Cited by 676Prenatal Substance Exposure EffectsSmoking Behavior and CessationNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study

Fetal Nicotine or Cocaine Exposure: Which One is Worse?

Slotkin, Theodore A.·1998·The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Abstract

Despite extensive adverse publicity, tobacco use continues in approximately 25% of all pregnancies in the United States, overshadowing illicit drugs of abuse, including cocaine. The societal cost of maternal smoking is seen most readily in underweight newborns, in high rates of perinatal morbidity, mortality and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and in persistent deficits in learning and behavior. We have designed animal models of nicotine exposure to prove that nicotine itself is a neuroteratogen, thus providing a causative link between tobacco exposure and adverse perinatal outcomes. In particular, nicotine infusion paradigms that, like the transdermal patch used in man, produce drug exposure without the confounds of other components of tobacco or of episodic hypoxic-ischemic insult, have enabled a mechanistic dissection of the role played by nicotine in fetal brain damage. Nicotine targets specific neurotransmitter receptors in the fetal brain, eliciting abnormalities of cell proliferation and differentiation, leading to shortfalls in the number of cells and eventually to altered synaptic activity. Because of the close regulatory association of cholinergic and catecholaminergic systems, adverse effects of nicotine involve multiple transmitter pathways and influence not only the immediate developmental events in fetal brain, but also the eventual programming of synaptic competence. Accordingly, defects may appear after a prolonged period of apparent normality, leading to cognitive and learning defects that appear in childhood or adolescence. Comparable alterations occur in peripheral autonomic pathways, leading to increased susceptibility to hypoxia-induced brain damage, perinatal mortality and Sudden Infant Death. Identifying the receptor-driven mechanisms that underlie the neurobehavioral damage caused by fetal nicotine exposure provides a rational basis for decisions about nicotine substitution therapy for smoking cessation in pregnancy. In contrast to the effects of nicotine, animal models of crack cocaine use in pregnancy indicate a more restricted spectrum of effects, a reflection of differences both in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the two drugs. Notably, although cocaine, like nicotine, also targets cell replication, its effects are short-lived, permitting recovery to occur in between doses, so that the eventual consequences are much less severe. To some extent, the effects of cocaine on brain development resemble those of nicotine because the two share cardiovascular actions (vasoconstriction) that, under some circumstances, elicit fetal hypoxia-ischemia. In light of the fact that nearly all crack cocaine users smoke cigarettes, the identification of specific developmental effects of cocaine may prove difficult to detect. Although scientists and the public continue to pay far more attention to fetal cocaine effects than to those of nicotine or tobacco use, a change of focus to concentrate on tobacco could have a disproportionately larger impact on human health.

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/s0022-3565(24)37495-6

Cites

8 of 8 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Slotkin, T. A.
Affiliations
Duke Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Slotkin, Theodore A.
Venue
The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-06
Volume
285
Issue
3
Pages
931-945
ISSN
0022-3565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136699448
Cited by
676
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 31
FWCI
27.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD 09713, R01HD009713)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Keywords
prenatal nicotine exposure, maternal smoking, fetal brain development, cholinergic receptors, catecholaminergic system, synaptic development, perinatal mortality, sudden infant death syndrome, hypoxia-ischemia, smoking cessation during pregnancy, nicotine patch, cell proliferation and differentiation
MeSH terms
Cocaine, Female, Embryonic and Fetal Development, Fetus, Ganglionic Stimulants, Humans, Infant Mortality, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Newborn, Diseases, Nicotine, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Receptors, Nicotinic, Risk Factors, Smoking, Sudden Infant Death, Neurotransmitter Agents, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Substance-Related Disorders

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