Search

Association of tobacco product use with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) prevalence and incidence in Waves 1 through 5 (2013-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. We used the longitudinal data to examine symptom worsening and symptom improvement. In our study, we analyzed cross-sectional and prospective Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study data from 2014 to 2016 in adults and concluded, "Past and current cigarette smoking drove functionally important respiratory symptoms, while exclusive use of other tobacco products was largely not associated. [Extracted from the article]

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]

Introduction: "Dual use" refers to the concurrent use of tobacco cigarettes (smoking) and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes; vaping). Although dual use is common among e-cigarette users, there is little evidence regarding biomarkers of exposure among dual users and how these change under different conditions of product use.Methods: A nonblinded within-subjects crossover experiment was conducted with adult daily dual users (n = 48) in Ontario, Canada. Participants completed three consecutive 7-day periods in which the use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes was experimentally manipulated, resulting in four study conditions: Dual use, Tobacco cigarette use, E-cigarette use, and No product use. Repeated measures models were used to examine changes in product use and biomarkers of exposure.Results: Compared to dual use, cotinine remained stable when participants exclusively smoked (p = .524), but significantly decreased when they exclusively vaped (p = .027), despite significant increases in e-cigarette consumption (p = .001). Levels of biomarkers of exposure to toxicants, including carbon monoxide (CO), 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HOP), and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), were significantly lower when participants exclusively vaped than when they engaged in dual use (CO = -41%, p < .001; 1-HOP = -31%, p = .025; NNAL = -30%, p = .017). Similar findings were observed among participants abstaining from both products as compared to dual use (CO: -26%, p < .001; 1-HOP = -14% [ns]; NNAL = -35%, p = .016). In contrast, levels of biomarkers of exposure increased when participants exclusively smoked as compared to dual use (CO = +21%, p = .029; 1-HOP = +23%, p = .048; NNAL = +8% [ns]).Conclusions: Although dual use may reduce exposure to tobacco smoke constituents to some extent, abstaining from smoking is the most effective way to reduce such exposure.Implications: Public health authorities should clearly communicate the relative risk of e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes to the general public, focusing on two salient points: (1) e-cigarettes are not harmless, but they are less harmful than tobacco cigarettes; and (2) using e-cigarettes while smoking may not necessarily reduce health risks; therefore, consumers should stop smoking completely to maximize potential health benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims Vaporized nicotine products (VNPs) can vary in important characteristics including size, shape, flavor and nicotine yield. We examined whether complex interactions among these characteristics could affect smokers' VNP perceptions and usage patterns. Design A within‐subject randomized cross‐over trial. Setting Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA. Participants Eighteen daily cigarette smokers. Measurements Participants attended eight weekly visits during which they sampled six different VNPs (disposable, rechargeable, eGO, mod, e‐Cigar and e‐Pipe) with tobacco‐flavored e‐liquid. Prior to device use, participants completed product‐ranking questionnaires. Participants completed controlled puffing sessions during each of the six trials, after which satisfaction questionnaires were completed and blood samples were taken. Findings Initial perceptions showed that the smallest device (disposable) was ranked as safer compared with a larger device (e‐Pipe) (P < 0.05). Participants rated the eGO and mod devices higher on satisfaction and enjoyment from use, taste, pleasantness, harshness ('throat hit') and speed of effect, but lower on perceived health risk and embarrassment from use (P < 0.05). All devices had a lower Cmax than the combustible cigarette (P < 0.05), but there were differences among devices (P < 0.05). The mod, e‐Pipe and eGO provided the highest amount of perceived smoking urge relief, and this correlated strongly with Cmax across all devices (R2 = 0.8614, P = 0.007). The perceived speed of urge relief was not correlated with Tmax (R2 = 0.0035, P = 0.911) Conclusions: Daily cigarette smokers testing six types of vaporized nicotine products (VNPs) reported that they varied in taste, amount of withdrawal relief, harshness, embarrassment from use, perceived health risk and subjective and objective nicotine delivery. The eGO and mod models have properties that may make them most effective for cigarette substitution among smokers who intend to switch to a VNP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are purported to deliver nicotine aerosol without any toxic combustion products present in tobacco smoke. In this longitudinal within-subjects observational study, we evaluated the effects of e-cigarettes on nicotine delivery and exposure to selected carcinogens and toxicants.Methods: We measured seven nicotine metabolites and 17 tobacco smoke exposure biomarkers in the urine samples of 20 smokers collected before and after switching to pen-style M201 e-cigarettes for 2 weeks. Biomarkers were metabolites of 13 major carcinogens and toxicants in cigarette smoke: one tobacco-specific nitrosamine (NNK), eight volatile organic compounds (1,3-butadiene, crotonaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, acrylamide, acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, and propylene oxide), and four polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (naphthalene, fluorene, phenanthrene, and pyrene). Changes in urine biomarkers concentration were tested using repeated measures analysis of variance.Results: In total, 45% of participants reported complete abstinence from cigarette smoking at 2 weeks, while 55% reported continued smoking. Levels of total nicotine and some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites did not change after switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes. All other biomarkers significantly decreased after 1 week of using e-cigarettes (p < .05). After 1 week, the greatest percentage reductions in biomarkers levels were observed for metabolites of 1,3-butadiene, benzene, and acrylonitrile. Total NNAL, a metabolite of NNK, declined by 57% and 64% after 1 and 2 weeks, respectively, while 3-hydroxyfluorene levels declined by 46% at week 1, and 34% at week 2.Conclusions: After switching from tobacco to e-cigarettes, nicotine exposure remains unchanged, while exposure to selected carcinogens and toxicants is substantially reduced.Implications: To our knowledge, this is the first study that demonstrates that substituting tobacco cigarettes with an e-cigarette may reduce user exposure to numerous toxicants and carcinogens otherwise present in tobacco cigarettes. Data on reduced exposure to harmful constituents that are present in tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes can aid in evaluating e-cigarettes as a potential harm reduction device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Differences in carcinogen exposure from different cigarette products could contribute to differences in smoking-associated cancer incidence among Chinese compared with US smokers. Methods Urine concentrations of metabolites of nicotine, the tobacco-specific nitrosamine (TSNA) 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites (PAHs) were compared in 238 Chinese and 203 US daily smokers. Results Comparing Chinese versus US smokers, daily nicotine intake and nicotine intake per cigarette smoked were found to be similar. When normalised for cigarettes per day, urine NNAL excretion was fourfold higher in US smokers, while the excretion of urine metabolites of the PAHs fluorene, phenanthrene and pyrene metabolites was 50% to fourfold higher in Chinese smokers (all, p<0.0001). Similar results were seen when NNAL and PAHs excretion was normalised for daily nicotine intake. Conclusions Patterns of carcinogen exposure differ, with lower exposure to TSNA and higher exposure to PAHs in Chinese compared with US smokers. These results most likely reflect country differences in cigarette tobacco blends and manufacturing processes, as well as different environmental exposures. Trial registration number NCT00264342. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Electronic cigarettes (EC) have the potential to generate a substantial public health benefit if there is a switch from smoking to EC use on a population scale. The nicotine delivery from EC is likely to play a major role in their attractiveness to smokers. We assessed nicotine delivery from a first-generation EC and the effect of experience with its use on nicotine intake. Methods: Six smokers provided pharmacokinetic (PK) data after their first use of EC and again following 4 weeks of use. Results: The peak nicotine levels were achieved within 5min of starting the EC use, which suggests that EC may provide nicotine via pulmonary absorption. There were large individual differences in nicotine intake. Compared with the PK profile when using EC for the first time, 4 weeks of practice generated a 24% increase in the peak plasma concentrations (from 4.6 to 5.7ng/ml; nonsignificant) and a 79% increase in overall nicotine intake (AUC0→inf increased from 115 to 206 ng*min/ml; p < .05). Conclusions: First-generation EC provide faster nicotine absorption than nicotine replacement products, but to compete successfully with conventional cigarettes, EC may need to provide higher doses of nicotine. Nicotine intake from EC can increase with practice, but further studies are needed to confirm this effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) represent an emerging public health issue. These devices deliver nicotine along with other constituents, including flavorants, via an inhalable aerosol. Their uptake is rapidly increasing in both adults and youths, primarily among current smokers. Public debate is increasing on how these devices should be regulated and used, yet only limited peer-reviewed research exists. To develop a informed policy for e-cigarettes, their effects on human behavior, physiology, and health need to be understood. Purpose: This paper describes proceedings from a National Institutes of Health–sponsored workshop, which was held in November 2013, to identify research needs related to the effects of e-cigarettes. Discussion topics included e-cigarette risks and abuse potential; the potential role for e-cigarettes in harm reduction and smoking cessation; unintended consequences of e-cigarette use, such as becoming a gateway to conventional cigarettes; and dual use of both e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes. Results and Conclusions: The research needs identified by the workshop participants included the following: standards to measure the contents and emissions of e-cigarettes; biomarkers of exposure; physiological effects of e-cigarettes on tissues and organ systems, including pulmonary and cardiovascular; information on e-cigarette users, how the devices are used, and identification of the best tools to assess these measures; factors that drive use and influence patterns of use; and appropriate methods for evaluating a potential role for e-cigarettes in smoking or nicotine cessation. To understand fully the challenges and the opportunities that e-cigarettes represent, expertise will be needed in basic, behavioral, translational, and clinical sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite increased e-cigarette use, limited research has focused on changes in e-cigarette and combustible cigarette use around pregnancy and the subsequent effects on infant health.Objective: This study aimed to characterize changes in e-cigarette and cigarette use from before to during pregnancy and examine their associations with small-for-gestational-age birth.Study Design: This was a secondary data analysis of 2016-2018 data of the US Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. We analyzed women aged ≥18 years who had a recent live birth (unweighted: n=105,438; weighted: n=5,446,900). Women were grouped on the basis of their self-reported e-cigarette and/or cigarette use 3 months before pregnancy (exclusive e-cigarette users, exclusive cigarette smokers, dual users, and nonusers) and change in e-cigarette and cigarette use during pregnancy (continuing use, quitting, switching, and initiating use). Small-for-gestational-age was defined as a birthweight below the 10th percentile for infants of the same sex and gestational age. We described the distributions of women's sociodemographic and pregnancy characteristics in both weighted and unweighted samples. We used multivariable log-binomial regression models to estimate the relative risks for the associations between changes in e-cigarette and cigarette use during pregnancy and risk of small-for-gestational-age, adjusting for significant covariates.Results: The rates of cessation during pregnancy were the highest among exclusive e-cigarette users (weighted percentage, 80.7% [49,378/61,173]), followed by exclusive cigarette users (54.4% [421,094/773,586]) and dual users (46.4% [69,136/149,152]). Among exclusive e-cigarette users, continued users of e-cigarettes during pregnancy had a higher risk of small-for-gestational-age than nonusers (16.5% [1849/11,206]) vs 8.8% [384,338/4,371,664]; confounder-adjusted relative risk, 1.52 [95% confidence interval, 1.45-1.60]), whereas quitters of e-cigarettes had a similar risk of small-for-gestational-age with nonusers (7.7% [3730/48,587] vs 8.8% [384,338/4,371,664]; relative risk, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.87]). Among exclusive cigarette users, those who completely switched to e-cigarettes during pregnancy also had a similar risk of small-for-gestational-age with nonusers (7.6% [259/3412] vs 8.8% [384,338/4,371,664]; relative risk, 0.83 [95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.93]). Among dual users before pregnancy, the risk of small-for-gestational-age decreased from 23.2% (7240/31,208) (relative risk, 2.53 [95% confidence interval, 2.47-2.58]) if continuing use to 16.9% (6617/39,142) (relative risk, 1.88 [95% confidence interval, 1.83-1.92]) if only quitting e-cigarettes or 15.1% (1254/8289) (relative risk, 1.61 [95% confidence interval, 1.52-1.70]) if only quitting cigarettes and further to 11.2% (7589/67,880) (relative risk, 1.23 [95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.25]) if both quitting e-cigarettes and cigarettes during pregnancy, compared with nonusers.Conclusion: Among exclusive e-cigarette users, quitting e-cigarettes during pregnancy normalized the risk of small-for-gestational-age. Among exclusive cigarette users, quitting smoking or completely switching to e-cigarettes normalized small for gestational age risk. Among dual users, smoking cessation has a greater effect than quitting e-cigarettes only, although discontinuing the use of both may lead to the greatest reduction in the risk of small-for-gestational-age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]