The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of Toxicant and Carcinogen Metabolites in the Urine of E-Cigarette Users Versus Cigarette Smokers
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are rapidly increasing in popularity but little information is available on their potential toxic or carcinogenic effects. METHODS: Twenty-eight e-cigarette smokers who had not smoked tobacco cigarettes for at least 2 months provided urine samples which were analyzed by validated methods for a suite of toxicant and carcinogen metabolites including 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HOP), 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronides (total NNAL), 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (3-HPMA), 2-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid (2-HPMA), 3-hydroxy-1-methylpropylmercapturic acid (HMPMA), S-phenylmercapturic acid (SPMA), nicotine, and cotinine. Levels of these compounds were compared to those found in cigarette smokers from three previous studies. RESULTS: Levels of 1-HOP, total NNAL, 3-HPMA, 2-HPMA, HMPMA, and SPMA were significantly lower in the urine of e-cigarette users compared to cigarette smokers. Levels of nicotine and cotinine were significantly lower in e-cigarette users compared to cigarette smokers in one study but not in another. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to the compounds analyzed here, e-cigarettes have a more favorable toxicity profile than tobacco cigarettes.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Biochemical verification of tobacco use and abstinence: 2019 update
Benowitz, N. L., Bernert, J. T., Foulds, J., Hecht, S. S., Jacob, P., Jarvis, M. J., Joseph, A., Oncken, C., & Piper, M. E. (2020) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntz132 · Cited by 619
Self-citationShahab, L., Goniewicz, M. L., Blount, B. C., Brown, J., McNeill, A., Alwis, K. U., Feng, J., Wang, L., & West, R. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m16-1107 · Cited by 538
Goniewicz, M. L., Gawron, M., Smith, D. M., Peng, M., Jacob, P., & Benowitz, N. L. (2017) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntw160 · Cited by 331
Wagener, T. L., Floyd, E. L., Stepanov, I., Driskill, L. M., Frank, S. G., Meier, E., Leavens, E. L., Tackett, A. P., Molina, N., & Queimado, L. (2017) · Tobacco Control · doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053041 · Cited by 296
Biomarkers of exposure to new and emerging tobacco delivery products
Schick, S. F., Blount, B. C., Jacob, P., Saliba, N. A., Bernert, J. T., El Hellani, A., Jatlow, P., Pappas, R. S., Wang, L., Foulds, J., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajplung.00343.2016 · Cited by 140
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hecht, S. S., Carmella, S. G., Kotandeniya, D., Pillsbury, M. E., Chen, M., Ransom, B. W. S., Vogel, R. I., Thompson, E., Murphy, S. E., & Hatsukami, D. K.
- Venue
- Nicotine & Tobacco Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-10-21
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 704-709
- ISSN
- 1462-2203 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-994X
- OpenAlex
- W1988060475
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of Toxicant and Carcinogen Metabolites in the Urine of E-Cigarette Users Versus Cigarette Smokers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ntr/ntu218
- The paper
- Hecht, S. S., Carmella, S. G., Kotandeniya, D., Pillsbury, M. E., Chen, M., Ransom, B. W. S., Vogel, R. I., Thompson, E., Murphy, S. E., & Hatsukami, D. K. (2015). Evaluation of Toxicant and Carcinogen Metabolites in the Urine of E-Cigarette Users Versus Cigarette Smokers. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntu218
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
