Search

Objectives: Little cigars resemble cigarettes but are not subject to the US Food and Drug Administration's flavor restrictions on cigarettes. This within-subject laboratory study assessed the abuse liability of cigarettes and little cigars of varying flavors. Methods: Forty-eight adult cigarette smokers who also smoke little cigars or cigarillos completed 4 sessions that differed by tobacco product smoked: usual brand cigarette, unflavored, cherry, and menthol little cigars. Expired breath CO (COex), plasma nicotine, physiological measures, smoking topography, and subjective measures were assessed during and after each session. Results: Compared to usual brand cigarettes, little cigars were associated with smaller reductions in craving and lower subjective appeal. Minor changes in COex were observed despite less tobacco smoked in some of the little cigar sessions. Cherry flavored little cigars had the highest COex boost and subjective appeal relative to unflavored and menthol flavored little cigars. Conclusions: Generally, little cigars were rated as less appealing than cigarettes. However, cherry flavored little cigars had higher subjective appeal and produced a different smoking topography compared to the unflavored and menthol flavored little cigars. These data suggest some tobacco flavors may lead to an increased abuse liability and toxicant exposure relative to others.

Objectives Poor mental health is associated with increased cigarette smoking, yet whether this extends to alternative tobacco product use remains unknown. Methods Wave 1 data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study assessed relationships between self-perceived mental health (SPMH) and prevalence of and motives for tobacco use among US adults (N = 32,320). Results Fair/poor SPMH, as compared to good/excellent SPMH, was associated with increased current cigarette (AOR = 2.91, 95% CI = 2.64, 3.20), e-cigarette (AOR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.20, 1.53), cigarillo (AOR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.22, 1.56), filtered cigar (AOR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.21, 1.70), and smokeless tobacco (AOR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.01, 1.36), but not traditional cigar use (AOR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.90, 1.20). Whereas most motives for tobacco use were similar across SPMH rating, those with fair/poor SPMH, as compared to good/excellent SPMH, were more likely to report using traditional cigars due to affordability (AOR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.23, 1.98) and e-cigarettes (AOR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15, 1.79) and smokeless tobacco (AOR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.19, 2.83) due to appealing advertising. Conclusions Although individuals with poor SPMH are more likely to use alternative tobacco products than those with better SPMH, most motives for use are strikingly similar. These findings highlight the importance of continual monitoring of tobacco use trends among vulnerable populations.

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

OBJECTIVES: The FDA is considering the implementation of a national nicotine reduction policy for cigarettes, and such a policy may reduce the reinforcing efficacy of cigarettes and ultimately reduce tobacco dependence. However, it is not yet known how different levels of nicotine may affect the reinforcing efficacy of cigarettes in adolescents. We aimed to determine how reduced nicotine content may affect adolescents’ demand for cigarettes using the cigarette purchase task (CPT). METHODS: Adolescent daily smokers (ages 15–19, n = 50) completed a CPT for their usual brand cigarette and for each dose of SPECTRUM research cigarettes (15.8, 5.2, 1.3, 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) during four laboratory sessions. We conducted repeated measures ANOVAs to evaluate the effect of nicotine dose on five demand indices derived from the CPT. RESULTS: Tests revealed significantly higher demand for usual brand than each research cigarette dose (all p’s < .01); dose did not significantly affect any measure when usual brand was excluded. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the potential utility of the CPT for comparing the reinforcing efficacy of cigarettes varying in nicotine content in adolescents, and indicate a significantly reduced reinforcing efficacy of all research cigarettes relative to usual brand.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we investigated potential effects of being a menthol smoker on response to reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes in smokers especially vulnerable to smoking. METHOD: Participants were 169 smokers (61 menthol and 108 non-menthol smokers) with comorbid mental illness, substance use disorder, or socioeconomic disadvantage. Participants completed a double-blind study assessing addiction potential, withdrawal/craving, and compensatory smoking across 4 research cigarettes varying in nicotine content from very low levels to commercial levels (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8mg/g of tobacco). Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to examine potential moderating effects of menthol status. RESULTS: Statistically significant effects of nicotine dose were noted across measures, with higher doses producing greater economic demand and relief from withdrawal/craving. The relationships between nicotine dose and response to RNC cigarettes do not differ by menthol status. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study suggest menthol does not have a differential impact on response to RNC cigarettes across measures of economic demand, withdrawal/craving, or smoking topography. These results suggest that any potential beneficial effects of RNC cigarettes should extend to menthol smokers including those especially vulnerable to smoking.

The purpose of this study was to begin researching the effects of very low nicotine content cigarettes in smokers especially vulnerable to dependence to assess their potential as a less dependence-producing alternative to current commercial cigarettes.Participants were 26 adult, daily cigarette smokers from one of three populations: economically disadvantaged women of reproductive age (n = 9), opioid-dependent individuals (n = 11), and individuals with affective disorders (n = 6). Participants completed fourteen 2-4-h experimental sessions in a within-subjects research design. Sessions were conducted following brief smoking abstinence. Four research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, and 15.8 mg/g) were studied under double-blind conditions, assessing smoking topography, subjective effects, and relative reinforcing effects of varying doses in concurrent choice tests. Results were collapsed across vulnerable populations and analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.No significant differences between doses were discernible in smoking topography. All doses were equi-effective at reducing nicotine withdrawal. Ratings of satisfaction from smoking were lower at the 0.4 compared to 15.8 mg/g dose. Participants preferred the 15.8 mg/g dose over the 0.4 and 2.4 but not the 5.2 mg/g doses in concurrent choice testing; no differences between the two lowest doses were noted.All cigarettes effectively reduced nicotine withdrawal with no differences in smoking topography, suggesting minimal compensatory smoking. Dependence potential was lowest at the 0.4 mg/g dose. These initial results are promising regarding the feasibility of lowering nicotine content in cigarettes to very low levels in vulnerable populations without untoward effects.

INTRODUCTION Reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes to a minimally addictive level has been proposed as a regulatory strategy for reducing tobacco dependence. However, smokers with schizophrenia (SS) may be prone to changing their smoking topography in efforts to compensate for the reduction in nicotine content. The aims of this study were to compare smoking topography characteristics of usual-brand and very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes in SS and control smokers without psychiatric illness (CS), and to determine whether nicotine replacement reversed any changes in topography produced by VLNC cigarettes. METHODS Using a within-subjects, counter-balanced design, SS (n = 27) and CS (n = 23) smoked usual brand cigarettes, VLNC cigarettes while wearing placebo patches (VLNC + PLA), or VLNC cigarettes while wearing transdermal nicotine patches totaling 42mg (VLNC + NIC) during 5-hour ad libitum smoking sessions. Cigarettes were smoked through topography measurement devices. RESULTS Across conditions, SS smoked more puffs per session and per cigarette, had higher cigarette volumes, and had shorter inter-puff intervals than CS (Ps < .01). During VLNC cigarette sessions, puff duration increased and time between puffs decreased, but participants smoked fewer puffs, resulting in a net decrease in cigarette and total session volume (Ps < .001). There were no significant interactions between group and condition. CONCLUSIONS These findings indicate that acute use of VLNC cigarettes does not increase intensity of smoking in SS, and support the feasibility of a nicotine reduction policy. IMPLICATIONS Reducing the nicotine in cigarettes to a minimally addictive level has been proposed as a means of reducing tobacco dependence. However, smokers, particularly those with schizophrenia (SS) may alter their puffing in an attempt to extract more nicotine from VLNC cigarettes. This study compared smoking topography of usual brand versus VLNC cigarettes, combined with placebo or transdermal nicotine patches, in SS and controls. Although some changes in topography were indicative of compensatory smoking, total puffs and total cigarette volume were reduced with VLNC cigarettes, indicating that acute VLNC cigarette use does not increase smoking in SS.

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

Background and Aims Prior studies by our group demonstrated the efficacy of a brief but intensive behavioral intervention for producing initial smoking abstinence among opioid-dependent patients. In the present study, our aim was to promote longer-duration abstinence in this population. Following an initial 2-week incentive intervention for smoking abstinence, we examined whether a 10-week maintenance arm involving continuation of contingent reinforcement will produce greater smoking abstinence than a similar duration of noncontingent reinforcement. Design Randomized, 12-week, parallel-group study. Setting Out-patient research clinic in Burlington, Vermont, USA. Participants Opioid-maintained smokers (n = 88) who provided breath carbon monoxide and urinary cotinine specimens and received contingent reinforcement for smoking abstinence during weeks 1–2 (phase 1), with 63 randomized on day 14 to an extended contingent (EC; n = 31) or extended noncontingent (EN; n = 32) experimental condition for weeks 3–12 (phase 2). Intervention and control The EC condition consisted of voucher values that escalated across consecutive negative samples until they reached $30, after which they remained at $30 per negative sample. A positive or a missing sample resulted in no vouchers for that day and reset the value of the next negative same to $9. Two consecutive negatives returned the schedule to the pre-reset value. The EN control condition consisted of vouchers delivered for providing scheduled samples, but independent of smoking status. Measurements The primary outcome was percentage of biochemically abstinent samples during phase 2. Secondary measures included abstinence status at final study visit, complete abstinence, participants’ longest duration of continuous abstinence, cotinine and carbon monoxide (CO) levels and self-reported cigarettes per day. Findings EC participants achieved greater smoking abstinence during phase 2 than EN participants [46.7 versus 23.5% negative samples, respectively; odds ratio (OR) = 2.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16–7.65, χ21 = 5.0, P = 0.02]. When longest duration of continuous abstinence was compared between experimental groups, EC participants achieved twice the mean duration of continuous abstinence compared with EN participants (3.31 versus 1.68 weeks; t61 = 1.83, P = 0.07). An effect of experimental condition was also seen on mean cotinine levels (42.5 versus 210.6 ng/ml, respectively; F1,61=5.9, P = 0.02). Conclusions Among opioid-maintained smokers receiving an initial period of daily contingent incentives, a contingent reinforcement intervention appears to be more effective at extending smoking abstinence than noncontingent reinforcement over 10 weeks.

This report describes results from a systematic literature review examining gender differences in U.S. prevalence rates of current use of tobacco and nicotine delivery products and how they intersect with other vulnerabilities to tobacco use. We searched PubMed on gender differences in tobacco use across the years 2004-2014. For inclusion, reports had to be in English, in a peer-reviewed journal or federal government report, report prevalence rates for current use of a tobacco product in males and females, and use a U.S. nationally representative sample. Prevalence rates were generally higher in males than in females across all products. This pattern remained stable despite changes over time in overall prevalence rates. Gender differences generally were robust when intersecting with other vulnerabilities, although decreases in the magnitude of gender differences were noted among younger and older users, and among educational levels and race/ethnic groups associated with the highest or lowest prevalence rates. Overall, these results document a pervasive association of gender with vulnerability to tobacco use that acts additively with other vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities should be considered whenever formulating tobacco control and regulatory policies.

While rates of smoking in the general population have decreased in recent years, dramatic disparities remain among disadvantaged subgroups of smokers, particularly those with concurrent substance abuse. Prevalence rates of smoking among opioid-dependent patients, for example, are fourfold those of the general population. While pharmacotherapies are recommended as a first-line treatment for nicotine dependence, the few studies that have investigated their effectiveness in this population have shown dramatically poorer outcomes compared to the general population. Indeed, these findings have led some researchers to suggest that pharmacotherapies may simply be ineffective in opioid-maintained smokers. In this commentary, we briefly summarize the extant literature on pharmacotherapies in opioid-maintained smokers and contribute new data investigating the contribution of bupropion on smoking outcomes in 81 methadone- and buprenorphine-maintained participants from two randomized trials of financial incentives for smoking cessation. We also discuss several important parameters (ie, timing of the quit attempt, medication adherence, nicotine withdrawal) that may be leveraged to strengthen smoking pharmacotherapy outcomes in opioid-dependent patients. Taken together, an improved understanding of these issues will aid efforts to reduce tobacco-related health disparities in this group of challenging smokers.

Affective disorders, a set of psychiatric disorders mainly comprised of mood disorders (eg, depressive disorders, bipolar disorder) and anxiety disorders (eg, generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder) are prevalent among smokers. In the United States, 13% of smokers have a current mood disorder and 23% have a current anxiety disorder, compared to rates of 7% and 15% for these disorders in the general population.1 Similarly, smoking prevalence rates among individuals with mood disorders are 2- to 3-fold higher than those in the general population.2–4 In addition, smokers with affective disorders are more likely to be nicotine dependent, initiate daily smoking earlier, and smoke more cigarettes per day than those without psychiatric comorbidity.5–9 As a result, affective disorders are associated with disproportionately-high rates of cardiovascular disease and tobacco-related cancers. 10–13 Effective methods of reducing tobacco dependence in this population are urgently needed. Epidemiological data show that people with affective disorders are significantly less likely to quit smoking than those without current mental illness. 2,4,14 Smokers with affective disorders do not appear to differ from smokers without these disorders on readiness to quit,15–17 nor are those with comorbid depression or anxiety disorders less likely to accept smoking cessation treatment when treatment is offered.18–20 However, having a history of depression or anxiety reduces the likelihood of maintaining long-term abstinence.21,22 In part, this may be due to higher nicotine dependence severity. 7,8 Moreover, smokers with affective disorders have difficulty accessing effective smoking treatments, in part, because of concerns among mental health clinicians that smoking cessation might destabilize psychiatric functioning.23 The American Psychiatric Association and the US Department of Health and Human Services have published guidelines and statements to encourage mental health clinicians to assess smoking in their patients and assist them with quitting,24–26 but adherence to these recommendations remains frustratingly low.27 A regulatory approach to treating tobacco dependence in the US may offer a novel avenue toward reducing cigarette smoking in people with psychiatric disorders. The 2009 enactment of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate tobacco products as appropriate to protect public health, including limiting the nicotine content of cigarettes. 28 A mandated reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes to a non-addictive level could reduce tobacco reinforcement and dependence, making it easier for smokers to quit.29–31 A nicotine reduction regulatory approach could be particularly beneficial to those who have less access to and success with currently-available smoking cessation treatments, such as people with affective disorders. However, one concern about a nicotine reduction policy is that it may have unintended negative consequences for these smokers. For example, if smokers with affective disorders are highly sensitive to the disrupting effects of nicotine reduction on mood or psychiatric symptoms, they could respond by increasing their smoking rate or altering their smoke inhalation patterns in an attempt to overcome these effects. Before going forward with a nicotine reduction strategy, it is important to assess the potential severity and persistence of these negative consequences in comorbid smokers, and to determine what strategies could be implemented to ameliorate these potential negative effects.

Background and Objectives While many individuals experiment with stimulants, only a subset transition to abuse or dependence. One characteristic widely associated with stimulant abuse vulnerability in general is sensation seeking (SS), though less clear is how individuals' baseline SS may predict their response to acute stimulant administration. Methods In this secondary analysis, we examined associations between SS and d-AMPH choice and subjective response among healthy male (n = 16) and female (n = 21) adults participating in an outpatient laboratory study wherein they received repeated opportunities to sample and choose between d-AMPH (5, 10, and 20 mg/70 kg) and placebo. Results Among males, elevated baseline SS was associated with increased d-AMPH choice and positive subjective effects at 5 and 10 mg/70 kg doses. Among females, there were no significant associations between SS and d-AMPH choice or subjective effects. Discussion and Conclusions Elevated SS in males may be associated with increased sensitivity to d-AMPH reinforcement and positive subjective effects. Data from this study suggest that SS may not predict sensitivity to stimulants in females, though future studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to answer this definitively. Scientific Significance Sensation seeking may reflect an important characteristic underlying sensitivity to stimulant reinforcement. Efforts to better understand these individual differences would inform efforts to identify and intervene with those at risk for developing abuse or dependence. (Am J Addict 2015;24:435 –442)

While research suggests primary prescription opioid (PO) abusers may exhibit less severe demographic and drug use characteristics than primary heroin abusers, less is known about whether a lifetime history of heroin use confers greater severity among PO abusers.In this secondary analysis, we examined demographic and drug use characteristics as a function of lifetime heroin use among 89 PO-dependent adults screened for a trial evaluating the relative efficacy of buprenorphine taper durations. Exploratory analyses also examined contribution of lifetime heroin use to treatment response among a subset of participants who received a uniform set of study procedures.Baseline characteristics were compared between participants reporting lifetime heroin use ≥5 (H(+); n=41) vs.5 (H(-); n=48) times. Treatment response (i.e., illicit opioid abstinence and treatment retention at end of study) was examined in the subset of H(+) and H(-) participants randomized to receive the 4-week taper condition (N=22).H(+) participants were significantly older and more likely to be male. They reported longer durations of illicit opioid use, greater alcohol-related problems, more past-month cocaine use, greater lifetime IV drug use, and greater lifetime use of cigarettes, amphetamines and hallucinogens. H(+) participants also had lower scores on the Positive Symptom Distress and Depression subscales of the Brief Symptom Inventory. Finally, there was a trend toward poorer treatment outcomes among H(+) participants.A lifetime history of heroin use may be associated with elevated drug severity and unique treatment needs among treatment-seeking PO abusers.

This study examines whether tobacco dependence severity moderates the acute effects of reducing nicotine content in cigarettes on the addiction potential of smoking, craving/withdrawal, or smoking topography. Participants (N = 169) were daily smokers with mild, moderate, or high tobacco-dependence severity using the Heaviness of Smoking Index. Following brief abstinence, participants smoked research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) in a within-subject design. Results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of co-variance. No main effects of dependence severity or interactions with nicotine dose were noted in relative reinforcing effects in concurrent choice testing or subjective effects on the modified Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire. Demand for smoking in the Cigarette Purchase Task was greater among more dependent smokers, but reducing nicotine content decreased demand independent of dependence severity. Dependence severity did not significantly alter response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes on the Minnesota Tobacco Withdrawal Scale nor Questionnaire of Smoking Urges-brief (QSU) Factor-2 scale; dependence severity and dose interacted significantly on the QSU-brief Factor-1 scale, with reductions dependent on dose among highly but not mildly or moderately dependent smokers. Dependence severity and dose interacted significantly on only one of six measures of smoking topography (i.e., maximum flow rate), which increased as dose increased among mildly and moderately but not highly dependent smokers. These results suggest that dependence severity has no moderating influence on the ability of reduced nicotine content cigarettes to lower the addiction potential of smoking, and minimal effects on relief from craving/withdrawal or smoking topography.

Smokers with mental health conditions (MHCs) lose approximately 15 years of life relative to non-smokers without MHCs, of which two-thirds are attributable to smoking. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced a new regulatory strategy for tobacco that includes a reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes sold in the US to a minimally-addictive level. This action could improve cessation rates in smokers with MHCs by reducing their dependence on nicotine. However, nicotine reduction also could have unintended negative consequences in smokers with MHCs. Thus, it is important to conduct randomized controlled trials to investigate the potential effects of nicotine reduction in smokers with MHCs. Several studies of the acute or extended effects of nicotine reduction in smokers with emotional disorders or serious mental illness have been recently completed or are underway. Studies to date indicate that when smokers with MHCs are switched, under randomized, double-blind conditions, to cigarettes with very low nicotine content, they reduce their cigarette intake, with minimal or no effects on withdrawal, psychiatric symptoms, or compensatory smoking. However, some deleterious effects of nicotine reduction on cognitive performance measures in smokers with schizophrenia have been observed, which are offset by providing concurrent nicotine replacement. We review these studies and provide suggestions for potentially increasing the effectiveness of a nicotine reduction strategy for reducing smoking in people with MHCs. The research described was conducted in the United States in 2010–2018.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and tobacco use are prevalent conditions that co-occur at striking rates in the US. Previous reviews examined prevalence and factors associated with cigarette smoking among individuals with PTSD but have not been summarized since 2007. Moreover, none explored rates and factors associated with the use of other tobacco products. This study aimed to systematically review the most recent literature examining the comorbidity of PTSD and tobacco use to provide prevalence rates, as well as summarize the literature exploring other factors associated with tobacco use among individuals with PTSD. Studies were identified using a systematic search of keywords related to tobacco use and PTSD within the following databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, PsycARTICLES, and Cochrane Clinical Trials Library. The studies included in this review (N = 66) showed that the prevalence of current use of tobacco products in individuals with PTSD was 24.0% and the rate of PTSD among users of tobacco products was 20.2%. Additionally, results demonstrated that individuals with PTSD present with high levels of nicotine dependence and heavy use of tobacco products, as well as underscore the importance of negative emotional states as a contributing factor to tobacco use among individuals with PTSD. It is imperative that future studies continue monitoring tobacco use among individuals with PTSD while also assessing factors identified as having a prominent role in tobacco use among individuals with PTSD. These findings also demonstrate the need for more innovative approaches to reduce the pervasive tobacco use among individuals with PTSD.

Introduction Contingency management (CM) is effective for promoting smoking abstinence; however, moderators and mediators of CM treatment efficacy in young adult populations are under-explored. We leveraged fine-grained data from a large randomized controlled trial: 1) to determine whether early attainment of sustained abstinence mediated the effect of treatment on abstinence; 2) to test whether heavy drinking moderated the effect of treatment on abstinence; and 3) to test a serial mediation model of the effects of drinking during early treatment on sustained smoking abstinence. Methods College student smokers (N = 110) were randomized to receive either CM treatment or noncontingent reinforcement (NR) over a 21-day treatment period. All participants received $5 for providing twice-daily breath carbon monoxide (CO) samples. In CM, additional money was provided for samples that indicated smoking reduction (Initial Phase; first 7 days), and for samples ≤ 5 ppm (Abstinence Phase; following 14 days). Results CM treatment led to greater sustained abstinence relative to NR. Longer sustained abstinence in the Initial Phase partially mediated the effect of treatment on sustained abstinence in the Abstinence Phase. Heavier pretreatment drinkers had shorter periods of sustained abstinence in the Abstinence Phase; this effect was greater in CM. A serial mediation model determined that increased drinking during the Initial Phase led to decreased sustained abstinence, which then led to decreased sustained abstinence in the Abstinence Phase. Conclusions These data provide a greater understanding of how heavy drinking and early sustained abstinence may affect success during treatment in young adults undergoing contingency management treatment for smoking.

OBJECTIVES Research that can provide a scientific foundation for the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tobacco policy decisions is needed to inform tobacco regulatory policy. One factor that affects the impact of a tobacco product on public health is its intensity of use, which is determined, in part, by its abuse liability or reinforcing efficacy. Behavioral economic tasks have considerable utility for assessing the reinforcing efficacy of current and emerging tobacco products. METHODS This paper provides a narrative review of several behavioral economic laboratory tasks and identifies important applications to tobacco regulatory science. RESULTS Behavioral economic laboratory assessments, including operant self-administration, choice tasks and purchase tasks, can be used generate behavioral economic data on the effect of price and other constraints on tobacco product consumption. These tasks could provide an expedited simulation of the effects of various tobacco control policies across populations of interest to the FDA. CONCLUSIONS Tobacco regulatory research questions that can be addressed with behavioral economic tasks include assessments of the impact of product characteristics on product demand, assessments of the abuse liability of novel and potential modified risk tobacco products (MRTPs), and assessments of the impact of conventional and novel products in vulnerable populations.

A national policy is under consideration to reduce the nicotine content of cigarettes to lower nicotine addiction potential in the United States.To examine how smokers with psychiatric disorders and other vulnerabilities to tobacco addiction respond to cigarettes with reduced nicotine content.A multisite, double-blind, within-participant assessment of acute response to research cigarettes with nicotine content ranging from levels below a hypothesized addiction threshold to those representative of commercial cigarettes (0.4, 2.3, 5.2, and 15.8 mg/g of tobacco) at 3 academic sites included 169 daily smokers from the following 3 vulnerable populations: individuals with affective disorders (n = 56) or opioid dependence (n = 60) and socioeconomically disadvantaged women (n = 53). Data were collected from March 23, 2015, through April 25, 2016.After a brief smoking abstinence, participants were exposed to the cigarettes with varying nicotine doses across fourteen 2- to 4-hour outpatient sessions.Addiction potential of the cigarettes was assessed using concurrent choice testing, the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), and validated measures of subjective effects, such as the Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale.Among the 169 daily smokers included in the analysis (120 women [71.0%] and 49 men [29.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.6 [11.4] years), reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes decreased the relative reinforcing effects of smoking in all 3 populations. Across populations, the 0.4-mg/g dose was chosen significantly less than the 15.8-mg/g dose in concurrent choice testing (mean [SEM] 30% [0.04%] vs 70% [0.04%]; Cohen d = 0.40; P .001) and generated lower demand in the CPT (α = .027 [95% CI, 0.023-0.031] vs α = .019 [95% CI, 0.016-0.022]; Cohen d = 1.17; P .001). Preference for higher over lower nicotine content cigarettes could be reversed by increasing the response cost necessary to obtain the higher dose (mean [SEM], 61% [0.02%] vs 39% [0.02%]; Cohen d = 0.40; P .001). All doses reduced Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale total scores (range of mean decreases, 0.10-0.50; Cohen d range, 0.21-1.05; P .001 for all), although duration of withdrawal symptoms was greater at higher doses (η2 = 0.008; dose-by-time interaction, P = .002).Reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes may decrease their addiction potential in populations that are highly vulnerable to tobacco addiction. Smokers with psychiatric conditions and socioeconomic disadvantage are more addicted and less likely to quit and experience greater adverse health impacts. Policies to reduce these disparities are needed; reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes should be a policy focus.

Prescription opioid (PO) abuse has become an urgent public health issue in the United States. Detoxification is one important treatment option, yet relatively little is known about the time course and severity of opioid withdrawal during buprenorphine detoxification.This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind evaluation of 1, 2, and 4-week outpatient buprenorphine tapers among primary prescription opioid (PO) abusers. The aim is to characterize the time course and severity of buprenorphine withdrawal under rigorous, double-blind conditions, across multiple taper durations, and using multiple withdrawal-related measures (i.e., self-report and observer ratings, pupil diameter, ancillary medication utilization). Participants were PO-dependent adults undergoing buprenorphine detoxification and biochemically-verified to be continuously abstinent from opioids during their taper (N = 28).Participants randomly assigned to the 4-week taper regimen experienced a relatively mild and stable course of withdrawal, with few peaks in severity. In contrast, the 1- and 2-week taper groups experienced stark increases in withdrawal severity during the week following the last buprenorphine dose, followed by declines in withdrawal severity thereafter. The 4-week taper group also reported significantly fewer disruptions in sleep compared to the other experimental groups. When predictors of withdrawal were examined, baseline ratings of "Expected Withdrawal Severity" was the most robust predictor of withdrawal experienced during the taper.Data from this trial may inform clinicians about the expected time course, magnitude, and pattern of buprenorphine withdrawal and aid efforts to identify patients who may need additional clinical support during outpatient buprenorphine detoxification.

While many individuals experiment with stimulants, only a subset transition to abuse or dependence. One characteristic widely associated with stimulant abuse vulnerability in general is sensation seeking (SS), though less clear is how individuals' baseline SS may predict their response to acute stimulant administration.In this secondary analysis, we examined associations between SS and d-AMPH choice and subjective response among healthy male (n = 16) and female (n = 21) adults participating in an outpatient laboratory study wherein they received repeated opportunities to sample and choose between d-AMPH (5, 10, and 20 mg/70 kg) and placebo.Among males, elevated baseline SS was associated with increased d-AMPH choice and positive subjective effects at 5 and 10 mg/70 kg doses. Among females, there were no significant associations between SS and d-AMPH choice or subjective effects.Elevated SS in males may be associated with increased sensitivity to d-AMPH reinforcement and positive subjective effects. Data from this study suggest that SS may not predict sensitivity to stimulants in females, though future studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to answer this definitively.Sensation seeking may reflect an important characteristic underlying sensitivity to stimulant reinforcement. Efforts to better understand these individual differences would inform efforts to identify and intervene with those at risk for developing abuse or dependence.

The high prevalence of cigarette smoking and tobacco related morbidity and mortality in people with chronic mental illness is well documented. This review summarizes results from studies of smoking cessation treatments in people with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder. It also summarizes experimental studies aimed at identifying biopsychosocial mechanisms that underlie the high smoking rates seen in people with these disorders. Research indicates that smokers with chronic mental illness can quit with standard cessation approaches with minimal effects on psychiatric symptoms. Although some studies have noted high relapse rates, longer maintenance on pharmacotherapy reduces rates of relapse without untoward effects on psychiatric symptoms. Similar biopsychosocial mechanisms are thought to be involved in the initiation and persistence of smoking in patients with different disorders. An appreciation of these common factors may aid the development of novel tobacco treatments for people with chronic mental illness. Novel nicotine and tobacco products such as electronic cigarettes and very low nicotine content cigarettes may also be used to improve smoking cessation rates in people with chronic mental illness.