wave 2 and e-cigarette experimentation at wave 3. Statistical analysis included multivariable regressions to examine the associations between wave 2 e-cigarette marketing exposure and wave 3 e-cigarette experimentation. RESULTS: At wave 2, 70.7% of youth and 73.9% of young adult never tobacco users reported past-month exposure to e-cigarette marketing; at wave 3, 4.9% and 4.5% of youth and young adults experimented with e-cigarettes, respectively. Youth and young adults exposed to e-cigarette marketing at wave 2 were more likely (adjusted odds ratio = 1.53, 95% confidence interval = 1.07-2.17; and adjusted odds ratio = 2.73, 95% confidence interval = 1.16-6.42, respectively) to have experimented with e-cigarettes at wave 3 than those not exposed. Marketing exposure through each place at wave 2 was associated with e-cigarette experimentation at wave 3. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette marketing exposure predicted subsequent e-cigarette experimentation among youth and young adult never tobacco users. Increased restrictions on marketing through various channels may help minimize their exposure to e-cigarette marketing messages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study is the first nationally representative survey of U.S. adults (18+) to examine perceptions of the relative harms of eight non-cigarette tobacco products.Methods: Data are from Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study Adult Questionnaire, a nationally representative study of 32,320 adults in the United States conducted from September 2013 to December 2014.Results: 40.7% of adults believed that electronic cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes, and 17.8% of adults believed that hookah was less harmful than cigarettes. Those less knowledgeable about the health risks of smoking were more likely to believe that the non-cigarette products were less harmful than cigarettes. Current non-cigarette tobacco product users were more likely to perceive that product to be less harmful than cigarettes (except filtered cigars). There was a significant positive correlation between beliefs that cigarettes were harmful and the likelihood of using hookah; perceptions of the harmfulness of cigarettes was not associated with the likelihood of using any other product.Conclusions: Perceptions of harmfulness varied widely across non-cigarette tobacco products. E-cigarettes and hookah in particular are seen as less harmful compared to cigarettes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cigarette pack health warning labels can elicit negative emotions among smokers, yet little is known about how these negative emotions influence behavior change. Objective Guided by psychological theories emphasizing the role of emotions on risk concern and behavior change, we investigated whether smokers who reported stronger negative emotional responses when viewing warnings reported stronger responses to warnings in daily life and were more likely to try to quit at follow-up. Methods We analyzed data from 5439 adult smokers from Australia, Canada, Mexico, and the US, who were surveyed every four months from September 2012 to September 2014. Participants were shown warnings already implemented on packs in their country and reported negative emotional responses (i.e., fear, disgust, worry), which were averaged (range = 1 to 9). Country-stratified logistic and linear generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the effect of negative emotional responses on self-reported responses to warnings in daily life (i.e., attention, risk concern, avoidance of warnings, forgoing planned cigarettes) and quit attempts at follow-up. Models were adjusted for socio-demographic and smoking-related characteristics, survey wave, and the number of prior surveys answered. Results Smokers who reported stronger negative emotions were more likely to make quit attempts at follow-up (Adjusted OR s ranged from 1.09 [95% CI 1.04 to 1.14] to 1.17 [95% CI 1.12 to 1.23]; p < .001) than those who reported lower negative emotions. This relationship was mediated through attention to warnings and behavioral responses to warnings. There was no significant interaction of negative emotions with self-efficacy or nicotine dependence. Conclusion Negative emotions elicited by warnings encourage behavior change, promoting attention to warnings and behavioral responses that positively predict quit attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine: (1) How perceptions of harm for seven non-cigarette tobacco products predict subsequent use; (2) How change in use is associated with changes in perceptions of product harm; (3) Whether sociodemographic variables moderate the association between perceptions and use.Methods: Data are from the adult sample (18+) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative longitudinal cohort survey conducted September 2013-December 2014 (Wave 1 (W1) n = 32,320) and October 2014-October 2015 (Wave 2 (W2) n = 28,362).Results: Wave 1 users and non-users of e-cigarettes, filtered cigars, cigarillos, and pipes, who perceived these products as less harmful had greater odds of using the product at W2. For the other products, there was an interaction between W1 perceived harm and W1 use status in predicting W2 product use. At W2, a smaller percentage of U.S. adults rated e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes compared to W1 (41.2% W1, 29.0% W2). Believing non-cigarette products to be less harmful than cigarettes was more strongly associated with subsequent product use in the oldest age group (55+ years) while weaker effects were observed in the youngest age group (18-24 years). This moderating effect of age was significant for e-cigarettes, hookah, traditional cigars, and cigarillos.Conclusions: Strategies to prevent initiation and promote cessation of these products may benefit from understanding and addressing perceptions of these products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Tobacco harm perceptions are associated with tobacco use for both youth and adults, but it is unknown how these harm perceptions have changed over time in a changing tobacco product landscape., Methods: Data from Waves 1-5 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study were analyzed to examine perceptions of harm of eight non-cigarette tobacco products compared to cigarettes. Perceptions of harm were assessed with the questions, "Is smoking/using [product] less harmful, about the same, or more harmful than smoking cigarettes?"., Results: The share of participants who perceived non-cigarette combustible products as posing similar harm to cigarettes increased over time, while the share of participants who perceived non-combustible products as less harmful than cigarettes decreased over time., Conclusions: Tobacco harm perceptions are changing over time, along with the tobacco product marketplace and regulatory environment., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: IQOS was authorized to be marketed as a reduced exposure product by the Food and Drug Administration in October 2020 during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Those who smoke may be more sensitive to reduced exposure marketing claims and may have an increased inclination toward IQOS use. We evaluated the likelihood of trying and purchasing IQOS as a function of exposure to ads, product appeal, and COVID-19 risk perceptions using the original IQOS ads with reduced exposure marketing., Method: An online cross-sectional survey recruited 604 US adults (18-45 years), both who smoke and do not smoke. Participants saw one of the six randomly assigned IQOS ads with or without reduced exposure claims, and they answered questions about product appeal and likelihood to try and purchase IQOS. Generalized linear models were used to examine associations., Results: A per unit increase in product appeal was associated with a greater likelihood of purchasing (B = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.15-0.18) and trying IQOS (B = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.14-0.18). Current smokers and former e-cigarette users reported greater intentions to try IQOS than never-smokers and never e-cigarette users, respectively. Likelihood to purchase IQOS was associated with greater confidence in not contracting COVID-19 (B = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.21). No significant differences were observed between different ad conditions. Current (B = -0.34, 95% CI = -0.50-(-0.19)) and former (B = -0.92, 95% CI = -0.15-(-0.68)) cigarette smokers who were someday e-cigarette users reported less intentions to purchase IQOS than never e-cigarette users. However, never smokers who were someday (B = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.27-0.89; B = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.39-0.98) and former e-cigarette (B = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15-0.61) users reported greater intentions to purchase and try IQOS, respectively., Discussion: IQOS may have a higher product appeal, especially for those who currently smoke and those who have lower risk perceptions from COVID-19. Among never smokers, those who currently use or have used e-cigarettes in the past may be more receptive to IQOS marketing. The data are informative for potential trends in the use of IQOS in the future and may have implications for marketing regulations of heated tobacco products (HTPs)., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Sharma, Fix, Hyland, Bansal-Travers, Quisenberry and O’Connor.)

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., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Background: Tobacco price promotions may prompt tobacco trials among youth. We assessed whether receiving price promotions for any tobacco, cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars was associated with product use progression., Methods: The analysis included a nationally representative sample of youth never tobacco users (aged 12-16; n=9405) from wave 4 (2016-2018) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. We assessed past-year receipt of price promotions and use progression (initiation, current use and ever regular use) for any tobacco, cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars 1 year later at wave 4.5 (2017-2018). Multivariable logistic regressions were used to examine the associations between receiving price promotions and use progression by product type, controlling for covariates., Results: At wave 4.5, 9.4% of youth initiated any tobacco (1.8%, 7.8% and 0.9% for cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars), and 5.4% received any price promotions (3.8%, 3.1% and 0.9% for cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars). Receiving any tobacco price promotions was associated with any tobacco initiation (adjusted OR (AOR)=1.77; 95% CI 1.30 to 2.41), current use (AOR=1.54; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.23) and ever regular use (AOR=1.76; 95% CI 1.04 to 3.10). Receiving e-cigarette price promotions was associated with e-cigarette initiation (AOR=1.78; 95% CI 1.18 to 2.26), current use (AOR=1.88; 95% CI 1.17 to 3.02) and ever regular use (AOR=2.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 4.40). The associations specific to cigarettes and cigars were only found for product initiation., Discussion: Receiving price promotions for any tobacco and e-cigarettes was respectively associated with the use progression of any tobacco and e-cigarettes. Continuous monitoring of tobacco marketing activities is needed to identify youth-appealing price promotion tactics., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: This study aims to investigate electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use behaviour changes after the implementation of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restriction on the sale of all unauthorised flavoured cartridge-based e-cigarettes other than tobacco and menthol flavour on 6 February 2020, as well as factors associated with these changes., Methods: Through Amazon's Mechanical Turk service, 3533 current adult flavoured e-cigarette users (who were not exclusive tobacco-flavoured or menthol-flavoured e-cigarette users) were recruited for an online survey from 8 July to 29 July 2021. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify significant factors associated with quitting e-cigarette use, switching to other flavoured electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products, switching to combustible tobacco products, switching to menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes and switching to tobacco-flavoured e-cigarettes., Results: Resulting from the FDA flavour enforcement policy, the top four e-cigarette use behaviour changes were: (1) switching to other flavoured ENDS products such as the tank system or disposable e-cigarettes (29.24%), (2) switching to menthol-flavoured pod systems (18.09%), (3) switching to combustible tobacco products (14.12%) and (4) switching to tobacco-flavoured pod systems (12.03%). There were 4.9% participants who indicated that they quit e-cigarette use. Overall, multiple factors, especially past 30-day use of certain flavours, were associated with different behaviour changes., Conclusions: The implementation of the FDA flavour enforcement policy on cartridge-based e-cigarette was associated with significant e-cigarette behaviour changes, with multiple factors being associated with these changes. These results provide important information for future regulations of flavoured e-cigarette products., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No, there are no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)