The New Nicotine Pouch Category: A Tobacco Harm Reduction Tool?

Perceptions of Harm and Addictiveness for Nicotine Products, THC e-Cigarettes, and e-Cigarettes with Other Ingredients Among Adolescents, Young Adults, and Adults

BACKGROUND

Perceptions of health harms and addictiveness related to nicotine products, THC e-cigarettes, and e-cigarettes with other ingredients are an important predictor of use. This study examined differences in perceived harm and addiction across such products among adolescents, young adults, and adults.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey (N = 6,131, ages 13-40 years old) in which participants reported perceived harm and addictiveness for 11 products (cigarettes, disposable nicotine e-cigarettes, pod-based nicotine e-cigarettes, other nicotine e-cigarettes, THC e-cigarettes, e-cigarettes with other ingredients, nicotine pouches, nicotine lozenges, nicotine gums, nicotine tablets, nicotine toothpicks). We applied adjusted regression models and conducted pairwise comparisons between age groups (13-17, 18-20, 21-25, and 26-40) and product use status (never, ever, and past-30-day use), adjusting for gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and financial comfort.

RESULTS

Overall, participants in younger age groups perceived products to be more harmful and addictive than those in older age groups, with the exception of e-cigarettes with other ingredients. For all products, participants who never used perceived each product to be more harmful than those who ever used. For all products, participants who used the products in the past 30-days had lower perceived harm and addictiveness compared to never and ever use. Certain sociodemographic groups, such as people who identify as LGBTQ+, Non-Hispanic Black, or Hispanic, had lower perceived harm and addictiveness for most products.

DISCUSSION

Efforts should be made to educate all age groups and minoritized groups on harms and addictiveness of all nicotine products, THC e-cigarettes, and e-cigarettes with other ingredients.

The Potential Impact of Oral Nicotine Pouches on Public Health: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are a new class of nicotine products. This scoping review summarizes evidence on ONPs and explores their potential public health impact.

AIMS AND METHODS

We conducted a structured literature search for empirical studies across three electronic databases through January 10, 2024. Outcomes included ONP product characteristics, use patterns, beliefs and perceptions, toxicity, and marketing and sales.

RESULTS

Sixty-two studies were included, 17 were industry-funded. Most studies were from the United States. While large variations across studies were observed in ONP youth prevalence estimates, nationally representative U.S. studies find current use at 1.5% and lifetime use below 2.5% through 2023. Between 35% and 42% of U.S. adolescents and young adults have heard of ONPs, and 9-21% of tobacco-naïve youth were susceptible to trying them. U.S. adult-use estimates varied widely (0.8%-3% current; 3%-16% lifetime use) and were limited to populations with a history of tobacco use. The chemical composition of ONPs suggests fewer harmful/potentially harmful compounds at lower levels than cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT), except formaldehyde. Industry-funded studies find substantially less cytotoxicity compared to cigarettes and suggest that higher nicotine-strength ONPs can deliver nicotine at levels comparable to or higher than SLT or cigarettes, although with slower nicotine release than cigarettes. Evidence on the cytotoxicity of ONPs relative to SLT is mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

ONPs appear to be less toxic than cigarettes and deliver comparable nicotine, presenting an alternative for combustible product users, although key data are mainly available from industry-funded studies. Data from independent research is critically needed. Industry marketing of ONPs may encourage initiation in youth and situational and dual use in adults.

IMPLICATIONS

The review provides an initial assessment of the potential role of ONPs in harm reduction and aims to determine unintended consequences of their use (youth uptake and dual-use) and identify populations that disproportionately use the product. This information is essential for tobacco regulatory bodies in determining the net public health impact of nicotine pouches.

Multi-endpoint in vitro toxicological assessment of snus and tobacco-free nicotine pouch extracts

'Modern' oral tobacco-free nicotine pouches (NPs) are a nicotine containing product similar in appearance and concept to Swedish snus. A three-step approach was taken to analyse the biological effects of NPs and snus extracts in vitro. ToxTracker was used to screen for biomarkers for oxidative stress, cell stress, protein damage and DNA damage. Cytotoxicity, mutagenicity, and genotoxicity were assessed in the following respective assays: Neutral Red Uptake (NRU), Ames and Mouse Lymphoma Assay (MLA). Targeted analysis of phosphorylation signalling and inflammatory markers under non-toxic conditions was used to investigate any potential signalling pathways or inflammatory response. A reference snus (CRP1.1) and four NPs with various flavours and nicotine strengths were assessed. Test article extracts was generated by incubating one pouch in 20 mL of media (specific to each assay) with the inclusion of the pouch material. NP extracts did not induce any cytotoxicity or mutagenic response, genotoxic response was minimal and limited signalling or inflammatory markers were induced. In contrast, CRP1.1 induced a positive response in four toxicological endpoints in the absence of S9: Srxn1 (oxidative stress), Btg2 (cell stress), Ddit3 (protein damage) and Rtkn (DNA damage), and three endpoints in presence of S9: Srxn1, Ddit3 and Rtkn. CRP1.1 was genotoxic when assessed in MLA and activated signalling pathways involved in proliferation and cellular stress and specifically induced phosphorylation of c-JUN, CREB1, p53, p38 MAPK and to a lesser extent AKT1S1, GSK3α/β, ERK1/2 and RSK1 in a dose-dependent manner. CRP 1.1 extracts resulted in the release of several inflammatory mediators including cytokines IL-1α, IL5, IL6, IL8, IL-1RA, MIF and TNF-β, receptor IL-2RA, and growth factors FGF-basic, VEGF and M-CSF. In conclusion these assays contribute to the weight of evidence assessment of the potential comparative health risks of NPs and snus.

Nicotine pouch marketing strategies in the USA: an analysis of Zyn, On! and Velo

INTRODUCTION

Nicotine pouches are gaining popularity, yet their marketing is understudied.

METHODS

Using Numerator advertising data from January 2019 to September 2021 regarding three popular brands of nicotine pouch in the USA-Zyn (by Swedish Match, introduced in the USA in July 2016), On! (Altria, August 2016) and Velo (RJ Reynolds, July 2019)-we examined (1) general advertising characteristics (eg, media type, year); (2) ad content (ie, headlines and imagery themes); (3) prominent media channels (ie, specific websites, magazines, etc); and (4) ad expenditures.

RESULTS

There were 286 unique ads (Zyn: 44.4%; On!: 2.8%; Velo: 52.8%), 119 143 occurrences (Zyn: 3.5%; On!: 0.5%; Velo: 96.0%) and $24 774 650 total expenditures (Zyn: 4.7%; On!: 0.6%; Velo: 94.7%). The greatest proportion of ad occurrences and expenditures were accounted for by radio (75.9% and 28.2%, respectively) and television (16.2% and 56.5%), followed by mobile (0.5% and 7.2%) and online display (6.7% and 3.6%). Across ad occurrences and expenditures, prominent headline themes included 'freedom' (26.0% and 17.1%, respectively), 'brand' (9.6% and 18.6%) and 'flavour' (16.4% and 7.6%); images mainly featured the product alone (61.4% and 56.1%), text (16.2% and 24.6%) or men (8.7% and 8.6%); and prominent channel themes were entertainment (34.7% and 37.3%), news/weather (14.3% and 21.7%), business/finance (12.9% and 9.0%) and sports (9.5% and 1.0%). Zyn and On! prioritised online display and print; Velo prioritised radio and television. Zyn's and Velo's headlines focused on 'freedom', with Zyn also emphasising 'brand' and Velo 'innovation'; On!'s headlines emphasised 'flavour'.

CONCLUSIONS

Regulatory efforts must be informed by surveillance of nicotine pouch marketing and impacts on consumer subgroups (eg, young people).

Qualitative perspective on nicotine pouches from adults who smoke cigarettes in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how nicotine pouch products are perceived by people who smoke, including if they are perceived as a cessation aid or a substitute for when they cannot smoke. We qualitatively investigated the reactions and perceptions about On!, a leading brand of nicotine pouches.

METHODS

We conducted online semistructured interviews with 30 adults who smoke cigarettes. Participants viewed an On! brochure and an image of an opened nicotine pouch and were asked about their initial impression, who the intended user is, and how they thought of the product's safety compared with other tobacco and cessation products. Transcripts were independently coded and the data were analysed using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Among the participants, half identified as female and slightly more than half were white (n=16). The mean age was 43 years old. The following are the central themes that emerged: (1) participants perceived the concealability, flavours and packaging of On! as appealing to youth and young adults; (2) participants perceived nicotine pouches as a product that would supplement rather than replace tobacco use; and (3) the product raised health concerns, which decreased interest in trying nicotine pouches.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants believed that the On! nicotine pouch promotional material may promote youth and young adult nicotine product initiation and dual product use for people who smoke. Most viewed On! as a product to use with cigarettes, rather than a way to quit cigarettes. Increased surveillance of nicotine pouches is warranted to monitor the trajectory of this emerging tobacco product and prevent youth initiation.

Potential Implications for Tobacco Industry Transformation of the Acquisition of Swedish Match by Philip Morris International

Philip Morris International's recent purchase of Swedish Match may prove to be a vital tobacco industry development. We focus on PMIs potential progress in moving from primarily selling cigarettes toward primarily selling noncombustible nicotine delivery products (NCNDPs). We also consider the potential contribution of the acquisition to industry transformation whereby other cigarette firms may potentially move toward primarily selling NCNDPs. We examine the potential impact on noncombustible nicotine delivery product use, including nicotine pouches (a major Swedish Match product), e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and, most importantly, on sales of the industry's staple, combustible cigarettes. We focus on the United States as a special case, where PMI is limited from entering the cigarette market. Implications: Philip Morris International's purchase of Swedish Match and policies regarding nicotine pouches (NPs) have been overlooked in the tobacco control literature. The acquisition indicates the importance of the NP market to the largest nonstate-owned tobacco company. The acquisition has the potential through pricing and marketing tactics to either encourage or discourage the use of NPs, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and most importantly cigarettes. Due to its inability to sell cigarettes in the United States, PMI will have incentives to use its alternative nicotine delivery products, including its newly acquired NPs, to reduce the sale of cigarettes by other companies. However, the potential effects in other countries, where PMI does sell cigarettes, are less clear. Monitoring and analyzing tobacco company acquisitions is essential to studying future transitions in using different kinds of tobacco products, especially from cigarettes to lower-risk alternative nicotine delivery products.

Nicotine pouches: a review for the dental team

Nicotine pouches are tobacco-free products that are becoming increasingly popular in the UK. They are held between the user's lip and gum to provide a source of nicotine. This article describes the composition of nicotine pouches, the legality surrounding their production and sale, patterns of use and explores possible oral and general health effects of their usage.

Applications of biomarkers of exposure and biological effects in users of new generation tobacco and nicotine products: Tentative proposals

Despite efforts to eliminate smoking, more than 1 billion people worldwide continue to use combustible cigarettes through choice or inability to quit. With an associated 8 million deaths, the provision of noncombustible tobacco and nicotine products that smokers will accept to replace combustible cigarettes can lessen harm. However, most of these products have entered the market only in the past 20 years. Therefore, particularly for some smoking-related diseases, epidemiological studies to test harm reduction potential are only now becoming feasible. For cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, around two decades of data might be required. In this article, we discuss how the use of biomarkers might be applied to supplement epidemiological research for regulators. We further discuss how health providers and insurers can keep up with the rapid changes in biomarker research and recognize these reduced risks.

Young adults' beliefs about modern oral nicotine products: Implications for uptake in nonvapers, dual use with e-cigarettes, and use to reduce/quit vaping

Modern oral nicotine products (ONPs; nontherapeutic nicotine pouches, gums, lozenges, and gummies) may be perceived in ways that could promote uptake in nonvapers, dual use with e-cigarettes, or use to quit vaping. In this cross-sectional digital remote survey of 1,460 respondents aged 21-24 from Southern California, we examined beliefs about ONPs among past-30-day e-cigarette nonusers, users unmotivated to quit vaping, and users motivated to quit vaping. Positive beliefs about ONPs were reported by 31.8% of the overall sample and higher in past-30-day e-cigarette users (with or without quit motivation) than nonusers. Perceiving ONPs to be easy to conceal, convenient, and able to be used where vaping/smoking is not allowed were the most common types of beliefs reported. Among e-cigarette users with quit motivation (n = 142), interest in using ONPs to quit/reduce vaping (44.4%) was higher than interest in using medicinal nicotine gum/lozenges (23.4%), nicotine patch (17.6%), or prescription medications (16.6%). Interest in using ONPs to reduce/quit vaping (vs. no interest) was greater among participants who reported vaping ≥ 20 (vs. < 10) days in the past month, vaping ≥ 10 (vs. < 10) times per day, low/moderate (vs. high) quit vaping self-efficacy, and low/moderate (vs. high) desire to quit vaping. These findings suggest that: (a) appreciable subsets of the young adult population may hold positive beliefs about ONPs that could promote ONP uptake, particularly e-cigarette users and (b) some young adult e-cigarette users may be interested in using ONPs to reduce/quit vaping, particularly frequent vapers with relatively lower self-efficacy and desire to quit vaping. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Tobacco-Free Oral Nicotine Product Use Among Youth in the U.S., 2019-2021

Introduction

Novel tobacco-free oral nicotine products are not combusted, easy to conceal, available in flavors, and do not contain tobacco leaf. Since 2016, oral nicotine product sales have increased and may be gaining popularity among youth. This study aims to examine the trends in the prevalence and correlates of oral nicotine product use among U.S. youth.

Methods

Data from participants aged 16-19 years in the U.S. International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Youth Tobacco and Vaping Survey were analyzed cross-sectionally from August 2019, February 2020, August 2020, February 2021, and August 2021. Weighted descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were used to describe the use and correlates of oral nicotine products.

Results

Oral nicotine product use significantly increased from 3.5% in August 2019 to 4.1% in August 2021. Oral nicotine product use was most prevalent among those aged 18 years, male, and non-Hispanic White. Those who used cigarettes (AOR=2.18, 95% CI=19.37, 40.88), nicotine vaping products (AOR=4.27, 95% CI=3.02, 6.04), and smokeless tobacco (AOR=28.14, 95% CI=19.37, 40.88) in the past 30 days were more likely to report recent use of oral nicotine products.

Conclusions

Although oral nicotine products are less popular among U.S. youth than cigarettes, nicotine vaping products, and smokeless tobacco, their prevalence of use significantly increased. Oral nicotine product users are more likely to use other nicotine products, but the availability of flavors and easy-to-conceal design may be appealing to those who may not use nicotine products. Researchers should continue to observe the behaviors associated with oral nicotine product use to inform the need for future regulatory efforts.

Tobacco-Derived Nicotine Pouch Brands and Marketing Messages on Internet and Traditional Media: Content Analysis

BACKGROUND

Nicotine pouches and lozenges are increasingly available in the United States, and sales are growing. The brands of nicotine pouch products with the largest market share are produced by tobacco companies.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to examine the marketing of 5 oral nicotine products sold by tobacco companies.

METHODS

Internet, radio, television, print, and web-based display advertisements between January 2019 and March 2020 for 6 brands of nicotine pouches and lozenges were identified through commercially available marketing surveillance systems supplemented by a manual search of trade press and a review of brand websites. A total of 711 advertisements (122 unique) were analyzed to identify characteristics, themes, marketing strategies, and target audiences, and qualitatively compared by brand. All 5 brand websites were also analyzed. Coders examined the entirety of each advertisement or website for products, marketing claims, and features and recorded the presence or absence of 27 marketing claims and lifestyle elements.

RESULTS

All 6 brands of nicotine pouch products spent a total of US $11.2 million on advertising in 2019, with the most (US $10.7 million) spent by the brand Velo, and 86.1% (n=105) of the unique advertisements were web-based. Of the 711 total nicotine pouch advertisements run in 2019, the 2 brands Velo (n=407, 57%) and ZYN (n=303, 42%) dominated. These brands also made the greatest number of advertising claims in general. These claims focused on novelty, modernity, and use in a variety of contexts, including urban contexts, workplaces, transportation, and leisure activities. Of the 122 unique advertisements, ZYN's most common claims were to be "tobacco-free," featuring many flavors or varieties, and modern. Velo was the only brand to include urban contexts (n=14, 38.9% of advertisements) or freedom (n=8, 22.2%); Velo advertisements portrayed use in the workplace (n=15, 41.7%), bars or clubs (n=5, 13.9%), leisure activities (n=4, 11.1%), transportation (n=4, 11.1%), sports (n=3, 8.3%), cooking (n=2, 5.6%), and with alcohol (n=1, 2.8%). Velo and ZYN also included most of the images of people, including women and people of color. The 36 Velo ads included people in advertising in 77.8% (n=28) of advertisements, and of those advertisements with identifiable people, 40% (n=4) were young adults and 50% (n=5) were middle-aged. About one-third (n=11, 35.5%) of the 31 unique ZYN advertisements included people, and most identifiable models appeared to be young adults. Brands such as Rogue, Revel, Dryft, and on! focused mainly on product features. All nicotine pouch products made either tobacco-free, smoke-free, spit-free, or vape-free claims. The most common claim overall was "tobacco-free," found in advertisements from Rogue (1/1, 100%), ZYN (30/31, 96.8%), Velo (19/36, 52.8%), and Dryft (1/3, 33.3%), but not Revel.

CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine pouches and lozenges may expand the nicotine market as tobacco-free claims alleviate concerns about health harms and advertising features a greater diversity of people and contexts than typical smokeless tobacco advertising. The market leaders and highest-spending brands, ZYN and Velo, included more lifestyle claims. Surveillance of nicotine pouch marketing and uptake, including influence on tobacco use behaviors, is necessary.

Emerging Oral Nicotine Products and Periodontal Diseases

Oral nicotine pouches are emerging as a new "modern oral" nicotine product. These prefilled pouches contain nicotine, flavorings, and filling agents that dissolve in the mouth. Nicotine can be derived from tobacco leaf or chemical synthesis. Traces of TSNAs and toxic chromium were detected in the pouch products. This raises the concern about general and periodontal health. This review aims to update the current oral nicotine products research relating to periodontal disease and its relevance in periodontal inflammation. Nicotine interacts with host cells and affects inflammatory responses to microbial challenges. It may directly or indirectly deteriorate periodontal tissues by activating nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, repressing PDL fibroblasts cells, increasing cellular ROS and cytokines/chemokines, growth factors, breaking microbiota balance, and dysregulating miRNAs expression. Studies show that appealing flavorings contained in nicotine pouches pose harm to periodontal innate immune responses and increase penetration of nitrosamines. In addition, flavored ONPs increase the risk of dual or poly-tobacco products among young adults, stacking up detrimental effects on the periodontium. Given the recent growth of users, further studies are needed to elucidate the impact of ONPs, even poly-tobacco use, on systemic and periodontal health. Moreover, policymakers should ensure to avoid generating a new wave of nicotine addiction among youths in the U.S.

Nicotine Pouch: Awareness, Beliefs, Use, and Susceptibility among Current Tobacco Users in the United States, 2021

Little is known about awareness, beliefs, and use of nicotine pouches (NPs). Data from 1583 U.S. adult (age ≥ 21 years) current tobacco users were collected in 2021. Respondents self-reported NP awareness, beliefs, use, and susceptibility as well as current tobacco product use and socio-demographics. We used weighted logistic and multinomial regression models to explore the associations between these variables. Overall, 46.6% of U.S. adult current tobacco users were aware of, 16.4% had ever used, and 3.0% currently used NPs. Younger individuals (vs. 61+ years) were more likely to have ever heard of NPs, while Black individuals (vs. White) were less likely to have ever heard of NPs. Individuals younger than 45 years (vs. 61+ years) and those using smokeless tobacco products (vs. non-users) were more likely to have ever used NPs. Additionally, younger than 45 years (vs. 61+ years) and current use of certain tobacco products (e.g., smokeless) were associated with current NP use. Holding favorable beliefs about NPs was associated with susceptibility to and more advanced NP use statuses (p < 0.05). Continuous surveillance of NP use and beliefs is important.

An Analysis of Nicotine Pouch Use by Middle School and High School Students Surveyed by the National Youth Tobacco Survey in 2021 and a Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

The use of alternative nicotine products by middle and high school students is a growing concern due to industry marketing techniques, availability, and popularity of new products, and ambiguous nicotine concentrations. The 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) provides information about the frequency, and characteristics of middle, and high school students who have used nicotine pouches.

METHODS

The National Youth Tobacco Surveys provide important information about the frequency of use of tobacco and alternative nicotine products by a representative sample of students in schools in the United States. The 2021 survey included questions about the use of nicotine pouches/dissolvable tobacco products. The results from the survey were analysis using descriptive statistics, and logistic regression to model the association between the use of these alternative nicotine products, and the use of electronic cigarettes or the use of conventional cigarettes.

RESULTS

A total of 20 413 students participated in the survey year 2021; 17 842 were included in the final data analysis. Their ages ranged from 9 to 18+. Identified risk factors for the use of alternative nicotine products included race, and age. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) was lower in non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic students, as compared to non-Hispanic White students. Older students had a substantially higher risk of using nicotine/dissolvable tobacco products, specifically, compared to students less than or equal to 13 years old. The OR increased 174% (OR: 2.74; 1.70-4.41) in 17-year-old students. The perception of harm associated with electronic cigarettes increased the likelihood of using alternative nicotine products. Students who did not smoke cigarettes (OR: 0.39; 0.27-0.56) or did not smoke electronic cigarettes (OR: 0.20; 0.18-0.40) had significantly lower OR for using alternative nicotine products.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey indicates that a relatively small percentage of middle school and high school student have used nicotine pouches. However, with the increase in new, alternative tobacco products, understanding adolescent use in comparison to other tobacco products is an important trend to monitor.

"Tobacco-free" Nicotine Pouches: Risk Perceptions, Awareness, Susceptibility, and Use Among Young Adults in the United States

BACKGROUND

Nicotine pouches containing synthetic nicotine or tobacco-derived nicotine (TDN) are available in the United States. Synthetic nicotine pouches are often marketed as "tobacco-free nicotine" (TFN), which may alter risk perceptions and product appeal. This study examined young adults' perceptions of TFN versus TDN pouches and the associations between product perceptions and TFN pouch awareness, susceptibility, and use, respectively.

AIMS AND METHODS

In total 630 young adults (18-25 years) completed an online Qualtrics panels survey in 2021. Participants were informed that TFN pouches contain synthetic nicotine as opposed to TDN. Participants reported on comparative risk perceptions for TFN versus TDN pouches and on TFN pouch awareness, susceptibility, and use. Unadjusted between-group comparisons and adjusted binary logistic regressions were run to examine relationships between product perceptions and TFN pouch awareness, susceptibility, and use.

RESULTS

Participants were aware of (37.3%), susceptible to (29.2%), or had used TFN pouches (3.8%). In unadjusted comparisons, TFN pouch awareness, susceptibility, and use were associated with disproportionately perceiving TFN pouches as less harmful or otherwise better than TDN pouches. In adjusted models, relationships between favorable perceptions and both TFN pouch awareness and susceptibility remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The descriptor "tobacco-free" may impact risk perceptions and the appeal of nicotine pouches among young adults. While no direct relationship was observed between TFN perceptions and TFN pouch use in the adjusted model, perceptions remained related to product awareness and susceptibility, which may be linked to future use. Continued surveillance is needed to fully determine how the term "tobacco-free" on product packaging and advertising impacts longitudinal public health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS

Nicotine pouches originally contained TDN. Today, numerous brands of synthetic nicotine pouches, which are often marketed as "tobacco-free," are available on the market. We informed participants that "tobacco-free nicotine" pouches contain synthetic nicotine and examined comparative risk perceptions (i.e. tobacco-free vs. TDN pouches) and TFN pouch awareness, susceptibility, and use. Perceiving tobacco-free nicotine pouches as less harmful than tobacco-derived pouches was associated with product awareness, susceptibility, and use in unadjusted models and with awareness and susceptibility in adjusted models. Restricting the term "tobacco-free" may become necessary if the term inaccurately reduces product risk perceptions or increases product appeal.

The 2022 Ferno Award Address: CrEATE, an Efficient Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy

Dozens of drugs have been evaluated in recent decades for initial evidence of efficacy to aid smoking cessation (i.e. "early Phase 2" testing, according to U.S. FDA terminology), with the vast majority failing to show efficacy. Even small randomized clinical trials (RCTs), the most common early Phase 2 tests, are costly undertakings, made more unappealing by their high likelihood of failure. At the same time, another early Phase 2 approach, acute tests of drug effects on surrogate endpoints such as withdrawal or craving severity, are more practical but have little predictive clinical validity. Described here is an innovative procedure that optimally combines the validity of clinical trials with the practical advantages of surrogate endpoint studies to more efficiently determine whether or not a novel drug warrants continued clinical development. This CrEATE procedure, or Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy, does so by assessing short-term quit success in smokers highly motivated to quit when briefly treated with active drug versus placebo in a crossover design, so that quit efficacy from both conditions is compared within participants. The program to develop and evaluate CrEATE demonstrates its sensitivity to efficacy from all three FDA-approved first-line cessation medications (NRT, varenicline, bupropion), tested here as model drugs, as well as specificity in identifying lack of efficacy with a drug known to be ineffective for cessation (modafinil). CrEATE has subsequently been used to evaluate a few novel interventions, concluding they lack efficacy in increasing quit success. Future directions for the potential utility of CrEATE are provided. Implications: The ability of CrEATE to reach a Go/No Go decision more quickly and with far less cost lowers the risk of failure, meaning widespread use of the procedure should encourage the evaluation of more novel candidate drugs. With its greater efficiency, failed tests, unfortunately the most likely outcome in early Phase 2 studies, will cause less waste of resources. At the same time, CrEATE tests that indicate a novel treatment has efficacy will justify the substantial time and expense of moving forward to evaluate the drug in late Phase 2 RCTs.

Nicotine Pouch Sales Trends in the US by Volume and Nicotine Concentration Levels From 2019 to 2022

This cross-sectional study examines the sale of 4 nicotine pouch brands in the contiguous 48 states and Washington, DC.

Flavor Classification/Categorization and Differential Toxicity of Oral Nicotine Pouches (ONPs) in Oral Gingival Epithelial Cells and Bronchial Epithelial Cells

Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are a modern form of smokeless tobacco products sold by several brands in the U.S., which comprise a significant portion of non-combustible nicotine-containing product (NCNP) sales to date. ONPs are available in various flavors and may contain either tobacco-derived nicotine (TDN) or tobacco-free nicotine (TFN). The growth in popularity of these products has raised concerns that flavored ONPs may cause adverse oral health effects and promote systemic toxic effects due to nicotine and other ONP by-products being absorbed into the circulatory system through oral mucosa. We hypothesized that flavored ONPs are unsafe and likely to cause oral and pulmonary inflammation in oral and respiratory epithelial cells. Before analyzing the effects of ONPs, we first classified ONPs sold in the U.S. based on their flavor and the flavor category to which they belonged using a wheel diagram. Human gingival epithelial cells (HGEP) were treated with flavored ONP extracts of tobacco (original, smooth), menthol (wintergreen and cool cider), and fruit flavor (americana and citrus), each from the TDN and TFN groups. The levels of ONP-induced inflammatory cytokine release (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8) by ELISA, cellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) production by CellRox Green, and cytotoxicity by lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release assay in HGEP cells were assessed. Flavored ONP extracts elicited differential toxicities in a dose- and extract-dependent manner in HGEP cells 24 h post-treatment. Both fruit TDN and TFN extracts resulted in the greatest cytotoxicity. Tobacco- and fruit-flavored, but not menthol-flavored, ONPs resulted in increased ROS production 4 h post-treatment. Flavored ONPs led to differential cytokine release (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8) which varied by flavor (menthol, tobacco, or fruit) and nicotine (TDN vs. TFN) 24 h post-treatment. Menthol-flavored ONPs led to the most significant TNF-α release; fruit TFN resulted in the most significant IL-6 release; and fruit TDN and tobacco TFN led to the highest release of IL-8. Subsequently, human bronchial epithelial cells (16-HBE and BEAS-2B) were also treated with flavored ONP extracts, and similar assays were evaluated. Here, the lowest concentration treatments displayed increased cytotoxicity. The most striking response was observed among cells treated with spearmint and tobacco flavored ONPs. Our data suggest that flavored ONPs are unsafe and likely to cause systemic and local toxicological responses during chronic usage.

A randomised, open-label, cross-over clinical study to evaluate the pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety and tolerability profiles of tobacco-free oral nicotine pouches relative to cigarettes

RATIONALE

Tobacco harm reduction (THR) involves encouraging adult smokers who would otherwise continue to smoke to transition to less harmful forms of nicotine delivery. These products must offer adult smokers reduced exposure to chemicals associated with tobacco combustion, satisfactory blood plasma nicotine levels and serve as an acceptable alternative. The most recent THR innovation is tobacco-free oral nicotine pouches.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety and tolerability profiles of two nicotine pouch variants (ZoneX #2 (5.8 mg nicotine/pouch); ZoneX #3 (10.1 mg nicotine/pouch)) with cigarette to assess the pouches' THR potential.

METHODS

This was a controlled use, randomised, open-label, cross-over clinical study with 24 healthy adult traditional tobacco users. Pharmacokinetic (plasma nicotine levels; up to 8 h post-use), pharmacodynamic (urge to smoke, product liking; up to 4 h post-use) and short-term safety and tolerability profiles were assessed.

RESULTS

Distinct nicotine pouch pharmacokinetic profiles indicated nicotine absorption via the oral mucosa. Plasma nicotine levels were lower, and time to peak slower, for the nicotine pouches compared to cigarette (Cmax cigarette: 11.6 ng/ml vs. #2: 5.2 ng/ml, p < 0.0001; #3: 7.9 ng/ml, p < 0.0003) (Tmax cigarette: 8.6 min vs. #2: 26 min; #3: 22 min). All products effectively reduced subjects' urge to smoke and presented favourable product liking scores; nicotine pouches were also well tolerated following short-term use (no serious adverse events).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the assessed ZoneX nicotine pouches may offer an acceptable alternative for adult smokers to achieve satisfactory levels of nicotine delivery and, based on the pharmacokinetic parameters and under the study conditions, likely have a lower abuse liability and addictive potential for current adult smokers compared to continued cigarette smoking.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER

NCT04891406 (clinicaltrials.gov).

A Mixed-Methods Study on Use of Different Tobacco Products among Younger and Older Adults with Lower and Higher Levels of Nicotine Exposure in California in 2019-2020

An increasing number of tobacco products are entering the market, offering a variety of options to attain desired nicotine intake. However, little is known about the effect of this diverse marketplace on the experiences and nicotine exposure among tobacco users. A mixed-methods study examined experiences with tobacco products among individuals with relatively lower or higher levels of biomarkers of nicotine exposure. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with younger and older adults to examine tobacco use behaviors, addiction to tobacco products, and nicotine effects. Younger and older adults provided similar narratives about addiction and nicotine effects, which were similar across age groups, product types (i.e., ENDS, combustible cigarettes, or oral tobacco products), and having lower or higher nicotine exposure. Some individuals with higher nicotine exposure who switched from combustible cigarettes to another product (e.g., ENDS) found similar or greater access and perceived addiction to nicotine. Adults with higher and lower levels of nicotine exposure provided narratives consistent with features of nicotine addiction, regardless of age and products used. Availability of multiple tobacco products may be associated with greater access and exposure to nicotine. Addiction may occur at low levels of use and with non-cigarette products.

Tobacco-free nicotine pouch use in Great Britain: a representative population survey 2020-2021

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco-free nicotine pouches are products that are placed between the lip and gum, where they deliver nicotine to users. Little is known about nicotine pouch use in Great Britain since they entered the market in 2019.

METHODS

Data came from a monthly representative survey of the adult (≥18y) population in Great Britain (England, Scotland, and Wales) between November 2020 and October 2021 (n=25,698). We estimated the weighted prevalence of pouch use, overall and stratified by demographics, smoking status, and other nicotine use.

RESULTS

Nicotine pouch use was rare among adults, with a weighted prevalence of just 0.26% (95% compatibility interval [CI]=0.19-0.35). Prevalence doubled from November 2020 to October 2021 (0.14% to 0.32%; Prevalence ratio [PR]=2.22, 95%CI=1.33-3.70). Pouch use was four times more common among men than women (0.42% versus 0.09%; PR=4.55, 95%CI=2.27-9.09) but less common in older age groups (p<.001). Pouch use was more prevalent among current smokers (0.87%; PR=13.60, 95%CI=5.46-33.89), recent former smokers (0.97%; PR=15.21, 95%CI=4.03-57.42), and long-term (>1y) former smokers (0.24%; PR=3.71, 95%CI=1.36-10.15), compared with never smokers (0.06%). Prevalence was also elevated among e-cigarette (1.64% versus 0.15%; PR=10.59, 95%CI=5.74-19.52) and nicotine replacement therapy users (2.02% versus 0.21%; PR=9.75, 95%CI=4.64-20.49).

CONCLUSIONS

One in 400 adults in Great Britain use nicotine pouches, but prevalence increased from 2020 to 2021.

IMPLICATIONS

Tobacco-free nicotine pouches were introduced to the market in Great Britain in 2019. We found that, while pouch use is currently rare in Great Britain, these products have become more popular over time. Pouch use is largely concentrated among younger and middle-aged men who use other nicotine products and have a history of smoking. Continued monitoring of nicotine pouch use is needed.