Search

Most population studies that evaluate the relationship between nicotine vaping and cigarette cessation focus on limited segments of the smoker population. We evaluated vaping uptake and smoking cessation considering differences in smokers' plans to quit.Longitudinal International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys were conducted in 2016, 2018 and 2020.This study was conducted in the United States, Canada, England and Australia.Participants of this study were adult daily cigarette smokers who had not vaped in the past 6 months at baseline and had participated in two or more consecutive waves of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (n = 2815).Plans to quit cigarette smoking was assessed at baseline (within 6 months, beyond 6 months, not planning to quit) and at follow-up (within 6 months vs not within 6 months), cigarette smoking cessation was assessed at follow-up (smoking less than monthly [including complete cessation] vs daily/weekly/monthly smoking) and inter-wave vaping uptake was assesed between baseline and follow-up (none, only non-daily vaping and any daily vaping). Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate whether inter-wave vaping uptake was associated with smoking cessation at follow-up and with planning to quit at follow-up, each stratified by plans to quit smoking at baseline.Overall, 12.7% of smokers quit smoking. Smokers not initially planning to quit within 6 months experienced higher odds of smoking cessation when they took up daily vaping (32.4%) versus no vaping (6.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 8.58; 95% CI, 5.06-14.54). Among smokers planning to quit, smoking cessation rates were similar between those who did and did not take up daily vaping (25.1% vs 16.8%; AOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.91-4.00), although we could not account for potential use of cessation aids. Daily vaping uptake was associated with planning to quit smoking at follow-up among those initially not planning to quit (AOR,6.32; 95% CI, 4.17-9.59).Uptake of nicotine vaping appears to be strongly associated with cigarette smoking cessation among smokers with no initial plans to quit smoking. Excluding smokers not planning to quit from studies on vaping and smoking cessation may underestimate potential benefit of daily vaping for daily smokers.

Introduction This study examined trajectories of tobacco dependence (TD) in relation to changes in tobacco product use and explored the effects of product-specific adding, switching, or discontinued use on dependence over time. Aims and Methods Data were analyzed from the first three waves of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative, longitudinal study of adults and youth in the United States. Data included 9556 Wave 1 (2013/2014) adult current established tobacco users who completed all three interviews and had established use at ≥2 assessments. Groups included cigarettes-only users, e-cigarettes-only users, cigars-only users, hookah-only users, any smokeless-only users, cigarette + e-cigarette dual users, and multiple product users. A validated 16-item scale assessed TD across product users. Results Wave 1 e-cigarette-only users’ who maintained exclusive e-cigarette use increased levels of TD through Wave 3 as did those who added or switched to another product. Wave 1 multiple product users’ TD decreased across waves. TD for all other Wave 1 user groups remained about the same. For Wave 1 cigarette-only smokers, switching to another product or moving to a pattern of no established use was associated with lower levels of TD than smokers whose use stayed the same. Movement to no established use of any tobacco product was consistently associated with lower TD for all other product users. Conclusions Except for Wave 1 e-cigarette-only users, TD among US tobacco product users was stable over time, with daily users less likely to vary from baseline. Implications The level of TD among most US tobacco users was stable over the first three waves of the PATH Study and trends in levels of TD were predominantly unrelated to changes in patterns of continued product use. Stable levels of TD suggest a population at persistent risk of health impacts from tobacco. Wave 1 e-cigarette users, including those maintaining exclusive e-cigarette use, experienced increasing levels of TD over time, perhaps because of increases in quantity or frequency of their e-cigarette product use or increasing efficiency of nicotine delivery over time.

Background Prior work established a measure of tobacco dependence (TD) among adults that can be used to compare TD across different tobacco products. We extend this approach to develop a common, cross-product metric for TD among youth. Methods 1,148 youth ages 12 to 17 who used a tobacco product in the past 30-days who were identified from 13,651 youth respondents in Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. Findings Analyses confirmed a single primary latent construct underlying responses to TD indicators for all mutually exclusive tobacco product user groups. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analyses supported use of 8 of 10 TD indicators for comparisons across groups. With TD levels anchored at 0.0 (standard deviation (SD)=1.0) among cigarette only (n=265) use group, mean TD scores were more than a full SD lower for e-cigarette only (n=150) use group (mean=-1.09; SD=0.64). Other single product use group (cigar, hookah, pipe, or smokeless; n=262) on average had lower TD (mean=-0.60; SD= 0.84), and the group with use of multiple tobacco products (n=471) experienced similar levels of TD (mean=0.14; SD= 0.78) as the cigarette only use group. Concurrent validity was established with product use frequency among all user groups. A subset of 5 TD items comprised a common metric permitting comparisons between youth and adults. Conclusion The PATH Study Youth Wave 1 Interview provided psychometrically valid measures of TD that enables future regulatory investigations of TD across tobacco products and comparisons between youth and adult tobacco product use group. Implications A measure of tobacco dependence (TD) has been established previously among adults to compare TD across tobacco products. This study established the validity of a similar, cross-product measure of TD among youth. Findings suggest a single latent TD construct underlying this measure, concurrent validity of the scale with product use frequency across different types of tobacco users, and a subset of common items that can be used to compare TD between youth and adults who use tobacco.

Background The 2020 European Union (EU) menthol cigarette ban increased quitting among pre-ban menthol smokers in the Netherlands, but some reported continuing to smoke menthol cigarettes. This study examined three possible explanations for post-ban menthol use—(i) illicit purchasing, (ii) use of flavour accessories and (iii) use of non-menthol replacement brands marketed for menthol smokers. Methods Data were from the ITC Netherlands Cohort Surveys among adult smokers before the menthol ban (Wave 1: February–March 2020, N = 2067) and after the ban (Wave 2: September–November 2020, N = 1752; Wave 3: June–July 2021, N = 1721). Bivariate, logistic regression and generalized estimating equation model analyses were conducted on weighted data. Results Illicit purchasing remained low from pre-ban (2.4%, 95% CI: 1.8–3.2, Wave 1) to post-ban (1.7%, 1.2–2.5%, Wave 3), with no difference between menthol and non-menthol smokers from Wave 1 to Wave 3. About 4.4% of post-ban menthol smokers last purchased their usual brand outside of the EU and 3.6% from the internet; 42.5% of post-ban menthol smokers and 4.4% of smokers overall reported using flavour accessories, with greater odds among those aged 25–39 years vs. 55+ (aOR = 3.16, P = 0.002). Approximately 70% of post-ban smokers who reported using a menthol brand were actually using a non-menthol replacement brand. Conclusions There was no increase in illicit purchasing or of smuggling outside the EU among menthol and non-menthol smokers in the Netherlands 1 year after the EU menthol cigarette ban. Use of flavour accessories and non-menthol replacement brands best explain post-ban menthol use, suggesting the need to ban accessories and ensure industry compliance.

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.

Co-occurring use (co-use) of nicotine and cannabis is common, and represents a broad range of use behaviors, includingWe conducted an online pilot survey on use behaviors related to inhaled modes of nicotine and cannabis. The survey was administered to 112 concurrent vapers of these substances. Descriptive analyses examined sample characteristics and co-administered vaping and smoking behaviors. Logistic regressions examined associations in use behaviors by mode and substance.Participants who vaped nicotine and cannabis monthly also reported monthly smoking of cannabis (100%), and cigarettes (58%). Most exhibited moderate-to-high degrees of mental health and substance use problems requiring clinical intervention. MonthlyThose who regularly vape nicotine and cannabis tend to engage in some form of smoking. Different subsets of nicotine and cannabis co-use behaviors showed different associations with patterns of use and modes of drug delivery. Findings underscore the diversity of nicotine and cannabis use behaviors among co-users, and the importance of considering associations by both substance and mode of use.

Introduction The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study is a longitudinal cohort study on tobacco use behavior, attitudes and beliefs, and tobacco-related health outcomes, including biomarkers of tobacco exposure in the U.S. population. In this report we provide a summary of urinary nicotine metabolite measurements among adult users and non-users of tobacco from Wave 1 (2013–2014) of the PATH Study. Methods Total nicotine and its metabolites including cotinine, trans-3′-hydroxycotinine (HCTT), and other minor metabolites were measured in more than 11 500 adult participants by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry methods. Weighted geometric means (GM) and least square means from statistical modeling were calculated for non-users and users of various tobacco products. Results Among daily users, the highest GM concentrations of nicotine, cotinine and HCTT were found in exclusive smokeless tobacco users, and the lowest in exclusive e-cigarette users. Exclusive combustible product users had intermediate concentrations, similar to those found in users of multiple products (polyusers). Concentrations increased with age within the categories of tobacco users, and differences associated with gender, race/ethnicity and educational attainment were also noted among user categories. Recent (past 12 months) former users had GM cotinine concentrations that were more than threefold greater than never users. Conclusions These urinary nicotine metabolite data provide quantification of nicotine exposure representative of the entire US adult population during 2013–2014 and may serve as a reference for similar analyses in future measurements within this study. Implications Nicotine and its metabolites in urine provide perhaps the most fundamental biomarkers of recent nicotine exposure. This report, based on Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, provides the first nationally representative data describing urinary nicotine biomarker concentrations in both non-users, and users of a variety of tobacco products including combustible, e-cigarette and smokeless products. These data provide a urinary biomarker concentration snapshot in time for the entire US population during 2013–2014, and will provide a basis for comparison with future results from continuing, periodic evaluations in the PATH Study.

Introduction The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study is a nationally representative cohort of tobacco product users and nonusers. The study’s main purpose is to obtain longitudinal epidemiologic data on tobacco use and exposure among the US population. Aims and Methods Nicotine biomarkers—cotinine (COT) and trans-3′-hydroxycotinine (HCT)—were measured in blood samples collected from adult daily tobacco users and nonusers during Wave 1 of the PATH Study (2013–2014; n = 5012; one sample per participant). Participants’ tobacco product use and exposure to secondhand smoke were categorized based on questionnaire responses. Nonusers were subdivided into never users and recent former users. Daily tobacco users were classified into seven tobacco product use categories: exclusive users of cigarette, smokeless tobacco, electronic cigarette, cigar, pipe, and hookah, as well as polyusers. We calculated sample-weighted geometric mean (GM) concentrations of cotinine, HCT, and the nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR) and evaluated their associations with tobacco use with adjustment for potential confounders. Results The GMs (95% confidence intervals) of COT and HCT concentrations for daily tobacco users were 196 (184 to 208) and 72.5 (67.8 to 77.4) ng/mL, and for nonusers they were 0.033 (0.028 to 0.037) and 0.021 (0.018 to 0.023) ng/mL. Exclusive smokeless tobacco users had the highest COT concentrations of all user groups examined. The GM NMR in daily users was 0.339 (95% confidence interval: 0.330 to 0.350). Conclusions These nationally representative estimates of serum nicotine biomarkers could be the basis for reference ranges characterizing nicotine exposure for daily tobacco users and nonusers in the US adult population. Implications This report summarizes the serum nicotine biomarker measurements in Wave 1 of the PATH Study. We are reporting the first estimates of HCT in serum for daily tobacco users and nonusers in the noninstitutionalized, civilian US adult population; the first nationally representative serum COT estimates for daily exclusive users of different tobacco products and daily polyusers; and the first nationally representative estimate of the serum NMR in daily tobacco users by age, race/ethnicity, and sex.

Introduction Heated tobacco products (HTP) have diversified global tobacco markets, and user characteristics remain understudied. This study evaluated sociodemographic characteristics, nicotine-related perceptions, and behaviors of current HTP users within a sample of adult (18+ years) nicotine users across four countries. Aims and Methods Data were from current smokers or nicotine vaping product (NVP; known as “e-cigarettes”) users from Canada, England, the United States, and Australia (n = 11 421) who participated in the 2018 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Current (at-least-monthly) HTP users were characterized (n = 441), and weighted multivariable logistic regressions examined correlates of HTP use. Results Compared to nonusers, current HTP users were younger (mean age: 44.4 vs 31.0 years; p < .001) and had higher socioeconomic status (p < .001). A majority of current HTP users used HTPs nondaily (daily: 40.3% vs nondaily: 59.7%). Most HTP users concurrently used both cigarettes and NVPs (90.5%). Among concurrent cigarette-HTP-NVP users, 36.2% used all three products daily. Use of other combusted tobacco products (cigars, cigarillos, pipe, waterpipe/hookah), cannabis, and binge drinking were each associated with current HTP use. HTP use was more common among smokers intending to quit within 6 months or reporting a quit attempt in the past 18 months, and vapers who had experienced negative side effects. Conclusion HTP users in this sample tended to be younger and more affluent. Most reported concurrent use of multiple nicotine products and other substances. Those cigarette smokers who used HTPs appeared more interested in smoking cessation, while some characteristics of concurrent HTP-NVP users were suggestive of dissatisfaction with NVPs. Implications Few studies have scrutinized characteristics of HTP early adopters in emerging markets. Our results indicate that in 2018, characteristics of established nicotine users who adopted HTP use in four high-income Western countries mirror those of HTP users in East Asian markets (South Korea and Japan) where HTPs are popular. HTP users reported high levels of concurrent use of noncigarette-combusted tobacco products (e.g., cigars, pipe tobacco). These findings point to the need for future longitudinal studies of HTP use given the implications of those use patterns on the harm reduction potential of HTPs. HTP user characteristics may yield important information to consider in regulation of these products.

Introduction We examined the relationship between current tobacco use and functionally important respiratory symptoms. Methods Longitudinal cohort study of 16 295 US adults without COPD in Waves 2–3 (W2–3, 2014–2016) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Exposure—Ten mutually exclusive categories of tobacco use including single product, multiple product, former, and never use (reference). Outcome—Seven questions assessing wheezing/cough were summed to create a respiratory symptom index; cutoffs of ≥2 and ≥3 were associated with functional limitations and poorer health. Multivariable regressions examined both cutoffs cross-sectionally and change over approximately 12 months, adjusting for confounders. Results All tobacco use categories featuring cigarettes (>2/3’s of users) were associated with higher risk (vs. never users) for functionally important respiratory symptoms at W2, for example, at symptom severity ≥ 3, risk ratio for exclusive cigarette use was 2.34 [95% CI, 1.92, 2.85] and for worsening symptoms at W3 was 2.80 [2.08, 3.76]. There was largely no increased symptom risk for exclusive use of cigars, smokeless tobacco, hookah, or e-cigarettes (adjustment for pack-years and marijuana attenuated the cross-sectional e-cigarette association from 1.53(95% CI 0.98, 2.40) to 1.05 (0.67, 1.63); RRs for these products were also significantly lower compared to exclusive use of cigarettes. The longitudinal e-cigarette–respiratory symptom association was sensitive to the respiratory index cutoff level; exclusive e-cigarette use was associated with worsening symptoms at an index cutoff ≥ 2 (RR = 1.63 [1.02, 2.59]) and with symptom improvement at an index cutoff of ≥ 3 (RR = 1.64 [1.04, 2.58]). Conclusions Past and current cigarette smoking drove functionally important respiratory symptoms, while exclusive use of other tobacco products was largely not associated. However, the relationship between e-cigarette use and symptoms was sensitive to adjustment for pack-years and symptom severity. Implications How noncigarette tobacco products affect respiratory symptoms is not clear; some studies implicate e-cigarettes. We examined functionally important respiratory symptoms (wheezing/nighttime cough) among US adults without COPD. The majority of adult tobacco users smoke cigarettes and have higher risk of respiratory symptoms and worsening of symptoms, regardless of other products used with them. Exclusive use of other tobacco products (e-cigarettes, cigars, smokeless, hookah) was largely not associated with functionally important respiratory symptoms and risks associated with their use was significantly lower than for cigarettes. The association for e-cigarettes was greatly attenuated by adjustment for cigarette pack-years and sensitive to how symptoms were defined.

Background Understanding similarities, differences, and associations between reasons people vape nicotine and cannabis may be important for identifying underlying contributors to their co-use. Methods A cross-sectional survey of 112 co-users of vaped nicotine and cannabis was conducted in 2020. A convenience sample of participants was recruited for the survey using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants responded to questions about their reasons for individual nicotine and cannabis product use and co-use and rated their level of agreement using numerical scales. Mean ratings for each reason for use subscale were examined across all participants and compared using paired samples t tests. Associations between reasons for use ratings and product consumption behaviors were examined using linear and logistic regression analyses. Results Cannabis vaping and smoking exhibited similar mean ratings for user experience and product/substance-related reasons for use. Mean ratings for reasons related to product utility were similar for cannabis vaping and nicotine vaping. Mean ratings for utility-related reasons for use were higher for cannabis vaping than cannabis smoking (mean (SD), 3.6 (± 1.0) vs. 2.6 (± 1.2), p < 0.0001). On average, harm reduction-related reasons for use were rated higher for nicotine vaping than cannabis vaping (2.4 (± 1.6) vs. 1.8 (± 1.4), p < 0.0001). Regression models showed higher average ratings for utility-related (b = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.03-0.60) and harm reduction-related (b = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.04-0.37) reasons for nicotine vaping were associated with more frequent nicotine vaping (both p < 0.05). Higher average ratings for instrumentality-related reasons for co-use corresponded with more frequent monthly nicotine vaping (b = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.44) and higher odds of ever chasing cannabis with nicotine (aOR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.29-7.30). Conclusions Vaping serves purposes that differ by substance; nicotine vaping was more closely related to reducing tobacco smoking-related harms, and cannabis vaping was more closely related to circumventing social problems posed by cannabis smoking. Lifetime sequential co-use practices and more frequent nicotine vaping were associated with enhancing the intoxicating effects of cannabis. While replication of these findings using non convenience-based sampling approaches is warranted, results underscore the need to consider shared and unique aspects of nicotine and cannabis vaping, as well as cross-substance interactions between nicotine and cannabis.

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 (Ptrend = 0.03) and former smokers who do not currently use any tobacco (Ptrend = 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.

Background Cannabis use is more common among nicotine users than non-users. This study characterized concurrent use of nicotine and cannabis (“co-use”) among 12,064 youth aged 16–19 years residing in Canada, the United States, and England in 2017. Methods Data were from the ITC Youth Tobacco & Vaping Survey (Wave 1). Seven modes of cannabis delivery (MOD) were characterized by country of residence and past 30-day use of combusted tobacco and electronic cigarettes. Weighted multivariable regression models were fitted to assess the correlates of co-use and each cannabis MOD. Results Seventy percent of cannabis users reported nicotine use. Co-users exhibited behavioral and demographic differences compared to exclusive users of either substance. “Smoking cannabis without tobacco” was the most popular form of use (78%). Use of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes was associated with “using an e-cigarette to vape cannabis oil/liquid” (aOR: 4.96, 95%CI: 2.23–11.06). Combustible tobacco use was associated with “smoking cannabis with tobacco in a joint/blunt” (aOR: 2.93, 95%CI: 1.89–4.56). Country-level differences were detected. Conclusions Nicotine use is substantial among cannabis users, and associations exist between modes of delivery for both drugs. Results underscore the importance of studying cannabis and nicotine use concurrently, and the need to address the use of both substances in developing interventions for youth users.

Objectives Our study sought to further characterize patterns of medical cannabis use in elderly cancer patients. Furthermore, we sought to assess efficacy of medical cannabis for the treatment of pain, nausea, anorexia, insomnia and anxiety in elderly cancer patients. Background Medical cannabis use is growing for symptom management in cancer patients, but limited data exists on the safety or efficacy of use in elderly patients. Methods A retrospective chart review assessing changes in numerical symptom scores reported at clinic visits before and after medical cannabis initiation. Results There was no statistically significant difference in pain, nausea, appetite, insomnia or anxiety scores reported before and after initiation of medical cannabis. Oil was the most common form used, followed by vape, and the most common ratios used were high tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to cannabidiol (CBD) and equal parts THC/CBD products. Conclusion This study did not find a statistically significant change in symptom scores with medical cannabis use, although further study is warranted given the limitations of the present study. Elderly patients most commonly are using equal parts THC/CBD or high THC ratio products initially.

Background: Determine the overall, sex-, and racially/ethnically-appropriate population-level cotinine and total nicotine equivalents (TNE-2, the molar sum of the two major nicotine metabolites) cut-points to distinguish tobacco users from nonusers across multiple definitions of use (e.g., exclusive vs. polytobacco, and daily vs. non-daily). Methods: Using Wave 1 (2013–2014) of the U.S. Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, we conducted weighted Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis to determine the optimal urinary cotinine and TNE-2 cut-points, stratified by sex and race/ethnicity. Results: For past 30-day exclusive cigarette users, the cotinine cut-point that distinguished them from nonusers was 40.5 ng/mL, with considerable variation by sex (male: 22.2 ng/mL; female: 43.1 ng/mL) and between racial/ethnic groups (non-Hispanic other: 5.2 ng/mL; non-Hispanic black: 297.0 ng/mL). A similar, but attenuated, pattern emerged when assessing polytobacco cigarette users (overall cut-point = 39.1 ng/mL, range = 5.5 ng/mL–80.4 ng/mL) and any tobacco users (overall cut-point = 39.1 ng/mL, range = 4.8 ng/mL–40.0 ng/mL). Using TNE-2, which is less impacted by racial differences in nicotine metabolism, produced a comparable pattern of results although reduced the range magnitude. Conclusions: Because of similar frequency of cigarette use among polytobacco users, overall cut-points for exclusive cigarette use were not substantially different from cut-points that included polytobacco cigarette use or any tobacco use. Results revealed important differences in sex and race/ethnicity appropriate cut-points when evaluating tobacco use status and established novel urinary TNE-2 cut-points. Impact: These cut-points may be used for biochemical verification of self-reported tobacco use in epidemiologic studies and clinical trials.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of menthol cigarette bans in seven Canadian provinces between 2016 and 2018.MethodsLongitudinal data from the Canadian arm of the 2016 and 2018 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. 1098 non-menthol and 138 menthol smokers were surveyed pre-menthol and post-menthol cigarette bans. Multivariate logistic regression models examined associations between pre-post ban changes in smoking behaviour, including differences between menthol and non-menthol smokers in quit attempts and quitting.ResultsAt follow-up, 59.1% of pre-ban menthol smokers switched to non-menthol cigarettes; 21.5% quit smoking and 19.5% still smoked menthols, primarily purchased from First Nations reserves. Menthol smokers were more likely than non-menthol smokers to make a quit attempt (adjusted OR (aOR)=1.61, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.51), and to remain quit (aOR=2.30, 95% CI 1.06 to 5.01). Menthol smokers did not differ significantly from non-menthol smokers in quit success (aOR=1.72, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.01); however, daily menthol smokers were more likely than daily non-menthol smokers to quit (aOR=2.21, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.24), and daily menthol smokers who quit before the ban were more likely than daily non-menthol smokers to remain quit (aOR=2.81, 95% CI 1.15 to 6.85).ConclusionsAlthough menthol smokers were most likely to switch to non-menthol cigarettes, the menthol ban was also significantly associated with higher rates of quit attempts and quit success among menthol smokers compared with non-menthol smokers, and may have helped to prevent relapse among menthol smokers who had quit smoking before the ban. Results confirm and extend evaluation of Ontario’s menthol ban across provinces covering 83% of the Canadian population.

The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study is a nationally representative study of the US population on tobacco use and its effects on health, with four waves of data collection between 2013 and 2017. Prior work described the methods of the first three waves. In this paper, we describe the methods of Wave 4, during which a replenishment sample was added to the ongoing cohort. We describe the design and estimation methods of the continuing Wave 1 cohort (with four waves of data) and the Wave 4 cohort (the new cohort created at Wave 4). We provide survey quality metrics, including response rates for both cohorts and a panel conditioning analysis, and guidance on understanding the target populations for both cohorts.

Introduction Concurrent use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes (“dual use”) is common among tobacco users. Little is known about differences in demographics and toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users. Aims and Methods We analyzed data from adult dual users (current every/some day users of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes, n = 792) included in the PATH Study Wave 1 (2013–2014) and provided urine samples. Samples were analyzed for biomarkers of exposure to nicotine and selected toxicants (tobacco-specific nitrosamine NNK [NNAL], lead, cadmium, naphthalene [2-naphthol], pyrene [1-hydroxypyrene], acrylonitrile [CYMA], acrolein [CEMA], and acrylamide [AAMA]). Subsets of dual users were compared on demographic, behavioral, and biomarker measures to exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 2411) and exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 247). Results Most dual users were predominant cigarette smokers (70%), followed by daily dual users (13%), non-daily concurrent dual users (10%), and predominant vapers (7%). Dual users who smoked daily showed significantly higher biomarker concentrations compared with those who did not smoke daily. Patterns of e-cigarette use had little effect on toxicant exposure. Dual users with high toxicant exposure were generally older, female, and smoked more cigarettes per day. Dual users who had low levels of biomarkers of exposure were generally younger, male, and smoked non-daily. Conclusions In 2013–2014, most dual users smoked cigarettes daily and used e-cigarettes occasionally. Cigarette smoking appears to be the primary driver of toxicant exposure among dual users, with little-to-no effect of e-cigarette use on biomarker levels. Results reinforce the need for dual users to stop smoking tobacco cigarettes to reduce toxicant exposure. Implications With considerable dual use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes in the United States, it is important to understand differences in toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users, and how these differences align with user demographics. Findings suggest most dual users smoke daily and use e-cigarettes intermittently. Low exposure to toxicants was most common among younger users, males, and intermittent smokers; high exposure to toxicants was most common among older users, females, and heavier cigarette smokers. Results underscore the heterogeneity occurring within dual users, and the need to quit smoking cigarettes completely in order to reduce toxicant exposure.

Objectives: The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study is a nationally representative study of the US population on tobacco use and its effects on health, with 3 waves of data collection between 2013 and 2016. Prior work described the methods of the first wave. In this paper, we describe the methods of the subsequent 2 waves and provide recommendations for how to conduct longitudinal analyses of PATH Study data. Methods: We use standard survey quality metrics to evaluate the results of the follow-up waves of the PATH Study. The recommendations and examples of longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses of PATH Study data follow a design-based statistical inference framework. Results: The quality metrics indicate that the PATH Study sample of approximately 40,000 continuing respondents remains representative of its target population. Depending on the intended analysis, different survey weights may be appropriate. Conclusion: The PATH Study data are a valuable resource for regulatory scientists interested in longitudinal analysis of tobacco use and its effects on health. The availability of multiple sets of specialized survey weights enables researchers to target a wide range of tobacco-related analytic questions.

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between established cigar use and prevalence and incidence of cardiovascular diseases (CVD; congestive heart failure, stroke, or heart attack/needed bypass surgery) among U.S. adults, 40 years or older. The study also explored if years of use, is associated with CVD prevalence. Methods: Using Waves 1-5 (2013-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative, longitudinal cohort study of U.S. adults and youth, pooled prevalence, restricted to adults 40 and older who provided data at every wave (N=10,128 unique respondents and Nobs=46,294;), was estimated to understand the association between established cigar use and self-reported CVD outcomes. Weighted generalized estimating equations were used to examine CVD outcomes among exclusive current/former established cigar smokers (ever cigar smokers who have smoked fairly regularly), exclusive current/former established cigarette smokers (lifetime smokers of 100 or more cigarettes), dual current/former established cigarette and cigar smokers compared to never smokers of cigars or cigarettes, adjusting for covariates. Results: The incidence of CVD among exclusive current/former established cigar smokers over a six-year period was low (overall average rate of 3.0%). The pooled-prevalence of CVD outcome was very similar among exclusive current/former established cigar smokers (10.7%; 95% CI: 7.0-16.1) and exclusive current/former established cigarette smokers (10.7%; 95% CI: 9.4-12.2) and slightly higher among dual users of cigars and cigarettes (14.3%; 95% CI: 11.8-17.1). Compared to never users, exclusive current/former established cigar smokers (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.11-2.51) and exclusive current/former established cigarette smokers (OR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.45-3.09) were more likely to have any CVD outcome in unadjusted analyses. When adjusted for covariates, only exclusive current/former established cigarette use was associated with CVD outcomes (AOR = 1.63, CI: 1.05-2.53). We did not find a consistent dose response relationship between duration of exclusive current/former established cigar use and CVD prevalence. Conclusions: Understanding how cigar use impacts CVD is important in reducing tobacco-related mortality and morbidity. In this study, exclusive established use of cigars or duration of exclusive cigar use was not associated with CVD prevalence compared to never cigar or cigarette smokers.

Introduction Cannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers in the United States. Prior studies suggest that cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation. Yet, the extent to which this is the case among adults seeking to quit tobacco use remains unclear. Tobacco quitlines are the most common provider of no-cost treatment for adults who use smoke in the United States. This study investigated the association between cannabis use and smoking cessation outcomes among quitline callers. Aims and Methods Participants included callers to the New York State Smokers’ Quitline, who were seeking to quit smoking cigarettes and were contacted for outcome assessment 7 months after intake. Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence rates were calculated and compared among cannabis use groups, based on frequency of past-30-day cannabis use at baseline (none: 0 days, occasional: 1–9 days, regular: 10–19 days, and daily: 20–30 days). Results Approximately 8.3% (n = 283) of participants (n = 3396) reported past-30-day cannabis use at baseline. Callers with daily cannabis use (20–30 days per month) had significantly lower odds of 30-day abstinence, relative to those who did not use cannabis (odds ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval [0.3, 0.9]). Conclusions Daily cannabis use appears to be associated with poorer smoking cessation treatment outcomes among adults seeking to quit smoking cigarettes via a quitline. Because quitlines are among the most accessible, affordable, and frequently utilized community-based treatments available in the United States, and the prevalence of cannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers, detailed inquiry into cannabis use might enhance cigarette smoking cessation outcomes. Implications Quitlines are free of cost and accessible to millions of smokers in the United States. The current study found an inverse relationship between daily cannabis use at baseline and 30-day abstinence from cigarette smoking at 7-month follow-up among New York State Smokers’ Quitline callers. Findings suggest that daily cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation and sustained abstinence among those seeking help to stop smoking cigarettes.

SignificanceReducing youth e-cigarette use is a New York State (NYS) public health priority. In May 2020, a state-wide restriction on flavoured e-cigarettes, except tobacco flavour, was passed. This study examines changes in nicotine product use behaviour among youth around the time of the state-wide vaping flavour restriction.MethodsNYS data from the US International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Youth Tobacco and E-cigarette Tobacco and Vaping Survey were analysed cross-sectionally from February 2020 (n=955), August 2020 (n=946), February 2021 (n=1030) and August 2021 (n=753). Online surveys were conducted among youth 16–19 years. Weighted descriptive statistics and regression models were used to describe changes in nicotine product use behaviour. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity and perceived family socioeconomic status.ResultsSignificant decreases in past 30-day e-cigarette use (20%–11%), cigarette (7%-4%), and dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (5%–2%) were observed over the 2-year period in NYS. Over 95% of vapers still reported using a non-tobacco-flavoured e-cigarette following the restriction, with fruit-flavoured being the most popular at each time point.ConclusionsNearly all NYS youth continued to vape flavours that were restricted in NYS. While youth past 30-day vaping prevalence decreased significantly from 2020 to 2021, increased flavour restriction compliance could result in an even greater decrease. Continuous monitoring is important to better understand perceptions, use patterns and access at the individual level, retail level and population level to inform future enforcement and restrictions.

BackgroundIn February 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prioritised enforcement efforts against flavoured prefilled cartridge/pod electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), with the exception of tobacco and menthol. This study examined changes between prepriority enforcement (2018) and early postenforcement (February–June 2020) among adults on: ENDS flavours and devices used most often; location of last purchase of fruit/other-flavoured cartridges (covered under the enforcement priority); and smoking and vaping.MethodsPrevalence estimates came from 1608 adult frequent (≥weekly) ENDS users (current smokers (n=1072), ex-smokers (n=536)) who participated in the 2018 and/or 2020 US ITC Smoking and Vaping Surveys. Transitions between flavours/devices and changes in smoking/vaping were assessed among baseline respondents who were followed up in 2020 (n=360). Respondents self-reported the ENDS device (disposable, cartridge/pod or tank) and the flavor that they used most often: (1) tobacco flavors (tobacco/tobacco-menthol mix) or unflavored; (2) menthol/mint; (3) fruit/other flavors.ResultsCompared to 2018, in the first 5 months of the 2020 enforcement priority, there were significant increases in the prevalence of fruit/other-flavoured cartridges (7.9% to 12.4%,p=0.026) and menthol/mint cartridges (7.1% to 13.0%, pConclusionsBetween 2018 and the early phase of the FDA’s 2020 enforcement priority, prevalence of menthol/mint and fruit/other-flavoured cartridges increased among adults. Half of vapers using cartridge flavours covered in the enforcement switched to other flavours and/or devices that were exempt, with the exception of disposables. The extent to which more comprehensive restrictions may be problematic for adults who prefer a range of ENDS flavours remains uncertain.

Background: Prior studies have not clearly established risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among smokers who switch to exclusive use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). We compared cardiovascular disease incidence in combustible-tobacco users, those who transitioned to ENDS use, and those who quit tobacco with never tobacco users. Methods: This prospective cohort study analyzes five waves of Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study data, Wave 1 (2013–2014) through Wave 5 (2018–2019). Cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence was captured over three intervals (Waves 1 to 3, Waves 2 to 4, and Waves 3 to 5). Participants were adults (40+ years old) without a history of CVD for the first two waves of any interval. Change in tobacco use status, from exclusive past 30 day use of any combustible-tobacco product to either exclusive past 30 day ENDS use, dual past 30 day use of ENDS and combustible-tobacco, or no past 30 day use of any tobacco, between the first two waves of an interval was used to predict onset of CVD between the second and third waves in the interval. CVD incidence was defined as a new self-report of being told by a health professional that they had congestive heart failure, stroke, or a myocardial infarction. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) analyses combined 10,548 observations across intervals from 7820 eligible respondents. Results: Overall, there were 191 observations of CVD among 10,548 total observations (1.7%, standard error (SE) = 0.2), with 40 among 3014 never users of tobacco (1.5%, SE = 0.3). In multivariable models, CVD incidence was not significantly different for any tobacco user groups compared to never users. There were 126 observations of CVD among 6263 continuing exclusive combustible-tobacco users (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.44; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87–2.39), 15 observations of CVD among 565 who transitioned to dual use (AOR = 1.85; 0.78–4.37), and 10 observations of CVD among 654 who quit using tobacco (AOR = 1.18; 0.33–4.26). There were no observations of CVD among 53 who transitioned to exclusive ENDS use. Conclusions: This study found no difference in CVD incidence by tobacco status over three 3 year intervals, even for tobacco quitters. It is possible that additional waves of PATH Study data, combined with information from other large longitudinal cohorts with careful tracking of ENDS use patterns may help to further clarify this relationship.

Little is known about population-level differences between adults who exclusively smoke cigarettes and those who smoke cigarettes and also use cannabis (co-consumers). Thus, this study describes differences on sociodemographic, cigarette-dependence, health and behavioral variables, and risk perceptions associated with smoking cannabis.This cross-sectional study included 6941 respondents from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (US, Canada, Australia, England). Adult daily cigarette smokers were included and categorized as: cigarette-only smokers (never used cannabis/previously used cannabis, but not in the past 12 months, n = 4857); occasional co-consumers (cannabis use in the past 12 months, but weekly use, n = 739); or regular co-consumers (use cannabis ≥ weekly, n = 1345). All outcomes were self-reported. Regression models were conducted on weighted data.Overall, 19.9 % of respondents reported regular cannabis co-use and 10.1 % reported occasional co-use. Regular co-use was highest in Canada (27.2 %), followed by the US (24.4 %), England (12.7 %) and Australia (12.3 %). Compared to cigarette-only smokers, regular co-consumers were more likely to be male and report chest/breathing problems (p 0.001). All co-consumers were more likely to be younger, have lower income, be experiencing financial stress, reside in Canada, have depressive symptoms, use alcohol more frequently and binge drink, use other tobacco/nicotine products, and perceive smoking cannabis as low health risk and less harmful than smoking cigarettes (all p 0.001). Cigarette dependence measures were similar between co-consumers and cigarette-only smokers (all p ≥ 0.05).Although there were no differences on cigarette dependence measures between daily cigarette smokers who do and do not use cannabis, there are several other risk factors that may affect tobacco use and abstinence among co-consumers (e.g., greater depression, high-risk alcohol consumption). Thus, tobacco cessation treatment may require multi-pronged strategies to address other health behaviors. Continued surveillance is needed to determine the nature and health implications of co-use considering changing policies, markets, and products.

ObjectiveTo evaluate heated tobacco product (HTP) awareness, trial and current use among adult cigarette smokers and vaping product users in four countries with varying regulations governing HTP sales.DesignData came from Wave 2 of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey, collected from February to July 2018. Respondents were current and former smokers and/or users of vaping products (18 years or older) from Canada (CA; n=3778), England (EN; n=4848), the USA (US; n=2846) and Australia (AU; n=1515). At the time of the survey, only Canada and England permitted the sale of contemporary HTPs (eg, IQOS).ResultsOverall, 30.2% of respondents reported being aware of HTPs (CA=30.4%; EN=31.0%; US=30.2%; AU=27.4%; p=0.346), 2.4% had ever tried HTPs (CA=3.3%; EN=2.4%; US=2.0%; AU=0.9%; p=0.001) and 0.9% currently used HTPs at least monthly (CA=0.8%; EN=1.2%; US=0.7%; AU=0.2%; pConclusionApproximately one third of respondents were aware of HTPs, even in the USA and Australia, where contemporary HTPs were not yet on the market. Trial and use were uncommon, except among concurrent smokers–vapers. Restrictions on availability may have limited HTP use generally, but less so for concurrent smokers–vapers.