Lack of effect of menthol level and type on smokers’ estimated mouth level exposures to tar and nicotine and perceived sensory characteristics of cigarette smoke

Menthol can reduce sensory irritation and it has been hypothesised that this could result in smokers of mentholated cigarettes taking larger puffs and deeper post-puff inhalations thereby obtaining higher exposures to smoke constituents than smokers of non-mentholated cigarettes. The aim of our study was to use part-filter analysis methodology to assess the effects of cigarette menthol loading on regular and occasional smokers of mentholated cigarettes. We measured mouth level exposure to tar and nicotine and investigated the effects of mentholation on smokers’ sensory perceptions such as cooling and irritation. Test cigarettes were produced containing no menthol and different loadings of synthetic and natural l-menthol at 1 and 4 mg ISO tar yields. A target of 100 smokers of menthol cigarettes and 100 smokers who predominantly smoked non-menthol cigarettes from both 1 and 4 mg ISO tar yield categories were recruited in Poland and Japan. Each subject was required to smoke the test cigarette types of their usual ISO tar yield. There were positive relationships between menthol loading and the perceived ‘strength of menthol taste’ and ‘cooling’ effect. However, we did not see marked menthol-induced reductions in perceived irritation or menthol-induced increases in mouth level exposure to tar and nicotine.     

Estimation of mouth level exposure to smoke constituents of cigarettes with different tar levels using filter analysis

A nicotine part-filter method can be applied to estimate smokers’ mouth level exposure (MLE) to smoke constituents. The objectives of this study were (1) to generate calibration curves for 47 smoke constituents, (2) to estimate MLE to selected smoke constituents using Japanese smokers of commercially available cigarettes covering a wide range of International Organization for Standardization tar yields (1–21 mg/cigarette), and (3) to investigate relationships between MLE estimates and various machine-smoking yields. Five cigarette brands were machine-smoked under 7 different smoking regimes and smoke constituents and nicotine content in part-filters were measured. Calibration curves were then generated. Spent cigarette filters were collected from a target of 50 smokers for each of the 15 brands and a total of 780 filters were obtained. Nicotine content in part-filters was then measured and MLE to each smoke constituent was estimated. Strong correlations were identified between nicotine content in part-filters and 41 out of the 47 smoke constituent yields. Estimates of MLE to acetaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3-butadiene, benzene, benzo[a]pyrene, carbon monoxide, and tar showed significant negative correlations with corresponding constituent yields per mg nicotine under the Health Canada Intense smoking regime, whereas significant positive correlations were observed for N-nitrosonornicotine and (4-methylnitrosoamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone.     

Influence of cigarette filter ventilation on smokers’ mouth level exposure to tar and nicotine

Cigarette filter ventilation allows air to be drawn into the filter, diluting the cigarette smoke. Although machine smoking reveals that toxicant yields are reduced, it does not predict human yields. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between cigarette filter ventilation and mouth level exposure (MLE) to tar and nicotine in cigarette smokers. We collated and reviewed data from 11 studies across 9 countries, in studies performed between 2005 and 2013 which contained data on MLE from 156 products with filter ventilation between 0% and 87%. MLE among 7534 participants to tar and nicotine was estimated using the part-filter analysis method from spent filter tips. For each of the countries, MLE to tar and nicotine tended to decrease as filter ventilation increased. Across countries, per-cigarette MLE to tar and nicotine decreased as filter ventilation increased from 0% to 87%. Daily MLE to tar and nicotine also decreased across the range of increasing filter ventilation. These data suggest that on average smokers of highly ventilated cigarettes are exposed to lower amounts of nicotine and tar per cigarette and per day than smokers of cigarettes with lower levels of ventilation.     

A randomized, controlled exposure study in adult smokers of full flavor Marlboro cigarettes switching to Marlboro Lights or Marlboro Ultra Lights cigarettes

Rationale. To date no state-of-the-art clinical study has been conducted to address the question as to whether switching to lower tar cigarettes reduces exposure to smoke constituents in humans. Methods. Randomized, controlled, forced switching study in 225 adult smokers of full flavor Marlboro (MFF) cigarettes for 8 days with a 24-week follow-up. Subjects smoked MFF (a 15-mg Federal Trade Commission (FTC) tar cigarette) at baseline and were randomized to smoke 11-mg Marlboro Lights (ML) or 6-mg Marlboro Ultra Lights (MUL) cigarettes. Biomarkers of exposure to nicotine, 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), pyrene, CO, benzene, acrolein, and mutagenic substances were measured. Results. In the short-term phase, switching from MFF to ML showed statistically significant decreases in nicotine exposure (-13%) and non-significant increases in CO exposure (+6%), while switching from MFF to MUL showed statistically significant decreases in nicotine (-27%) and CO (-13%) exposure. Both nicotine and CO biomarkers trended similarly in the 24-week follow-up as in the short-term phase. The other biomarkers of cigarette smoke constituents followed the same trend as nicotine at the end of the 24-week follow-up. Conclusions. Switching smokers to lower FTC tar yield cigarettes, on average, reduces nicotine and other biomarkers considered surrogates of tar exposure.     

Estimating tar and nicotine exposure: Human smoking versus machine generated smoke yields

Objective

Determine human smoked (HS) cigarette yields of tar and nicotine for smokers using their own brand in their everyday environment.

Method

A robust, filter analysis method was used to estimate the tar and nicotine yields for 784 subjects. Seventeen brands were chosen to represent a wide range of styles: 85 and 100 mm lengths; menthol and non-menthol; 17, 23, and 25 mm circumference; with tar yields [Federal Trade Commission (FTC) method] ranging from 1 to 18 mg. Tar bands chosen corresponded to yields of 1–3 mg, 4–6 mg, 7–12 mg, and 13+ mg.

Results

A significant difference (p < 0.0001) in HS yields of tar and nicotine between tar bands was found. Machine-smoked yields were reasonable predictors of the HS yields for groups of subjects, but the relationship was neither exact nor linear. Neither the FTC, the Massachusetts (MA) nor the Canadian Intensive (CI) machine-smoking methods accurately reflect the HS yields across all brands. The FTC method was closest for the 7–12 mg and 13+ mg products and the MA method was closest for the 1–3 mg products. The HS yields for the 4–6 mg products were approximately midway between the FTC and the MA yields. HS nicotine yields corresponded well with published urinary and plasma nicotine biomarker studies.     

Evaluation of a low to middle tar/medium nicotine cigarette designed to maintain nicotine delivery to the smoker

A specific objective of this 6-week crossover study was to determine how 21 regular smokers of middle tar cigarettes changed their smoking behaviour and uptake of smoke constituents, when switching to either lower tar cigarettes capable of delivering amounts of nicotine similar to a conventional middle tar cigarette (maintained nicotine product), or to conventional low tar/low nicotine cigarettes. Subjects visited the laboratory every 2 weeks for detailed assessment of their smoking behaviour. Weekly per capita consumption was similar for all three cigarettes. They were smoked with variable intensities (low tar > maintained nicotine > middle tar), the tendency being for larger puff volumes, faster puffing and increased puff duration with the low tar cigarettes. The maintained nicotine cigarette was preferred to the middle tar cigarette, although acceptability ratings of the three cigarettes only differed marginally. The nicotine absorbed from the maintained nicotine and middle tar cigarettes was similar and significantly greater than the levels achieved from the low tar cigarettes. Intake of carbon monoxide into the mouth and absorption into the blood stream was lower for the maintained nicotine cigarette than for the middle tar cigarette, with the low tar cigarette occupying an intermediate position. Derived estimates of tar intake suggested reduced intake of tar into the respiratory tract (around 25%) from the maintained nicotine product relative to the middle tar product. The possible advantages of switching to maintained nicotine cigarettes is discussed.     

New lower nicotine cigarettes can produce compensatory smoking and increased carbon monoxide exposure

Potential reduced exposure products (PREPs) are marketed as a means to reduce exposure to tobacco toxicants. Quest cigarettes, a new type of PREP, use genetically modified tobacco to provide a nicotine step-down approach, and are available as 0.6, 0.3 and 0.05 mg nicotine cigarettes. However, these cigarettes deliver equivalent levels of tar (10 mg). Prior research on low nicotine cigarettes suggests smokers will compensate for lower nicotine delivery by increasing their puffing behavior to extract more nicotine. This study tested the hypothesis that compensatory smoking will occur with this PREP as nicotine levels decrease, increasing exposure to tobacco toxins. Fifty smokers completed a within-subject human laboratory study investigating the effect of cigarette nicotine level on smoking behavior. Cigarette nicotine level was double-blinded and order of presentation counter-balanced. Breath carbon monoxide (CO) boost was used as a biomarker of smoke exposure; total puff volume to assess smoking behavior. Total puff volume was greatest for the 0.05 mg nicotine cigarette and CO boost was moderately greater after smoking the 0.3 and 0.05 mg cigarettes compared to the 0.6 mg nicotine cigarette. These data provide novel behavioral and biochemical evidence of compensatory smoking when smoking lower nicotine cigarettes. Although marketed as a PREP, increases in CO boost suggest this product can potentially be a harm-increasing product.     

Influence of cigarette circumference on smoke chemistry,biological activity,and smoking behaviour

Cigarettes with reduced circumference are increasingly popular in some countries, hence it is important to understand the effects of circumference reduction on their burning behaviour, smoke chemistry and bioactivity. Reducing circumference reduces tobacco mass burn rate, puff count and static burn time, and increases draw resistance and rod length burned during puff and smoulder periods. Smoulder temperature increases with decreasing circumference, but with no discernible effect on cigarette ignition propensity during a standard test. At constant packing density, mainstream (MS) and sidestream (SS) tar and nicotine yields decrease approximately linearly with decreasing circumference, as do the majority of smoke toxicants. However, volatile aldehydes, particularly formaldehyde, show a distinctly non-linear relationship with circumference and increases in the ratios of aldehydes to tar and nicotine have been observed as the circumference decreases. Mutagenic, cytotoxic and tumorigenic specific activities of smoke condensates (i.e. per unit weight of condensate) decrease as circumference decreases. Recent studies suggest that there is no statistical difference in mouth-level exposure to tar and nicotine among smokers of cigarettes with different circumferences. Commercially available slim cigarettes usually have changes in other cigarette design features compared with cigarettes with standard circumference, so it is difficult to isolate the effect of circumference on the properties of commercial products. However, available data shows that changes in cigarette circumference offer no discernible change to the harm associated with smoking.     

Influence of Smoking Charcoal Filter Tipped Cigarettes on Various Biomarkers of Exposure

Charcoal (CC) filters of cigarettes are known to significantly reduce a series of volatile constituents in mainstream smoke, including reactive α,β-unsaturated aldehydes such as acrolein and crotonaldehyde. We performed a randomized, crossover, 2-wk brand-switching study with 39 smokers. Twenty of the subjects smoked cellulose acetate (CA) filter tipped cigarettes during wk 1 of the study; the remaining 19 subjects smoked CC filter tipped cigarettes during wk 1. In wk 2, the subjects switched to the corresponding brand with the other filter type, with similar smoking machine-derived tar and nicotine yields. Daily cigarette consumption, carbon monoxide in exhaled breath, salivary cotinine, and urinary nicotine equivalents (molar sum of nicotine plus five major metabolites) did not change significantly when switching to the cigarettes with the other filter type. Urinary excretion rates of 3-hydroxy-1-methylpropylmercapturic acid (metabolite of crotonaldehyde), monohydroxybutenylmercapturic acid (metabolite of 1,3-butadiene), and S-phenylmercapturic acid (metabolite of benzene) were significantly lower when smoking CC compared to CA filter tipped cigarettes. The reduction in amount of 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (metabolite of acrolein) was of borderline significance. Other mercapturic acids and thioethers (the latter is a summary parameter that indicates the exposure to electrophilic compounds) were not or were only slightly reduced upon smoking CC filter tipped cigarettes. We conclude that smoking CC filter tipped cigarettes does not change the uptake of carbon monoxide and nicotine when compared to CA filter tipped cigarettes with similar tar and nicotine yields, but significantly reduces the exposure to toxicologically relevant smoke constituents such as acrolein, crotonaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and benzene.     

The effect of menthol containing cigarettes on adult smokers’ exposure to nicotine and carbon monoxide

There is limited information comparing biomarkers of exposure (BOE) to cigarette smoke in menthol (MS) and non-menthol cigarette smokers (NMS). Objective: To compare BOE to nicotine and carbon monoxide in MS and NMS. Methods: Cross-sectional, observational, ambulatory, multi-centre study in 3341 adult cigarette smokers. Nicotine equivalents (NE) in 24 h urine, NE/cigarette, COHb and serum cotinine were measured. Statistical analyses included analysis of variance and Wilcoxon test. Results: Analyses of variance revealed no statistically significant effects of mentholated cigarettes on NE/24 h, COHb, serum cotinine and NE/cigarette. On average MS smoked 15.0 and NMS 16.8 cigarettes/day. The unadjusted mean differences were as follows: MS had lower NE/24 h (5.4%) and COHb (3.2%), higher serum cotinine (3.0%) and NE/cigarette (5.7%) than NMS. African-Americans MS smoked 40% fewer cigarettes, showed lower NE/24 h (24%) and COHb (10%) and higher NE/cig (29%) and serum cotinine (8%) levels than their White counterparts. Conclusions: Smoking mentholated cigarettes does not increase daily exposure to smoke constituents as measured by NE and COHb. These findings are consistent with the majority of epidemiological studies indicating no difference in smoking related risks between MS and NMS.     

Influence of smoking charcoal filter tipped cigarettes on various biomarkers of exposure

Charcoal (CC) filters of cigarettes are known to significantly reduce a series of volatile constituents in mainstream smoke, including reactive alpha,beta-unsaturated aldehydes such as acrolein and crotonaldehyde. We performed a randomized, crossover, 2-wk brand-switching study with 39 smokers. Twenty of the subjects smoked cellulose acetate (CA) filter tipped cigarettes during wk 1 of the study; the remaining 19 subjects smoked CC filter tipped cigarettes during wk 1. In wk 2, the subjects switched to the corresponding brand with the other filter type, with similar smoking machine-derived tar and nicotine yields. Daily cigarette consumption, carbon monoxide in exhaled breath, salivary cotinine, and urinary nicotine equivalents (molar sum of nicotine plus five major metabolites) did not change significantly when switching to the cigarettes with the other filter type. Urinary excretion rates of 3-hydroxy-1-methylpropylmercapturic acid (metabolite of crotonaldehyde), monohydroxybutenylmercapturic acid (metabolite of 1,3-butadiene), and S-phenylmercapturic acid (metabolite of benzene) were significantly lower when smoking CC compared to CA filter tipped cigarettes. The reduction in amount of 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (metabolite of acrolein) was of borderline significance. Other mercapturic acids and thioethers (the latter is a summary parameter that indicates the exposure to electrophilic compounds) were not or were only slightly reduced upon smoking CC filter tipped cigarettes. We conclude that smoking CC filter tipped cigarettes does not change the uptake of carbon monoxide and nicotine when compared to CA filter tipped cigarettes with similar tar and nicotine yields, but significantly reduces the exposure to toxicologically relevant smoke constituents such as acrolein, crotonaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and benzene.     

Comparison of the behavioral effects of cigarette smoke and pure nicotine in rats

Animal models of tobacco dependence typically rely on parenteral administration of pure nicotine. Models using cigarette smoke inhalation might more accurately simulate nicotine exposure in smokers. The primary goal of this study was to validate methods for administering cigarette smoke to rats using exposure conditions that were clinically relevant and also produced brain nicotine levels similar to those produced by behaviorally active doses of pure nicotine. A secondary goal was to begin examining the behavioral effects of smoke. Nose-only exposure (NOE) to smoke for 10-45 min or whole-body exposure (WBE) to smoke for 1-4 h produced serum nicotine concentrations similar to those in smokers (14-55 ng/ml), without excessive carbon monoxide exposure. Daily nicotine (0.1 mg/kg, s.c.) induced locomotor sensitization whereas 45-min NOE producing brain nicotine levels within the same range did not. Nicotine 0.125 mg/kg s.c. reversed withdrawal from a chronic nicotine infusion as measured by elevations in intracranial self-stimulation thresholds whereas 4-h WBE producing similar brain nicotine levels did not. These data demonstrate the feasibility of delivering cigarette smoke to rats at clinically relevant doses, and provide preliminary evidence that the behavioral effects of nicotine delivered in smoke may differ from those of pure nicotine.     

Long-term effects of switching to cigarettes with lower tar and nicotine yields

On switching to cigarettes with lower tar and nicotine yields, most individuals smoke more intensively, but it is not clear if this effect persists over a long period. Smoking behaviour was monitored in 10 male and 18 female volunteers at five monthly visits, smoking commercially available cigarettes (tar yield>10 mg), then for six more visits at 6-week intervals after switching (mean reduction of 5.9 mg tar and 0.45 mg nicotine). Puffing behaviour was monitored with a flow sensing holder, and measurements were made before and after smoking of plasma cotinine, carboxyhaemglobin and alveolar carbon monoxide. After switching, cotinine levels only fell 40% of that predicted from the fall in nicotine yields, and there were no systematic trends for the rest of the study. Puff volumes rose (reflecting perhaps the reduced draw resistance of the lower yield cigarettes), and remained higher thereafter. The number of puffs per cigarette appeared to rise on switching, but then decreased again. In conclusion, most effects of switching to lower yield cigarettes appeared to persist for at least 36 weeks, suggesting that the strategy of reducing exposure to cigarette smoke by lowering tar and nicotine yields may be of limited value.     

The relationship between smoking machine derived tar yields and biomarkers of exposure in adult cigarette smokers in the US

Comprehensive data on human exposure to smoke constituents from different machine-measured tar yield cigarettes is limited. Methods: This study used a stratified, cross-sectional, multi-center design to estimate biomarkers of exposure (BOE) from nicotine, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), pyrene, CO, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene and their relationship to tar yield categories of cigarette in adult smokers in the U.S. 3625 adults smokers were enrolled into four tar categories 2.9 mg (T1), 3.0–6.9 mg (T2), 7.0–12.9 mg (T3), and 13.0 mg (T4). Biomarkers were measured in blood (carboxyhemoglobin, 4-aminobiphenyl-hemoglobin (4-ABP-Hb)-adducts, serum cotinine) and 24 h urine (nicotine and five metabolites, calculated as nicotine equivalents (NE), NNAL, 1-OH-pyrene, 3-HPMA, MHBMA and DHBMA). Data were analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Results: Tar was a significant factor for most biomarkers in the ANCOVA models. The largest least square mean differences between tar categories was 35% for NE per day, 28% for NE per cigarette, 36% for serum cotinine, 42% for NNAL per day, 29% for NNAL per cigarette, 26% for 1-OHP, 24% for COHb, 14% for 3-HPMA and 40% for 4-ABP-Hb. Variability in BOE ranged from 41% to 154% CV. Conclusions: There was a statistically significant effect of machine-measured tar yield on most BOE, which were generally lower with lower tar yield.     

Effects of a nicotine-enriched cigarette on nicotine titration,daily cigarette consumption,and levels of carbon monoxide,cotinine, and nicotine

To test whether cigarettes with low tar, low carbon monoxide, and medium nicotine yield produce less dangerous effects than cigarettes low in tar and CO but high in nicotine, 12 subjects were recruited to smoke nicotine-enriched cigarettes. The subjects smoked three types of cigarettes in the three experimental conditions: (1) their own brand; (2) cigarettes with 4.8 mg tar, 4.0mg CO, and 0.5 mg nicotine; (3) cigarettes with 5.8 mg tar, 4.1 mg CO, and 1.1 mg nicotine. Subjects monitored their daily consumption for 12 weeks; 4 weeks for each condition. During laboratory visits, the subjects smoked a cigarette while their heart rate and carbon monoxide in expired air were measured pre- and post-smoking. A blood sample was drawn and analyzed for nicotine and cotinine in each experimental condition. No significant differences in daily cigarette consumption were found, although a trend (P<0.07) in the direction of fewer nicotine-enriched cigarettes per day was found. Levels of CO varied significantly among the three conditions: The subjects' own brands yielded the highest level, while the nicotine-enriched cigarette yielded the lowest level. No differences were found for nicotine or cotinine levels. A second purpose of the experiment was to record the degree of nicotine titration displayed by individual smokers, tar and CO levels remained constant in the experimental cigarettes. No general titration effect was observed, although for daily consumption it approached significance. When the subjects' nicotine dependence, measured with a tolerance questionnaire, was taken into acount, a correlation with daily consumption was found (r=77, P<0.005). A cigarette with low tar and CO, but medium to high nicotine yield, would seem to produce less hazardous effects and is worthy of further investigation. The controversial question of whether smokers titrate for nicotine is a function of the individual's nicotine dependence.     

Analytical cigarette yields as predictors of smoke bioavailability

The smoke intake of 865 undisturbed smokers of over 10 cigarettes per day was measured using plasma nicotine and cotinine, and expired carbon monoxide (CO) as markers. While nicotine yields, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) analytical standards, varied 16-fold from 0.1 to 1.6 mg/cigarette, the corresponding plasma nicotine values varied from around 25 to 45 ng/ml, and estimated mean nicotine intake of smokers varied from around 0.75 to 1.25 mg/cigarette. Expired CO and plasma cotinine values also varied in similar proportion, but mean daily cigarette consumption was independent of the FTC nicotine yield of the cigarettes smoked. The results indicate that pharmacodynamic satiation causes behavioral regulation, and that smokers of very high yield brands compensate downward, and vice versa. The ratio of tar yield to nicotine yield usually increases with increasing tar yield; therefore tar intake is likely to increase at higher tar yields, even though the increment of nicotine intake is small. It follows that FTC analytical determinations are poor predictors of relative intake of nicotine, CO, or tar, while rankings based on mean tar-to-nicotine ratio of a brand's smoke could be more meaningful. Moreover, the considerable variation of individual smoking behavior suggests that precise numerical rankings of cigarettes are not justified. An analogic ranking of cigarettes into a few broad classes would better reflect the realities and expectations of average consumers.     

A study to estimate and correlate cigarette smoke exposure in smokers in Germany as determined by filter analysis and biomarkers of exposure

A clinical study, conducted in Germany, compared two methods of estimating exposure to cigarette smoke. Estimates of mouth level exposure (MLE) to nicotine, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), pyrene and acrolein were obtained by chemical analysis of spent cigarette filters for nicotine content. Estimates of smoke constituent uptake were achieved by analysis of corresponding urinary biomarkers: for nicotine; total nicotine equivalents (nicotine, cotinine, trans-3′-hydroxycotinine plus their glucuronide conjugates), for NNK; (4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) plus glucuronide, for pyrene; 1-hydroxy pyrene (1-OHP) plus glucuronide and for acrolein; 3-hydroxylpropyl-mercapturic acid (3-HPMA) plus the nicotine metabolite cotinine in plasma and saliva. Two hundred healthy volunteer subjects were recruited; 50 smokers of each of 1–2 mg, 4–6 mg and 9–10 mg ISO tar yield cigarettes and 50 non-smokers (NS). Smokers underwent two periods of home smoking, each followed by residence in a clinic. Smoking was permitted ad libitum, and spent cigarette filters, cigarette consumption data, 24 h urine, as well as plasma and saliva samples were collected. Significant correlations (p < 0.001) were found between MLE and the relevant biomarker for each smoke constituent. The Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were 0.83 (nicotine), 0.76 (NNK), 0.82 (acrolein) and 0.63 (pyrene). Mean MLE estimates for nicotine, NNK and pyrene showed a dose response in line with ISO tar yield smoked, with 10 mg > 4 mg > 1 mg, and for acrolein 10 mg > 4 mg > *1 mg (where * indicates not significant at 95% confidence level). The mean exposure estimates from biomarkers for nicotine, NNK and acrolein also showed a dose response in line with ISO tar yield with 10 mg > 4 mg > 1 mg > NS, and for pyrene 10 mg > *4 mg > 1 mg > NS. This study shows that estimates of exposure obtained by filter analysis and biomarkers of exposure correlate significantly over a wide range of smoke exposures and that filter analysis may provide a simple and effective alternative to biomarkers for estimating smokers’ exposure.     

Smoking behaviour and compensation: a review of the literature

Rationale: Compensation or compensatory smoking, accurately defined, deals with the question of whether switching to cigarette brands with different smoke yields is associated with a change in smoke uptake proportional to the change in machine-derived yields. The issue of compensation is important because it bears on whether switching to ”lighter” brands means lower overall smoke intake or not. Objectives: The present review investigated whether and to what extend low yield cigarettes are smoked more intensively. In addition, published data on whether nicotine, ”tar”, or any other smoke constituent or property influence compensational smoking are summarized. Methods: The studies on compensation were classified as follows: (1) studies on smoking behaviour in relation to cigarette yields (with and without brand switching); (2) studies on compensation for nicotine (switching between cigarettes which differ ”only” in their nicotine yield, nicotine supplementation, manipulation of renal nicotine excretion, administration of nicotine agonists or antagonists); (3) studies on compensation for other factors (influence of tar, taste, irritation, draw resistance). In order to quantify the degree of compensation, an index is defined and applied to selected brand switching studies. This compensation index determines, in relative units, the degree to which a smoker responds to a change in smoke yields with a change in smoke uptake measured by suitable biomarkers. The role of vent blocking is also briefly discussed. Results: Most of the studies which compare the smoking behaviour when smoking cigarettes with different smoke yields supply evidence for ”partial” compensation, suggesting that cigarettes with lower yields are smoked more intensively than those with higher yields. These studies also show that a change in the daily number of cigarettes is not a common mechanism of compensation. Effective vent blocking during smoking is a rare event and can therefore also be regarded as an uncommon mechanism of compensation. Evaluation of a suitable subset of brand-switching studies revealed an average compensation of 50–60% of the nicotine yield. Compensation tended to be more complete when changing to cigarettes with higher yields than when changing to cigarettes with lower yields. In general, brand-switching studies do not supply information on the underlying causal factors responsible for compensatory smoking. Results of the nicotine supplementation studies are not conclusive: some report evidence of nicotine titration, others do not. A general problem with this type of investigation is that continuous nicotine application does not mimic the spike-wise application with cigarette smoking, and may lead to nicotine tolerance. There is limited evidence that cigarettes were smoked more intensively when the urinary clearance of nicotine was increased. A small number of studies provide some evidence that smoking intensity increased after smokers were administered a nicotine antagonist. Several reports indicate that tar, taste and sensory properties of the smoke as well as the draw resistance of the cigarette may play a role in compensatory smoking. Low-yield cigarettes usually have reduced pressure drops which smoke researchers have suggested leads to increased puff volume. This effect seems to be independent of the smoke yield of the cigarette. There is also some evidence that some smokers maintain a consistent pattern of smoking which works independent of any changes in nicotine or tar yields, taste or design features of the cigarette (”functional autonomy”). Conclusions: The available data suggest that smokers partially compensate for a different smoke yield. While the factors and their interaction responsible for compensational smoking are not fully understood, there are data suggesting that a subgroup of smokers may partially compensate for nicotine. Even in this subgroup of smokers, however, the relative importance of the pharmacological versus the sensory effects of nicotine in smoke remains to be determined. Received: 4 January 1999 / Final version: 22 March 1999     

Do smokers of specialty and conventional cigarettes differ in their dependence on nicotine?

Specialty cigarettes, bidis and kreteks, have commonly been viewed by adolescent users as being less harmful than conventional cigarettes. Biochemical studies, however, have shown that the concentration and delivery of nicotine from these tobacco products are not insignificant. The current study tested whether the diagnosis and symptoms for nicotine dependence differed among conventional-only smokers (n = 16 959), specialty-only smokers (n = 313), and poly-tobacco smokers (n = 1288) from the 2002 and 2003 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. Compared with the specialty-only smokers, the conventional-only and poly-tobacco smokers were more dependent on nicotine, assessed by the Nicotine Dependence Syndrome Scale and a single item from the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence. However, after accounting for differences in smoking frequency, the specialty-only smokers had significantly greater odds of being nicotine dependent than the conventional-only smokers. The reversed effect was primarily attributed to the specialty-only smokers who smoked less frequently, but reported a shorter time to their first cigarette. These findings suggest that the nicotine acquired from specialty cigarettes may be sufficient in yielding a sense of urgency to smoke.     

Factors affecting exposure to nicotine and carbon monoxide in adult cigarette smokers

Exposure to cigarette smoke among smokers is highly variable. This variability has been attributed to differences in smoking behavior as measured by smoking topography, as well as other behavioral and subjective aspects of smoking. The objective of this study was to determine the factors affecting smoke exposure as estimated by biomarkers of exposure to nicotine and carbon monoxide (CO). In a multi-center cross-sectional study of 3585 adult smokers and 1077 adult nonsmokers, exposure to nicotine and CO was estimated by 24 h urinary excretion of nicotine and five of its metabolites and by blood carboxyhemoglobin, respectively. Number of cigarettes smoked per day (CPD) was determined from cigarette butts returned. Puffing parameters were determined through a CreSS® micro device and a 182-item adult smoker questionnaire (ASQ) was administered. The relationship between exposure and demographic factors, smoking machine measured tar yield and CPD was examined in a statistical model (Model A). Topography parameters were added to this model (Model B) which was further expanded (Model C) by adding selected questions from the ASQ identified by a data reduction process. In all the models, CPD was the most important and highest ranking factor determining daily exposure. Other statistically significant factors were number of years smoked, questions related to morning smoking, topography and tar yield categories. In conclusion, the models investigated in this analysis, explain about 30-40% of variability in exposure to nicotine and CO.