CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33

Evaluating the acute effects of oral, non-combustible potential reduced exposure products marketed to smokers

Cobb, C O, Weaver, M F, Eissenberg, T·2010·Tobacco Control
DOI 10.1136/tc.2008.028993PMC PMC3207996
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Non-combustible potential reduced exposure products (PREPs; eg, Star Scientific's Ariva; a variety of other smokeless tobacco products) are marketed to reduce the harm associated with smoking. This marketing occurs despite an absence of objective data concerning the toxicant exposure and effects of these PREPs. Methods used to examine combustible PREPs were adapted to assess the acute effects of non-combustible PREPs for smokers. Methods: 28 overnight abstinent cigarette smokers (17 men, 14 non-white) each completed seven, Latin-squared ordered, approximately 2.5 h laboratory sessions that differed by product administered: Ariva, Marlboro Snus (Philip Morris, USA), Camel Snus (RJ Reynolds, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA), Commit nicotine lozenge (GlaxoSmithKline; 2 mg), own brand cigarettes, Quest cigarettes (Vector Tobacco; delivers very low levels of nicotine) and sham smoking (ie, puffing on an unlit cigarette). In each session, the product was administered twice (separated by 60 min), and plasma nicotine levels, expired air CO and subjective effects were assessed regularly. Results: Non-combustible products delivered less nicotine than own brand cigarettes, did not expose smokers to CO and failed to suppress tobacco abstinence symptoms as effectively as combustible products. Conclusions: While decreased toxicant exposure is a potential indicator of harm reduction potential, a failure to suppress abstinence symptoms suggests that currently marketed non-combustible PREPs may not be a viable harm reduction strategy for US smokers. This study demonstrates how clinical laboratory methods can be used to evaluate the short-term effects of non-combustible PREPs for smokers.

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 · 10.1136/tc.2008.028993

Cites

5 of 5 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: 24

  1. [1]Lakier JB Smoking and cardiovascular disease Am J Med 1992 93 8S 12S 1497005
  2. [2]Hoffmann D Hoffmann I Tobacco consumption and lung cancer Cancer Treat Res 1995 72 1 42 7702982
  3. [3]Critchley J Capewell S Smoking cessation for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004 4 CD003041 14974003
  4. [4]Schroeder SA What to do with a patient who smokes JAMA 2005 294 482 487 16046655
  5. [5]Benowitz NL Neurobiology of nicotine addiction: implications for smoking cessation treatment Am J Med 2008 121 S3 S10 18342164
  6. [11]Stratton K Shetty P Wallace R Clearing the smoke: the science base for tobacco harm reduction 2001 Washington, DC National Academy Press 25057541
  7. [14]Buchhalter AR Schrinel L Eissenberg T Withdrawal-suppressing effects of a novel smoking system: comparison with own brand, not own brand, and de-nicotinized cigarettes Nicotine Tob Res 2001 3 111 118 11403724
  8. [15]Hughes JR Keely JP The effect of a novel smoking system—Accord—on ongoing smoking and toxin exposure Nicotine Tob Res 2004 6 1021 1027 15801575
  9. [16]Breland AB Evans SE Buchhalter AR Acute effects of Advance: a potential reduced exposure product for smokers Tob Control 2002 11 376 378 12432165 PMC1747694
  10. [17]Breland AB Buchhalter AR Evans SE Evaluating acute effects of potential reduced-exposure products for smokers: clinical laboratory methodology Nicotine Tob Res 2002 4 S131 S140 12573174
  11. [18]Breland AB Kleykamp BA Eissenberg T Clinical laboratory evaluation of potential reduced exposure products for smokers Nicotine Tob Res 2006 8 727 738 17132520
  12. [19]Acosta MC Buchhalter AR Breland AB Urine cotinine as an index of smoking status in abstinent smokers: comparison of GC/MS with immunoassay test strip Nicotine Tob Res 2004 6 615 620 15370157
  13. [20]Blank MD Sams C Weaver MF Nicotine delivery, cardiovascular profile, and subjective effects of an oral tobacco product for smokers Nicotine Tob Res 2008 10 417 421 18324559 PMC3207995
  14. [21]Kotlyar M Mendoza-Baumgart MI Li ZZ Nicotine pharmacokinetics and subjective effects of three potential reduced exposure products, moist snuff and nicotine lozenge Tob Control 2007 16 138 142 17400953 PMC2598476
  15. [22]Stepanov I Jensen J Hatsukami D New and traditional smokeless tobacco: comparison of toxicant and carcinogen levels Nicotine Tob Res 2008 10 1773 1782 19023828 PMC2892835
  16. [23]Choi JH Dresler CM Norton MR Pharmacokinetics of a nicotine polacrilex lozenge Nicotine Tob Res 2003 5 635 644 14577980
  17. [24]Woodman G Wintoniuk DM Taylor RG Time course of end-expired carbon monoxide concentration is important in studies of cigarette smoking Clin Sci 1987 73 553 555 3677561
  18. [25]Cox LS Tiffany ST Christen AG Evaluation of the brief questionnaire of smoking urges (QSU-brief) in laboratory and clinical settings Nicotine Tob Res 2001 3 7 16 11260806
  19. [26]Evans SE Blank M Sams C Transdermal nicotine-induced tobacco abstinence symptoms suppression: nicotine dose and smokers’ gender Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2006 14 121 135 16756416 PMC1564049
  20. [27]Foulds J Stapleton J Feyerabend C Effects of transdermal nicotine patches on cigarette smoking: a double blind crossover study Psychopharmacology 1992 106 421 427 1570391
  21. [28]Pickworth WB Bunker EB Henningfield JE Transdermal nicotine: reduction of smoking with minimal abuse liability Psychopharmacology 1994 115 9 14 7862918
  22. [30]Keppel G Design and analysis: a researcher’s handbook 1991 Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall
  23. [31]Strasser AA Lerman C Sanborn PM New lower nicotine cigarettes can produce compensatory smoking and increased carbon monoxide exposure Drug Alcohol Depend 2007 86 294 300 16930853
  24. [32]Gray JN Breland AB Weaver MF Potential reduced exposure products (PREPs) for smokeless tobacco users: clinical evaluation methodology Nicotine Tob Res 2008 10 1441 1448 19023835 PMC3212707

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cobb, C. O., Weaver, M. F., & Eissenberg, T.
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-04-02
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
367-373
ISSN
  • 0964-4563
  • 1468-3318
DOI
10.1136/tc.2008.028993
PMC
PMC3207996
Cited by
33
References
5
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