Cited by 91Smoking Behavior and CessationNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects

Different physiological and behavioural effects of e-cigarette vapour and cigarette smoke in mice

Open access
Ponzoni, L, Moretti, M, Sala, M, Fasoli, F, Mucchietto, V, Lucini, V, Cannazza, G, Gallesi, G +5 more·2015·European Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Nicotine is the primary addictive substance in tobacco smoke and electronic cigarette (e-cig) vapour. Methodological limitations have made it difficult to compare the role of the nicotine and non-nicotine constituents of tobacco smoke. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of traditional cigarette smoke and e-cig vapour containing the same amount of nicotine in male BALB/c mice exposed to the smoke of 21 cigarettes or e-cig vapour containing 16.8 mg of nicotine delivered by means of a mechanical ventilator for three 30-min sessions/day for seven weeks. One hour after the last session, half of the animals were sacrificed for neurochemical analysis, and the others underwent mecamylamine-precipitated or spontaneous withdrawal for the purposes of behavioural analysis. Chronic intermittent non-contingent, second-hand exposure to cigarette smoke or e-cig vapour led to similar brain cotinine and nicotine levels, similar urine cotinine levels and the similar up-regulation of α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in different brain areas, but had different effects on body weight, food intake, and the signs of mecamylamine-precipitated and spontaneous withdrawal episodic memory and emotional responses. The findings of this study demonstrate for the first time that e-cig vapour induces addiction-related neurochemical, physiological and behavioural alterations. The fact that inhaled cigarette smoke and e-cig vapour have partially different dependence-related effects indicates that compounds other than nicotine contribute to tobacco dependence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2015.06.010

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Hogg S (1996). A review of the validity and variability of the elevated plus-maze as an animal model of anxiety. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 54:21-30.
  2. Hughes, J.R., 2007. Measurement of the effects of abstinence from tobacco: a qualitative review. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 21,127-137.
  3. Hussmann, G.P., Dedominicis, K.E., Turner, J.R., Yasuda, R.P., Klehm, J., Forcelli, P.A., et al 2014. Chronic sazetidine-A maintains anxiolytic effects and slower weight gain following chronic nicotine without maintaining increased density of nicotinic receptors in rodent brain. J. Neurochem. doi: 10.1111/jnc.12653. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ponzoni, L., Moretti, M., Sala, M., Fasoli, F., Mucchietto, V, Lucini, V, Cannazza, G., Gallesi, G., Castellana, C., Clementi, F., Zoli, M., Gotti, C., & Braida, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT)
Corresponding author
Gotti, C
Venue
European Neuropsychopharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
25
Issue
10
Pages
1775-1786
ISSN
0924-977X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111746394
Cited by
91
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2
FWCI
6.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Ministero della Salute (RF 2009, RF2009‐1549619)
  • Regione Lombardia (30263049, 18099/RCC)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Keywords
cigarette smoke, nicotine, tobacco dependence, nicotine dependence, cotinine, α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, spontaneous withdrawal, episodic memory, emotional responses, body weight, dietary intake
MeSH terms
Animals, Body Weight, Brain, Cotinine, Disease Models, Animal, Eating, Emotions, Male, Mecamylamine, Memory, Short-Term, Mice, Inbred BALB C, Nicotine, Receptors, Nicotinic, Respiration, Artificial, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Tobacco Use Disorder, Nicotinic Agonists, Nicotinic Antagonists, Spatial Memory, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review