Dataset Information

Cancer potencies and margin of exposure used for comparative risk assessment of heated tobacco products and electronic cigarettes aerosols with cigarette smoke.

ABSTRACT: Health risk associated with the use of combustible cigarettes is well characterized and numerous epidemiological studies have been published for many years. Since more than a decade, innovative non-combusted tobacco products have emerged like heated tobacco products (HTP) or electronic cigarettes (EC). Long-term effects of these new products on health remain, however, unknown and there is a need to characterize associated potential health risks. The time dedicated to epidemiological data generation (at least 20 to 40 years for cancer endpoint), though, is not compatible with innovative development. Surrogates need, therefore, to be developed. In this work, non-cancer and cancer risks were estimated in a range of HTP and commercial combustible cigarettes based upon their harmful and potentially harmful constituent yields in aerosols and smoke, respectively. It appears that mean lifetime cancer risk values were decreased by more than one order of magnitude when comparing HTPs and commercial cigarettes, and significantly higher margin of exposure for non-cancer risk was observed for HTPs when compared to commercial cigarettes. The same approach was applied to two commercial ECs. Similar results were also found for this category of products. Despite uncertainties related to the factors used for the calculations and methodological limitations, this approach is valuable to estimate health risks associated to the use of innovative products. Moreover, it acts as predictive tool in absence of long-term epidemiological data. Furthermore, both cancer and non-cancer risks estimated for HTPs and ECs highlight the potential of reduced risk for non-combusted products when compared to cigarette smoking.

SUBMITTER: Rodrigo G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7811518 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cancer potencies and margin of exposure used for comparative risk assessment of heated tobacco products and electronic cigarettes aerosols with cigarette smoke.

Rodrigo Gregory G Jaccard Guy G Tafin Djoko Donatien D Korneliou Alexandra A Esposito Marco M Belushkin Maxim M

Archives of toxicology 20201006 1

Health risk associated with the use of combustible cigarettes is well characterized and numerous epidemiological studies have been published for many years. Since more than a decade, innovative non-combusted tobacco products have emerged like heated tobacco products (HTP) or electronic cigarettes (EC). Long-term effects of these new products on health remain, however, unknown and there is a need to characterize associated potential health risks. The time dedicated to epidemiological data generat ...[more]

PMID: 33025067

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: As e-cigarette popularity has increased, there is growing evidence to suggest that while they are highly likely to be considerably less harmful than cigarettes, their use is not free of risk to the user. There is therefore an ongoing need to characterise the chemical composition of e-cigarette aerosols, as a starting point in characterising risks associated with their use. This study examined the chemical complexity of aerosols generated by an e-cigarette containing one unflavored and three flavored e-liquids. A combination of targeted and untargeted chemical analysis approaches was used to examine the number of compounds comprising the aerosol. Contributions of e-liquid flavors to aerosol complexity were investigated, and the sources of other aerosol constituents sought. Emissions of 98 aerosol toxicants were quantified and compared to those in smoke from a reference tobacco cigarette generated under two different smoking regimes. Results: Combined untargeted and targeted aerosol analyses identified between 94 and 139 compounds in the flavored aerosols, compared with an estimated 72-79 in the unflavored aerosol. This is significantly less complex (by 1-2 orders of magnitude) than the reported composition of cigarette smoke. Combining both types of analysis identified 5-12 compounds over and above those found by untargeted analysis alone. Gravimetrically, 89-99% of the e-cigarette aerosol composition was composed of glycerol, propylene glycol, water and nicotine, and around 3% comprised other, more minor, constituents. Comparable data for the Ky3R4F reference tobacco cigarette pointed to 58-76% of cigarette smoke "tar" being composed of minor constituents. Levels of the targeted toxicants in the e-cigarette aerosols were significantly lower than those in cigarette smoke, with 68.5->99% reductions under ISO 3308 puffing conditions and 88.4->99% reductions under ISO 20778 (intense) conditions; reductions against the WHO TobReg 9 priority list were around 99%. Conclusion: These analyses showed that the e-cigarette aerosols contain fewer compounds and at significantly lower concentrations than cigarette smoke. The chemical diversity of an e-cigarette aerosol is strongly impacted by the choice of e-liquid ingredients.

Project description:BackgroundWorldwide adoption of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) has increased exponentially over the past decade. These products have been proposed as non-combustible alternatives to traditional tobacco products such as cigarettes and may thus reduce the negative health consequences associated with tobacco smoke. However, the overall health impact and safety of using these products remains unclear. This review seeks to provide an updated summary of available evidence on changes to levels of tobacco-related biomarkers to aid the overall assessment of the consequences of using e-cigarettes and HTPs.MethodsA systematic review was conducted through major databases (Medline/PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE) searching for articles directly comparing biomarker levels in humans using e-cigarettes or HTPs and those using combustible cigarettes. We included peer reviewed articles with comparative or longitudinal design and extracted key information for our purpose (type of population, demographics, biomarkers measurements, and health effects). An initial qualitative analysis was performed followed by a summary of findings.ResultsA total of 44 studies were included from initial citations. The vast majority of the literature reported reductions in levels of biomarkers of tobacco smoke exposure (BOE), especially nicotine, MHBMA, 3-HPMA, S-PMA, 1-OHP and NNAL, when using e-cigarettes and HTPs compared to combustible cigarettes. There was a slight tendency toward a larger reduction in these biomarkers levels with the use of e-cigarettes, although direct comparisons between e-cigarettes and HTPs were lacking. There was also a trend toward positive changes in levels of biomarkers of biological effect (BOBE) with the use of e-cigarettes and HTPs.ConclusionsA comparison of levels of biomarkers of tobacco-related exposure collected in clinical studies revealed that the use of e-cigarettes and HTPs could lead to a significant reduction in exposure to harmful substances compared to combusted cigarettes. In tandem, the health status of e-cigarettes and HTP users, indexed by levels of biomarkers of biological effect showed potential for improvement compared to smoking. However, larger and longer-term population-based studies are needed to further clarify these findings.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the introduction of tobacco control measures, smoking remains highly prevalent in most EU countries. In Italy, one in four adults were still regular smokers in 2017. Increasing use of combustion-free delivering nicotine technologies for cigarette substitution may accelerate the current downward trends in smoking prevalence. Whether Heated Tobacco Products (HTPs) are more effective tobacco smoking substitutes that may potentially facilitate adoption and full conversion compared to e-cigarettes (ECs) is not known.We have designed a prospective study to compare changes in cigarette consumption and adoption rates among smokers randomized to either HTPs or ECs. Product acceptability, tolerability, and their tobacco harm reduction potential will be also compared.Methods220 healthy smokers, not motivated to quit, will be randomized into a 12-weeks single-center, open label, non-inferiority trial comparing study outcomes from HTPs vs. ECs use. The primary outcome will be biochemically verified self-reported continuous abstinence at 12-weeks from the previous visit. Secondary outcomes will include: smoking reduction from baseline, adoption rates and product acceptability, tolerability, changes in step test values and in the level of selected biomarkers of exposure in exhaled breath (i.e. eCO) and in spot urine samples. A follow-up visit will be also included at 24-weeks to review product usage and smoking behavior under naturalistic condition of use.Recruitment of participants started in May 2019 and enrolment is expected to be completed in November 2019.DiscussionThis will be the first study directly comparing Heated Tobacco Products with Electronic Cigarettes in term of reduction in cigarette consumption, adoption rates, product acceptability, tolerability, and tobacco harm reduction potential. This knowledge can contribute to a better understanding of the potential role of this new technology in the evolving nicotine consumer market.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03569748.Registered June 25, 2018.https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/LoginUser?ts=1&cx=-jg9qo4.

Dataset Information

Cancer potencies and margin of exposure used for comparative risk assessment of heated tobacco products and electronic cigarettes aerosols with cigarette smoke.

Publications

Cancer potencies and margin of exposure used for comparative risk assessment of heated tobacco products and electronic cigarettes aerosols with cigarette smoke.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets