Search

IntroductionReports in relatively healthy smokers suggest men are more sensitive than women to the subjective effects of reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCCs). We know of no reports examining sex differences in the relative reinforcing effects of RNCCs, an important outcome in assessing smoking's addiction potential. The aim of the present study is to address this gap by examining sex/gender differences on reinforcing effects while examining whether sex differences in subjective effects are discernible in vulnerable populations.MethodsSecondary analysis of a within-subject, double-blinded experiment examining acute effects of cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among 169 adult smokers with psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. Effects of dose, sex, and their interaction were examined on reinforcing (concurrent-choice and Cigarette Purchase Task [CPT] testing), and subjective effects (Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire [CEQ] and craving/withdrawal ratings).ResultsReducing nicotine content decreased the relative reinforcing effects of smoking in concurrent-choice and CPT testing (p's < .05) with no significant effects of sex nor dose × sex/gender interactions. Reducing nicotine content decreased CEQ ratings with only a single significant effect of sex (higher Psychological Reward scores among women than men, p = .02) and no significant dose × sex/gender interactions. Results on craving/withdrawal paralleled those on the CEQ.ConclusionsReducing nicotine content decreases the addiction potential of smoking independent of sex in populations highly vulnerable to smoking and addiction, with no indication that women are less sensitive to subjective effects of RNCCs or would benefit less from a policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes.ImplicationsA policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes has the potential to reduce the addiction potential of smoking across men and women who are especially vulnerable to smoking, addiction, and tobacco-related adverse health impacts.

BackgroundA 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.MethodsSmokers 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.ResultsThere 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.ConclusionsReductions in nicotine content did not result in compensatory changes in how intensively participants smoked research cigarettes.ImpactCombined 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.

IntroductionBecause 30% of cigarettes sold in the United States are characterized as menthol cigarettes, it is important to understand how menthol preference may affect the impact of a nicotine reduction policy.MethodsIn a recent trial, non-treatment-seeking smokers were randomly assigned to receive very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNC; 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) or normal nicotine cigarettes (NNC; 15.5 mg/g) for 20 weeks. On the basis of preference, participants received menthol or non-menthol cigarettes. We conducted multivariable regression analyses to examine whether menthol preference moderated the effects of nicotine content on cigarettes per day (CPD), breath carbon monoxide (CO), urinary total nicotine equivalents (TNE), urinary 2-cyanoethylmercapturic acid (CEMA), and abstinence.ResultsAt baseline, menthol smokers (n = 346) reported smoking fewer CPD (14.9 vs. 19.2) and had lower TNE (52.8 vs. 71.6 nmol/mg) and CO (17.7 vs. 20.5 ppm) levels than non-menthol smokers (n = 406; ps < .05). At week 20, significant interactions indicated that menthol smokers had smaller treatment effects than non-menthol smokers for CPD (-6.4 vs. -9.3), TNE (ratio of geometric means, 0.22 vs. 0.10) and CEMA (ratio, 0.56 vs. 0.37; ps < .05), and trended toward a smaller treatment effect for CO (-4.5 vs. -7.3 ppm; p = .06). Odds ratios for abstinence at week 20 were 1.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.8 to 4.4) for menthol and 9.11 (95% CI = 3.3 to 25.2) for non-menthol VLNC smokers (p = .02) relative to the NNC condition.ConclusionsAlthough menthol smokers experienced reductions in smoking, toxicant exposure, and increases in quitting when using VLNC cigarettes, the magnitude of change was smaller than that observed for non-menthol smokers.ImplicationsResults of this analysis suggest that smokers of menthol cigarettes may respond to a nicotine reduction policy with smaller reductions in smoking rates and toxicant exposure than would smokers of non-menthol cigarettes.

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.

Introduction Considering recent and proposed bans on menthol cigarettes, methods are needed to understand the substitutability of potential menthol cigarette alternatives (MCAs) for menthol cigarettes. This study examined the prospective relationship between behavioral economic demand indices and subjective effects of usual brand menthol cigarettes (UBMC) and preferred MCAs with subsequent performance on a laboratory-based concurrent-choice task comparing UBMC and MCAs. Methods Eighty participants who typically smoked menthol cigarettes completed this clinical laboratory study. After sampling each product, participants completed the cigarette purchase task (CPT) and modified cigarette evaluation questionnaire (mCEQ). Following 1 week of substituting their preferred MCA for their UBMC, participants completed a 90-minute concurrent-choice self-administration (SA) task comparing their UBMC and preferred MCA. Linear regression models explored associations between CPT demand indices and mCEQ subjective effects in the laboratory with subsequent response effort for UBMCs on the concurrent-choice task. Results Three demand indices for UBMC were positively associated with UBMC response effort: essential value (EV; p  = .02), O max (p  = .02), and breakpoint (p  = .04). Four CPT demand indices for the preferred MCA significantly corresponded with UBMC response effort: EV (p  = .03), price associated with maximal expenditure (P max) (p  = .04), maximal expenditure (O max) (p  = .03), and breakpoint (p  = .03). Subjective effects captured by the mCEQ were not associated with response effort. Conclusions Demand indices reflecting Persistence (ie, sensitivity to escalating price) predicted effort to obtain UBMC puffs on the concurrent-choice task. Among this sample, the CPT captured information on the relative reinforcing value (ie, addiction potential) of combustible tobacco products similar to the longer SA task. Implications In an ever-changing product market, assessing the reinforcing efficacy of menthol cigarettes and putative substitutes quickly and with validity is an important methodological tool for understanding abuse liability. Results suggest that behavioral economic demand indices of CPT efficiently capture information on the relative reinforcing value of UBMC and plausible alternative tobacco products, similar to a 90-minute in-laboratory SA task. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Cigarette and little cigar/cigarillo (LCC) dual use is popular among young people and poses a substantial health risk. What remains unclear is the abuse liability of LCCs vs. cigarettes, LCCs' substitutability for cigarettes, and the influence of flavors on the abuse liability and substitutability of LCCs. Methods Sixty-five young adults (18–34 years) who dual use completed hypothetical purchase tasks to measure consumption of usual brand cigarettes and LCCs in 24 hours at increasing prices (demand), and LCC consumption at increasing cigarette prices (substitution). Three demand indices were calculated from raw data: breakpoint (price after which consumption reaches 0), O max (maximum daily expenditure), and P max (price at maximum expenditure). Two indices were estimated using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling: intensity (consumption when free) and price-sensitivity (rate of decline in consumption as price increases). Substitution, and associations of flavored use with demand and substitution, were estimated using linear mixed models. Results Results indicated similar abuse liability for LCCs and cigarettes. Intensity was greater for cigarettes, but price-sensitivity was similar. Flavored LCC use was associated with lower price-sensitivity and greater intensity than unflavored. LCCs were significant substitutes for cigarettes, but the effect was small. Flavored use was not associated with substitution. Conclusions Among young adults who dual use, LCCs and cigarettes had similar abuse liability, and those who used flavored had higher demand for their LCCs. A flavored cigar ban, as well as targeted prevention and cessation services for those who smoke flavored LCCs, may be important for reducing dual use in young adults. Implications Cigarette and LCC dual use remains high among young adults. Using hypothetical purchase tasks with young adults who dual use, LCCs had abuse liability similar to cigarettes, but were only modest substitutes for cigarettes. Participants who used flavored LCCs reported greater abuse liability than those who used unflavored, but not greater substitution for cigarettes. Prevention and cessation services are needed to target LCCs in young people, particularly those smoking flavored products. A flavored cigar ban may help to reduce their demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has initiated a public dialogue about reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes. A reduced-nicotine standard could increase withdrawal symptoms among current smokers. We examined the impact of switching smokers to cigarettes that varied in nicotine content on withdrawal symptoms over 6 weeks. A secondary analysis (N = 839) of a 10-site, double-blind clinical trial of nontreatment-seeking smokers was completed. Participants were instructed to smoke study cigarettes, containing 0.4 to 15.8 mg of nicotine/g of tobacco, for 6 weeks and were then abstinent overnight. Using latent growth curves, trajectories of individual withdrawal symptoms were compared between the reduced nicotine content (RNC) conditions and a normal nicotine content (NNC) condition. Path analyses compared symptoms after overnight abstinence. Relative to NNC cigarettes, participants smoking RNC cigarettes had increased anger/irritability/frustration and increased appetite/weight gain during the initial weeks, but the symptoms resolved by Week 6. Individuals who were biochemically verified as adherent with using only the 0.4 mg/g cigarettes had higher sadness levels (Cohen's d = .40) at Week 6 compared with the NNC condition, although symptoms were mild. After a post-Week 6 overnight abstinence challenge, some RNC conditions relative to NNC condition exhibited reduced withdrawal. Individuals who were biochemically confirmed as adherent to the lowest nicotine condition experienced only mild and transient symptom elevations. Thus, a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes produced a relatively mild and temporary increase in withdrawal among nontreatment-seeking smokers (ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT01681875). (PsycINFO Database Record

BackgroundThe FDA recently acquired regulatory authority over tobacco products, leading to renewed interest in whether reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes would reduce tobacco dependence in the United States. Given the association between depressive symptoms and cigarette smoking, it is important to consider whether smokers with elevated depressive symptoms experience unique benefits or negative consequences of nicotine reduction.MethodsIn this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial that examined the effects of cigarettes varying in nicotine content over a 6-week period in non-treatment-seeking smokers, we used linear regression to examine whether baseline depressive symptom severity (scores on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [CES-D]) moderated the effects of reduced-nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes, relative to normal-nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes, on smoking rates, depressive symptom severity, and related subjective and physiological measures.ResultsOf the 717 participants included in this analysis, 109 (15.2%) had CES-D scores ≥ 16, indicative of possible clinical depression. Relative to NNC cigarettes, RNC cigarettes reduced smoking rates, nicotine dependence, and cigarette craving, and these effects were not significantly moderated by baseline CES-D score. A significant interaction between baseline CES-D score and cigarette condition on week 6 CES-D score was observed (p < .05); among those with CES-D scores ≥ 16 at baseline, those assigned to RNC cigarettes had lower week 6 CES-D scores than those assigned to NNC cigarettes. Among those in the lowest nicotine content conditions, biochemically confirmed compliance with the RNC cigarettes was associated with an increase in CES-D score for those with baseline CES-D scores < 16 and no change in CES-D score for those with baseline CES-D scores ≥ 16.ConclusionsThese findings provide initial evidence that a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes may reduce smoking, without worsening depressive symptoms, among smokers with elevated depressive symptoms.ImplicationsThis secondary analysis of a recent clinical trial examined whether depressive symptom severity moderated the effects of reduced-nicotine cigarettes on smoking and depressive symptoms. Results indicate that, regardless of baseline depressive symptoms, participants randomized to reduced-nicotine cigarettes had lower smoking rates, nicotine intake, nicotine dependence, and craving at week 6 post-randomization than those assigned to normal-nicotine cigarettes. In participants with higher baseline depressive symptoms, those assigned to reduced-nicotine cigarettes had lower week 6 depressive symptoms than those assigned to normal-nicotine cigarettes. These results suggest that a nicotine reduction policy could have beneficial effects for smokers, regardless of depressive symptom severity.

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%.

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

IntroductionBoth the Tobacco Control Act in the U.S. and Article 9 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control enable governments to directly address the addictiveness of combustible tobacco by reducing nicotine through product standards. Although nicotine may have some harmful effects, the detrimental health effects of smoked tobacco are primarily due to non-nicotine constituents. Hence, the health effects of nicotine reduction would likely be determined by changes in behavior that result in changes in smoke exposure.MethodsHerein, we review the current evidence on nicotine reduction and discuss some of the challenges in establishing the empirical basis for regulatory decisions.ResultsTo date, research suggests that very low nicotine content cigarettes produce a desirable set of outcomes, including reduced exposure to nicotine, reduced smoking, and reduced dependence, without significant safety concerns. However, much is still unknown, including the effects of gradual versus abrupt changes in nicotine content, effects in vulnerable populations, and impact on youth.DiscussionA coordinated effort must be made to provide the best possible scientific basis for regulatory decisions. The outcome of this effort may provide the foundation for a novel approach to tobacco control that dramatically reduces the devastating health consequences of smoked tobacco.