Nicotine Delivery and Subjective Effects of Swedish Portion Snus Compared With 4 mg Nicotine Polacrilex Chewing Gum
Abstract
Introduction Snus availability has been claimed to have contributed to the low rates of smoking among Swedish men and made possible the transfer to a less harmful form of nicotine dependence. Methods Fourteen cigarette smokers were randomly assigned to 2 types of 1 g Swedish portion snus and 4 mg nicotine polacrilex (NP) chewing gum in open-label, single-dose crossover study. Nicotine delivery and pharmacokinetics were estimated, and self-reports of subjective effects were obtained using Visual Analogue Scales (VASs). Results Extracted dose from the NP gum averaged 2.56 mg compared with 2.12 and 2.18 mg, respectively, for Swedish portion snus. This resulted in a slightly larger area under the curve (AUC) for the NP chewing gum. The rise of the nicotine plasma concentration was faster for Swedish snus. Median T(max) was shorter, 30 min for snus compared with 45 min for the NP gum. The lower C(max) of NP gum compared with the snus products in spite of larger AUC may be explained by slower absorption from the chewing gum. The faster absorption of nicotine from Swedish portion snus was mirrored in a higher VAS score for "head rush." Craving/urges to smoke decreased similarly for all treatments. Salivation and throat burn were rated higher for the 4 mg NP gum compared with both types of snus. Conclusions Swedish snus produced higher maximum blood nicotine concentration in shorter time and with a quicker onset of "head rush" compared with 4 mg NP chewing gum in spite of a smaller e…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Previous studies have reported greater AUC and Cmax values for some types of snus than for cigarettes, probably due to the longer period of snus use relative to smoking a single cigarette.
“previous studies have similarly reported greater AUC and Cmax values for some types of snus than for cigarettes [25–27], probably due to the longer period of snus use relative to smoking a single cigarette.”
From A Randomised Study to Investigate the Nicotine Pharmacokinetics of Oral Nicotine Pouches and a Combustible Cigarette (2022) · cites this paper as [27]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lunell, E., Fagerström, K., Hughes, J., & Pendrill, R. (2020) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntaa068 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Self-citationMcEwan, M., Azzopardi, D., Gale, N., Camacho, O. M., Hardie, G., Fearon, I. M., & Murphy, J. (2022) · European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.1007/s13318-021-00742-9 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Liu, J., Rensch, J., Wang, J., Jin, X., Vansickel, A., Edmiston, J., & Sarkar, M. (2022) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-022-06172-y · Cited by 37 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lunell, E., & Curvall, M.
- Venue
- Nicotine & Tobacco Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-03-31
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 573-578
- ISSN
- 1462-2203
- 1469-994X
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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