Search

BACKGROUND: Reducing cigarette addictiveness has the potential to avert millions of yearly tobacco-related deaths worldwide. Substantially reducing nicotine in cigarettes decreases cigarette consumption, but no large clinical trial has determined the effects of reduced-nicotine cigarettes when other nicotine-containing products are available. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of reduced-nicotine cigarettes in the context of the availability of alternative nicotine delivery systems. METHODS: In a U.S. six-site, open-label, parallel-arm study, smokers were randomized for twelve weeks to an experimental marketplace containing cigarettes with either 0.4 mg or 15.8 mg nicotine per gram of tobacco; all had access to non-combusted alternative nicotine delivery systems (e.g., e-cigarettes; medicinal nicotine). Group differences in the primary outcomes (cigarettes per day, number of smoke-free days) were examined using linear and negative binomial regression, respectively (Trial Registration: NCT03272685). FINDINGS: Among 438 randomized participants (mean [standard deviation (SD), range] age, 44.5 [11.9, 20-73] years, 225 [51.4%] women, 282 [64.4%] White and 339 [77.4%] trial completers), those in the 0.4 mg vs. 15.8 mg nicotine cigarette condition experienced significantly lower cigarettes per day at the end of intervention (mean [SD], 7.05 [7.88] vs. 12.95 [9.07], adjusted mean difference, -6.21 [95% CI, -7.66 to -4.75], P

OBJECTIVE: Plain packaging and graphic warning labels are two regulatory strategies that may impact cigarette risk beliefs and reduce consumption, but data are needed to better understand how smokers respond to such regulations. METHODS: Adult, daily, Marlboro non-menthol smokers (Red [n = 141] or Gold [n = 43]) completed a mixed factorial randomized trial. Participants smoked their usual cigarettes during baseline (5-days) and were randomized to receive cigarette packs with a warning label manipulation (graphic vs. text-only). Within each warning label condition, participants completed three within-subjects pack color manipulations (red, gold, plain), each lasting 15 days. Participants were blinded to the fact that all packs contained their usual cigarettes. Mixed-effects models examined between- and within-subject differences on risk beliefs, product perceptions, and smoking behavior. RESULTS: Warning type and package color did not impact cigarette consumption or subjective ratings. However, use increased in all conditions (2.59-3.59 cigarettes per day) relative to baseline. While smokers largely held correct risk beliefs at baseline (Mean = 6.02, SE = 0.17, Range:0-8), the cumulative number of incorrect or uncertain cigarette risk beliefs increased from baseline in all pack color manipulations in the text (IRR range = 1.70-2.16) and graphic (IRR range = 1.31-1.70) warning conditions. Across all pack color periods, those in the graphic (vs. text) warning condition had reduced odds of reporting their study cigarettes as safer than regular cigarettes (OR range = 0.22-0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Pack color modification may increase uncertainty about several key cigarette risk beliefs, though graphic warnings may attenuate these effects. Regulatory agencies could consider supporting policy changes with information campaigns to maximize public knowledge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: November 25, 2014; Registration number: NCT02301351.

Research suggests consumers may misunderstand modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims. We examined the effects of nicotine content across four tobacco products with and without MRTP claims among a racially and ethnically diverse sample of adults who do and do not smoke. Adults (n = 1484) aged 21-65 completed an online experiment using a 2 × 2 × 4 mixed factorial design to examine the effects of tobacco product (Classic White Snus, IQOS, JUUL e-cigarette, and VLN cigarette) and nicotine content (high vs. low) stratified by MRTP claim (present vs. absent) across four outcomes: (1) likely to try (2) serious disease if used regularly, (3) least addictive, and (4) ease of quitting smoking. Not including an MRTP claim resulted in an increased likelihood of trying a product, decreased concern of serious disease, lower perceived addictiveness, and increased ease of quitting smoking. Participants selected low nicotine IQOS without a claim as the least likely to cause serious disease. Low nicotine JUUL, without a claim, was selected as least addictive and most likely to facilitate quitting. Intentions to try were highest for low nicotine JUUL. Participants selected low-nicotine products as less addictive than high nicotine products. Regulatory efforts should consider how MRTP claims interact with different product characteristics. Subtle differences exist across outcomes between racial and ethnic groups, which indicates that further research is warranted.

The United States Food and Drug Administration has the authority to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes to minimal or non-addictive levels and could do so immediately or gradually over time. A large clinical trial compared the two approaches. This secondary analysis assesses abstinence and cessation-related outcomes one month after the trial concluded, when participants no longer had access to very low nicotine content (VLNC) research cigarettes. Smokers not interested in quitting (N = 1250) were recruited for the parent trial from 2014 to 2016 across 10 sites throughout the US and randomized to a 20-week study period during which they immediately switched to VLNC cigarettes, gradually transitioned to VLNC cigarettes with five monthly dose reductions, or smoked normal nicotine research cigarettes (control). At the one-month follow-up, both immediate and gradual reduction resulted in greater mean cigarette-free days (4.7 and 4.6 respectively) than the control group (3.2, both p

In studies of tobacco toxicology, including comparisons of different tobacco products and exposure to secondhand or thirdhand smoke, exposure assessment using biomarkers is often useful. Some studies have indicated that most of the toxicity of tobacco smoke is due to gas-phase compounds. 3-Ethenylpyridine (3-EP) is a major nicotine pyrolysis product occurring in the gas phase of tobacco smoke. It has been used extensively as an environmental tracer for tobacco smoke. 3-EP would be expected to be a useful tobacco smoke biomarker as well, but nothing has been published about its metabolism and excretion in humans. In this Article we describe a solid-phase microextraction (SPME) GC-MS/MS method for determination of 3-EP in human urine and its application to the determination of 3-EP in the urine of smokers and people exposed to secondhand smoke. We conclude that 3-EP is a promising biomarker that could be useful in studies of tobacco smoke exposure and toxicology. We also point out the paucity of data on 3-EP toxicity and suggest that additional studies are needed.Graphical Abstract

BACKGROUND: We examined the nicotine metabolite ratios (NMR) relationship with smoking intensity, nicotine dependence, and a broad array of biomarkers of exposure and biological effect in commercial cigarette smokers. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted on two cross-sectional samples of adult, daily smokers from Wave 1 (2013-2014) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) Study and baseline data from a 2014-2017 randomized clinical trial. Data were restricted to participants of non-Hispanic, white race. The lowest quartile of NMR (

BACKGROUND: A mandated reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes could reduce smoking rate and prevalence. However, one concern is that smokers may compensate by increasing the intensity with which they smoke each cigarette to obtain more nicotine. This study assessed whether smokers engage in compensatory smoking by estimating the mouth-level nicotine intake of low nicotine cigarettes smoked during a clinical trial. METHODS: Smokers were randomly assigned to receive cigarettes with one of five nicotine contents for 6 weeks. An additional group received a cigarette with the lowest nicotine content, but an increased tar yield. The obtained mouth-level nicotine intake from discarded cigarette butts for a subset of participants (51-70/group) was estimated using solanesol as described previously. A compensation index was calculated for each group to estimate the proportion of nicotine per cigarette recovered through changes in smoking intensity. RESULTS: There was no significant increase in smoking intensity for any of the reduced nicotine cigarettes as measured by the compensation index (an estimated 0.4% of the nicotine lost was recovered in the lowest nicotine group; 95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 1.2). There was a significant decrease in smoking intensity for very low nicotine content cigarettes with increased tar yield. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in nicotine content did not result in compensatory changes in how intensively participants smoked research cigarettes. IMPACT: Combined with data from clinical trials showing a reduction in cigarettes smoked per day, these data suggest that a reduction in nicotine content is unlikely to result in increased smoke exposure.

BackgroundA faster rate of nicotine metabolism has been associated with smoking more cigarettes, greater nicotine withdrawal symptoms, and lower smoking quit rates. However, the association between nicotine metabolic rate (NMR) and cognitive functioning during withdrawal has not been determined.MethodsWe compared cognitive function in 121 fast or slow nicotine metabolizers after smoking, and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence. Cognitive functioning was assessed using N-back working memory tests with outcomes of accuracy and processing speed. Participants smoked two cigarettes and then abstained from smoking for 6 h. N-back tests were administered after smoking (0 h) and at 3 and 6 h of nicotine abstinence.ResultsAn effect of processing speed was found over time on the 2-back, in that participants had significantly longer average reaction times when the stimuli presented did not match the target letter. NMR was not significantly associated with the processing speed change over time. Within-race differences in working memory were evident in that Caucasian fast metabolizers had significantly poorer accuracy and processing speed.ConclusionsMinimal change in working memory over 6 h of nicotine abstinence was observed. Overall, NMR was not significantly associated with the change in processing speed, however Caucasian fast metabolizers displayed poorer accuracy and processing speed at discrete time points.

AimA previous study showed significantly greater reductions in number of cigarettes smoked and biomarkers of toxicant and carcinogen exposure in smokers assigned to immediate reduction of nicotine in cigarettes to very low levels versus gradually over time or continued smoking of normal nicotine content cigarettes. This study examines the effects of these approaches on selected biomarkers associated with harmful biological effects.DesignThree-arm, randomized controlled trial.SettingTen United States academic institutional sites.ParticipantsDaily smokers uninterested in quitting smoking with a mean age of 45.1 [standard deviation (SD) = 13.4)] years and smoking 17.1 (SD = 8.5) cigarettes/day; 43.9% (549 of 1250) female; 60.6% (758 of 1250) white ethnicity.Interventions(1) Smoking cigarettes where nicotine content was immediately reduced to very low levels (n = 503); (2) smoking cigarettes where nicotine content was gradually reduced, with dose changes occurring monthly (n = 498); and (3) continued smoking with normal nicotine content cigarettes (n = 249).MeasurementsSmokers were assessed at baseline while smoking their usual brand cigarettes, and again at 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 weeks. Outcomes were areas under the concentration time curve (AUC) for the period of study of biomarkers of inflammation, oxidative stress and hematological parameters.FindingsNo consistent significant differences were observed across groups (Bayes factors showing data to be insensitive), with the only exception being red blood cell size variability, which was observed to be lower in the immediate versus gradual nicotine reduction [mean difference =  -0.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.18, -0.04, P = 0.004] and normal nicotine control groups (mean difference = - 0.15, 95% CI = -0.23, -0.06, P = 0.001).ConclusionIt remains unclear whether switching to very low nicotine cigarettes leads to a short-term reduction in biomarkers of tobacco-related harm.

The urinary metabolites cyanoethyl mercapturic acid (CEMA) and 3-hydroxypropyl mercapturic acid (3-HPMA) have been widely used as biomarkers of exposure to acrylonitrile and acrolein, respectively, but there are no published data on their consistency over time in the urine of cigarette smokers. We provided, free of charge over a 20 week period, Spectrum NRC600/601 research cigarettes to cigarette smokers in the control arm of a randomized clinical trial of the reduced nicotine cigarette. Urine samples were collected at weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 and analyzed for CEMA and 3-HPMA, and total nicotine equivalents (TNE) using validated methods. Creatinine-corrected intra-class correlation coefficients for CEMA, 3-HPMA, and TNE were 0.67, 0.46, and 0.68, respectively, indicating good longitudinal consistency for CEMA, while that of 3-HPMA was fair. A strong correlation between CEMA and TNE values was observed. These data support the use of CEMA as a reliable biomarker of tobacco smoke exposure. This is the first report of the longitudinal stability of the biomarkers of acrylonitrile and acrolein exposure in smokers. The data indicate that CEMA, the biomarker of acrylonitrile exposure, is consistent over time in cigarette smokers, supporting its use. While 3-HPMA levels were less stable over time, this biomarker is nevertheless a useful monitor of human acrolein exposure because of its specificity to this toxicant.

The urinary metabolites (Z)-7-[1R,2R,3R,5S)-3,5-dihydroxy-2-[(E,3S)-3-hydroxyoct-1-enyl]cyclopentyl]hept-5-enoic acid (8-iso-PGF2α), an F2-isoprostane and biomarker of oxidative damage, and "prostaglandin E2 metabolite" (PGE-M), a biomarker of inflammation, are elevated in cigarette smokers. However, there is little information in the literature on the longitudinal stability of these widely used biomarkers. In a large clinical trial involving 10 institutional sites, smokers were given, free of charge over a period of 20 weeks, Spectrum NRC600/601 research cigarettes containing 15.5 mg nicotine/g tobacco. All participants were instructed to smoke these cigarettes for the duration of the study. At weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, first morning urine voids were collected and analyzed for 8-iso-PGF2α and PGE-M using validated liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry methods. The mean level of 8-iso-PGF2α at Week 4 was 1.34 ± 1.08 (S.D.) pmol/mg creatinine (N = 226) while that of PGE-M was 73.7 ± 113 (S.D.) pmol/mg creatinine (N = 232). The corresponding levels at Week 20 were 1.35 ± 0.93 (S.D.) pmol/mg creatinine (N = 209) for 8-iso-PGF2α and 74.2 ± 142 (S.D.) pmol/mg creatinine (N = 210) for PGE-M. There was variation in these values in the intervening weeks. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were 0.51 (95% CI, 0.45, 0.57) and 0.36 (0.30, 0.43), for 8-iso-PGF2α and PGE-M, respectively, indicating fair longitudinal stability for 8-iso-PGF2α and poorer longitudinal stability for PGE-M in cigarette smokers. Males had higher ICC values than females for both 8-iso-PGF2α and PGE-M. These results indicate that, in addition to cigarette smoking, endogenous processes of oxidative damage and inflammation influence the levels of these biomarkers over time among current smokers.

Combustible cigarettes remain the most harmful and addictive tobacco product, and reducing the prevalence of smoking continues to be a critical public health goal. While nicotine is the constituent primarily responsible for addiction to cigarettes, most of the harm associated with smoking comes from byproducts of tobacco combustion. Recently, two different approaches for reducing the harms of smoking have emerged, both of which focus on breaking the link between the addiction to nicotine and the harms caused by smoking. First, the addictive potential of cigarettes could be minimized by requiring a large reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes. Evidence for a nicotine reduction policy thus far shows that the use of very low nicotine content cigarettes results in a reduction in the number of cigarettes people smoke per day and a reduction in cigarette dependence. Second, emerging alternative nicotine delivery systems (ANDS) like electronic cigarettes may provide sufficient nicotine to act as substitutes for cigarettes while delivering much lower levels of toxicants. Evidence suggests that the emergence of ANDS has increased the percentage of smokers who are able to quit. The present paper will briefly review the evidence for each of these approaches, and consider what contemporary reinforcement and addiction theories can tell us about their likely success. We argue that the most effective endgame approach is one that pursues both nicotine reduction and alternative nicotine delivery systems as complementary.

Young adults are influenced by cigarette package marketing. Pictorial warning labels are a recommended intervention. Evidence demonstrates pictorial warnings impact negative emotion, risk perceptions, and motivation to quit smoking, but there is limited research on their effects over time. This study analyzes data from a randomized trial of young adult smokers (N = 229) exposed to a pictorial or text-only cigarette warning. We assessed changes in fear, anger, risk perceptions, and motivation to quit smoking after 4 weeks using latent change score modeling and over 3 months using latent growth modeling. Latent change results showed exposure was associated with increases in fear, anger, and motivation to quit after 4 weeks. Latent growth showed exposure was associated with increases in motivation to quit smoking over 3 months, but not other outcomes. Findings suggest pictorial warning labels produce an emotional response and increase motivation to quit among young adult smokers., Author(s): Andrea C. Johnson [sup.1] , Samuel J. Simmens [sup.2] , Monique M. Turner [sup.3] , W. Douglas Evans [sup.4] , Andrew A. Strasser [sup.1] , Darren Mays [sup.5] Author [...]

ImportanceThe optimal temporal approach for reducing nicotine to minimally or nonaddictive levels in all cigarettes sold in the United States has not been determined.ObjectivesTo determine the effects of immediate vs gradual reduction in nicotine content to very low levels and as compared with usual nicotine level cigarettes on biomarkers of toxicant exposure.Design, setting, and participantsA double-blind, randomized, parallel-design study with 2 weeks of baseline smoking and 20 weeks of intervention was conducted at 10 US sites. A volunteer sample of daily smokers with no intention to quit within 30 days was recruited between July 2014 and September 2016, with the last follow-up completed in March 2017.Interventions(1) Immediate reduction to 0.4 mg of nicotine per gram of tobacco cigarettes; (2) gradual reduction from 15.5 mg to 0.4 mg of nicotine per gram of tobacco cigarettes with 5 monthly dose changes; or (3) maintenance on 15.5 mg of nicotine per gram of tobacco cigarettes.Main outcomes and measuresBetween-group differences in 3 co-primary biomarkers of smoke toxicant exposure: breath carbon monoxide (CO), urine 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (3-HPMA, metabolite of acrolein), and urine phenanthrene tetraol (PheT, indicator of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) calculated as area under the concentration-time curve over the 20 weeks of intervention.ResultsAmong 1250 randomized participants (mean age, 45 years; 549 women [44%]; 958 [77%] completed the trial), significantly lower levels of exposure were observed in the immediate vs gradual reduction group for CO (mean difference, -4.06 parts per million [ppm] [95% CI, -4.89 to -3.23]; P

ImportanceThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced its intention to reduce the nicotine content in combustible cigarettes but must base regulation on public health benefits. Fast nicotine metabolizers may be at risk for increased smoking following a national nicotine reduction policy. We hypothesized that using reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes would be associated with increases in smoking behaviors and exposure among smokers with a fast-but not slow-nicotine-metabolite ratio (NMR).ObjectivesTo examine the association of RNC cigarettes with smoking behaviors and biomarkers of exposure and to compare these associations in fast and slow metabolizers of nicotine based on the NMR.Design setting and participantsA 35-day, 3-period, within-participant nonrandomized clinical trial was conducted at an academic medical center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. A 5-day baseline period using the smokers' preferred brand of cigarettes was followed by 2 consecutive 15-day periods using free investigational RNC cigarettes. A total of 100 daily, non-treatment-seeking, nonmenthol cigarette smokers (59 fast, 41 slow metabolizers) were recruited from December 24, 2013, to December 2, 2015. Data analysis was performed from December 12, 2016, to January 3, 2018.InterventionsTwo 15-day periods using cigarettes containing 5.2 mg (RNC1) and 1.3 mg (RNC2) of nicotine per gram of tobacco.Main outcomes and measuresSmoking behaviors (number of cigarettes per day [CPD], total puff volume) and biomarkers of exposure (carbon monoxide [CO], urine total nicotine equivalents [TNE], and 4-[methylnitrosamino]-1-[3-pyridyl]-1-butanol [NNAL]).ResultsSmokers (73 [73.0%] men; 74 [74.0%] white; mean [SD] age, 43.02 [12.13] years; mean [SD] CPD, 17.31 [5.72]) consumed 2.62 (95% CI, 1.54-3.70) more CPD during the RNC1 period vs their preferred brand during baseline (P < .001) and approximated baseline CPD during the RNC2 period (mean difference, 0.96 [95% CI, -0.36 to 2.28]; P = .24). Additional outcome measures were lower during both RNC periods vs baseline (total puff volume, mean [95% CI]: RNC1, 537 mL [95% CI, 479-595 mL]; RNC2, 598 mL [95% CI, 547-649 mL] vs baseline, 744 mL [95% CI, 681-806 mL]; TNE, mean [95% CI]: RNC1, 30.9 nmoL/mg creatinine [95% CI, 26.0-36.6 nmoL/mg]; RNC2, 22.8 nmoL/mg creatinine [95% CI, 17.8-29.0 nmoL/mg] vs baseline, 54.6 nmoL/mg creatinine [95% CI, 48.1-62.1 nmoL/mg]; and NNAL, mean [95% CI]: RNC1, 229 pg/mg creatinine [95% CI, 189-277 pg/mg]; RNC2, 190 pg/mg creatinine [95% CI, 157-231 pg/mg] vs baseline, 280 pg/mg creatinine [95% CI, 231-339 pg/mg]; all P < .001). Carbon monoxide measures were similar across study periods (CO boost [SD], RNC1, 4.6 ppm [4.1-5.1 ppm]; RNC2, 4.2 ppm [3.7-4.6 ppm]; and baseline, 4.4 ppm [3.8-4.9 ppm]). The RNC cigarette associations did not differ by NMR.Conclusions and relevanceBoth RNC cigarettes were associated with decreased puffing and urinary biomarker exposure but not with decreased daily cigarette consumption or CO levels. The NMR did not moderate associations at the nicotine levels tested, suggesting that fast metabolizers may not be at greater risk of increasing use or exposure from these products should the FDA mandate an RNC standard for cigarettes.

Background and aimsClinical trials on the impact and safety of reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCs) are ongoing, and an important methodological concern is participant compliance with smoking only RNCs. Our aims were to measure non-compliance biochemically with urine cotinine (COT) and total nicotine equivalents (TNEs), compare with self-reported non-compliance and identify associated covariates.DesignSecondary analysis of a double-blind, parallel, randomized clinical trial.SettingResearch centers from the United States, enrolling participants from June 2013 to July 2014.ParticipantsVolunteer sample of 242 participants (55% Caucasian), average age of 41.2 years, smoking at least five cigarettes per day (CPD).InterventionSmoking very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs; 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) for 6 weeks.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was biochemically verified non-compliance, measured as thresholds of COT/CPD and TNE/CPD ratios, considering changes in nicotine content from conventional levels to VLNCs, and as an absolute threshold of week 6 TNEs. Self-reported non-compliance was measured via daily phone calls. Key predictors included age, sex, race, menthol preference, nicotine metabolite ratio, time to first cigarette, dependence, CPD, TNEs, tar level and cigarette evaluation.FindingsEstimates of non-compliance with smoking the VLNCs exclusively include: the biochemical ratios (both 78%), the week 6 TNE threshold (76%) and self-report (39%). Of the key covariates, age, dependence and cigarette evaluations of satisfaction were significant; for age, younger participants more likely to be non-compliant [P = 0.01; odds ratio (OR) = 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96-0.99]. Dependence was associated significantly with self-reported non-compliance (P = 0.01; OR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.06-1.55). Cigarette evaluations of satisfaction were associated significantly with non-compliance (P = 0.001; OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.61-0.82).ConclusionsAmong smokers volunteering to smoke only very low nicotine cigarettes for 6 weeks, non-compliance was common and biochemical assessments detected more cases of non-compliance than self-report. Despite high levels of non-compliance, smokers reduced their intake of nicotine by an average of 60%.

ObjectivesLittle is known about the degree of nicotine replacement across first-generation e-cigarette brands, how e-cigarettes are used, and if there is variation across brands in relevant smoking phenotypes. The objective of this project was to collect data that are critical to better understanding, use, and exposure when using e-cigarettes, which may then inform clinical trials and tobacco regulatory policy.MethodsTwenty-eight cigarette smokers were randomized to use one of 5 popular brands of e-cigarettes for a 10-day study. Day 1 (own cigarette brand) data established baseline levels for cotinine, carbon monoxide (CO), topography, cigarette liking, withdrawal, and craving. Participants returned on Days 5 and 10 to reassess these measures while exclusively using e-cigarettes.ResultsCompared to cigarette smoking, e-cigarettes provided significantly lower nicotine levels (25%-50%), reduced CO exposure, and lower ratings of liking (p < .05). Topography significantly differed between cigarette and e-cigarette sessions (p < .05). All brands significantly reduced withdrawal and craving (p < .05). There were no significant brand differences in outcome measures associated with exposure or use.ConclusionsE-cigarettes are not liked as much as cigarettes, provide significantly lower nicotine replacement, reduce CO exposure, and mitigate withdrawal and craving. The patterns of use significantly differ compared to cigarette smoking.

BackgroundThe Food and Drug Administration can set standards that reduce the nicotine content of cigarettes.MethodsWe conducted a double-blind, parallel, randomized clinical trial between June 2013 and July 2014 at 10 sites. Eligibility criteria included an age of 18 years or older, smoking of five or more cigarettes per day, and no current interest in quitting smoking. Participants were randomly assigned to smoke for 6 weeks either their usual brand of cigarettes or one of six types of investigational cigarettes, provided free. The investigational cigarettes had nicotine content ranging from 15.8 mg per gram of tobacco (typical of commercial brands) to 0.4 mg per gram. The primary outcome was the number of cigarettes smoked per day during week 6.ResultsA total of 840 participants underwent randomization, and 780 completed the 6-week study. During week 6, the average number of cigarettes smoked per day was lower for participants randomly assigned to cigarettes containing 2.4, 1.3, or 0.4 mg of nicotine per gram of tobacco (16.5, 16.3, and 14.9 cigarettes, respectively) than for participants randomly assigned to their usual brand or to cigarettes containing 15.8 mg per gram (22.2 and 21.3 cigarettes, respectively; P