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

Association of electronic cigarette use and suicidal behaviors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has presented new challenges in public health, particularly among adolescents and young adults. While marketed as safer than tobacco and as cessation aids, e-cigarettes have raised concerns about their long-term health and psychosocial impacts, including potential links to increased suicidal behaviors. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between e-cigarette use and suicidal behaviors by conducting a systematic review of the current literature.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE for studies up to March 10, 2024, examining the relationship between e-cigarette use and suicidal behaviors. Eligible studies included cross-sectional, longitudinal, retrospective, prospective, and case-control designs. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs). Newcastle Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of studies. R software (V 4.3) was used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our analysis included fourteen studies, predominantly from the US and Korea, with participants ranging from 1,151 to 255,887. The meta-analysis identified a significant association between e-cigarette use and an increased risk of suicidal ideation (OR = 1.489, 95% CI: 1.357 to 1.621), suicide attempts (OR = 2.497, 95% CI: 1.999 to 3.996), and suicidal planning (OR = 2.310, 95% CI: 1.810 to 2.810). Heterogeneity was noted among the studies.

CONCLUSION

E-cigarette use is significantly associated with the risk of suicidal behaviors, particularly among adolescents. The findings underscore the necessity for caution in endorsing e-cigarettes as a safer smoking alternative and call for more extensive research to understand the underlying mechanisms. Public health strategies should be developed to address and mitigate the risks of suicidal behaviors among e-cigarette users.

The Untapped Biomarker Potential of MicroRNAs for Health Risk-Benefit Analysis of Vaping vs. Smoking

Despite the popularity of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) among adolescent never-smokers and adult smokers seeking a less pernicious substitute for tobacco cigarettes, the long-term health impact of vaping is largely unknown. Like cigarette smoke, e-cig vapor contains harmful and potentially harmful compounds, although in fewer numbers and at substantially lower concentrations. Many of the same constituents of e-cig vapor and cigarette smoke induce epigenetic changes that can lead to the dysregulation of disease-related genes. MicroRNAs (MiRNAs) are key regulators of gene expression in health and disease states. Extensive research has shown that miRNAs play a prominent role in the regulation of genes involved in the pathogenesis of smoking-related diseases. However, the use of miRNAs for investigating the disease-causing potential of vaping has not been fully explored. This review article provides an overview of e-cigs as a highly consequential electronic nicotine delivery system, describes trends in e-cig use among adolescents and adults, and discusses the ongoing debate on the public health impact of vaping. Highlighting the significance of miRNAs in cell biology and disease, it summarizes the published and ongoing research on miRNAs in relation to gene regulation and disease pathogenesis in e-cig users and in vitro experimental settings. It identifies gaps in knowledge and priorities for future research while underscoring the need for empirical evidence that can inform the regulation of tobacco products to protect youth and promote public health.

Exploring the Utility of Long Non-Coding RNAs for Assessing the Health Consequences of Vaping

Electronic cigarette (e-cig) use, otherwise known as "vaping", is widespread among adolescent never-smokers and adult smokers seeking a less-harmful alternative to combustible tobacco products. To date, however, the long-term health consequences of vaping are largely unknown. Many toxicants and carcinogens present in e-cig vapor and tobacco smoke exert their biological effects through epigenetic changes that can cause dysregulation of disease-related genes. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have emerged as prime regulators of gene expression in health and disease states. A large body of research has shown that lncRNAs regulate genes involved in the pathogenesis of smoking-associated diseases; however, the utility of lncRNAs for assessing the disease-causing potential of vaping remains to be fully determined. A limited but growing number of studies has shown that lncRNAs mediate dysregulation of disease-related genes in cells and tissues of vapers as well as cells treated in vitro with e-cig aerosol extract. This review article provides an overview of the evolution of e-cig technology, trends in use, and controversies on the safety, efficacy, and health risks or potential benefits of vaping relative to smoking. While highlighting the importance of lncRNAs in cell biology and disease, it summarizes the current and ongoing research on the modulatory effects of lncRNAs on gene regulation and disease pathogenesis in e-cig users and in vitro experimental settings. The gaps in knowledge are identified, priorities for future research are highlighted, and the importance of empirical data for tobacco products regulation and public health is underscored.

Relationship Between Product Features and the Prices of e-Cigarette Devices Sold in Web-Based Vape Shops: Comparison Study Using a Linear Regression Model

BACKGROUND

Open-system electronic cigarette (EC) product features, such as battery capacity, maximum output wattage, and so forth, are major components that drive product costs and may influence use patterns. Moreover, continued innovation and monitoring of product features and prices will provide critical information for designing appropriate taxation policies and product regulations.

OBJECTIVE

This study will examine how product features are associated with the prices of devices sold in web-based vape shops.

METHODS

We draw samples from 5 popular, US-based, web-based vape shops from April to August 2022 to examine starter kits, device-only products, and e-liquid container-only products. We implemented a linear regression model with a store-fixed effect to examine the association between device attributes and prices.

RESULTS

EC starter kits or devices vary significantly by type, with mod prices being much higher than pod and vape pen prices. The prices of mod starter kits were even lower than those of mod devices, suggesting that mod starter kits are discounted in web-based vape shops. The price of mod kits, mod device-only products, and pod kits increased as the battery capacity and output wattage increased. For vape pens, the price was positively associated with the volume size of the e-liquid container. On the other hand, the price of pod kits was positively associated with the number of containers.

CONCLUSIONS

A unit-based specific tax, therefore, will impose a higher tax burden on lower-priced devices such as vape pens or pod systems and a lower tax burden on mod devices. A volume- or capacity-based specific tax on devices will impose a higher tax burden on vape pens with a larger container size. Meanwhile, ad valorem taxes pegged to wholesale or retail prices would apply evenly across device types, meaning those with advanced features such as higher battery capacities and output wattage would face higher rates. Therefore, policy makers could manipulate tax rates by device type to discourage the use of certain device products.

The online promotion strategies of e-cigarette and heated tobacco product retailers in South Korea following the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for regulation

INTRODUCTION

The surge in popularity of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs) in South Korea, driven by perceived health benefits and COVID-19-related concerns, has led to increased advertising claims about their safety despite ongoing debates about their health effects. This study explores the marketing strategies of online e-cigarette and HTP retailers in South Korea pre- and post-COVID-19, examining potential misleading claims and providing a foundation for future regulatory measures.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive study of eight major e-commerce platforms and three dominant search engines in South Korea to analyze the marketing and advertising strategies of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs) (n=774). Using specific keywords, promotional strategies were identified and categorized, after which statistical analysis was conducted to understand the frequency and proportion of these strategies, highlighting differences between HTP and e-cigarette sellers.

RESULTS

Our analysis reveals a significant rise in the number of online retailers selling e-cigarettes and HTPs following the COVID-19 pandemic, with the promotional strategies 'Stay home and vape' and 'Trendy' being the most prevalent. Trends also indicate a shift in promotional strategies over the years, with a marked increase in health reassurance themes and appeals to trendiness, particularly targeting female consumers, which were used significantly more at HTPs stores.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights the need for stricter regulation due to the potential health risks posed by the aggressive marketing strategies of e-cigarette and HTP online retailers in South Korea, amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Association between e-cigarette use and susceptibility to tobacco product use: findings from the 2019 China National Youth Tobacco Survey

Background

There is an ongoing debate about whether e-cigarettes act as a gateway to tobacco smoking or contribute to smoking cessation, and relevant studies are limited among Chinese adolescents. This cross-sectional study therefore aimed to explore the relationship between e-cigarette use and susceptibility to tobacco product use among Chinese high school students.

Methods

The study population comprised 107,633 never smokers and 19,377 former smokers, generated from the 2019 China National Youth Tobacco Survey. The primary independent variables of interest were ever e-cigarette use, current e-cigarette use, and the frequency of current e-cigarette use. The main outcome was the susceptibility to tobacco product use. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate the association between the primary independent variables of interest and the outcome variable. Moreover, two additional multilevel logistic regression models were fitted using two alternative definitions of the outcome as the sensitivity analyses.

Results

Among never smokers, students who ever used e-cigarettes were more likely to be susceptible to tobacco product use compared to students who never used e-cigarettes (AOR = 2.83, 95%CI = 2.59-3.08). Students who currently used e-cigarettes were more likely to be susceptible to tobacco product use than those who did not currently use e-cigarettes (AOR = 3.89, 95%CI = 3.21-4.72). Among former smokers, with the same settings of modeling, the AORs were 1.76 (95%CI = 1.62-1.91) and 3.16 (95%CI = 2.52-3.97), respectively. Similar results were obtained from the two sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

Among Chinese high school students, both never smokers and former smokers, e-cigarette use, especially current e-cigarette use, was positively associated with susceptibility to tobacco product use. It is recommended to strengthen the monitoring of e-cigarettes and to provide targeted health education to adolescents.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol by heating an e-liquid. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit smoking, and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is a review update conducted as part of a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the safety, tolerability and effectiveness of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke tobacco achieve long-term smoking abstinence, in comparison to non-nicotine EC, other smoking cessation treatments and no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register to 1 February 2023, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to 1 July 2023, and reference-checked and contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included 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 as these studies have the potential to provide further information on harms and longer-term use. Studies had to report an eligible outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Critical outcomes were abstinence from smoking after at least six months, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). 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 pairwise and network meta-analyses (NMA).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 88 completed studies (10 new to this update), representing 27,235 participants, of which 47 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Of the included studies, we rated ten (all but one contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 58 at high risk overall (including all non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There is high certainty that nicotine EC increases quit rates compared to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.93; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 2544 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional four quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 6 more). There is moderate-certainty evidence (limited by imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs is similar between groups (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2052 participants). SAEs were rare, and there is insufficient evidence to determine whether rates differ between groups due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.60; I2 = 32%; 6 studies, 2761 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that nicotine EC increases quit rates compared to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.96; I2 = 4%; 6 studies, 1613 participants). In absolute terms, this might lead to an additional three quitters per 100 (95% CI 1 to 7 more). There is 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%; 5 studies, 1840 participants). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differ between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.79; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 1412 participants; low-certainty evidence). Due to issues with risk of bias, there is low-certainty evidence that, compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates may be higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.25; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 5024 participants). In absolute terms, this represents an additional four quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 5 more). There was some evidence that (non-serious) AEs may be more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32; I2 = 41%, low-certainty evidence; 4 studies, 765 participants) and, again, insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.34; I2 = 23%; 10 studies, 3263 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Results from the NMA were consistent with those from pairwise meta-analyses for all critical outcomes, and there was no indication of inconsistency within the networks. 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 EC use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons, hence, evidence for these is limited, with CIs often encompassing both clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to NRT and moderate-certainty evidence that they increase quit rates compared to ECs without nicotine. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain due to risk of bias inherent in the study design. 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 nor between nicotine ECs and NRT. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect evidence of serious harm from nicotine EC, but the 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. Further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information to decision-makers, this review is 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.

Trade agreements and tobacco control policy: analysis of the impact of FCTC on regulatory contents of trade agreements from 2001 to 2019

BACKGROUND

This study aims to analyze the impact of Framework of Convention of Tobacco Control (FCTC) on regulatory contents of trade agreements from 2001 to 2019.

METHODS

A search of trade agreements from'WTO Regional Free Trade Agreement Database' using keywords including "tobacco", "cigarette", "smoking" and "FCTC" from May to August 2020 resulted in a total sample of 268 trade agreements, from which 69 trade agreements were coded and analyzed. Provisions in trade agreements, identified via the aforementioned keywords, were categorized into 6 trade measures. The word counts of the provisions containing; FCTC; were calculated. Chi-square tests were applied to analyze the differences of regulatory patterns between different time frames. The import and export values (USD) of tobacco products under trade agreements containing the term "FCTC" were further collected from the "International Trade Statistics 2001-2020" for understanding the impact of the provision on the trade flow.

RESULTS

Among 69 agreements, the percentage of trade agreements containing keyword as "FCTC" increased significantly from 0% to 2011 to 12% after 2011. A significant decrease of using trade measures as "the exclusion list" was found after 2011 (from 10% to 0). The word counts of provisions containing; FCTC; increased from 24 words in 2011 to 164 words in 2018, and the content of the provisions became more concrete over time. There are six trade agreements containing "FCTC", and all these 6 agreements were ratified by European Union (EU). Despite EU ratified trade agreements with "FCTC", the import and export values of tobacco products between EU and the other party countries increased with time. But the gap of average trade values between trade agreements with and without "FCTC" being widened with time.

CONCLUSIONS

As a first study evaluated the impact of FCTC on regulatory contents of trade agreements, our study results showed that after countries signed trade agreements containing keyword FCTC, the regulatory contents changed significantly. Further studies are recommended to understand the reason and criteria for incorporating FCTC provisions into trade agreements, especially in the EU.

Examination of the impact of myblu electronic nicotine delivery system e-liquid nicotine strength on self-reported measures of dependence

BACKGROUND

Greater nicotine delivery is associated with higher nicotine concentrations in electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) liquids. However, there is a current debate as to whether this leads to increased dependence and mitigates ENDS public health potential.

METHODS

Self-reported dependence among users of myblu ENDS containing different nicotine concentrations was examined with data from a multiwave cross-sectional survey of US young adults and adults. Questions examined responses related to dependence measures and participants' most often used myblu ENDS nicotine concentration (low: 0%, 1% and 1.2%; medium: 2%, 2.4% and 2.5%; or high: 3.6% and 4%).

RESULTS

A global general linear model using nicotine concentration, age and days myblu that was used in the past 30 revealed a significant difference in PROMIS scores among nicotine concentration groups (F = 4.07, p = 0.02). However, pairwise comparisons to examine which specific groups differed significantly from others showed no significant differences. Logistic regression demonstrated that strong past 30-day cravings to use myblu among participants using high or medium nicotine concentrations were not significantly different from those using a low concentration (ORs 0.66 [0.42, 1.03], p = 0.07 and 0.95 [0.49, 1.82], p = 0.98, respectively). Time to daily first use for high or medium nicotine concentration users was not significantly different from those using a low concentration (ORs 0.89 [0.70, 1.14], p = 0.35 and 0.84 [0.57, 1.25], p = 0.40, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of myblu ENDS with different nicotine concentrations is not associated with differing levels of dependence. Our findings contradict the notion that high ENDS e-liquid nicotine levels generate increased dependence.

Regional French evolution of tobacco and e-cigarette experimentation and use among adolescents aged 15-16 years: A cross-sectional observational study conducted in the Loire department from 2018 to 2020

Background

We assessed/compared the evolution of tobacco and e-cigarette experimentation and use among French adolescents of the Loire department aged 15-16 years.

Methods

A descriptive, cross-sectional/observational study conducted in 2018-2020 among 7,950 Year 11 pupils attending 27 public secondary schools of the Loire department, France.

Results

From 2018 to 2020, 66.18% of adolescents were "non-vapers and non-smokers", 19.76% were "vapers and smokers", 7.90% were "non-vapers and smokers" and 6.15% were "vapers and non-smokers". E-cigarette experimentation was more prevalent than tobacco experimentation (44.92% vs 41.67%), and daily vaping was less prevalent than daily smoking (5.40% vs 10.24%). More boys than girls were daily vapers or daily smokers. A decrease was observed in tobacco experimentation (from 41.22% in 2018 to 39.73% in 2020) and e-cigarette experimentation (from 50.28% in 2018 to 41.25% in 2020). Current vaping remained stable, with an increase in daily vaping. French adolescent vapers frequently use e-liquids with little or no nicotine or with fruit or sweet flavours.

Conclusions

Adolescents used e-cigarettes mainly for experimental and/or recreational purposes, with no intention of progression to daily smoking. Although the design of this study is not longitudinal and caution must be exercised, from our cross-sectional observational study data, it appears that the proportion of "non-vapers and non-smokers" tended to increase. "Smokers" tended to progress to the dual use of vaping and smoked tobacco, with the likely intention to reduce or quit smoking.

Switching away from smoking at 12 months among adult JUUL users varying in recent history of quit attempts made with and without smoking cessation medication

Some smokers switch away from smoking using e-cigarettes, but guidelines recommend trying approved medications first. We analyzed switching in adult smokers using JUUL by their recent history of quit attempts and use of smoking cessation medications. Participants were 8511 adult (21+) established smokers (at baseline), in which 50.3% are daily smokers, in a longitudinal observational study who completed a survey 12 months after first purchasing a JUUL Starter Kit. At baseline, participants reported attempts to quit smoking in the prior year and use of pharmacotherapy (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT] or prescription medication) in their most recent attempt. The outcomes were switching (self-reported no past-30-day smoking) and 50%+ reductions in cigarette consumption. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for baseline covariates. Two thirds of the participants had made a quit attempt in the year before purchasing JUUL. Overall, 59% [58%, 60%] had switched at 12 months. Switching was more likely in those who had used NRT and who attempted quitting without medication versus those who used prescription medications or made no quit attempt. In adjusted multivariable analyses, only making a past-year quit attempt (vs. not) was associated with higher odds of switching (OR = 1.15 [1.04, 1.28]). Over 60% of dual users reduced cigarette consumption by ≥50%. These associations were largely similar in daily smokers. Twelve months after purchasing JUUL, almost all smokers reported either switching or reducing their smoking by 50%+, including those who had recently failed to quit smoking with approved pharmacotherapies. E-cigarettes provide an alternative route to abstinence from smoking for smokers with a history of cessation and cessation treatment failure.

Non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Although non-pharmacological smoking cessation measures have been widely used among smokers, current research evidence on the effects of smoking cessation is inconsistent and of mixed quality. Moreover, there is a lack of comprehensive evidence synthesis. This study seeks to systematically identify, describe, and evaluate the available evidence for non-pharmacological interventions in smoking populations through evidence mapping (EM), and to search for best-practice smoking cessation programs.

METHODS

A comprehensive search for relevant studies published from the establishment of the library to January 8, 2023, was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, Wan Fang, and VIP. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. The PRISMA statement and AMSTAR 2 tool were used to evaluate the report quality and methodology quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs), respectively. Bubble plots were utilized to display information, such as the study population, intervention type, evidence quality, and original study sample size.

RESULTS

A total of 145 SRs/MAs regarding non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation were investigated, with 20 types of interventions identified. The most commonly used interventions were cognitive behaviour education (n = 32, 22.07%), professional counselling (n = 20, 13.79%), and non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) (n = 13, 8.97%). Among them, counselling and behavioural support can improve smoking cessation rates, but the effect varies depending on the characteristics of the support provided. These findings are consistent with previous SRs/MAs. The general population (n = 108, 74.48%) was the main cohort included in the SRs/MAs. The total score of PRISMA for the quality of the reports ranged from 8 to 27, and 13 studies (8.97%) were rated as high confidence, and nine studies (6.21%) as moderate confidence, in the AMSTAR 2 confidence rating.

CONCLUSIONS

The abstinence effect of cognitive behaviour education and money incentive intervention has advantages, and non-nicotine e-cigarettes appear to help some smokers transition to less harmful replacement tools. However, the methodological shortcomings of SRs/MAs should be considered. Therefore, to better guide future practice in the field of non-pharmacological smoking cessation, it is essential to improve the methodological quality of SRs and carry out high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

E-Cigarette-Related Health Beliefs Expressed on Twitter Within the U.S

Introduction

This mixed-methods study analyzed English-language U.S.-based Twitter posts related to E-cigarette use from February 2021.

Methods

Posts were manually identified as health-related or not and, if health-related, whether they were posted by an E-cigarette user. A random selection of 1,000 health-related tweets from 986 unique E-cigarette users were qualitatively content analyzed for theory of planned behavior constructs as well as nature and tone of each tweet message. Using quantitative semantic network analysis, relationships among the identified topics and sentiment-specific conversation patterns were explored.

Results

The most salient health-related conversation topics of E-cigarette users, health beliefs corresponding to each theory of planned behavior construct, and major motivational contexts of E-cigarette use were identified. Seven topics emerged in positive tweets: smoking cessation, social impact generation, controls over addiction, therapeutic effects on physical and mental health, social support, device attachment, and peer influence. Nine topics emerged in negative tweets: side effects on physical health, vaping addiction, lack of E-cigarette regulations, peer pressure, increased risk of COVID-19, side effects on mental health, no help in smoking cessation, social conflict, and polysubstance use. Most assertions for E-cigarette benefits were not substantiated. Jokes in tweets appeared to contribute to the view of vaping as an attractive, enjoyable, safe, and fun activity. Discussions about positive aspects of E-cigarette use were concentrated on a few related topics, whereas tweets discouraging E-cigarette use presented a diverse, less related set of topics.

Conclusions

The results provide insights into the drivers of E-cigarette use behaviors. E-cigarette user perspectives gathered from social media may inform research to guide future prevention and cessation interventions.

Electronic Cigarette Usage Patterns and Perceptions in Adult Australians

Despite their increasing popularity, and Australia's unique regulatory environment, how and why Australian adults use e-cigarettes and their perceptions of their safety, efficacy and regulation have not been extensively reported before. In this study, we screened 2217 adult Australians with the aim of assessing these questions in a sample of current or former e-cigarette users. A total of 505 out of 2217 respondents were current or former e-cigarette users, with only these respondents completing the full survey. Key findings of this survey included the high proportion of respondents who indicated they were currently using e-cigarettes (307 out of 2217 = 13.8%), and the high proportion of current e-cigarette users that were also smokers (74.6%). The majority of respondents used e-liquids containing nicotine (70.3%), despite it being illegal in Australia without a prescription, and the majority bought their devices and liquids in Australia (65.7%). Respondents reported using e-cigarettes in a variety of places, including inside the home, inside public places (where it is illegal to smoke tobacco cigarettes), and around other people-which has implications for second and third hand exposures. A significant proportion of current e-cigarette users (30.6%) thought that e-cigarettes were completely safe to use long-term, although in general, there was a large amount of uncertainty/ambivalence with respect to perceptions of e-cigarette safety and efficacy as smoking cessation tools. This study shows that e-cigarette use is common in Australia, and that appropriate dissemination of unbiased research findings on their safety and efficacy in smoking cessation is urgently required.

Occurrence of metals in e-cigarette liquids: Influence of coils on metal leaching and exposure assessment

Electronic cigarettes are generally recognized as a safer alternative than conventional cigarettes. Nevertheless, previous research suggests metal (loid) leaching due to coil contact, potentially transferring to the e-liquid and its aerosolized form. In this study, Cr, Cd, Ni, and Pb levels were measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) on 17 samples of e-liquids with different chemical properties (e.g., pH, nicotine content, flavoring, free-base, and nicotine salts). Twelve e-liquids were then put in contact with 36-gauge Kanthal A-1, Nichrome 80, Stainless steel 317 L and disposable coils such as Juul, and Aspire BVC for three days at 200-250 °C for 1 h each day. Metal levels expressed as mean (standard deviation) metal concentration, were below detection (Cd) to very low in bottle samples (Ni ≤ 76 (18); Pb ≤ 16 (1.5); and Cr ≤ 386 (15.6) μg/kg). In the coil extracts, varying concentrations of the same metal (loid) were found, indicating that metal leaching capacity may differ per sample. All samples contained Ni and Cr, followed by Pb to a much lesser extent. Cd levels were mostly below detection limits. Coil + e-liquid combinations with the highest Ni, Cr, and Pb concentrations were: Aspire BVC + Melon 0 mg/mL: Ni = 1.22 E+04 (281); Aspire BVC + Hit Nicotine 40 mg/mL: Cr = 864 (116); and Nichrome 80 + Melon 0 mg/mL: Pb = 56 (5) μg/kg. Overall, results suggest that nicotine salts at 40 mg/mL enhance Cr and Ni transfer. Stainless steel 317 L released very low metal concentrations. A conservative screening level risk characterization showed that 10.5% and 3.5% of the coil extracts may exceed Ni and Cr (III) safe concentrations, respectively. In the aerosol phase, 8.8% of samples might be above Ni equivalent daily dose for chronic exposure and 1.8% for intermediate exposure. Further studies on coil metal leaching could aid in establishing coil manufacturing regulations.

A critique of the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council CEO statement on electronic cigarettes

This paper critically analyses a statement by Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) on e-cigarettes in May 2022 that will be used to guide national policy. We reviewed the evidence and the conclusions drawn in the NHMRC Statement. In our view, the Statement is not a balanced reflection of the benefits and risks of vaping because it exaggerates the risks of vaping and fails to compare them to the far greater risks of smoking; it uncritically accepts evidence of harms from e-cigarettes while adopting a highly sceptical attitude towards evidence of their benefits; it incorrectly claims that the association between adolescent vaping and subsequent smoking is causal; and it understates the evidence of the benefits of e-cigarettes in assisting smokers to quit. The Statement dismisses the evidence that vaping is probably already having a positive net public health effect and misapplies the precautionary principle. Several sources of evidence supporting our assessment were published after the NHMRC Statement's publication and are also referenced. The NHMRC Statement on e-cigarettes does not present a balanced assessment of the available scientific literature and fails to meet the standard expected of a leading national scientific body.

Smoke and mirrors: Support from psychiatrists for nicotine e-cigarette availability in Australia

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists' (RANZCP) 2018 position statement supports increased, regulated availability of e-cigarettes (ECs) as a harm-reduction measure and recommends further research into their use. Aligned with this recommendation, we aimed to critically evaluate the RANZCP's stance on this issue through a literature review focused on the areas identified in the position statement as requiring further investigation: (1) the adverse health effects attributable to ECs; (2) use of ECs for smoking cessation (particularly for people living with severe mental illness); and (3) EC-associated risks for nicotine naïve young people. We identified and summarised evidence of harm attributable to ECs that is particularly relevant to young people through direct adverse health sequelae, onset of nicotine dependence and increased risk of combustible cigarette (CC) use. A small number of studies suggest ECs can be used for harm-reduction purposes in people diagnosed with nicotine dependence and severe mental illness. However, these results must be considered alongside robust evidence supporting the effectiveness of existing pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in people with severe mental illness. The position statement is in urgent need of review in line with the available evidence.

Global trends in smoking cessation research from 2002 to 2021: A bibliometric and visual analysis

•

Our study is the first bibliometric and visual analysis on smoking cessation research of the past two decades.

•

Our study identifies productive countries/regions, institutions, authors, journals, and reveals a global network of collaborations of smoking cessation research.

•

The Co-occurrence Analysis of Keywords shed lights on the research frontier, trends and hot topics on smoking cessation research.

This study aimed to analyze the scientific outputs of smoking cessation research and explore its hotspots and frontiers from 2002 to 2021, using bibliometric methods. We use the core collection of Web of Science as a data source, and apply bibliometric methods to visually analyze articles published in smoking cessation research from 2002 to 2021, including publication year, countries/regions, journals, authors, institutions, and keywords. The VOSviewer (1.6.16) tool was used for the analysis. A total of 8797 articles related to smoking cessation research were identified. The USA was the leading contributor with 4671 publications. NICOTINE＆TOBACCO RESEARCH contributed the most publications (528), with the most citations (13746) and the highest H-index (59). The most contributing institutions were the University College London and University of California San Francisco. Robert West was most productive author. We found active collaborations among both productive authors and productive institutions. There were five hot topics in smoking cessation research: (1) Public health harm from tobacco; (2) The role of e-health in smoking cessation; (3) Role of primary health care in eliminating tobacco dependence; (4) Nicotine replacement therapy and pharmacotherapy; (5) The biological and clinical understanding of addiction. Our current study showed a growing trend in smoking cessation based on the number of published articles over the last 20 years. There was active cooperation between institutions, and authors. Electronic cigarettes, mHealth, eHealth, public health and mental health are foci of new and emerging research.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol by heating an e-liquid. Some people who smoke use ECs to stop or reduce smoking, although 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 smoking, and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is a review 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 July 2022, and reference-checked and contacted 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. 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 78 completed studies, representing 22,052 participants, of which 40 were RCTs. Seventeen of the 78 included studies were new to this review update. Of the included studies, we rated ten (all but one contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 50 at high risk overall (including all non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There was high certainty that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.04; I2 = 10%; 6 studies, 2378 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional four quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 6). There was moderate-certainty evidence (limited by imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs was similar between groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1702 participants). SAEs were rare, but there was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates differed between groups due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.52; I2 = 34%; 5 studies, 2411 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, 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%; 5 studies, 1840 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.79; I2 = 0%; 8 studies, 1272 participants). Compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates were higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.52 to 4.65; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 3126 participants). In absolute terms, this represents an additional two quitters per 100 (95% CI 1 to 3). 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 1.03, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.97; I2 = 38%; 9 studies, 1993 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 EC 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 high-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to NRT and moderate-certainty evidence that they increase quit rates 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 nor between nicotine ECs and NRT. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect evidence of serious 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 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.

Nicotine-Free E-Cigarettes Might Promote Tobacco Smoking Reduction Better Than Nicotine Delivery Devices: Results of a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial at 1 Year

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the use of e-cigarettes to aid in quitting contributed to the increase in the pulmonary health of chronic smokers. The efficacy of e-cigarettes to support a successful smoking cessation attempt was also investigated. A total of 210 smokers (78 women) were enrolled in a screening program for the early detection of lung cancer and distributed in three arms: nicotine e-cigarette plus support, nicotine-free e-cigarette plus support, and support. Results showed that participants in the nicotine e-cigarette arm had a significant and fast decrease in daily cigarettes, but that later they resume smoking more than the other two groups. Conversely, participants in the other two arms showed similar daily consumption at the two evaluation points. Among abstinent participants, only 12.5% reported cough, while 48% of current smokers had pulmonary symptoms. Our study suggests that, in the long run, the use of a nicotine-free liquid may favor reducing smoking and could be considered a good option in a clinical setting.

A call to ban the sale of tobacco products

Tobacco is both toxic and addictive. Mounting evidence shows that tobacco use has a detrimental impact on almost every aspect of human health, causing or worsening deadly public health crises from the cancer epidemic to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, while tobacco use is a threat to both personal and public health, it continues to surge across the world, especially in China and other low- and middle-income countries. To this end, this article argues in favor of using a ban on the sale of all tobacco products as a practical solution to the global tobacco use epidemic. It is our hope that insights provided by our work will inspire swift policy actions in countries such as China and beyond to curb the tide of rising tobacco consumption, so that populations around the world could be better shielded from the pervasive and long-lasting damage that tobacco products cause or compound.

Electronic cigarettes versus nicotine-replacement therapy for smoking cessation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT) and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been frequently used for smoking cessation. The aim of this review is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes versus NRT for smoking cessation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library from inception to 10 October 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing e-cigarettes versus NRT for smoking cessation. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for eligibility. Paired authors extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and used GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) to rate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

The study included five RCTs with 1748 participants. The meta-analysis suggested the e-cigarettes versus NRT increased the ≥6 months continuous abstinence rate (RR=1.67; 95% CI: 1.21-2.28; 55 more per 1000 participants, low certainty), and 7-day point abstinence rate at ≥6 months follow-up (RR=1.43; 95% CI: 1.19-1.72; 84 more per 1000, low certainty). However, we found no evidence that e-cigarettes versus NRT increased 3-6 months continuous abstinence rate (RR=1.07; 95% CI: 0.73-1.57; 10 more per 1000, very low certainty) and <3 months continuous abstinence rate (RR=1.20; 95% CI: 0.90-1.60; 54 more per 1000, low certainty); similar results were found at <3 months follow-up (RR=1.19; 95% CI: 0.92-1.54; 55 more per 1000, very low certainty) and 3-6 months follow-up in 7-day point abstinence rate (RR=1.01; 95% CI: 0.70-1.44; 2 more per 1000, very low certainty). The adverse events were not significant between e-cigarettes and NRT other than throat irritation (RR=1.27; 95% CI: 1.13-1.42; 118 more per 1000, low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarettes appeared to be superior to NRT in ≥6 months continuous abstinence rate and 7-day point abstinence rate. At short-term duration, we found no evidence that e-cigarettes compared to NRT increased the <6 months continuous abstinence rate and 7-day point abstinence rate.

E-Cigarettes Reexamined: Product Toxicity

The introduction of e-cigarettes, or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), has been accompanied by controversy regarding their safety and effectiveness as a cessation aid and by an explosion in their use by youth. Their use does not involve the combustion of tobacco and the creation of harmful combustion products; they have been seen as a "harm reduction" tool that may be of assistance in promoting smoking cessation. Recognition that ENDS can deliver an array of chemicals and materials with known adverse consequences has spurred more careful examination of these products. Nicotine, nitrosamines, carbonyl compounds, heavy metals, free radicals, reactive oxygen species, particulate matter, and "emerging chemicals of concern" are among the constituents of the heated chemical aerosol that is inhaled when ENDS are used. They raise concerns for cardiovascular and respiratory health that merit the attention of clinicians and regulatory agencies. Frequently cited concerns include evidence of disordered respiratory function, altered hemodynamics, endothelial dysfunction, vascular reactivity, and enhanced thrombogenesis. The absence of evidence of the consequences of their long-term use is of additional concern. Their effectiveness as cessation aids and beneficial impact on health outcomes continue to be examined. It is important to ensure that their production and availability are thoughtfully regulated to optimise their safety and permit their use as harm reduction devices and potentially as smoking-cessation aids. It is equally vital to effectively prevent them from becoming ubiquitous consumer products with the potential to rapidly induce nicotine addiction among large numbers of youth. Clinicians should understand the nature of these products and the implications of their use.

Electronic Cigarettes for Smoking Cessation: The Gap Between Behavior in Smokers and Medical Education

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarettes have engendered a great deal of controversy within the public health and medical communities.  Methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were administered. First, patients at an annual lung cancer screening appointment who self-identified as former smokers were asked about strategies for achieving and maintaining smoking cessation with open-ended questions. Second, medical students at a single university reported their opinion and knowledge of combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes.

RESULTS

Among the n=102 in the patient survey indicating that they used e-cigarettes or over-the-counter (OTC) nicotine replacement products for smoking cessation, 34.3% (35/102) vaped e-cigarettes, making it the second most common next to patches (47.1% {48/102}). By comparison, n=48 reported using medication. Medical student participants (n=168) were mixed regarding whether a patient should switch from traditional to electronic cigarettes (56.0% yes; 44.0% no) and reported receiving education about traditional cigarettes (92.3%) at a much higher rate than for e-cigarettes (46.4%), p<.001.

CONCLUSION

Many former heavy smokers undergoing a lung cancer screen used e-cigarettes to achieve smoking cessation. However, nearly half of medical students surveyed do not think patients should switch from traditional to e-cigarettes.

Propylene glycol, a component of electronic cigarette liquid, damages epithelial cells in human small airways

Background

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are used worldwide as a substitute for conventional cigarettes. Although they are primarily intended to support smoking cessation, e-cigarettes have been identified as a gateway to smoking habits for young people. Multiple recent reports have described the health effects of inhaling e-cigarettes. E-cigarette liquid (e-liquid) is mainly composed of propylene glycol (PG) and glycerol (Gly), and the aerosol generated by these devices primarily contains these two components. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of PG and Gly on human small airway epithelial cells (SAECs).

Methods

SAECs were exposed to PG or Gly, and cell proliferation, cell viability, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release, DNA damage, cell cycle, and apoptosis were evaluated. Additionally, SAECs derived from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients (COPD-SAECs) were investigated.

Results

Exposure of SAECs to PG significantly inhibited proliferation (1%, PG, p = 0.021; 2–4% PG, p < 0.0001) and decreased cell viability (1–4% PG, p < 0.0001) in a concentration-dependent manner. Gly elicited similar effects but to a reduced degree as compared to the same concentration of PG. PG also increased LDH release in a concentration-dependent manner (3% PG, p = 0.0055; 4% PG, p < 0.0001), whereas Gly did not show a significant effect on LDH release. SAECs exposed to 4% PG contained more cells that were positive for phosphorylated histone H2AX (p < 0.0001), a marker of DNA damage, and an increased proportion of cells in the G1 phase (p < 0.0001) and increased p21 expression (p = 0.0005). Moreover, caspase 3/7-activated cells and cleaved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 expression were increased in SAECs exposed to 4% PG (p = 0.0054). Furthermore, comparing COPD-SAECs to SAECs without COPD in PG exposure, cell proliferation, cell viability, DNA damage and apoptosis were significantly greater in COPD-SAECs.

Conclusion

PG damaged SAECs more than Gly. In addition, COPD-SAECs were more susceptible to PG than SAECs without COPD. Usage of e-cigarettes may be harmful to the respiratory system, especially in patients with COPD.

The Reshaping of the E-Cigarette Retail Environment: Its Evolution and Public Health Concerns

E-cigarette use represents a public health controversy in the US and globally. Despite the potential of e-cigarettes to support cigarette cessation, their use increases health risks and risk for addiction, particularly in young people. Various federal, state, and local laws have impacted tobacco retail in general and e-cigarettes in particular. In the US, 2019–2020 federal laws increased in the minimum legal sales age for tobacco to 21 and banned flavored cartridge-based e-cigarettes. Many states and localities were early adopters of Tobacco 21 and implemented more comprehensive flavor restrictions than the federal ban. Meanwhile, cannabis retail is increasingly being legalized in the US—while cannabis-based product regulation has notable gaps at the federal, state, and local levels. These regulatory complexities have impacted specialized retailers selling e-cigarettes, including “vape shops” that exclusively sell e-cigarettes, “smoke shops” that sell e-cigarettes and other tobacco (and potentially CBD/THC and other un- or under-regulated products), and online retail. This commentary outlines public health concerns related to: (1) youth access; (2) consumer exposure to a broader range of tobacco products and marketing in retail settings where they may seek products to aid in cigarette cessation (i.e., such broad product exposure could hinder cessation attempts); (3) consumer exposure to un-/under-regulated products (e.g., delta-8-THC, kratom); and (4) federal, state, and local regulations being undermined by consumer access to prohibited products online and via the mail. These concerns underscore the need for ongoing surveillance of how retailers and consumers respond to regulations.

Correlates of e-cigarette use before and after comprehensive regulatory changes and e-liquid flavour ban among general population

INTRODUCTION

In 2016, the Finnish Tobacco Act was revised to harmonise e-cigarette regulations with the EU Tobacco Products Directive. Unlike before, the sale of nicotine-containing e-liquids was allowed while additional national regulations included, for example, a ban for other than unflavoured and tobacco-flavoured e-liquids. This study examines the correlates of e-cigarette use before and after the comprehensive regulatory change, and characteristics and correlates of flavoured e-cigarette use after the flavour ban in the general Finnish population.

METHODS

Repeated cross-sectional population-based drug surveys for 15-69-year-olds in 2014 (n = 3485; 50% response rate) and in 2018 (n = 3229; 46%). Correlates of e-cigarette use were studied with logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Current e-cigarette use remained infrequent (approximately 2%) and the correlates of e-cigarette use varied only slightly between the study years. In 2018, of past-year e-cigarette users (n = 316), 43% used unflavoured e-liquids, 24% used tobacco and 43% used other flavours, fruits being the most common. In univariate models, demographic variables, smoking and e-cigarette use-related factors were associated with flavoured e-cigarette use. In multivariable models, those who used e-cigarettes to experiment used unflavoured e-cigarettes more likely than other than tobacco flavours (odds ratio 3.00, 95% confidence interval 1.15-7.82).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In Finland, the regulated entry of nicotine-containing e-liquids to retail sales has not led to increased e-cigarette use in the general population. After the flavour ban, other than tobacco-flavoured e-cigarette use still occurs. The use of flavoured e-cigarettes is associated with reasons for e-cigarette use. Flavoured e-cigarette use and its correlates warrant further monitoring.

Investigating the effect of e-cigarette use on quitting smoking in adults aged 25 years or more using the PATH study

Background: The evidence on harms and benefits of e-cigarettes partly concerns whether their use encourages smokers to quit.  We addressed this using data from the nationally representative PATH study, with detailed accounting for potential confounding variables.

Methods: We considered adults aged 25+.  Our original analyses, reported in version 1 of this paper, used data for Waves 1 to 3, separate analyses considering Waves 1 to 2, 2 to 3 and 1 to 3.  These related baseline ever e-cigarette use (or e-product use at Wave 2) to quitting at follow-up, adjusting for confounders derived from 55 candidates.  Sensitivity analyses omitted ever other product users, linked quitting to current e-cigarette use, and used values of some predictors modified using follow-up data.  Additional analyses used data for Waves 1 to 4, separately considering sustained, delayed and temporary quitting during Waves 1 to 3, 2 to 4 and 1 to 4.  Sensitivity analyses considered 30-day quitting, restricted attention to smokers attempting to quit, and considered ever smokeless tobacco or snus use.

Results: In the original analyses, unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) of quitting smoking for ever e-cigarette use were 1.29 (95% CI 1.01-1.66), 1.52 (1.26-1.83) and 1.47 (1.19-1.82) for the Wave 1 to 2, 2 to 3, and 1 to 3 analyses.  These reduced after adjustment, to 1.23 (0.94-1.61), 1.51 (1.24-1.85) and 1.39 (1.11-1.74).  Quitting rates remained elevated in users in all sensitivity analyses.  The additional analyses found associations of e-cigarette use with sustained, delayed and temporary quitting, associations little affected by considering 30-day quitting, and only slightly reduced restricting attention to quit attempters.  Ever use of smokeless tobacco or snus also predicted increased quitting.  

Conclusions: As does most evidence from clinical trials, other analyses of PATH, and other epidemiological studies, our results suggest using e-cigarettes helps adult smokers to quit.

Passive exposure to e-cigarette emissions is associated with worsened mental health

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking, secondhand cigarette smoke (SHS) exposure, and e-cigarette use ("vaping") are each associated with increased rates of depressive symptoms and other internalizing mental health disorders. The prevalence of vaping has increased greatly, yet the mental health correlates of secondhand exposure to e-cigarette emissions are as yet to be investigated. This study examined the potential adverse mental health outcomes associated with different tobacco exposures (direct and passive), with a particular focus on the mental health correlates of secondhand exposure to e-cigarette emissions.

METHODS

The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study data collected from a sample of 16,173 Wave 4 adults were used to test the hypothesis that secondhand e-cigarette emissions exposure is associated with increased odds of internalizing mental health disorders. Individuals were categorized as exclusive cigarette smokers, exclusive e-cigarette users, cigarette and e-cigarette dual users, exclusive noncombustible tobacco users, secondhand smoke exposed non-users, secondhand e-cigarette emissions exposed non-users, and non-users with no current SHS/secondhand e-cigarette aerosol exposure. Adjusted weighted logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association between exposure type and internalizing problems as assessed by scores on the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs-Short Screener (GAIN-SS), a widely used instrument for assessing mental health problems.

RESULTS

Cigarette smokers (AOR = 2.53, 95% CI: 2.19-2.92), e-cigarette users (AOR = 3.14, 2.41-4.09), dual users (AOR = 3.37, 2.85-4.00), noncombustible tobacco users (AOR = 1.48, 1.01-2.17), SHS exposed non-users (AOR = 1.63, 1.37-1.94), and secondhand e-cigarette emissions exposed non-users (AOR = 1.43, 1.03-1.99) were each associated with increased odds of moderate to severe internalizing mental health problems as compared to unexposed non-users. Odds of internalizing problems among SHS and secondhand e-cigarette emissions exposed non-users did not differ (p = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study, to our knowledge, to identify an association between recent secondhand exposure to e-cigarette emissions and mental health problems, and the risk is comparable to that of SHS. Corroboration of this relationship needs further research to explicate directionality and mechanisms underlying this association.

Emission and Gas/Particle Partitioning Characteristics of Nicotine in Aerosols for Electronic Cigarettes

Nicotine is a dependence-producing component in electronic cigarettes. The nicotine release characteristics of electronic cigarettes are closely connected with human exposure and respiratory health. In this paper, a theoretical model was established to study the effects of the compositions of e-liquids and the heating powers of device on the emission and gas/particle partitioning characteristics of nicotine in aerosols at equilibrium. The simulation results of nicotine emissions were compared with the experimental data. The errors between them were within a reasonable range. At a larger heating power level, a higher nicotine yield and a larger vaporization amount of e-liquids could be observed. Under the same heating power condition, a higher vegetable glycerin content in e-liquids could result in a lower nicotine emission. When the heating powers supplied by the device increased, a larger mass fraction of particle-phase nicotine in aerosols at equilibrium would appear. As more propylene glycol was added into e-liquids, a lower mass fraction of gas-phase nicotine would exist in aerosols at equilibrium. The results may provide more information for the industry to set technical standards for electronic cigarettes and for the government department to make regulatory policies.

Smoking cessation aids and strategies: a population-based survey of former and current smokers in Norway

BACKGROUND

In Norway, tobacco consumption is equally divided between combustible (cigarettes) and non-combustible (snus) tobacco. In the process of quitting, people who smoke can choose between several smoking cessation aids and strategies based on what is available on the market or what are recommended as cessation aids. A quit attempt may be planned or unplanned and consist of a gradual decline in consumption or an abrupt quitting. This study explores smoking cessation aids and strategies used at the latest quit attempt among people who have ever smoked. How prevalent is the use of various cessation aids and strategies, and do they correlate with each other? Are there any differences in successful quits depending on the use of a specific cessation aid or strategy?

METHOD

We used repeated cross-sectional representative surveys in Norway for 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020. The analytic sample consists of people aged 20 years or older who have ever smoked daily, more precisely current daily smokers with at least one quit attempt (n = 476), and former daily smokers who quit in 2012 or later (n = 397). Participants answered questions on cessation aids and strategies used at their last quit attempt. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the associations between cessation aids and strategies and sociodemographic and smoking-related variables and successful quit attempts.

RESULTS

Fifty-six percent of people who ever smoked daily reported any use of cessation aids, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), snus and e-cigarettes were the most commonly used cessation aids. Snus and web/mobile use was associated with successful quits, while NRT was associated with unsuccessful quit attempts. When exclusive use was separated from the combined use of several aids, only snus was associated with successful quits.

CONCLUSION

Snus use was found to be a "stand-alone" cessation aid, and only weakly associated with the use of other cessation aids. Further investigation of cessation aid preferences is needed, especially among smokers with little or no contact with health services and/or for whom traditional cessation aids have no appeal.

Differences in switching away from cigarettes and JUUL use characteristics among adult menthol and nonmenthol smokers who purchased the JUUL System

OBJECTIVES

Studies have assessed switching away from cigarettes among adult smokers who use electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), but there is little data assessing differences in likelihood of switching or ENDS use characteristics by menthol smoking.

METHODS

Adult (age ≥ 21) established smokers who purchased a JUUL Starter Kit (N = 15,036) completed baseline and 1-, 2-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month assessments. Switching (no past-30-day cigarette smoking) and flavor use were assessed at each follow-up. Repeated-measure logistic regression models evaluated association of menthol smoking and switching across 1 year.

RESULTS

Across the 6 follow-ups, more menthol smokers primarily used Menthol/Mint-flavored JUULpods (53.8%) than nonmenthol smokers (22.9%). Only 6.4% of menthol smokers primarily used Tobacco flavors (vs. 25.9% of nonmenthol smokers). Across all follow-ups menthol smokers (41.2% of sample) were more likely to switch than nonmenthol smokers (42.6% vs. 38.8%: OR [95% CI] = 1.17 [1.11, 1.23]); this association remained significant after adjustment for sociodemographic, smoking and JUUL use covariates (aOR [95% CI] = 1.13 [1.05, 1.21]). Nonmenthol smokers, but not menthol smokers, were significantly more likely to switch when primarily using Menthol/Mint-flavored (vs. Tobacco-flavored) JUULpods (aOR [95% CI] = 1.14 [1.04, 1.25]). Differences in baseline smoking characteristics between menthol and nonmenthol smokers were small in magnitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult menthol (vs. nonmenthol) smokers using JUUL were more likely to switch. More than twice as many menthol (vs. nonmenthol) smokers primarily used Menthol/Mint-flavor JUULpods; few menthol smokers used tobacco flavors. Given these pronounced differences in flavor preferences, availability of ENDS in menthol flavors may be particularly important for menthol smokers, but may also benefit some nonmenthol smokers.

Electronic Cigarettes or Vaping: Are There Any Differences in the Profiles, Use and Perceptions between a Developed and a Developing Country?

The use of electronic cigarettes or vaping is currently increasing in popularity globally. Debate continues regarding their potential role for smoking cessation. We aimed to compare the profiles, use and perceptions of using e-cigarettes amongst online forum users in a developed and a developing country. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among members of different popular online forums in Australia and Bangladesh who were current or ex-users of e-cigarettes. There were 422 study participants, 261 (62%) from Australia and 161 (38%) from Bangladesh. The mean age was 36.3 (±12) years and 83% were men. Australians were more likely to be exclusive users of e-cigarettes (70% vs. 30%, AOR 3.05 [95% CI 1.63–5.71]), but less likely to be dual users of smoking and e-cigarettes (43% vs. 57%, 0.36 [0.19–0.69]); they were also more likely to mention that the perceived reasons for using were their low cost, good taste/flavour, safety and assistance in reducing or quitting smoking (66% vs. 34%, 5.10 [2.04–12.8]), but less likely to mention a social/cool image as a reason for use (23% vs. 77%, 0.11 [0.01–0.87]) compared with Bangladeshi participants. About two-thirds of the participants in both countries perceived the use of e-cigarettes as less addictive than cigarettes and more than three-quarters perceived them as less harmful. E-cigarette users in Australia were more likely to use them to reduce or quit cigarettes compared with those in Bangladesh, and dual use was common in Bangladesh. These findings warrant the consideration of precautions for promoting e-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for smoking cessation in developing countries, such as Bangladesh.

A scoping review on disparities in exposure to advertising for e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products and implications for advancing a health equity research agenda

Background

Disparities in exposure to and density of tobacco advertising are well established; however, it is still unclear how e-cigarette and heated tobacco product (HTP) advertising vary by age, education, sex, gender identity, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status (SES), and/or urban/rural area. Through a scoping review, we sought to identify potential disparities in exposure to e-cigarette and HTP advertising and promotion across populations.

Methods

In January 2020, a systematic literature search was conducted in five databases: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The search was updated in October 2020. Articles reporting on exposure to e-cigarette and/or HTP advertising and promotion across age, education, sex, gender identity, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, SES, and/or urban/rural areas were included for full-text review (n = 25). Of those, 15 were deemed relevant for data extraction.

Results

The majority of the studies were from the U.S. (n = 12) and cross-sectional (n = 14). Studies were published between 2014 and 2020 and focused on determining causal relationships that underlie disparities; only one study assessed HTP advertising and promotion. Exposure to e-cigarette and HTP advertising was assessed at the individual-level (e.g., recall seeing ads on television) and at the neighborhood-level (e.g., ad density at the point-of-sale). Studies addressed differences across age (n = 6), education (n = 2), sex (n = 6), gender identity and sexual orientation (n = 3), race/ethnicity (n = 11), SES (n = 5), and urban/rural (n = 2). The following populations were more likely to be exposed to e-cigarette advertising: youth, those with more than a high school diploma, males, sexual and gender minorities, Whites, and urban residents. At the neighborhood-level, e-cigarette advertisements were more prevalent in non-White neighborhoods.

Conclusions

Exposure to e-cigarette/HTP advertising varies based on sociodemographic characteristics, although the literature is limited especially regarding HTPs. Higher exposure among youth might increase tobacco-related disparities since it can lead to nicotine/tobacco use. Research should incorporate and apply a health equity lens from its inception to obtain data to inform the elimination of those disparities.

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.

Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) Use and Pregnancy I: ENDS Use Behavior During Pregnancy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) use behavior during pregnancy, including the prevalence of and transitions in use during pregnancy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Twenty-two papers addressed the prevalence of and/or transitions in ENDS use during pregnancy. Findings show a complex landscape of ENDS use. A minority (0.4%-7.0%) of pregnant persons use ENDS; most commonly this occurs in the form of dual use (ENDS and combustible cigarettes (CC); 75%). Many pregnant persons report using ENDS because they perceive them to be a lower-risk alternative and/or potential cessation aide for CC smoking. However, while a subset of those who use ENDS do quit all tobacco product use during pregnancy, only a small proportion switch from exclusive CC smoking to exclusive ENDS use.

SUMMARY

ENDS are a somewhat new addition to the tobacco product landscape. The perception of ENDS as a lower-risk alternative may contribute to ENDS use in pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to support the notion that ENDS facilities the cessation of tobacco product use during pregnancy.

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.

Smoking cessation using preference-based tools among socially disadvantaged smokers: study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Many smoking cessation aids such as nicotine replacement treatments and e-cigarettes have been proven effective in aiding smoking cessation attempts. Encouraging smokers with low socioeconomic position (SEP) to choose their smoking aid tool based on their preferences, and giving that tool free of charge, might increase the odds of smoking cessation. This trial examines the effectiveness of the 'STOP' (Sevrage Tabagique à l'aide d'Outils dédiés selon la Préférence: Smoking cessation using preference-based tools), a preference-based smoking cessation intervention for smokers with low SEP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The STOP study is a randomised, multicentre, controlled trial (RCT). Smokers with low SEP and wishing to quit will be randomised to either the intervention or the control group (standard care). Participants in the intervention group will be asked to choose between different types of nicotine substitutes (patches, inhalers, gum, tablets, etc) and/or an electronic cigarette which will be delivered free of charge to aid their smoking cessation attempt.The primary outcome will be smoking abstinence at 6 months after inclusion, defined as self-reported 7-day point prevalence of tobacco abstinence. Secondary outcomes include the total number of days of abstinence at 6 months after inclusion, 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at 1 and 3 months after inclusion and number of relapses.The study will also include an economic evaluation, and a process evaluation using a mixed methods approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the 'Île de France II' Institutional Review Board on 8 September 2020 (CPP Île de France II; Ref No: 20.01.31.65528 RIPH2 HPS), and results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04654585.

Smoking cessation using preference-based tools: a mixed method pilot study of a novel intervention among smokers with low socioeconomic position

BACKGROUND

Compared to smokers with favorable socio-economic position (SEP), those with low SEP are less likely to have a successful smoking cessation attempt. Tailored approaches are therefore needed, and general practitioners could help reaching and assisting usually hard-to-reach population.

METHOD

STOP (Sevrage Tabagique à l'aide d'Outils dédiés selon la Préférence) is a pilot study, examining the feasibility, acceptability and potentiality of a smoking cessation intervention centered on smoker's preference. Smokers with low SEP, wishing to quit, were recruited in six healthcare centers in the Greater Paris area. They were asked to choose between different types of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products and/or e-cigarette with liquids delivered free of charge to aid their smoking cessation attempt. We describe the characteristics of recruited participants, their perception of smoking cessation aids, and the evolution of their smoking status 4 to 6 weeks after recruitment.

RESULTS

We recruited 49 participants, of which 29% chose an e-cigarette, 29% chose NRT and 42% chose both an e-cigarette and NRT. The intervention was shown to be acceptable by participants and health professionals. Among the 24 participants followed for at least one month, 14 (28% of all participants) stopped smoking, and 9 (18%) considerably reduced their consumption.

CONCLUSION

The STOP intervention is feasible and acceptable, even if more efforts should be made to limit lost-to-follow-up. This preference-based intervention also shows interesting prospect in helping smokers with low SEP quit smoking. We will test the efficacy of this preference-based intervention in a randomized controlled trial.

Real-world vaping experiences and smoking cessation among cigarette smoking adults

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarettes may have the potential to be an effective cessation aid for some cigarette smokers. However, the extent to which smokers' experiences using e-cigarettes (vaping) to quit smoking impact their cessation outcomes is unclear. In this cross-sectional survey study, we develop a multidimensional measure of vaping experiences in adults who quit smoking by vaping and test its association with perceived success in smoking cessation.

METHODS

In 2019, recruitment invitations were emailed to adult past-year smokers who had accessed cessation services across Ontario, Canada. Respondents who tried vaping to quit smoking in the past year completed a detailed online survey. Factor analysis was performed on ratings of 45 vaping experiences items to identify dimensions of vaping experiences. Factor scores were entered into logistic regressions to test if vaping experiences dimensions had differential impact on perceived success in smoking cessation.

RESULTS

Of the 889 participants, 56.0% were female, 81.1% were Caucasian, and the mean age was 37.7 ± 11.9 years. Twenty percent (19.6%) reported having successfully quit smoking by vaping in the past year. Among the six vaping experiences factors, better experiences in five factors-Relationships, Flexibility of Vaping, Side Effects, Vaping Devices, and Sensory Functions-were each independently and positively associated with improved odds of successful quitting. Notably, Relationships [OR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.61-2.64] and Side Effects [OR = 1.95; 95% CI 1.54-2.29] were the strongest correlates of perceived success in smoking cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate an opportunity to increase cessation rates by improving the experiences of smokers who vape to quit smoking.

Association between observing peers vaping on campus and E-cigarette use and susceptibility in middle and high school students

BACKGROUND

This study examines the association between exposure to e-cigarette use on school campus and e-cigarette use behaviors among adolescents in the United States.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the 2019 National Youth Tobacco Survey. First, two multivariate logistic regression models examined the association between in-school exposure to e-cigarette use and ever and past 30-day (i.e., current) e-cigarette use. Next, a multivariate logistic regression model to examine the relationship between in-school exposure to e-cigarette use and susceptibility to use was conducted among a subsample (n = 11,958) of never e-cigarette users. Covariates included grade, race/ethnicity, marketing exposure, and ever use of other tobacco products.

RESULTS

Approximately 64.3 % of adolescents reported seeing someone use an e-cigarette on school campus; the most common locations being in the bathroom/locker room (34.4 %) and parking lot (34.0 %). In-school exposure to e-cigarette use was associated with greater odds of ever (Adj OR: 2.06; 95 % CI: 1.82-2.33) and current (Adj OR: 1.70; 95 % CI: 1.46-1.98) e-cigarette use among adolescents as well as greater odds of susceptibility to use (Adj OR: 2.00; 95 % CI: 1.82-2.20) among never e-cigarette users.

CONCLUSIONS

Observing e-cigarette use on school campus was associated with greater odds of e-cigarette use and susceptibility. It is plausible that observing e-cigarette use on campus reinforces the social acceptability of adolescent e-cigarette use. Findings inform on the prevalence of e-cigarettes use on-campus as well as how this phenomenon may influence e-cigarette use/susceptibility among youth. The observed relationship highlights the role of schools in the efforts to reduce adolescent e-cigarette use.

Content Analysis of U.S. Newspaper Coverage of Causes and Solutions to Vaping-Associated Lung Injury

In 2019, an outbreak of vaping-associated lung injury (also known as "EVALI") spread throughout the U.S., linked to use of illicit THC cartridges. This paper examines U.S. newspaper coverage on the causes and solutions to EVALI. Methods: A content analysis of 417 articles from April to December 2019 from two national newspapers, one regional newspaper, and the Associated Press was conducted. Articles were coded for information about EVALI causes, mentions of the brand Dank Vapes, calls for individuals take a specific action to prevent harm, and mentions of policy actions to address vaping. Mentions of increasing youth vaping and JUUL were also coded. Results: Most articles (77%) provided an update on the number of EVALI cases and/or deaths. Fewer described EVALI symptoms (20%) or mentioned vaping cessation resources available to the public (2%). Almost half of articles also mentioned youth vaping as a concern (49%). Dank Vapes was mentioned rarely (4%) compared to JUUL (39%). After CDC recommendations changed to no longer recommend avoiding all vaping products, news articles became significantly less likely to mention nicotine products as a cause of EVALI or suggest that individuals cease all vaping. While policy was generally not articulated as a solution to EVALI, banning or limiting flavored nicotine vaping products were the most common policy actions mentioned. Conclusions/Importance: The discussions of causes of and solutions to EVALI were often intertwined with coverage of youth vaping, potentially failing to convey a clear sense of how the public should respond to the EVALI outbreak.

Use of Electronic Cigarettes in European Populations: A Narrative Review

The increasing popularity of electronic cigarettes in past decades has aroused public health concern. This study aims to review the literature on the prevalence of e-cigarette use among the general adult and young populations in Europe. We searched Medline and Google Scholar from September 2019, and included "prevalence of e-cigarettes", "electronic cigarettes" or "e-cigarettes", and "electronic nicotine delivery system" or "vaping". The prevalence of current e-cigarette use ranged from 0.2% to 27%, ever-use ranged from 5.5% to 56.6% and daily use ranged from 1% to 2.9%. Current smokers of conventional cigarettes showed the highest prevalence for the use of e-cigarettes, ranging from 20.4% to 83.1%, followed by ex-smokers, with ranges from 7% to 15%. The following socio-demographic factors were associated with a higher chance of using e-cigarettes: male sex and younger age groups; results for economic status were inconclusive. In European countries, there is a higher prevalence of e-cigarette use among males, adolescents and young adults, smokers of conventional cigarettes, and former smokers.