Project description:IntroductionMany people incorrectly think that very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes are less carcinogenic than current cigarettes. This risk misperception by people who smoke could reduce motivation to quit under a nicotine reduction policy. We qualitatively examined perspectives on campaign messages designed to reduce misperceptions.Aims and methodsAdults who smoke from North Carolina participated in online interviews. After being introduced to the idea of a VLNC policy, participants were shown VLNC messages and asked about their perceptions on the clarity, understandability, persuasiveness, and meaning of the messages. We conducted a thematic content analysis of the transcripts.ResultsThirty adults who smoke cigarettes participated (15 females, 13 males, 2 nonbinary) with a mean age of 43 years. Central themes that emerged were: (1) Confusion about the proposed VLNC cigarette policy affected how messages were interpreted; (2) Messages that promote self-efficacy for quitting rather than guilt or fear were better received; and (3) Direct and succinct messages were seen as more able to grab attention and inform people who smoke. Some participant concerns focused on whether VLNC cigarettes would relieve their nicotine cravings and whether they would need to smoke more VLNC cigarettes to feel satisfied.ConclusionCampaign messages to educate the public about the harmful effects of smoking VLNC cigarettes may be more effective if people who smoke are informed about the policy's rationale to understand why nicotine is removed rather than the other harmful chemicals. Messages should also acknowledge the difficulty of quitting and be short and direct to capture attention.ImplicationsAdults who smoke have some confusion about nicotine reduction in cigarettes and this affects how they perceive potential communication campaign messages about the risk of smoking VLNC cigarettes. In our qualitative research, we found that adults who smoke prefer messages about VLNC cigarettes that acknowledge the challenge of quitting and that are direct and succinct. With further development, campaign messages may be able to reduce misperceptions about VLNC cigarettes and maximize the public health benefit of a nicotine reduction policy.
Project description:IntroductionRegulators are considering reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes to a minimally addictive level. This could particularly benefit smokers from populations vulnerable to heavy smoking and difficulties quitting. We assessed predictors of adherence among adults from vulnerable populations assigned to use very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) in randomized clinical trials, to identify characteristics of those who require additional assistance if a nicotine reduction policy were implemented.Aims and methodsData came from three populations of vulnerable adult smokers assigned to use VLNC cigarettes (0.4 mg/g nicotine) during 12-week randomized controlled trials (n = 286): Socioeconomically disadvantaged women of reproductive age, opioid-maintained adults, and adults with affective disorders. Logistic and linear regressions modeled predictors of adherence based on changes in cotinine at week-6 and week-12 assessments relative to baseline, and as a 90% reduction in cotinine relative to baseline (full adherence: yes/no). Predictors included satisfaction with study cigarettes, craving, nicotine dependence severity, withdrawal, population membership, baseline affective-disorder symptoms, and sociodemographic characteristics.ResultsDependence severity was negatively associated with both adherence measures at week 6 (p < .01), whereas increased satisfaction with study cigarettes and age were positively associated with both measures at weeks 6 and 12 (p < .01). Opioid-maintained adults exhibited reduced adherence and were less likely to reach full adherence at week 12 compared to disadvantaged women (p = .02).ConclusionsFactors associated with VLNC adherence in vulnerable populations are similar to those in the general population of smokers. Furthermore, studies are indicated investigating nicotine supplements (e.g., e-cigarettes, NRT) to support highly dependent adults faced with using VLNCs.ImplicationsThis study identified factors predicting difficulty maintaining adherence to a regimen of very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNC) among adults from vulnerable populations. Findings suggested that factors predicting difficulty maintaining adherence (greater nicotine dependence and low satisfaction with study-provided VLNC) were common across vulnerable smokers and the general population of adults who smoke. Furthermore, research should investigate alternatives to support highly dependent adults, such as pairing VLNC with supplemental, noncombusted nicotine. Some vulnerable populations (e.g., opioid-maintained adults) may be especially in need of supplemental, noncombusted nicotine.
Project description:AIMS:To compare the use of alternative nicotine products, smoking behavior and tobacco biomarker exposure in smokers unwilling to quit who were assigned randomly to normal nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes or very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes. DESIGN:Randomized, parallel-arm 8-week study with assignment to VLNC (VLNC 1, n = 53) or NNC (NNC, n = 27) with access to non-cigarette combusted and non-combusted tobacco/nicotine products or to VLNC with access to only non-combusted products (VLNC2, n = 56). SETTING:Clinics in Minnesota, USA. PARTICIPANTS:Smokers uninterested in quitting smoking with a mean [± standard deviation (SD)] age of 44 (± 14) years and smoking 16 (± seven) cigarettes/day; 51% female, 72% white. MEASUREMENTS:During the experimental period, the measures taken included: rate of alternative products used, amount of and abstinence from combusted tobacco used and tobacco exposure biomarkers. FINDINGS:There were higher rates of non-combusted alternative tobacco/nicotine product use in both VLNC conditions versus the NNC condition [rate ratio (RR) = 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.94, 2.46 and RR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.46, 1.85, respectively] and in VLNC1 versus VLNC2 condition (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.23, 1.44), accompanied by reduced biomarkers of exposure primarily in VLNC2 condition compared to NNC condition (Ps < 0.05). Fewer combusted products were smoked at almost all visits (Ps ? 0.02) and there were higher rates of abstinence for both VLNC conditions compared with the NNC condition (VLNC1 versus NNC: RR = 9.96, 95% CI = 5.01, 19.81; VLNC2 versus NNC: RR = 11.23, 95% CI = 5.74, 21.97). CONCLUSION:The offer of, and instructions to use, reduced nicotine content cigarettes during an 8-week period led to greater use of alternative tobacco/nicotine products compared with continued use of normal nicotine cigarettes and also reductions in smoking rates.
Project description: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 < .0055), 3-HPMA (ratio of geometric means, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77 to 0.88]; P < .0055), and PheT (ratio of geometric means, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.93]; P < .0055). Significantly lower levels of exposure were observed in the immediate reduction vs control group for CO (mean difference, -3.38 [95% CI, -4.40 to -2.36]; P < .0055), 3-HPMA (ratio of geometric means, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.75 to 0.88]; P < .0055), and PheT (ratio of geometric means, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.92]; P < .0055). No significant differences were observed between the gradual reduction vs control groups for CO (mean difference, 0.68 [95% CI, -0.31 to 1.67]; P = .18), 3-HPMA (ratio of geometric means, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.06]; P = .64), and PheT (ratio of geometric means, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.04]; P = .52).Conclusions and relevanceAmong smokers, immediate reduction of nicotine in cigarettes led to significantly greater decreases in biomarkers of smoke exposure across time compared with gradual reduction or a control group, with no significant differences between gradual reduction and control.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02139930.
Project description:The Food and Drug Administration has the authority to regulate tobacco product constituents, including nicotine, to promote public health. Reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes may lead to lower levels of addiction. Smokers however may compensate by smoking more cigarettes and/or smoking more intensely. The objective of this study was to test whether individual differences in the level of nicotine dependence (as measured by the Fagerstrom Test of Cigarette Dependence [FTCD]) and/or the rate of nicotine metabolism influence smoking behavior and exposure to tobacco toxicants when smokers are switched to reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNC).Data from 51 participants from a previously published clinical trial of RNC were analyzed. Nicotine content of cigarettes was progressively reduced over 6 months and measures of smoking behavior, as well as nicotine metabolites and tobacco smoke toxicant exposure, CYP2A6 and nicotinic CHRNA5-A3-B4 (rs1051730) genotype were measured.Higher baseline FTCD predicted smoking more cigarettes per day (CPD), higher cotinine and smoke toxicant levels while smoking RNC throughout the study, with no interaction by RNC level. Time to first cigarette (TFC) was associated with differences in compensation. TFC within 10 min was associated with a greater increase in CPD compared to TFC greater than 10 min. Neither rate of nicotine metabolism, nor CYP2A6 or nicotinic receptor genotype, had an effect on the outcome variables of interest.FTCD is associated with overall exposure to nicotine and other constituents of tobacco smoke, while a short TFC is associated with an increased compensatory response after switching to RNC.
Project description:Background and aimsA broadly mandated reduction of the nicotine content (RNC) of cigarettes has been proposed in the United States to reduce the addictiveness of cigarettes, to prevent new smokers from becoming addicted and to facilitate quitting in established smokers. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether following 7 months of smoking very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNC), and then returning to their own cigarettes, smokers would demonstrate persistently reduced nicotine intake compared with baseline or quit smoking.MethodsIn a community-based clinic 135 smokers not interested in quitting were randomized to one of two groups. A research group smoked their usual brand of cigarettes, followed by five types of research cigarettes with progressively lower nicotine content, each for 1 month, followed by 6 months at the lowest nicotine level (0.5 mg/cigarette) (53 subjects) and then 12 months with no intervention (30 subjects completed). A control group smoked their usual brand for the same period of time (50 subjects at 6 months, 38 completed). Smoking behavior, biomarkers of nicotine intake and smoke toxicant exposure were measured.ResultsAfter 7 months smoking VLNC, nicotine intake remained below baseline (plasma cotinine 149 versus 250 ng/ml, P<0.005) with no significant change in cigarettes per day or expired carbon monoxide (CO). During the 12-month follow-up, cotinine levels in RNC smokers rose to baseline levels and to those of control smokers. Quit rates among RNC smokers were very low [7.5 versus 2% in controls, not significant).ConclusionsIn smokers not interested in quitting, reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes over 12 months does not appear to result in extinction of nicotine dependence, assessed by persistently reduced nicotine intake or quitting smoking over the subsequent 12 months.
Project description:Objective: We estimated whether recent cannabis use moderates response to cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among smokers with concurrent affective disorders, opioid dependence, or socioeconomic disadvantage. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site, double-blind, laboratory study examining acute response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCC) in 169 adult smokers with co-morbid conditions. Participants positive for recent cannabis use or self-reported past 30-day cannabis use at baseline were categorized as current cannabis users (N = 63). Repeated measures analysis of variance tests assessed whether baseline cannabis use moderated cigarette reinforcement, tobacco withdrawal, craving, smoking topography, or carbon monoxide boost. Results: Cannabis users were younger, less educated, and had more depression and anxiety than non-users (p < .05). Cannabis use status did not moderate the effects of nicotine dose on concurrent choice testing, subjective effects of RNCCs, or smoking topography. After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, cannabis users had higher ratings on Smoking Satisfaction, Enjoyment of Respiratory Tract Sensations, and Craving Reduction across all nicotine doses. Cannabis users reported longer withdrawal symptom duration and more rapid decline of carbon monoxide boost than non-users. Conclusions: Findings suggest RNCCs decrease the addiction potential of cigarettes in vulnerable populations independent of cannabis use status.
Project description:The reduction of the nicotine content of cigarettes to nonaddicting levels is a potential federal regulatory intervention to reduce the prevalence of cigarette smoking and related disease. Many clinical trials on the effects and safety of nicotine reduction are ongoing. An important methodologic concern is noncompliance with reduced nicotine content cigarettes in the context of freely available conventional cigarettes. We propose two approaches using biomarkers to estimate noncompliance in smokers of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes in a clinical trial.Data from 50 subjects in a study of gradual nicotine reduction were analyzed. Using plasma cotinine concentrations measured at baseline and while smoking VLNC cigarettes, we compared within-subject ratios of plasma cotinine comparing usual brand to VLNC in relation to nicotine content of these cigarettes. In another approach, we used nicotine pharmacokinetic data to estimate absolute plasma cotinine/cigarettes per day (CPD) threshold values for compliance based on the nicotine content of VLNC.The two approaches showed concordance, indicating at least 60% noncompliance with smoking VLNC. In a sensitivity analysis assuming extreme compensation and extreme values for nicotine metabolic parameters, noncompliance was still at least 40%, much higher than self-reported noncompliance.Biomarker analysis demonstrates a high degree of noncompliance with smoking VLNC cigarettes, indicating that smokers are supplementing these with conventional cigarettes.We propose a practical approach to assessing compliance with smoking VLNC in clinical trials of nicotine reduction.
Project description:A national nicotine reduction policy has the potential to reduce cigarette smoking and associated adverse health impacts among vulnerable populations. However, possible unanticipated adverse effects of reducing nicotine content in cigarettes, such as increasing the use of alcohol or other abused substances, must be examined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of exposure to varying doses of nicotine in cigarettes on use of other substances. This was a secondary analysis (n = 753) of three simultaneous, multisite, double-blind, randomized-controlled trials examining 12 weeks of exposure to study cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) among daily smokers from three vulnerable populations: individuals with affective disorders (n = 251), individuals with opioid use disorder (n = 256), and socioeconomically-disadvantaged women of reproductive age (n = 246). Effect of study cigarette assignment on urine toxicology screens (performed weekly) and responses to drug and alcohol use questionnaires (completed at study weeks 6 and 12) were examined using negative binomial regression, logistic regression, or repeated measures analysis of variance, controlling for sex, age, and menthol status. The most common substances identified using urine toxicology included tetrahydrocannabinol (THC; 44.8%), cocaine (9.2%), benzodiazepine (8.6%), and amphetamines (8.0%), with 57.2% of participants testing positive at least once for substance use (27.3% if excluding THC). No significant main effects of nicotine dose were found on any of the examined outcomes. These results suggest that reducing nicotine content does not systematically increase use of other substances, even among individuals at increased risk of substance use. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT2250664, NCT2250534.
Project description:There has been long-standing interest in a reduced-nicotine product standard for combusted tobacco, which is within the regulatory purview of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In weighing whether to establish this standard, it is important to consider potential responses among people who are at elevated risk for tobacco-related health harms. In this narrative review, we summarize studies of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes conducted between 2010 and 2021 in groups that the FDA has identified as vulnerable populations. Studies conducted to date in adults with mental health conditions, adults with opioid use disorder, socioeconomically-disadvantaged adults, and youth or young adults indicate that immediate switching to VLNC cigarettes decreases smoking, with minimal or no unintended negative consequences. Few studies have investigated the effects of VLNC cigarettes in racial or ethnic minorities, people who smoke menthol cigarettes, and pregnant women, but initial findings suggest that responses of these individuals are similar to responses observed in other vulnerable populations. We are not aware of studies that have investigated VLNC cigarettes in military/veteran populations, sexual or gender minority individuals, or people living in underserved rural environments. Future research directions include understanding how to promote cessation in the context of a reduced-nicotine standard, and how to correct VLNC misperceptions in vulnerable populations. Nevertheless, the evidence to date indicates that a reduced-nicotine standard is likely to have the same beneficial effects on smoking reductions as it does in less vulnerable populations, which should provide some confidence in pursuing this regulatory approach.