Dataset Information

Twenty-four-hour subjective and pharmacological effects of ad-libitum electronic and combustible cigarette use among dual users.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

Relative pharmacological effects of e-cigarettes and cigarettes during 24 hours of ad-libitum use have not been described. In this study, 24-hour blood plasma nicotine concentrations and 48-hour subjective effects with use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes were measured among dual users.

Design

Two-arm within-subject cross-over design with preferred e-cigarette or cigarette ad-libitum use over 48 hours.

Setting

Hospital research ward in San Francisco, California, USA.

Participants

Thirty-six healthy dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (n = 8, 25% females).

Measurements

Twenty-four-hour blood plasma nicotine and cotinine concentrations and 48-hour self-reported nicotine withdrawal symptoms and rewarding effects.

Findings

Analyses used analysis of variance (ANOVA)-based mixed models with order of product (e-cigarette or cigarette) and product type (combustible cigarette or type of e-cigarette) as fixed effects, and subject as a repeated effect. During a 24-hour period, e-cigarettes produced lower nicotine exposure than cigarettes for the majority of users, although 25% received more nicotine from e-cigarettes, which was predicted by more frequent e-cigarette use or greater dependence. Compared to cigarette smoking, nicotine exposure for variable-power tank users was similar, while cig-a-like (t₍₃₀₎ = 2.71, P = 0.011, d = 0.745) and fixed-power tank users (t₍₃₀₎ = 3.37, P = 0.002, d = 0.993) were exposed to less nicotine. Cigarettes were rated higher than e-cigarettes on some desirable subjective effects (e.g. psychological reward, t₍₃₂₂₎ = 7.24 P < 0.001, d = 0.432), but withdrawal symptom reduction was comparable. No differences were found between e-cigarette types, but Bayes factors indicate that these measures were insensitive.

Conclusions

During a 24-hour period in a hospital setting in the United States, nicotine exposure for dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes was similar when using cigarettes or variable-power tank devices only but was lower for those using cig-a-like or fixed-power devices only. Despite lower nicotine levels, all types of e-cigarette were effective in preventing withdrawal symptoms. E-cigarettes were rated less rewarding than cigarettes.

SUBMITTER: Harvanko AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7255919 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionElectronic cigarettes e-cigarettes aerosolize a liquid solution often containing nicotine. e-cigarette nicotine delivery may be influenced by user puffing behaviors ("puff topography"). E-cigarette puff topography can be recorded using mouthpiece-based computerized systems. The present study sought to examine the extent to which these systems influence e-cigarette nicotine delivery and other e-cigarette associated acute effects under ad libitum use conditions.MethodsPlasma nicotine concentration, heart rate, and subjective effects were assessed in 29 experienced e-cigarette users using their preferred e-cigarette battery and liquid (?12mg/mL nicotine) in two sessions differing only by the presence of a mouthpiece-based device. In both sessions, participants completed a directed e-cigarette use bout (10 puffs, 30-s interpuff interval) and a 90-min ad libitum bout. Puff topography was recorded in the session with the topography mouthpiece.ResultsPlasma nicotine, heart rate, and subjective effects, aside from "Did the e-cigarette Taste Good?" were independent of topography measurement (higher mean taste ratings were observed in the no topography condition). Mean (SEM) plasma nicotine concentration following the ad libitum bout was 34.3ng/mL (4.9) in the no topography condition and 35.7ng/mL (4.3) in the topography condition. Longer puff durations, longer interpuff intervals, and larger puff volumes were observed in the ad libitum relative to the directed bout.ConclusionsE-cigarette use significantly increased plasma nicotine concentration and heart rate while suppressing abstinence symptoms. These effects did not differ when a topography mouthpiece was present. Future studies using ad libitum e-cigarette use bouts would facilitate understanding of e-cigarette toxicant yield.ImplicationsNo prior study has examined whether mouthpiece-based topography recording devices influence e-cigarette associated nicotine delivery, heart rate, or subjective effects under ad libitum conditions or assessed ad libitum puff topography in experienced individuals using their preferred e-cigarette battery and liquid with a mouthpiece-based computerized device. E-cigarette use significantly increased plasma nicotine concentration and heart rate while suppressing abstinence symptoms. These effects did not differ when a topography mouthpiece was present. Ad libitum puff topography differed from puff topography recorded during directed puffing. These findings suggest that future studies using ad libitum use bouts would facilitate better understanding of e-cigarette toxicant yield.

Project description:We aimed to compare the pharmacokinetics of nicotine between the heat-not-burn Tobacco Heating System 2.1 (THS 2.1) and combustible cigarettes (CCs). We also examined whether the subjective urge to smoke was associated with the pharmacokinetics of nicotine.This open-label, randomized, two-period, two-sequence crossover study conducted in 28 healthy smokers assessed the pharmacokinetics of nicotine after single and ad libitum use of the THS 2.1 or CCs. During the 7-day confinement period, blood samples were drawn for pharmacokinetic analysis. Subjective effects related to THS 2.1 or CC use were assessed using the Questionnaire of Smoking Urges (QSU-Brief).The nicotine delivery rate was similar with the THS 2.1 and CCs after single and ad libitum use. The time to the maximum nicotine concentration was 8 minutes after single use of the THS 2.1 and CCs. The time to the peak concentration following ad libitum use was similar between the THS 2.1 and CCs. The maximum plasma nicotine concentration after single use of the THS 2.1 was 8.4 ng/mL, 70.3% of that obtained with CCs. A transient reduction from baseline in the urge to smoke of 40% was observed 15 minutes after the single use of both the THS 2.1 and CCs. The mean QSU-Brief total scores following single and ad libitum use were similar for the THS 2.1 and CCs.These results suggest that the THS 2.1 effectively delivers nicotine and achieves similar pharmacokinetic profiles to CCs. The THS 2.1 also reduced the urge to smoke similarly to CCs.Reducing exposure to toxicants and safer delivery of nicotine are among the strategies that may reduce the harm of smoking-related diseases. In the present study, we investigated the pharmacokinetics of nicotine and their effects on the urge to smoke using the THS 2.1. It was developed to replicate the ritual of smoking as closely as possible by providing nicotine in a way that mimics CC smoking, but limits pyrolysis and combustion by heating tobacco at a much lower temperature than CCs (heat-not-burn).

Project description:ImportanceUse of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasing. Measures of exposure to known tobacco-related toxicants among e-cigarette users will inform potential health risks to individual product users.ObjectivesTo estimate concentrations of tobacco-related toxicants among e-cigarette users and compare these biomarker concentrations with those observed in combustible cigarette users, dual users, and never tobacco users.Design, setting, and participantsA population-based, longitudinal cohort study was conducted in the United States in 2013-2014. Cross-sectional analysis was performed between November 4, 2016, and October 5, 2017, of biomarkers of exposure to tobacco-related toxicants collected by the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Participants included adults who provided a urine sample and data on tobacco use (N = 5105).ExposuresThe primary exposure was tobacco use, including current exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 247), current exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 2411), and users of both products (dual users) (n = 792) compared with never tobacco users (n = 1655).Main outcomes and measuresGeometric mean concentrations of 50 individual biomarkers from 5 major classes of tobacco product constituents were measured: nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).ResultsOf the 5105 participants, most were aged 35 to 54 years (weighted percentage, 38%; 95% CI, 35%-40%), women (60%; 95% CI, 59%-62%), and non-Hispanic white (61%; 95% CI, 58%-64%). Compared with exclusive e-cigarette users, never users had 19% to 81% significantly lower concentrations of biomarkers of exposure to nicotine, TSNAs, some metals (eg, cadmium and lead), and some VOCs (including acrylonitrile). Exclusive e-cigarette users showed 10% to 98% significantly lower concentrations of biomarkers of exposure, including TSNAs, PAHs, most VOCs, and nicotine, compared with exclusive cigarette smokers; concentrations were comparable for metals and 3 VOCs. Exclusive cigarette users showed 10% to 36% lower concentrations of several biomarkers than dual users. Frequency of cigarette use among dual users was positively correlated with nicotine and toxicant exposure.Conclusions and relevanceExclusive use of e-cigarettes appears to result in measurable exposure to known tobacco-related toxicants, generally at lower levels than cigarette smoking. Toxicant exposure is greatest among dual users, and frequency of combustible cigarette use is positively correlated with tobacco toxicant concentration. These findings provide evidence that using combusted tobacco cigarettes alone or in combination with e-cigarettes is associated with higher concentrations of potentially harmful tobacco constituents in comparison with using e-cigarettes alone.