A Computational Approach for Respiratory Hazard Identification of Flavor Chemicals in Tobacco Products

Nontargeted Analysis in Tobacco Research: Challenges and Opportunities

Tobacco products are evolving at a pace that has outstripped tobacco control, leading to a high prevalence of tobacco use in the population. Researchers have been tirelessly developing suitable techniques to assess these products' emissions, toxicity, and public health impact. The nonclinical testing of tobacco products to assess the chemical profile of emissions is needed for evidence-based regulations. This testing has largely relied on targeted analytical methods that focus on constituent lists that may fall short in determining the toxicity of newly designed tobacco products. Nontargeted analysis (NTA), or the process of identifying and quantifying compounds within a complex matrix without prior knowledge of its chemical composition, is a promising technique for tobacco regulation, but it is not without challenges. The lack of standardized methods for sample generation, sample preparation, chromatographic separation, compound identification, and data analysis and reporting must be addressed so that the quality and reproducibility of the data generated by NTA can be benchmarked. This review discusses the challenges and highlights the opportunities of NTA in studying tobacco product constituents and emissions.

Dissonance in Young Adult Cigarillo Users' Categorization of Concept Flavored and Unflavored Products

This study asks young adult cigarillo users to categorize their preferred flavor in order to examine user consensus and potential methodological and regulatory implications of flavor name-based categorization systems. Young adult (21–28 years) cigarillo users (n = 426) named and categorized their favorite cigarillo flavor into one of seven categories: Fruit, Sweet and Candy, Mint, Alcohol, Menthol, Tobacco, and Other. Flavor responses were coded as characterizing (ex: Grape, Wine) or concept (ex: Jazz, Diamond) flavors. Variation within and between categories was assessed, including the presence of concept flavors and the placement of flavors in multiple categories. Of the 66 unique flavor names provided, participants placed 20 (30.1%) in more than one flavor category. Most of the Tobacco (76.9%) and Other (69.2%) flavor names appeared in multiple categories. The majority of flavor names in the Tobacco (69.2%) and Other (61.5%) categories were concept flavors. Concept flavors were placed in multiple categories (45.0%) twice as often as characterizing flavors (23.9%). This study has identified dissonance among cigarillo users’ flavor categorizations, particularly for concept flavored and unflavored products. Flavor names may obscure how and whether a product is flavored. Research on and regulation of flavored tobacco products should classify products by flavor additives rather than by name alone.