Exposure to Nicotine and Selected Toxicants in Cigarette Smokers Who Switched to Electronic Cigarettes: A Longitudinal Within-Subjects Observational Study

Changes in Biomarkers of Tobacco Exposure among Cigarette Smokers Transitioning to ENDS Use: The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, 2013-2015

Limited data are available for how biomarkers of tobacco exposure (BOE) change when cigarette smokers transition to using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). Using biomarker data from Waves 1 (2013-2014) and 2 (2014-2015) of the PATH Study, we examined how mean BOE concentrations, including metabolites of nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNA), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and volatile organic compounds (VOC) and metals, changed when 2475 adult smokers transitioned to using ENDS or quit tobacco products. Exclusive smokers who transitioned to dual use had a significant decrease in NNAL (4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol), but not nicotine metabolites, most PAHs, metals, or VOCs. Exclusive smokers who became dual users had significant reductions in total nicotine equivalents, NNAL, and 2CyEMA (acrylonitrile metabolite), but only in those who reduced cigarettes per day (CPD) by >=50%. Smokers who transitioned to exclusive ENDS use had significant reductions in most TSNAs, PAHs, and VOCs; however, nicotine metabolites did not decrease in dual users who became exclusive ENDS users. Smokers who quit tobacco use had significant decreases in nicotine metabolites, all TSNAs, most PAHs, and most VOCs. Cigarette smokers who became dual users did not experience significant reductions in most BOEs. Reductions were impacted by changes in CPD. However, transitioning from smoking to no tobacco or exclusive ENDS use was associated with reduced exposure to most BOEs measured. Future analyses could incorporate additional waves of PATH data and examine changes in biomarker exposure by ENDS device type and CPD.

Associations of propylene oxide exposure with fasting plasma glucose and diabetes: Roles of oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation

Whether propylene oxide (PO) exposure is associated with hyperglycemia were rarely explored. We aimed to determine the relationship between PO exposure and glucose metabolism, and potential role of oxidative stress. Among 3294 Chinese urban adults, urinary PO metabolite (N-Acetyl-S-(2-hydroxypropyl)-L-cysteine, 2HPMA), biomarkers of oxidative DNA damage (8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-20-deoxyguanosine, 8-OHdG) and lipid peroxidation (8-isoprostane, 8-iso-PGF_2α) in urine were determined. The associations of 2HPMA with 8-OHdG, 8-iso-PGF_2α, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and risk of diabetes were explored. The roles of 8-OHdG and 8-iso-PGF_2α on association of 2HPMA with FPG and risk of diabetes were detected. After adjusted for potential confounders, each 1-unit increase in log-transformed concentration of 2HPMA was associated with a 0.15-mmol/L increase in FPG level, and the adjusted OR (95% CI) of diabetes by the associations of log-transformed urinary 2HPMA concentrations was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.03-2.11). Combination effects of 2HPMA with 8-OHdG or 8-iso-PGF_2α on risk of diabetes were detected, and elevated 8-iso-PGF_2α significantly mediated 34.5% of the urinary 2HPMA-associated FPG elevation. PO exposure was positively associated with FPG levels and risk of diabetes. PO exposure combined with DNA oxidative damage or lipid peroxidation may increase the risk of diabetes, and lipid peroxidation may partially mediate the PO exposure-induced FPG elevation.

Changes in dependence, withdrawal, and craving among adult smokers who switch to nicotine salt pod-based e-cigarettes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

For electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to be a viable substitute for combustible cigarettes, it is likely that they must be rewarding enough for regular use, indicated by factors such as craving and dependence, important aspects of reinforcement. This study aimed to understand short-term changes in measures of nicotine dependence between groups differing by use trajectory in a switching trial, and within group changes of these measures.

DESIGN

Secondary data analysis of one arm of an e-cigarette randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

San Diego, California and Kansas City, Missouri, United States.

PARTICIPANTS

114 African American (n = 60) and Latinx (n = 54) smokers (58.8% male) attempting to switch to nicotine salt pod system (NSPS) e-cigarettes in a 6-week trial.

MEASUREMENTS

At week 6, participants were classified by use trajectory: exclusive smokers (n = 16), exclusive e-cigarette (n = 32), or dual users (n = 66). E-cigarette, cigarette, and total nicotine dependence (cigarette + e-cigarette), use patterns, cigarette craving and nicotine withdrawal, and cotinine were assessed at baseline and week 6 using standard measures.

FINDINGS

In between group comparisons, exclusive e-cigarette and dual users showed greater reductions in cigarette dependence (e-cigarette: -32.38, 95% CI = -37.7,-27.1; dual: -18.48, 95% CI = -22.2,-14.7), withdrawal (e-cigarette: -6.25, 95% CI = -8.52,-3.98; dual: -3.18, 95% CI = -5.02,-1.34), craving (e-cigarette: -11.44, 95% CI = -14.2,8.7; dual: -9.59, 95% CI = -11.6,-7.59), and cigarettes per day (CPD; e-cigarette: -11.19, 95% CI = -13.1,-9.27; dual: -9.39, 95% CI = -11.3, -7.52) compared with exclusive smokers. In within group analyses, e-cigarette and dual users showed reductions in craving and withdrawal from baseline to week 6. Exclusive e-cigarette and dual users, maintained cotinine levels (all Ps > 0.05) and showed reductions in CPD and cigarette dependence (all Ps < 0.01). Findings were inconclusive regarding changes in total nicotine dependence from baseline to week 6 among exclusive e-cigarette users (P = 0.123). Dual users showed increased total nicotine dependence (P < 0.001) and smokers showed decreased total dependence (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers who switch to nicotine salt pod system e-cigarettes maintain their nicotine levels and transfer their dependence, suggesting that nicotine salt pod system e-cigarettes have a similar reinforcement potential to cigarettes and facilitate switching.

Factors Associated with the Dual Use of Electronic Cigarettes and Cigarettes among Thai Undergraduate Students Who Smoked Cigarettes

This study proposed to identify factors associated with the dual use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and cigarettes among undergraduate students who smoked cigarettes. This cross-sectional study employed a self-administered, anonymous online questionnaires to collect information from undergraduate smokers in northern Thailand. Of the 494 participants, 82.8% were dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes. The two main reasons for using e-cigarettes were an absence of cigarette smoke odor (76.8%) and availability of flavors (70.7%). Undergraduate smokers who initiated smoking at ≥18 years old were more likely to be dual users than those who initiated smoking at younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.79, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.32-5.89, p = 0.007). Undergraduate smokers who smoked ≥11 cigarettes daily were more likely to be dual users than those who smoked less (aOR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.52-4.61, p = 0.001). Conversely, undergraduate smokers who had attempted to quit during the past year were less likely to be dual users (aOR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12-0.56, p = 0.001). In conclusion, dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes among undergraduate smokers was associated with older age at cigarette smoking initiation, a higher number of cigarettes smoked daily, and having no past year's cigarette quit attempts.

Tobacco-use behavior and toxicant exposure among current dual users of electronic cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use continues to grow with most users reporting concurrent cigarette smoking, but few studies have focused on tobacco use and toxicant exposure among naturalistic dual-using populations. This controlled clinical laboratory study examined how dual versus exclusive use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes and no tobacco/nicotine affected behavioral, physiological, and subjective measures among current dual users. Twenty-two participants identifying as cigarette (≥ 10 cigarettes per day [CPD]) and e-cigarette (≥ 3 days/week) users of "cig-a-like" e-cigarettes completed four 5-day outpatient conditions, which differed by their own brand of products used ad libitum: (a) cigarette and e-cigarette (dual), (b) cigarette-only, (c) e-cigarette-only, and (d) no tobacco/nicotine. Primary outcomes included daily tobacco use, expired air carbon monoxide (CO), and urinary cotinine and NNAL. Linear mixed models with pairwise comparisons (Bonferroni corrected) were performed (p < .05). CPD did not differ significantly between dual and cigarette-only use, but e-cigarette use and liquid consumed increased significantly during e-cigarette-only relative to dual use. Relative to dual use, expired air CO did not differ during cigarette-only and was significantly lower during e-cigarette-only use. Urinary cotinine was significantly lower during e-cigarette-only use relative to dual and cigarette-only use, while urinary NNAL did not differ between the nicotine-containing conditions. In summary, among current dual users, e-cigarettes in combination with cigarettes did not reduce CPD relative to exclusive cigarette use or toxicant exposure relative to exclusive use of either product. However, exclusive e-cigarette use did reduce CO and cotinine, highlighting the benefits of cigarette cessation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Association between blood ethylene oxide levels and the risk of cardiovascular diseases in the general population

Ethylene oxide (EtO) is a highly reactive organic compound that is mainly used as a sterilizing agent. However, to date, the effects of EtO on the cardiovascular system are not clear. We aimed to explore the association between blood EtO levels and the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the general US population. We obtained information on blood levels of EtO and CVD outcomes in 3,410 participants from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2014 and 2015-2016. Logistic regression models were applied to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for the association between EtO and risk of all CVD as well as subtypes of CVD. Linear regression analyses were used to estimate the associations of EtO with potential mechanistic parameters of CVD, including blood pressure, blood lipid levels and inflammatory parameters. Higher blood levels of EtO were associated with an increased risk of all CVD (p for trend = 0.003), with an adjusted OR (95% CI) in the highest quartile of 1.94 (1.24, 3.02) compared with the lowest quartile as a reference. Higher concentrations of EtO were positively associated with the risk of angina (p for trend = 0.04) and heart attack (p for trend = 0.011). In addition, the concentration of EtO was positively associated with the levels of triglycerides, white blood cells, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils and eosinophils (p = 0.003 for eosinophils and p < 0.001 for the others) and negatively associated with the level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p < 0.001). We found that exposure to EtO was associated with angina, heart attack and all CVD in a large representative US population. Furthermore, EtO may induce CVD through the inflammatory response and abnormal fatty acid metabolism.

Developing Graphic Messages for Vaping Prevention Among Black and Latino Adolescents: Participatory Research Approach

Background

As an important transition stage in human development, adolescence is a critical window for vaping prevention. There is a substantial gap in communication research on vaping prevention among racial and ethnic minority groups. Their representation is essential to develop, implement, and disseminate innovative and effective interventions for vaping prevention.

Objective

The aim of this study is to describe the participatory research (PR) procedures used with Black and Latino adolescents to develop culturally and linguistically appropriate graphic messages for vaping prevention.

Methods

This PR study used a qualitative, user-centered design method. We conducted a series of focus groups with 16 Black and Latino adolescents to develop culturally and linguistically appropriate graphic messages for vaping prevention. The biobehavioral model of nicotine addiction provided a framework for the development of the graphic messages. Participants met 4 times to provide iterative feedback on the graphic messages until they reached a consensus on overall quality and content.

Results

At baseline, the participants’ mean age was 15.4 years (SD 1.4). Of the participants, 50% (8/16) were female, 88% (14/16) were heterosexual, 56% (9/16) were Black/African American, and 44% (7/16) were Hispanic/Latino. A total of 12 of the 16 participants (75%) chose to participate in the English sessions. Participants decided to create four types of graphic messages: (1) financial reward, (2) health reward, (3) social norms, and (4) self-efficacy. Meeting 4 times with the 4 groups provided sufficient opportunities for iterative feedback on the graphic messages to reach a consensus on overall quality and content.

Conclusions

It is feasible and practical to build PR among Black and Latino adolescents focused on vaping prevention. Adolescents added innovation and creativity to the development of culturally and linguistically appropriate graphic messages for vaping prevention. Appropriate staffing, funding, and approaches are key for successful PR efforts among Black and Latino adolescents. Future research is needed to evaluate the impact of the graphic messages on vaping prevention.

Improving on estimates of the potential relative harm to health from using modern ENDS (vaping) compared to tobacco smoking

BACKGROUND

Although the harm to health from electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) compared to smoked tobacco remains highly uncertain, society and governments still need to know the likely range of the relative harm to inform regulatory policies for ENDS and smoking.

METHODS

We identified biomarkers with specificity of association with different disease groupings e.g., volatile organic compound (VOCs) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and tobacco-specific N´-nitrosamines (TSNAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) for all cancers. We conducted a review of recent studies (post January 2017) that compared these biomarkers between people exclusively using ENDS and those exclusively smoking tobacco. The percentage differences in these biomarkers, weighted by study size and adjusted for acrolein from other sources, were used as a proxy for the assumed percentage difference in disease harm between ENDS and smoking. These relative differences were applied to previously modelled estimates of smoking-related health loss (in health-adjusted life-years; HALYs).

RESULTS

The respective relative biomarker levels (ENDS vs smoking) were: 28% for respiratory diseases (five results, three studies); 42% for cancers (five results, four studies); and 35% for cardiovascular (seven results, four studies). When integrated with the HALY impacts by disease, the overall harm to health from ENDS was estimated to be 33% that of smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis, suggests that the use of modern ENDS devices (vaping) could be a third as harmful to health as smoking in a high-income country setting. But this estimate is based on a limited number of biomarker studies and is best be considered a likely upper level of ENDS risk given potential biases in our method (i.e., the biomarkers used being correlated with more unaccounted for toxicants in smoking compared to with using ENDS).

Systemic biomarkers of exposure associated with ENDS use: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review provides an overview of the existing literature on biomarkers of exposure from electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) use and identifies gaps in existing knowledge.

DATA SOURCES

We searched two international databases (PubMed and Web of Science) to identify relevant studies published from August 2013 to February 2021.

DATA SELECTION

Studies were included if they assessed and compared biomarkers of exposure between exclusive ENDS users, non-users, exclusive cigarette smokers, dual users of ENDS and cigarettes or cigarette smokers who switch to ENDS.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Of the 5074 studies identified, 188 studies met criteria and were selected for full-text screening. Of these, 27 studies were selected for inclusion and data extraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent, although limited, evidence shows that exclusive ENDS users have elevated levels of biomarkers of certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs; eg, acrylamide and acrylonitrile), metals (eg, cadmium and selenium) and propylene glycol compared with non-users; however, evidence for biomarkers of other toxicants (eg, acrolein, benzene and chromium) is mixed. Biomarkers of most VOCs are lower in ENDS users compared with cigarette smokers, and cigarette smokers who switch to ENDS consistently show reductions in VOC biomarkers. Evidence comparing metal exposures from exclusive ENDS use, cigarette smoking and dual use is mixed and depends on the metal. ENDS and e-liquid characteristics as well as use patterns may be associated with elevated exposure to VOCs and metals. Additional rigorous, controlled studies can assess biomarker exposures from ENDS use and inform the overall risk-benefit of ENDS use for different user populations.

Oral and periodontal implications of tobacco and nicotine products

Tobacco use contributes to more mortality and morbidity globally than any other behavioral risk factor. Adverse effects do not spare the oral cavity, with many oral diseases more common, and treatments less successful, in the tobacco-using patient. Many of the oral health effects of cigarette smoking are well established, but other forms of tobacco, including cigars and smokeless tobacco, merit dental professionals' attention. Recently, an expanding variety of new or emerging tobacco and/or nicotine products has been brought to market, most prominently electronic cigarettes, but also including heated tobacco and other noncombustible nicotine products. The use of cannabis (marijuana) is increasing and also has risks for oral health and dental treatment. For the practicing periodontist, and all dental professionals, providing sound patient recommendations requires knowledge of the general and oral health implications associated with this wide range of tobacco and nicotine products and cannabis. This review provides an overview of selected tobacco and nicotine products with an emphasis on their implications for periodontal disease risk and clinical management. Also presented are strategies for tobacco use counselling and cessation support that dental professionals can implement in practice.

Carcinogen Biomarkers in the Urine of Electronic Cigarette Users and Implications for the Development of Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has rapidly increased despite unclear longitudinal health effects. Once thought to be a safer alternative to tobacco smoke, it is possible that e-cigarettes expose the user to similar carcinogenic byproducts during the vaping process. These toxicants are metabolized and excreted in the urine, and may have oncogenic implications for bladder urothelium.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize and summarize known urinary carcinogenic biomarkers in e-cigarette users as they relate to the risk of developing bladder cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and included PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Relevant articles published in peer-reviewed journals, through January 2019, that reported on urinary biomarkers in e-cigarettes users were included. Parent compounds and urinary biomarkers were classified according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans and cross referenced using the Collaborative on Health and the Environment, Toxicant and Disease Database to determine a link to bladder cancer, grouped by strength of evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Our initial search identified 1385 articles, 22 of which met final inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. In summation, these studies described 40 different parent compounds and four metals found in the urine of e-cigarette users. Since each parent compound can be metabolized several different ways, 63 unique toxicant or carcinogenic metabolite biomarkers were identified. Compared with nonuser controls, e-cigarette users had higher concentrations of urinary biomarkers of several carcinogenic compounds linked to bladder cancer. The majority of studies were limited by heterogeneous reporting and a dearth of control individuals who had never smoked.

CONCLUSIONS

Biomarkers of carcinogens, several with a strong link to bladder cancer, are present in the urine of e-cigarette users. Long-term implications of urothelial exposure to these toxicants are unknown but concerning, given the similarities to tobacco smoke and its established relationship with bladder cancer. Further study on the urological safety of e-cigarettes is necessary.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our review shows that several carcinogens that have a known link to bladder cancer are present in the urine of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) users. Further study on the urological safety of e-cigarettes is necessary.

Investigating the DNA methylation profile of e-cigarette use

BACKGROUND

Little evidence exists on the health effects of e-cigarette use. DNA methylation may serve as a biomarker for exposure and could be predictive of future health risk. We aimed to investigate the DNA methylation profile of e-cigarette use.

RESULTS

Among 117 smokers, 117 non-smokers and 116 non-smoking vapers, we evaluated associations between e-cigarette use and epigenome-wide methylation from saliva. DNA methylation at 7 cytosine-phosphate-guanine sites (CpGs) was associated with e-cigarette use at p < 1 × 10-5 and none at p < 5.91 × 10-8. 13 CpGs were associated with smoking at p < 1 × 10-5 and one at p < 5.91 × 10-8. CpGs associated with e-cigarette use were largely distinct from those associated with smoking. There was strong enrichment of known smoking-related CpGs in the smokers but not the vapers. We also tested associations between e-cigarette use and methylation scores known to predict smoking and biological ageing. Methylation scores for smoking and biological ageing were similar between vapers and non-smokers. Higher levels of all smoking scores and a biological ageing score (GrimAge) were observed in smokers. A methylation score for e-cigarette use showed poor prediction internally (AUC 0.55, 0.41-0.69) and externally (AUC 0.57, 0.36-0.74) compared with a smoking score (AUCs 0.80) and was less able to discriminate lung squamous cell carcinoma from adjacent normal tissue (AUC 0.64, 0.52-0.76 versus AUC 0.73, 0.61-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

The DNA methylation profile for e-cigarette use is largely distinct from that of cigarette smoking, did not replicate in independent samples, and was unable to discriminate lung cancer from normal tissue. The extent to which methylation related to long-term e-cigarette use translates into chronic effects requires further investigation.

"It is the One Thing that has Worked": facilitators and barriers to switching to nicotine salt pod system e-cigarettes among African American and Latinx people who smoke: a content analysis

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes are a harm reduction strategy for individuals who smoke cigarettes who cannot or do not want to quit using FDA-approved cessation methods. Identifying perceived facilitators and barriers to switching among people who smoke cigarettes is critical to optimizing health impact. This is particularly important for the most dominant e-cigarette device, nicotine salt pod electronic cigarettes. We investigate the experience using pod electronic cigarettes among African American and Latinx individuals who smoke, the two largest racial/ethnic minority groups who experience significant health disparities.

METHODS

From July 2018 to May 2019, adults who smoked cigarettes, age 21 + (N = 114; M age = 44.6, 59.6% male, 52.6% African American from Kansas City, 47.4% Latinx from San Diego) received JUUL-brand electronic cigarettes (referred to hereafter as JUUL) for 6 weeks and answered interview questions at week six. We inquired what they liked and disliked about using JUUL, what helped with switching and made switching difficult, future intentions for continued JUUL use, and how JUUL compared to past smoking reduction methods. Responses were coded into themes by independent raters. Theme frequencies were analyzed separately by race/ethnicity and week 6 use trajectory (exclusive JUUL use, dual JUUL and cigarette use, exclusive cigarette use).

RESULTS

Clean/smell was the aspect of using JUUL most commonly liked (23%), followed by convenience (19%). Coughing/harshness was a more common barrier to switching for African American (44%) than Latinx (9%), and for continuing cigarette use (56%) than for those who exclusively switched or dually used JUUL and combustible cigarettes (15-21%). Most (78% African American; 90% Latinx) reported that the benefits of using JUUL outweighed barriers, and this varied by JUUL use trajectory: 94% exclusive switch, 86% dual use, and 42% continued cigarette use. The majority said they would continue using JUUL to replace cigarettes (83% African American; 94% Latinx) and that JUUL worked better than other methods to reduce cigarettes (72%).

CONCLUSION

African American and Latinx individuals who smoked experience using pod electronic cigarettes was generally positive. Understanding facilitators and impediments to switching to electronic cigarettes among racial/ethnic minority people who smoke can inform harm reduction interventions and reduce tobacco-related health disparities. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03511001 posted April 27, 2018.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol formed by heating an e-liquid. Some people who smoke use ECs to stop or reduce smoking, but some organizations, advocacy groups and policymakers have discouraged this, citing lack of evidence of efficacy and safety. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is an update conducted as part of a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke tobacco achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to 1 May 2021, and reference-checked and contacted study authors. We screened abstracts from the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) 2021 Annual Meeting.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized cross-over trials, in which people who smoke were randomized to an EC or control condition. We also included uncontrolled intervention studies in which all participants received an EC intervention. Studies had to report abstinence from cigarettes at six months or longer or data on safety markers at one week or longer, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcome measures were abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people still using study product (EC or pharmacotherapy) at six or more months after randomization or starting EC use, changes in carbon monoxide (CO), blood pressure (BP), heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation, lung function, and levels of carcinogens or toxicants or both. We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences. Where appropriate, we pooled data in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 completed studies, representing 16,759 participants, of which 34 were RCTs. Five of the 61 included studies were new to this review update. Of the included studies, we rated seven (all contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 42 at high risk overall (including all non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 1.93; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1924 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional three quitters per 100 (95% CI 1 to 6). There was low-certainty evidence (limited by very serious imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs was similar (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 485 participants). SAEs were rare, but there was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates differed between groups due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.90: I2 = 0; 4 studies, 1424 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.13; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1447 participants). In absolute terms, this might lead to an additional seven quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 16). There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference in the rate of AEs between these groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 601 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.38; I2 = 0; 5 studies, 792 participants). Compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates were higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.74; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 2886 participants). In absolute terms this represents an additional six quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 15). However, this finding was of very low certainty, due to issues with imprecision and risk of bias. There was some evidence that non-serious AEs were more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32; I2 = 41%, low certainty; 4 studies, 765 participants), and again, insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.24; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 1303 participants).  Data from non-randomized studies were consistent with RCT data. The most commonly reported AEs were throat/mouth irritation, headache, cough, and nausea, which tended to dissipate with continued use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons, hence evidence for these is limited, with CIs often encompassing clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to NRT and compared to ECs without nicotine. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain. More studies are needed to confirm the effect size. Confidence intervals were for the most part wide for data on AEs, SAEs and other safety markers, with no difference in AEs between nicotine and non-nicotine ECs. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect  evidence of harm from nicotine EC, but longest follow-up was two years and the  number of studies was small. The main limitation of the evidence base remains imprecision due to the small number of RCTs, often with low event rates, but further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information to decision-makers, this review is now a living systematic review. We run searches monthly, with the review updated when relevant new evidence becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the review's current status.

Development and testing of relative risk-based health messages for electronic cigarette products

BACKGROUND

Health messages on e-cigarette packs emphasise nicotine addiction or harms using similar wording to warnings on cigarette packs. These may not be appropriate for e-cigarettes which constitute a reduced risk alternative for smokers. This research aimed to (1) develop and test a selection of relative risk messages for e-cigarette products; (2) compare these to the two current EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) nicotine addiction messages; and (3) explore differences between smokers, non-smokers and dual users.

METHOD

Twenty-six messages focusing on either harm-reduction or cessation were developed and rated by multidisciplinary experts for accuracy, persuasiveness and clarity. The eight highest ranking messages were compared alongside the TPD messages in a sample of 983 European residents (316 smokers, 327 non-smokers, 340 dual users) on understandability, believability and convincingness.

RESULTS

On all three constructs combined, the two TPD messages rated the highest, closely followed by four relative risk messages "Completely switching to e-cigarettes lowers your risk of smoking related diseases", "Use of this product is much less harmful than smoking", "Completely switching to e-cigarettes is a healthier alternative to smoking", and "This product presents substantially lower risks to health than cigarettes" which did not differ statistically from the TPD messages. Non-smokers rated TPD1 significantly higher overall than dual users. Dual users rated "This product is a safer alternative to smoking" significantly higher than non-smokers. Messages did not differ on understandability.

CONCLUSIONS

These alternative messages provide a useful resource for future research and for policy makers considering updating e-cigarette product labelling.

Acrolein but not its metabolite, 3-Hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (3HPMA), activates vascular transient receptor potential Ankyrin-1 (TRPA1): Physiological to toxicological implications

Acrolein, an electrophilic α,β-unsaturated aldehyde, is present in foods and beverages, and is a product of incomplete combustion, and thus, reaches high ppm levels in tobacco smoke and structural fires. Exposure to acrolein is linked with cardiopulmonary toxicity and cardiovascular disease risk. The hypothesis of this study is the direct effects of acrolein in isolated murine blood vessels (aorta and superior mesenteric artery, SMA) are transient receptor potential ankyrin-1 (TRPA1) dependent. Using isometric myography, isolated aorta and SMA were exposed to increasing levels of acrolein. Acrolein inhibited phenylephrine (PE)-induced contractions (approximately 90%) in aorta and SMA of male and female mice in a concentration-dependent (0.01-100 μM) manner. The major metabolite of acrolein, 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (3HPMA), also relaxed PE-precontracted SMA. As the SMA was 20× more sensitive to acrolein than aorta (SMA EC50 0.8 ± 0.2 μM; aorta EC50 > 29.4 ± 4.4 μM), the mechanisms of acrolein-induced relaxation were studied in SMA. The potency of acrolein-induced relaxation was inhibited significantly by: 1) mechanically-impaired endothelium; 2) Nω-Nitro-L-arginine methyl ester hydrochloride (L-NAME); 3) guanylyl cyclase (GC) inhibitor (ODQ); and, 4) a TRPA1 antagonist (A967079). TRPA1 positive immunofluorescence was present in the endothelium. Compared with other known TRPA1 agonists, including allyl isothiocyanate (AITC), cinnamaldehyde, crotonaldehyde, and formaldehyde, acrolein stimulated a more potent TRPA1-dependent relaxation. Acrolein, at high concentration [100 μM], induced tension oscillations (spasms) independent of TRPA1 in precontracted SMA but not in aorta. In conclusion, acrolein is vasorelaxant at low levels (physiological) yet vasotoxic at high levels (toxicological).

Balancing Consideration of the Risks and Benefits of E-Cigarettes

The topic of e-cigarettes is controversial. Opponents focus on e-cigarettes' risks for young people, while supporters emphasize the potential for e-cigarettes to assist smokers in quitting smoking. Most US health organizations, media coverage, and policymakers have focused primarily on risks to youths. Because of their messaging, much of the public-including most smokers-now consider e-cigarette use as dangerous as or more dangerous than smoking. By contrast, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that e-cigarette use is likely far less hazardous than smoking. Policies intended to reduce adolescent vaping may also reduce adult smokers' use of e-cigarettes in quit attempts. Because evidence indicates that e-cigarette use can increase the odds of quitting smoking, many scientists, including this essay's authors, encourage the health community, media, and policymakers to more carefully weigh vaping's potential to reduce adult smoking-attributable mortality. We review the health risks of e-cigarette use, the likelihood that vaping increases smoking cessation, concerns about youth vaping, and the need to balance valid concerns about risks to youths with the potential benefits of increasing adult smoking cessation.

Characterising vaping products in the United Kingdom: an analysis of Tobacco Products Directive notification data

AIMS

To analyse content and emission data submitted by manufacturers for nicotine-containing vaping products in the United Kingdom (UK) in accordance with the European Union Tobacco Products Directive.

DESIGN

Analysis of ingredient and emission data reported for all e-liquid-containing e-cigarettes, cartridges or refill containers notified to the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency (MHRA) from November 2016 to October 2017.

SETTING

United Kingdom CASES: A total of 40 785 e-liquid containing products.

MEASUREMENTS

The average number of ingredients per product, nicotine concentrations, frequency of occurrence ingredients and frequency and levels of chemical emissions.

FINDINGS

Reports were not standardised in relation to units of measurement or constituent nomenclature. Products listed an average of 17 ingredients and 3.3% were reported not to contain nicotine. A total of 59% of products contained <12 mg nicotine per mL, and <1% were reported to have nicotine concentrations above the legal limit of 20 mg/mL. Over 1500 ingredients were reported, and other than nicotine the most commonly reported non-flavour ingredients were propylene glycol (97% of products) and glycerol (71%). The most common flavour ingredients were ethyl butyrate (42%), vanillin (35%) and ethyl maltol (33%). The most frequently reported chemical emissions were nicotine (65%), formaldehyde (48%) and acetaldehyde (40%). The reporting of the concentration of emissions was not standardised; emissions were reported in a format allowing analysis of median estimated concentration for between 13% and 100% of products for each reported emission. Most of the frequently reported emissions, other than nicotine, were present in median estimated concentrations below 1 μg/L of inspired air, and with the exception of nicotine, acrolein and diacetyl, at median levels below European Chemicals Agency Long Term Exposure and United States (US) Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) limits, where these were available.

CONCLUSIONS

An analysis of reports to the United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency by manufacturers of vaping products shows that (i) these products have a large range of ingredients and emissions, (ii) the reporting system is unstandardized in terms of reporting requirements, and (iii) for quantified emissions, median levels are for the most part below published safe limits for ambient air.

Pregnant Smokers' Intention to Switch From Cigarettes to E-Cigarettes: A Reasoned Action Approach

INTRODUCTION

This study used the reasoned action approach (RAA) to examine 1) factors associated with pregnant smokers' intention to switch from cigarettes to e-cigarettes and 2) the influence that intention to switch had on future expectations to resume cigarette use postpartum.

METHODS

U.S. pregnant women (N = 267) who reported past 30-day use of cigarettes completed an online cross-sectional survey between November and December 2019. A 30-item scale measured RAA constructs (intention, instrumental attitudes, experiential attitudes, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, perceived autonomy, and perceived capacity). A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed and structural equation modeling tested the RAA constructs' association with intention to switch and the relationship between intention to switch and future expectations to resume smoking after pregnancy.

RESULTS

The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the seven-factor measurement model. Structural equation modeling found instrumental attitudes (β = 0.43; p < .001) and descriptive norms (β = 0.53; p < .001) were associated with intention to switch from cigarettes to e-cigarettes. However, there were differences between the constructs' relationships with intention between those who did and did not use e-cigarettes in the past 30 days. Intention to switch was inversely related with future expectations to resume smoking postpartum (β = -0.13; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined multiple facets of behavioral decision-making that may influence pregnant smokers' intention to switch to e-cigarettes during pregnancy. In this sample, pregnant people who believed switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes was important and that other smokers commonly switched during pregnancy reported greater intention to switch. Novel theories, such as the RAA, may provide an optimal lens to understand pregnant smokers' behavioral decision-making process as they consider switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes.

Toxicological interaction between tobacco smoke toxicants cadmium and nicotine: An in-vitro investigation

Cigarettes and other tobacco products are used to obtain nicotine that is responsible for their stimulating effects. However, a lot of other organic and inorganic chemicals are also released along with nicotine. Cadmium (Cd) is one of the several heavy metals that are health hazards and is one of the inorganic elements released in tobacco smoke. The in-vitro investigation focused on exploring the effects of nicotine hydrogen tartrate (NHT) and cadmium (Cd) and their toxic interactions in the A549 cell line. In cell viability assay NHT exhibited its IC50 at 11.71 mM concentration, and the IC50 of Cd was found to be 83 µM after a 24 h exposure. Toxic effects of NHT (5 mM and 10 mM), Cd (50 µM and 100 µM), and their combination were also investigated by flowcytometry. The investigation included apoptotic and necrotic events, the effect on different cell cycle phases, and generation of reactive oxygen species by NHT, Cd, and their combination of different concentrations. Data reveal evident toxic effects of NHT, Cd, and NHT + Cd. It also indicates that the toxic interaction of NHT and Cd is not additive and appears to be minimal when compared with NHT or Cd exposures alone.

Dependence on nicotine in US high school students in the context of changing patterns of tobacco product use

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There have been substantial recent changes in youth tobacco product use in the United States-including, notably, a rapid increase in use of e-cigarettes. It is not known whether, and if so how far, these changes are reflected in levels of nicotine dependence. This study used data from a large, nationally representative sample of US adolescents to (i) estimate the annual prevalence of nicotine dependence in relation to current use of tobacco products, (ii) describe trends in dependence over time and (iii) evaluate whether the increase in youth use of tobacco products has been paralleled by a similar increase in the population burden of nicotine dependence.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of National Youth Tobacco Surveys conducted annually, 2012-19.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 86 902 high school students.

MEASUREMENTS

Prevalence of (i) strong cravings to use tobacco in the past 30 days and (ii) wanting to use nicotine products within 30 minutes of waking, in relation to type of product used (cigarettes, other combustible tobacco, smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes).

FINDINGS

Between 2012 and 2019 there was a marked decline in past 30-day cigarette smoking and a surge in use of e-cigarettes. Different products were associated with differing levels of nicotine dependence, with cigarettes characterized by highest dependence (strong craving 42.3%; wanting to use within 30 minutes 16.8% among exclusive users in 2019) and e-cigarettes in otherwise tobacco-naive students by low dependence (16.1 and 8.8% respectively in 2019). The overall 33.8% increase in population use of nicotine products between 2012 and 2019 (from 23.2 to 31.2%) was not accompanied by an equivalent increase in overall population burden of dependence {percentage reporting craving 10.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 9.8-12.2%] in 2012 and 9.5% (95% CI = 7.5-12.0%) in 2019; wanting to use within 30 minutes 4.7% (95% CI = 4.0-5.5%) in 2012, 5.4% (95% CI = 4.0-7.2%) in 2019}.

CONCLUSIONS

Among US high school students, increases in the prevalence of nicotine product use from 2012 to 2019 do not appear to have been accompanied by a similar increase in the population burden of nicotine dependence. This may be at least partly attributable to a shift in the most common product of choice from cigarettes (on which users are most dependent) to e-cigarettes (on which users are least dependent).

Changes in Biomarkers of Cigarette Smoke Exposure After 6 Days of Switching Exclusively or Partially to Use of the JUUL System with Two Nicotine Concentrations: A Randomized Controlled Confinement Study in Adult Smokers

Introduction

Evidence suggests that cigarette smokers who switch to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) reduce their exposure to harmful toxicants and carcinogens. It is unclear if dual-use is associated with decreases in exposure to toxicants.

Methods

This parallel-group confinement study assessed changes in biomarkers of exposure (BOEs) over six days among healthy adult smokers who were randomized into 1 of 11 study groups: eight JUUL-brand System (JUUL) groups (4 JUUL flavors [Virginia Tobacco, Menthol, Mint, Mango] × 2 nicotine concentrations [5.0% or 3.0% by weight]); Dual-Use group used preferred JUUL flavor (5.0% nicotine) and ≤50% usual brand (UB) cigarettes/day; UB Cigarette group and one group abstained from all tobacco/nicotine product use (Abstinence group). Urine and blood analysis assessed changes in primary BOE endpoints (NNAL, 3-HPMA, MHBMA, S-PMA COHb) and secondary BOE endpoints (NNN, HMPMA, CEMA, 1-OHP, O-toluidine, 2-NA, 4-ABP) among 279 adult smokers.

Results

In JUUL groups, median percent reductions in primary BOEs (Day 6–Baseline) were 90%–≥100% of Abstinence; there were no significant differences between JUUL groups and Abstinence. All reductions in JUUL groups were substantially and statistically significantly greater than reductions in the UB Cigarette group (ps < 0.025). Median reductions in primary BOEs in the Dual-Use group were 43%–55% of Abstinence. Similar results were observed for secondary BOEs.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the use of JUUL as a complete or partial substitute (i.e., dual-use with ≥50% reduction in cigarette consumption) for combustible cigarettes can substantially reduce exposure to multiple toxins associated with cigarette smoking.

Implications

This study adds to the growing body of evidence supporting the utility of ENDS products as potentially reduced-harm alternatives to cigarettes for adult smokers. Adult smokers who switched completely from cigarette smoking to use of the JUUL System (“JUUL”) in two nicotine concentrations (5.0% and 3.0%) and four flavors significantly reduced their exposure to multiple classes of cigarette-related toxicants. Additionally, smokers who used JUUL and continued smoking but reduced their daily cigarette consumption by ≥50% (dual users) also significantly reduced their toxicant exposure compared to cigarette smoking.

Will E-Cigarette Modified Risk Messages with a Nicotine Warning Polarize Smokers' Beliefs about the Efficacy of Switching Completely to E-Cigarettes in Reducing Smoking-Related Risks?

In the U.S., e-cigarette companies can apply for permission to use reduced or modified risk messages (MRMs) in their marketing materials. Because e-cigarette marketing materials should have a nicotine addictiveness warning, MRMs and a nicotine warning could appear together-resulting in a conflicting message. When reading a conflicting message, individuals assimilate evidence supporting their pre-existing beliefs and eventually develop stronger beliefs, diverging more from those with different pre-existing beliefs (i.e., polarization). This study examined if exposure to e-cigarette MRMs with a nicotine warning polarizes smokers' initially opposing beliefs about the efficacy of switching completely to e-cigarettes in reducing smoking-related risks, and if this polarization depends on individuals' need for closure. An online experiment randomized 761 U.S. adult smokers to either three MRMs with a nicotine warning or three control messages. People reported their perceived efficacy of switching completely to e-cigarettes at pre- and posttest and need for closure at pretest. Linear regression showed no polarization effects. Nonetheless, need for closure and pretest efficacy beliefs influenced message response: MRMs with a nicotine warning only enhanced efficacy beliefs of smokers with low pretest efficacy beliefs and low need for closure. Evaluation of e-cigarette mixed communication should consider individuals' motivational and cognitive differences.

Effectiveness of Electronic Cigarettes in Smoking Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Reports of the effectiveness of e-cigarettes (ECs) for smoking cessation vary across different studies making implementation recommendations hard to attain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the current evidence regarding effectiveness of ECs for smoking cessation.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycInfo, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing nicotine ECs with non-nicotine ECs or with established smoking cessation interventions (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT] and or counseling) published between 1 January 2014 and 27 June 2020. Data from eligible studies were extracted and used for random-effects meta-analyses (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019141414).

RESULTS

The search yielded 13 950 publications with 12 studies being identified as eligible for systematic review (N = 8362) and 9 studies for random-effects meta-analyses (range: 30-6006 participants). The proportion of smokers achieving abstinence was 1.71 (95 CI: 1.02-2.84) times higher in nicotine EC users compared with non-nicotine EC users. The proportion of abstinent smokers was 1.69 (95 CI: 1.25-2.27) times higher in EC users compared with participants receiving NRT. EC users showed a 2.04 (95 CI: 0.90-4.64) times higher proportion of abstinent smokers in comparison with participants solely receiving counseling.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that nicotine ECs may be more effective in smoking cessation when compared with placebo ECs or NRT. When compared with counseling alone, nicotine ECs are more effective short term, but its effectiveness appears to diminish with later follow-ups. Given the small number of studies, heterogeneous design, and the overall moderate to low quality of evidence, it is not possible to offer clear recommendations.

IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study do not allow for a conclusive argument. However, pooling current evidence points toward a potential for ECs as a smoking cessation tool. Though, given the overall quality of evidence, future studies should aim for more clarity in terms of interventions and larger study populations.

A randomized controlled study in healthy participants to explore the exposure continuum when smokers switch to a tobacco heating product or an E-cigarette relative to cessation

Background

Cigarette smoking is associated with a number of diseases, such as cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Recently, there has been an increase in the use of electronic cigarettes (ECs) and tobacco-heating products (THPs) as an alternative to cigarettes, which may reduce the health burden associated with smoking. However, an exposure continuum when smokers switch to ECs or THPs compared to complete smoking cessation is not well established.

Methods

148 healthy smokers were randomized to either continue smoking cigarettes, switch to using the glo THP or a prototype EC, or completely quit any nicotine or tobacco product use for 5 days, after a 2-day baseline period. During this study breath and 24-h urine samples were collected for Biomarker of Exposure (BoE) analysis.

Results

After a 5-day switching period BoE levels showed a substantial significant decrease in levels from baseline in the groups using the glo THP, the prototype EC, and having quit all nicotine and tobacco use. On an exposure continuum, smokers who completely quit nicotine had the lowest levels of assessed BoEs, followed by those who switched to the EC and then those who switched to glo THP use. Participants who continued to smoke had the highest levels of BoEs.

Conclusions

THP or EC use over a 5-day period resulted in significant reductions in exposure to smoke toxicants, in some cases to levels similar to those for nicotine cessation. These results show that on an exposure continuum, nicotine cessation gives the greatest reduction in exposure to tobacco smoke toxicants, closely followed by the EC and the glo THP. These significant reductions in exposure to toxicants suggest that the glo THP and EC have the potential to be Reduced Risk Products.

Study Registration

ISRCTN80651909.

Exposure to Nicotine and Toxicants Among Dual Users of Tobacco Cigarettes and E-Cigarettes: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, 2013-2014

INTRODUCTION

Concurrent use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes ("dual use") is common among tobacco users. Little is known about differences in demographics and toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users.

AIMS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from adult dual users (current every/some day users of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes, n = 792) included in the PATH Study Wave 1 (2013-2014) and provided urine samples. Samples were analyzed for biomarkers of exposure to nicotine and selected toxicants (tobacco-specific nitrosamine NNK [NNAL], lead, cadmium, naphthalene [2-naphthol], pyrene [1-hydroxypyrene], acrylonitrile [CYMA], acrolein [CEMA], and acrylamide [AAMA]). Subsets of dual users were compared on demographic, behavioral, and biomarker measures to exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 2411) and exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 247).

RESULTS

Most dual users were predominant cigarette smokers (70%), followed by daily dual users (13%), non-daily concurrent dual users (10%), and predominant vapers (7%). Dual users who smoked daily showed significantly higher biomarker concentrations compared with those who did not smoke daily. Patterns of e-cigarette use had little effect on toxicant exposure. Dual users with high toxicant exposure were generally older, female, and smoked more cigarettes per day. Dual users who had low levels of biomarkers of exposure were generally younger, male, and smoked non-daily.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2013-2014, most dual users smoked cigarettes daily and used e-cigarettes occasionally. Cigarette smoking appears to be the primary driver of toxicant exposure among dual users, with little-to-no effect of e-cigarette use on biomarker levels. Results reinforce the need for dual users to stop smoking tobacco cigarettes to reduce toxicant exposure.

IMPLICATIONS

With considerable dual use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes in the United States, it is important to understand differences in toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users, and how these differences align with user demographics. Findings suggest most dual users smoke daily and use e-cigarettes intermittently. Low exposure to toxicants was most common among younger users, males, and intermittent smokers; high exposure to toxicants was most common among older users, females, and heavier cigarette smokers. Results underscore the heterogeneity occurring within dual users, and the need to quit smoking cigarettes completely in order to reduce toxicant exposure.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol formed by heating an e-liquid. Some people who smoke use ECs to stop or reduce smoking, but some organizations, advocacy groups and policymakers have discouraged this, citing lack of evidence of efficacy and safety. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to 1 February 2021, together with reference-checking and contact with study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized cross-over trials in which people who smoke were randomized to an EC or control condition. We also included uncontrolled intervention studies in which all participants received an EC intervention. To be included, studies had to report abstinence from cigarettes at six months or longer and/or data on adverse events (AEs) or other markers of safety at one week or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcome measures were abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included changes in carbon monoxide, blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, lung function, and levels of known carcinogens/toxicants. We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences. Where appropriate, we pooled data from these studies in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 completed studies, representing 12,804 participants, of which 29 were RCTs. Six of the 56 included studies were new to this review update. Of the included studies, we rated five (all contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 41 at high risk overall (including the 25 non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (risk ratio (RR) 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 2.27; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 1498 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional four successful quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 8). There was low-certainty evidence (limited by very serious imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs was similar) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 485 participants). SAEs occurred rarely, with no evidence that their frequency differed between nicotine EC and NRT, but very serious imprecision led to low certainty in this finding (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.41: I2 = n/a; 2 studies, 727 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.81; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1057 participants). In absolute terms, this might again lead to an additional four successful quitters per 100 (95% CI 0 to 11). These trials mainly used older EC with relatively low nicotine delivery. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference in the rate of AEs between these groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 601 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.44; I2 = n/a; 4 studies, 494 participants). Compared to behavioral support only/no support, quit rates were higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 2.70, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.26; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2561 participants). In absolute terms this represents an increase of seven per 100 (95% CI 2 to 17). However, this finding was of very low certainty, due to issues with imprecision and risk of bias. There was no evidence that the rate of SAEs differed, but some evidence that non-serious AEs were more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (AEs: RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32; I2 = 41%, low certainty; 4 studies, 765 participants; SAEs: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.09; I2 = 5%; 6 studies, 1011 participants, very low certainty). Data from non-randomized studies were consistent with RCT data. The most commonly reported AEs were throat/mouth irritation, headache, cough, and nausea, which tended to dissipate with continued use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons and hence evidence for these is limited, with confidence intervals often encompassing clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to ECs without nicotine and compared to NRT. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain. More studies are needed to confirm the size of effect, particularly when using modern EC products. Confidence intervals were for the most part wide for data on AEs, SAEs and other safety markers, though evidence indicated no difference in AEs between nicotine and non-nicotine ECs. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect any clear evidence of harm from nicotine EC, but longest follow-up was two years and the overall number of studies was small. The evidence is limited mainly by imprecision due to the small number of RCTs, often with low event rates. Further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information, this review is now a living systematic review. We run searches monthly, with the review updated when relevant new evidence becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the review's current status.

Perspectives on Epigenetics Alterations Associated with Smoking and Vaping

Epigenetic alterations, including DNA methylation, microRNA, and long noncoding RNA, play important roles in the pathogenesis of numerous respiratory health conditions and diseases. Exposure to tobacco smoking has been found to be associated with epigenetic changes in the respiratory tract. Marketed as a less harmful alternative to combustible cigarettes, electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) has rapidly gained popularity in recent years, especially among youth and young adults. Accumulative evidence from both animal and human studies has shown that e-cigarette use (vaping) is also linked to similar respiratory health conditions as observed with cigarette smoking, including wheezing, asthma, and COPD. This review aims to provide an overview of current studies on associations of smoking and vaping with epigenetic alterations in respiratory cells and provide future research directions in epigenetic studies related to vaping.

Public health implications of vaping in the USA: the smoking and vaping simulation model

Background

Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) are increasingly popular worldwide. They may provide public health benefits if used as a substitute for smoking, but may create public health harms if used as a gateway to smoking or to discourage smoking cessation. This paper presents the Smoking and Vaping Model (SAVM), a user-friendly model which estimates the public health implications of NVPs in the USA.

Methods

SAVM adopts a cohort approach. We derive public health implications by comparing smoking- and NVP-attributable deaths and life-years lost under a No-NVP and an NVP Scenario. The No-NVP Scenario projects current, former, and never smoking rates via smoking initiation and cessation rates, with their respective mortality rates. The NVP Scenario allows for smoking- and NVP-specific mortality rates, switching from cigarette to NVP use, separate NVP and smoking initiation rates, and separate NVP and smoking cessation rates. After validating the model against recent US survey data, we present the base model with extensive sensitivity analyses.

Results

The SAVM projects that under current patterns of US NVP use and substitution, NVP use will translate into 1.8 million premature smoking- and vaping-attributable deaths avoided and 38.9 million life-years gained between 2013 and 2060. When the NVP relative risk is set to 5%, the results are sensitive to the level of switching and smoking cessation rates and to a lesser extent smoking initiation rates. When the NVP relative risk is raised to 40%, the public health gains in terms of averted deaths and LYL are reduced by 42% in the base case, and the results become much more sensitive to variations in the base case parameters.

Discussion

Policymakers, researchers, and other public health stakeholders can apply the SAVM to estimate the potential public health impact of NVPs in their country or region using their own data sources. In developing new simulation models involving NVPs, it will be important to conduct extensive sensitivity analysis and continually update and validate with new data.

Conclusion

The SAVM indicates the potential benefits of NVP use. However, given the uncertainty surrounding model parameters, extensive sensitivity analysis becomes particularly important.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12963-021-00250-7.

Critical appraisal of the European Union Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) Preliminary Opinion on electronic cigarettes

BACKGROUND

In preparation for the 2021 revision of the European Union Tobacco Products Directive, the Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) has posted its Preliminary Opinion on Electronic Cigarettes. They concluded that e-cigarettes only achieve a sub-optimal level of protection of human health. In this paper, we provide evidence that the Opinion's conclusions are not adequately backed up by scientific evidence and did not discuss the potential health benefits of using alternative combustion-free nicotine-containing products as substitute for tobacco cigarettes.

METHODS

Searches for articles were conducted in PubMed and by citation chasing in Google Scholar. Articles were also retrieved with a review of references in major publications. Primary data from World Health Organization surveys, the conclusions of reviews, and peer-reviewed non-industry studies were cited to address errors and omissions identified in the Opinion.

RESULTS

The Opinion omitted reporting on the individual and population health benefits of the substitution of e-cigarettes (ENDS) for cigarette smoking. Alternative hypotheses to the gateway theory were not evaluated. Its assessment of cardiovascular risk is contradicted by numerous reviews. It cites ever-use data that do not represent current patterns of use. It did not report non-nicotine use. It presented erroneous statements on trends in ENDS prevalence. It over-emphasized the role of flavours in youth ENDS initiation. It did not discuss cessation in sufficient length.

CONCLUSIONS

For the delivery of a robust and comprehensive final report, the members of the Working Group of the Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks will need to consider (1) the potential health benefits of ENDS substitution for cigarette smoking, (2) alternative hypotheses and contradictory studies on the gateway effect, (3) its assessment of cardiovascular risk, (4) the measurements of frequency of use, (5) non-nicotine use, (6) the role of flavours, and (7) a fulsome discussion of cessation.

Multi-endpoint analysis of human 3D airway epithelium following repeated exposure to whole electronic vapor product aerosol or cigarette smoke

Smoking is a cause of serious diseases in smokers including chronic respiratory diseases. This study aimed to evaluate the tobacco harm reduction (THR) potential of an electronic vapor product (EVP, myblu™) compared to a Kentucky Reference Cigarette (3R4F), and assessed endpoints related to chronic respiratory diseases. Endpoints included: cytotoxicity, barrier integrity (TEER), cilia function, immunohistochemistry, and pro-inflammatory markers. In order to more closely represent the user exposure scenario, we have employed the in vitro 3D organotypic model of human airway epithelium (MucilAir™, Epithelix) for respiratory assessment. The model was repeatedly exposed to either whole aerosol of the EVP, or whole 3R4F smoke, at the air liquid interface (ALI), for 4 weeks to either 30, 60 or 90 puffs on 3-exposure-per-week basis. 3R4F smoke generation used the ISO 20778:2018 regime and EVP aerosol used the ISO 20768:2018 vaping regime. Exposure to undiluted whole EVP aerosol did not trigger any significant changes in the level of pro-inflammatory mediators, cilia beating function, barrier integrity and cytotoxicity when compared with air controls. In contrast, exposure to diluted (1:17) whole cigarette smoke caused significant changes to all the endpoints mentioned above. To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating the effects of repeated whole cigarette smoke and whole EVP aerosol exposure to a 3D lung model at the ALI. Our results add to the growing body of scientific literature supporting the THR potential of EVPs relative to combustible cigarettes and the applicability of the 3D lung models in human-relevant product risk assessments.

Intensive Longitudinal Study of the Relationship Between Cigalike E-cigarette Use and Cigarette Smoking Among Adult Cigarette Smokers Without Immediate Plans to Quit Smoking

INTRODUCTION

This study examined the association between the introduction of an e-cigarette and subsequent change in cigarette smoking among smokers who were not immediately interested in quitting.

AIMS AND METHODS

The Moment Study was a 21-day intensive longitudinal study with an online follow-up survey at 30 days. After observing baseline cigarette smoking for 1 week, participants received 10 cigalike e-cigarettes on study days 6 and 13. Participants reported cigarettes per day, e-cigarette puffs per day, and e-cigarette satisfaction using text-message-based surveys.

RESULTS

The sample of 96 daily smokers was majority female (53.1%), African American (67.7%), and non-Hispanic (95.8%). When e-cigarettes were provided (day 6), average cigarettes per day dropped by 1.82 cigarettes (p < .0001). The within-person e-cigarette puff effect on daily cigarette smoking was significantly negative (β = -0.023; p = .005); a participant who consumed 100 more e-cigarette puffs in a day than usual for that person was expected to smoke 2.3 fewer cigarettes that day, but this was only true for non-menthol smokers (p = .006). Smokers older than 45 and those who started smoking at a younger age rated e-cigarettes as less satisfying (ps < .05). Participants with greater than the median reported satisfaction were 6.5 times more likely to use an e-cigarette at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Giving e-cigarettes to smokers who did not intend to quit reduced their cigarette smoking on days when they used e-cigarette more frequently, but this relationship did not hold for menthol smokers. Satisfaction with e-cigarette use was predictive of continued use 30 days later.

IMPLICATIONS

A greater amount of cigalike e-cigarette use resulted in less smoking among adult daily smokers without immediate plans to quit, but a lack of nicotine delivery and satisfaction for these devices may have limited their utility as a replacement for cigarette smoking, especially among menthol smokers. The global concept of "satisfaction" may be an important driver of e-cigarette use among adult smokers.

Systematic review of biomarker findings from clinical studies of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products

BACKGROUND

Worldwide 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

A 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.

CONCLUSIONS

A 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.

Delivery of beclomethasone dipropionate nanosuspensions with an electronic cigarette

The aim of this work was to ascertain the ability of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) to deliver drug nanocrystals through the produced aerosol. A nanocrystal nanosuspension of beclomethasone dipropionate, a synthetic chlorinated corticosteroid diester commonly used by inhalation in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was prepared with a wet media milling technique using Poloxamer 188 as stabilizer. The obtained nanosuspension was thoroughly characterized by different techniques: transmission electron microscopy, photon correlation spectroscopy, X-ray powder diffractometry and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. The nanosuspension was then loaded in the cartomizer of the electronic cigarette and the produced aerosol was collected and analysed, confirming the presence of drug nanocrystals. The results of this study suggested the possible alternative use of ENDS as medical device for the delivery of poorly soluble drugs.

From the Deeming Rule to JUUL-US News Coverage of Electronic Cigarettes, 2015-2018

INTRODUCTION

News media may influence public perceptions and attitudes about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), which may influence product use and attitudes about their regulation. The purpose of this study is to describe trends in US news coverage of e-cigarettes during a period of evolving regulation, science, and trends in the use of e-cigarettes.

METHODS

We conducted a content analysis of e-cigarette topics and themes covered in US news articles from 2015 to 2018. Online news databases (Access World News, Factiva) were used to obtain US news articles from the top 34 circulating newspapers, four national wire services, and five leading online news sources.

RESULTS

The number of articles increased by 75.4% between 2015 and 2018 (n = 1609). Most articles focused on policy/regulation (43.5%) as a main topic, followed by health effects (22.3%) and prevalence/trends (17.9%). Discussion about flavor bans quadrupled (6.1% to 24.6%) and discussion of youth e-cigarette use was most prevalent (58.4%) in 2018, coinciding with an increase in coverage about JUUL. JUUL was mentioned in 50.8% of 2018 articles. Across years, articles more frequently mentioned e-cigarette risks (70%) than potential benefits (37.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarettes continue to be a newsworthy topic, with coverage both reflecting numerous changes and events over time, and providing repeated opportunities for informing the public and policymakers about these novel products. Future research should continue to track how discourse changes over time and assess its potential influence on e-cigarette perceptions and policy changes.

IMPLICATIONS

E-cigarette news coverage in the United States increased between 2015 and 2018 and predominantly focused on policy and regulation. Notable spikes in volume were associated with some but not all major e-cigarette events, including the FDA's deeming rule, Surgeon General's report, and release of the National Youth Tobacco Survey data in 2018. Coverage of the 2018 National Academy of Medicine, Engineering, and Sciences report on the Public Health Consequences of E-cigarettes received minimal news coverage. The high volume in 2018 was driven in large part by coverage of the e-cigarette brand JUUL; over half of news articles in 2018 referenced JUUL specifically.

The Misuse of the Precautionary Principle in Justifying Australia's Ban on the Sale of Nicotine Vaping Products

In Australia, the precautionary principle has been used to justify an effective sales ban on nicotine vaping products (NVPs) by requiring all NVPs to be approved as medicines. Australia's policy is out of step with other English-speaking countries, which allow the sale of NVPs as consumer products. We provide a brief history of the precautionary principle, discuss guidelines on how it should be used, and examine key documents from Australian policy debates to describe how the precautionary principle has been misapplied in justifying Australian NVP policy. We argue that the precautionary principle has been inappropriately applied to NVP regulation in Australia in that it has: failed to consider the regulation of similar products, imposed regulations that are disproportionate to the level of risk, failed to assess the costs of its regulatory approach, and failed to undertake a cost/benefit analysis of a range of available regulatory options. Australian policy illustrates the risks of regulating nicotine products in isolation rather than considering NVPs as falling on a continuum of harmful nicotine products. Implications: The precautionary principle has been misapplied to NVP regulation in Australia. We recommend that the precautionary principle be used in a way that regulates nicotine products in proportion to their risks.

E-cigarette use and beliefs among adult smokers with substance use disorders

•

We estimated prevalence of e-cigarette dual use among smokers with substance use disorders.

•

Dual e-cigarette users were more likely to have tried to quit in the past year.

•

Overall, participants preferred to use e-cigarettes in comparison to nicotine patches/gum.

•

E-cigarettes seem appealing to patients with substance use disorders.

•

E-cigarette use may be effective for harm reduction among patients in addiction treatment.

Background

We explored characteristics and beliefs associated with e-cigarette use patterns among cigarette smokers requiring inpatient detoxification for opioid and/or alcohol use disorder(s).

Methods

Adult cigarette smokers (≥18 years), admitted to inpatient detoxification for alcohol and/or opioid use disorder(s) in a safety-net tertiary referral center in New York City were surveyed in 2015 (n = 158). Descriptive statistics (proportions) were used to assess for demographic, clinical diagnosis, cigarette smoking patterns (exclusive and dual use of e-cigarettes). Chi-square, t-test statistics, and logistic regression models were used.

Results

Among our sample of combustible cigarette users, 13.9% (n = 22) reported dual use with electronic cigarettes. Dual use did not differ by demographic or clinical variables. Compared to exclusive smokers, dual users were more likely to have tried to quit in the past year (Adjusted Odds ratio = 8.59; CI: 2.58, 28.35; p < 0.001). Dual smokers had significantly higher mean ratings perceiving that e-cigarettes can help people quit smoking compared to exclusive smokers (M = 3.7, SD= ±1.4 vs. M = 2.7, SD= ±1.5, p = 0.002) respectively. Dual users also preferred e-cigarettes over nicotine patches /gum for quitting (M = 3.7, SD= ±1.7 vs. M = 2.6, SD= ±1.6, p = 0.005).

Conclusions

E-cigarette use seems to be appealing to a small proportion of cigarette smokers with SUD. Although, dual smokers seem to use e-cigarettes for its cessation premise, they don’t appear to be actively seeking to quit. E-cigarettes may offer a more effective method for harm reduction, further evaluation of incorporating it within smoking cessation protocols among patients in addiction treatment is needed.

Vaping Instead of Cigarette Smoking: A Panacea or Just Another Form of Cardiovascular Risk?

Since 2007, the electronic cigarette (EC), with its increasingly diverse array of device options, has gained popularity both among long-term tobacco cigarette (TC) smokers and among never-smoking youth. The absence of a number of known toxic by-products of TC smoking has helped cultivate the perception that ECs are healthy. However, an expanding literature has provided concerning evidence that a number of EC constituents, including nicotine, and their thermal degradation by-products may have adverse effects, including cardiovascular effects. In this review, we discuss the cardiovascular risks associated with EC vaping and compare this risk profile with TC smoking. Acknowledging the dynamic nature of EC vaping, we will focus on the latest developments, including the introduction of the pod-like device, which is the most popular EC device used today. We discuss the implications of a new, unique, nicotine chemistry that mimics the efficient and addictive nicotine delivery of TCs. Furthermore, we touch on the outbreak of the lethal lung disease associated with ECs, which exposed the lack of quality control in the EC industry. Along the way, we will identify the limitations of current knowledge and provide suggestions for future research. Overall, we conclude that although ECs may once have held promise as part of a harm-reduction strategy in people who smoke lethal TCs, this role has been largely offset by the unconscionable marketing to our youth, in addition to a failure of regulation and enforcement, leading to significant harm, especially in never-smokers who use them.

User-Perceived Negative Respiratory Symptoms Associated with Electronic Cigarette Use

INTRODUCTION

Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) expose users to an aerosol containing chemicals, which could affect the respiratory system negatively. This study examined negative respiratory symptoms associated with ECIG use.

METHODS

In 2019, adult current ECIG users from 24 US states who reported experiencing negative respiratory symptoms from ECIG use (n = 49; 44.9% women; mean age = 35.2, SD = 11.5) completed an online survey and brainstormed statements that completed the prompt: "A specific negative effect or symptom related to my breathing, nose, mouth, throat, or lungs that I have experienced from vaping/using my e-cigarette is..." Participants sorted the final list of 56 statements into groups of similar content and rated statements on how true they were for them. Multidimensional scaling analysis identified thematic clusters.

RESULTS

Eight ECIG use respiratory symptom clusters identified in analysis included Mucus and Congestion, Fatigue, Throat Symptoms, Breathing Problems, Mouth Symptoms, Chest Symptoms, Illness Symptoms, and Nose and Sinus Symptoms. Highly rated (ie, most common) symptoms included dry throat or mouth, fatigue during physical activity, coughing, shortness of breath, excessive phlegm, and bad taste in mouth. Mean cluster ratings did not differ based on lifetime cigarette smoking status (100 lifetime cigarettes smoked), but current cigarette smokers (ie, dual users) rated the Fatigue, Breathing Problems, Mucus and Congestion, and Nose and Sinus Symptoms clusters higher than noncurrent cigarette smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Participant-identified respiratory symptoms perceived to be ECIG related, many similar to cigarette smoking symptoms. Future research should assess if these symptoms are associated with other negative health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS

ECIG use exposes users to chemicals that may have negative health impacts on the respiratory system. Limited research has examined the broad range of negative respiratory symptoms associated with e-cigarette use. This study identified that ECIG-cigarette users perceive their ECIG use to be associated with negative respiratory symptoms. Many e-cigarette user-reported negative respiratory symptoms are similar to those associated with cigarette smoking, though some appear unique to e-cigarette use. Future research should continue to monitor respiratory symptoms reported by ECIG users and whether these are associated with health outcomes over time.

Electronic Cigarettes: Past, Present, and Future: What Clinicians Need to Know

Electronic cigarettes (EC) are battery-operated devices that heat and aerosolize a liquid solution that typically contains nicotine. ECs have become commonly used among youth and may pose substantial risks of future addiction and health problems in this population. However, ECs are far less toxic per puff compared with combustible cigarettes, and as a result, might present an important harm reduction opportunity for cigarette smokers who cannot stop smoking by traditional means. The long-term health effects of ECs on individuals and the net effect on public health will remain unknown for many years.

How effective are electronic cigarettes for reducing respiratory and cardiovascular risk in smokers? A systematic review

Background

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are widely promoted as harm-reduction products for smokers, and smokers commonly perceive them as less harmful than combustible cigarettes. One of the key questions regarding public health consequences of e-cigarettes is the magnitude of harm reduction achievable by smokers who switch from combustible cigarettes to e-cigarettes. We conducted a systematic literature review of epidemiological studies that estimated odds of respiratory and cardiovascular outcomes among former smokers who use e-cigarettes compared to current smokers.

Methods

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We searched the PubMed and Embase databases in September 2020 to identify epidemiological studies that compared odds of cardiovascular and respiratory outcomes among former smokers who transitioned to e-cigarettes relative to odds among current smokers not using e-cigarettes (current exclusive smokers). We included studies that provided direct estimates of relevant odds ratios (ORs). We also included studies where indirect estimates of relevant ORs could be calculated based on published results. Two reviewers independently extracted data and conducted quality appraisals.

Results

Six population-based studies with sample sizes ranging from 19,475 to 161,529 respondents met review inclusion criteria, five of which were cross-sectional and one longitudinal. Three studies reported respiratory outcomes and three reported cardiovascular outcomes. ORs of respiratory outcomes (including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, asthma, and wheezing) in former smokers who transitioned to e-cigarettes versus current exclusive smokers were below 1.0, ranging from 0.58 (95%CI 0.36–0.94) to 0.66 (95%CI 0.50–0.87; all p < 0.05). All ORs for cardiovascular outcomes (including stroke, myocardial infarction, and coronary heart disease) did not differ significantly from 1.0.

Conclusion

Though our review included a small number of studies, it provided consistent results. Former smokers who transitioned to e-cigarettes showed ~ 40% lower odds of respiratory outcomes compared to current exclusive smokers. Switching from smoking to e-cigarette does not appear to significantly lower odds of cardiovascular outcomes. Since the utility of cross-sectional studies for causal inference remains limited, both randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies are needed to better evaluate contributions of e-cigarettes as harm reduction tools for smokers.

Use of Electronic Cigarettes and Self-Reported Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Diagnosis in Adults

INTRODUCTION

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use (vaping) has increased in recent years. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death associated with smoking.

AIMS AND METHODS

Based on 2016 and 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System national survey data on 891 242 adult participants who indicated their smoking and vaping status, the cross-sectional association of vaping with self-reported COPD diagnosis was investigated, using univariable and multivariable weighted logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Compared to never users, while dual users showed the highest association with self-reported COPD diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.98 to 4.85), current vapers who were either ex-smokers or never smoked showed significantly higher association with self-reported COPD diagnosis (aOR = 3.24; 95% CI = 2.78 to 3.78 and aOR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.01 to 2.12, respectively). Current vapers who were ex-smokers showed higher association with self-reported COPD diagnosis than ex-smokers who do not vape (aOR = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.48). Dual users showed higher association with self-reported COPD diagnosis than current smokers who do not vape (aOR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.27). Ex-smokers showed significantly less association with self-reported COPD diagnosis (aOR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.71) than current smokers. Current vapers who were either ex-smokers or never smoked had less association with self-reported COPD diagnosis compared to current smokers, with aOR = 0.85 (95% CI = 0.73 to 0.99) and aOR = 0.39 (95% CI = 0.27 to 0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Vaping is significantly associated with self-reported COPD diagnosis in adults, even among vapers who never smoked. Whether there is a benefit for COPD of switching from smoking to vaping requires study of the long-term effects of vaping.

IMPLICATIONS

With the increase of e-cigarette use in recent years, the health effects of e-cigarettes need to be investigated. While several studies have examined the association of vaping with respiratory symptoms among adolescents, little is known about the association of vaping with susceptibility to COPD among US adults. Using cross-sectional national survey data in adults, our study showed that vaping was significantly associated with self-reported COPD diagnosis. Although our data did not establish the causal relationship between vaping and self-reported COPD diagnosis, this study raises concerns about the observed association between vaping and self-reported COPD diagnosis.

Sensory Evaluation of E-Liquid Flavors by Smelling and Vaping Yields Similar Results

INTRODUCTION

Sensory research on e-liquid flavors can be performed by means of smelling and vaping. However, data comparing smelling versus vaping e-liquid flavors are lacking. This study aims to investigate if smelling could be an alternative to vaping experiments by determining the correlation for hedonic flavor assessment between orthonasal smelling and vaping of e-liquids, for smokers and nonsmokers.

METHODS

Twenty-four young adult smokers (mean age 24.8 ± 9.3) and 24 nonsmokers (mean age 24.9 ± 7.7) smelled and vaped 25 e-liquids in various flavors. Participants rated liking, intensity, familiarity, and irritation on a 100-mm Visual Analog Scale. Pearson correlations within and between smelling and vaping were calculated. Differences between user groups were calculated using t tests.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficients between smelling and vaping based on mean group ratings were 0.84 for liking, 0.82 for intensity, 0.84 for familiarity, and 0.73 for irritation. Means of the within-subjects correlation coefficients were, respectively, 0.51, 0.37, 0.47, and 0.25. Correlations between smelling and vaping varied across individuals (ranging from -0.27 to 0.87) and flavors (-0.33 to 0.81). Correlations and mean liking ratings did not differ between smokers and nonsmokers.

CONCLUSIONS

The strong group-level correlations between orthonasal smelling and vaping e-liquid flavors justify the use of smelling instead of vaping in future research. For example, smelling could be used to investigate differences in e-liquid flavor liking between (potential) user groups such as nicotine-naïve adolescents. The more modest within-subject correlations and variation across individuals and flavors merit caution in using smelling instead of vaping in other types of experiments.

IMPLICATIONS

This study supports the use of orthonasal smelling (instead of vaping) e-liquids to measure hedonic flavor perception in some studies where vaping would be inappropriate or not feasible. Examples of research situations where smelling e-liquids may be sufficient are (1) investigating nicotine-naïve individuals (ie, nonusers), (2) investigating individuals under legal age for e-cigarette use (ie, youth and adolescents), (3) investigating brain responses to exposure of e-liquid flavors using functional magnetic resonance imaging or electroencephalogram, and (4) comparing hedonic flavor assessment between adolescent nonusers and current smokers to provide support for future regulations on e-liquid flavors.

Real-World Evidence of Differences in Biomarkers of Exposure to Select Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents and Biomarkers of Potential Harm Between Adult E-Vapor Users and Adult Cigarette Smokers

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence regarding likely long-term health effects of e-vapor products (EVP) under actual use conditions relative to cigarette smoking is not well studied.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional, observational study, biomarkers of exposure (BOE) to select harmful and potentially harmful constituents and biomarkers of potential harm (BOPH) relevant to smoking-related diseases were measured in exclusive adult EVP users (AEVP, n = 144) and exclusive adult cigarette smokers (AS, n = 73). AEVP used their own brand of EVP for 6+ months following 10+ years of cigarette smoking and AS smoked own brand of cigarettes for 10+ years. Subject recruitment and informed consent were obtained online and urine/blood samples were collected at local clinical laboratories, representing a new paradigm for collecting real-world evidence.

RESULTS

The levels of total NNAL (NNK metabolite), 3-hydroxypropyl mercapturic acid (acrolein metabolite), and carboxyhemoglobin (carbon monoxide measure) were 46% to 86% lower in AEVP compared with AS (p ≤ .0001) as was nicotine equivalents (nicotine and its five metabolites; 36%, p < .01). The levels of some BOPH were significantly lower in AEVP compared with AS for 11-dehydrothromboxane-B2 (29%, p = .04; platelet activation), 8-epi-prostaglandin F2α (23%, p = .02; oxidative stress) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (16%, p = .02; endothelial function).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the feasibility of a new approach for collecting real-world evidence. Substantially lower levels of BOEs (NNK, nicotine, acrolein, carbon monoxide) and favorable differences in BOPHs (platelet activation, oxidative stress, endothelial function) suggest EVP users may have lower health risks than cigarette smokers.

IMPLICATIONS

Cigarette smoking causes serious diseases. Switching from a combustible tobacco product to a noncombustible product is a potential harm reduction pathway for adult smokers unable or unwilling to quit. Real-world evidence regarding the relative risk of EVP use compared with cigarettes is not well established. This study provides data specific to BOE to tobacco smoke constituents and biomarkers of potential harm collected under actual use conditions in a real-world setting. The totality of evidence suggests that exclusive EVP use may present lower health risk compared with smoking cigarettes.

Electronic Cigarettes and Head and Neck Cancer Risk-Current State of Art

E-cigarettes have become increasingly popular in the last decade and are considered less harmful than traditional tobacco products due to the lower content of toxic and carcinogenic compounds. However, this is still a controversial issue. This paper contains a review of previous reports on the composition of e-cigarettes and their impact on the pathogenesis and risk of head and neck cancer (HNC). The objective of the review was to compare the molecular and health effects of e-cigarette use in relation to the effects of traditional cigarette smoking in the upper respiratory tract, and to assess the safety and effect of e-cigarettes on HNC risk. A review for English language articles published until 31 August 2020 was made, using a PubMed (including MEDLINE), CINAHL Plus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science data. The authors reviewed articles on both toxic and carcinogenic compounds contained in e-cigarettes and their molecular and health effects on the upper respiratory tract in comparison to tobacco cigarettes. The risk of developing head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains lower in users of e-cigarettes compared with tobacco smokers. However, more long-term studies are needed to better address the safety of e-cigarettes.

Effect of Pod e-Cigarettes vs Cigarettes on Carcinogen Exposure Among African American and Latinx Smokers: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Fourth-generation nicotine salt pod system (NSPS) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are the leading class of e-cigarettes. They contain high nicotine concentrations, which may facilitate switching among smokers, but could also lead to increased exposure to nicotine and biomarkers of potential harm. African American and Latinx smokers experience significant tobacco-related health disparities. The potential of NSPS e-cigarettes to reduce smoking-related harm among these groups is unknown.

Objective

To compare the harm reduction potential of NSPS e-cigarette vs combustible cigarettes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This unblinded randomized clinical trial compared 6 weeks of e-cigarette use vs cigarettes as usual from to 2018 to 2019 among smokers in the San Diego, California, and Kansas City, Missouri, areas. Participants included African American and Latinx adult combustible cigarette smokers who smoked at least 5 cigarettes/d on at least 25 of the past 30 days for at least 6 months and were interested in switching to e-cigarettes. Data were analyzed from September 18, 2019, to September 4, 2020.

Interventions

6 weeks of e-cigarette use in a choice of pod flavors (5% nicotine) along with brief education, training, and action planning to completely switch to e-cigarettes from combustible cigarettes. The control group smoked combustible cigarettes as usual.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was reduction in urinary 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) concentration at week 6. Secondary outcomes were change in urinary cotinine, expired carbon monoxide (CO), respiratory symptoms, lung function, blood pressure, past 7-day consumption of combustible cigarettes, and switching rates (e-cigarette group only) at weeks 2 and 6.

Results

This study included 186 participants, including 92 African American participants and 94 Latinx participants. The mean (SD) age was 43.3 (12.5) years, and 75 (40.3%) were women. Participants smoked a mean (SD) of 12.1 (7.2) cigarettes/d on 6.8 (0.6) d/wk at baseline. A total of 125 participants were randomized to the e-cigarette group and 61 were randomized to the control group. At baseline, median (interquartile range) NNAL was 124 (45-197) pg/mL in the e-cigarette group and 88 (58-197) pg/mL in the control group. At week 6, the e-cigarette group had significantly greater reductions in NNAL (relative risk [RR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.23-0.54]; P < .001), CO (RR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.42-0.68]; P < .001), respiratory symptoms (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.47-0.85]; P = .002), and number of cigarettes smoked in the past 7 days among those still smoking (RR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.20-0.43]; P < .001) than the control group and maintained their cotinine levels (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.58-1.10]; P = .17). Lung function and diastolic and systolic blood pressure remained unchanged and did not differ between groups. For participants randomized to receive e-cigarettes, 32 participants (28.1%) were exclusively using e-cigarettes at week 6, while 66 participants (57.9%) were dual using and 16 participants (14%) resumed exclusively using cigarettes.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that e-cigarettes may be an inclusive harm reduction strategy for African American and Latinx smokers.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03511001.

Apoptosis of lung cells regulated by mitochondrial signal pathway in crotonaldehyde-induced lung injury

Crotonaldehyde, a highly toxic α, β-unsaturated aldehyde, is a ubiquitous hazardous pollutant. Because of its extreme toxicity and ubiquity in all types of smoke, most current research focuses on the lung toxicity of such air pollutants. However, the specific mechanism of pulmonary toxicity caused by crotonaldehyde remains unclear, especially after long-term exposure to crotonaldehyde at low dose. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to determine whether crotonaldehyde-induced oxidative damage and inflammation promote apoptosis in rats via the mitochondrial pathway using histopathology, immunohistochemistry, biochemistry analysis and Western blot analysis. The results show that crotonaldehyde elicited oxidative damage and inflammation in rats in a concentration-dependent manner. Crotonaldehyde-induced lung injury which was confirmed by H&E, Masson's trichrome staining and TUNEL. And crotonaldehyde-induced lung cell apoptosis showed a concentration-response relationship. Immunohistochemistry and Western blot results showed that apoptotic mitochondrial signaling pathway is abnormally activated in crotonaldehyde-induced lung injury. Collectively, this study demonstrates that exposure of rats to crotonaldehyde induces lung injury by inducing apoptosis, which is related to oxidative damage and inflammation through mitochondrial pathway.

Cluster analysis of urinary tobacco biomarkers among U.S. adults: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) biomarker study (2013-2014)

Tobacco use delivers nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are metabolized and excreted in urine offering useful biomarkers of exposure. Previous studies compared individual toxicants across tobacco users. Based on a group of biomarkers, cluster analysis was used to define tobacco toxicant exposure profiles. Clusters with distinct exposure profiles, were determined and described, based on levels of urinary biomarkers of exposure to nicotine, TSNAs, VOCs, and PAHs among a national sample of current, established, adult tobacco users, and examine the association of use behavior and cluster membership. The PATH Biomarker Wave 1 data were analyzed. Current established tobacco users with complete urinary biomarker data were included (N = 6724). User groups included cigarette smokers, users of electronic cigarette (ECIG), smokeless tobacco (SLT), and dual and poly tobacco users. Cluster analysis, pairwise comparisons, and multinomial logistic regression were conducted. Cigarette smokers were primarily in clusters with high biomarker concentrations across all groups, but actual concentrations were associated with smoking quantity. A cluster with high TSNAs but low levels of PAHs and VOCs was heavily populated by SLT users. Exclusive ECIG users, depending on use frequency, were predominantly in clusters with low biomarker concentrations, except for one cluster that had relatively high TSNAs. Clusters heavily populated by dual and poly tobacco users were the same as those heavily populated by cigarette smokers. Ten exposure profiles (clusters) were determined and linked to tobacco use behavior. Findings could inform future research and policy initiatives.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol formed by heating an e-liquid. People who smoke report using ECs to stop or reduce smoking, but some organisations, advocacy groups and policymakers have discouraged this, citing lack of evidence of efficacy and safety. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This review is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect and safety of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO for relevant records to January 2020, together with reference-checking and contact with study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized cross-over trials in which people who smoke were randomized to an EC or control condition. We also included uncontrolled intervention studies in which all participants received an EC intervention. To be included, studies had to report abstinence from cigarettes at six months or longer and/or data on adverse events (AEs) or other markers of safety at one week or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcome measures were abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up, AEs, and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included changes in carbon monoxide, blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, lung function, and levels of known carcinogens/toxicants. We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences. Where appropriate, we pooled data from these studies in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We include 50 completed studies, representing 12,430 participants, of which 26 are RCTs. Thirty-five of the 50 included studies are new to this review update. Of the included studies, we rated four (all which contribute to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 37 at high risk overall (including the 24 non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (risk ratio (RR) 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 2.27; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 1498 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional four successful quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 8). There was low-certainty evidence (limited by very serious imprecision) of no difference in the rate of adverse events (AEs) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 485 participants). SAEs occurred rarely, with no evidence that their frequency differed between nicotine EC and NRT, but very serious imprecision led to low certainty in this finding (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.41: I2 = n/a; 2 studies, 727 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.92; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 802 participants). In absolute terms, this might again lead to an additional four successful quitters per 100 (95% CI 0 to 12). These trials used EC with relatively low nicotine delivery. There was low-certainty evidence, limited by very serious imprecision, that there was no difference in the rate of AEs between these groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 346 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.19; I2 = n/a; 4 studies, 494 participants). Compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates were higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.04; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 2312 participants). In absolute terms this represents an increase of six per 100 (95% CI 1 to 14). However, this finding was very low-certainty, due to issues with imprecision and risk of bias. There was no evidence that the rate of SAEs varied, but some evidence that non-serious AEs were more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (AEs: RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.31; I2 = 28%; 3 studies, 516 participants; SAEs: RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.25 to 6.96; I2 = 17%; 5 studies, 842 participants). Data from non-randomized studies were consistent with RCT data. The most commonly reported AEs were throat/mouth irritation, headache, cough, and nausea, which tended to dissipate over time with continued use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons and hence evidence for these is limited, with confidence intervals often encompassing clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to ECs without nicotine and compared to NRT. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain. More studies are needed to confirm the degree of effect, particularly when using modern EC products. Confidence intervals were wide for data on AEs, SAEs and other safety markers. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect any clear evidence of harm from nicotine EC, but longest follow-up was two years and the overall number of studies was small. The main limitation of the evidence base remains imprecision due to the small number of RCTs, often with low event rates. Further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information for decision-makers, this review is now a living systematic review. We will run searches monthly from December 2020, with the review updated as relevant new evidence becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the review's current status.

Differences in Exposure to Nicotine, Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines, and Volatile Organic Compounds among Electronic Cigarette Users, Tobacco Smokers, and Dual Users from Three Countries

Country-level differences in nicotine vaping products used and biomarkers of exposure among long-term e-cigarette users and dual users remain understudied. This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2014 in the United States (n = 166), United Kingdom (n = 129), and Poland (n = 161). We compared patterns of tobacco product use and nicotine and toxicant exposure among cigarette-only smokers (n = 127); e-cigarette-only users (n = 124); dual users of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes (n = 95); and non-users (control group, n = 110) across three countries using mixed-effects linear regression. Compared with cigarette smokers, e-cigarette-only users had lower levels of toxicant biomarkers, but higher levels of nicotine biomarkers. Dual users had higher levels of toxicant biomarkers than e-cigarette-only users but similar levels to cigarette-only smokers. E-cigarette users in Poland, who overwhelmingly used refillable tank devices, exhibited greater levels of nicotine, and toxicant biomarkers relative to e-cigarette users in US/UK. Despite smoking fewer cigarettes, dual users from Poland exhibited similar levels of nicotine biomarkers compared with UK dual users, but higher than US dual users. Country-level differences in e-cigarette devices used and smoking behaviors (e.g., intensity) may contribute to differences in biomarker levels among users of the same products residing in different countries.