Across the world availability of flavour accessories for tobacco products.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide an inventory of different types of flavour accessories for combustible tobacco products in eight countries varying in their approaches to flavour legislation and cultural aspects, including tobacco use. METHODS: A standardised search protocol was developed and shared with local informants to acquire information on the availability and marketing of flavour accessories in web shops accessible from Brazil, India, Italy, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, the UK and the USA. Characteristics of the products and web shops were reported, and flavours were categorised in a flavour wheel. RESULTS: Flavour accessories were available in all participating countries. Reported types are flavour capsules, cards, filter tips and tubes for make-your-own cigarettes, drops, sprays, rolling paper, aroma markers, a flavour stone and a flavour powder. In total, 118 unique flavours were reported, which were mostly fruity and sweet. Marketing of these products was often associated with (menthol) flavour bans. CONCLUSIONS: The wide availability and variety of flavour accessories raise significant public health concerns, as they have attractive flavours, and thus hinder the regulatory aim of flavour bans. Flavour accessories are not tobacco products and thus not regulated as such. Therefore, it is recommended that policymakers include these products in comprehensive flavour bans, to close this loophole in existing tobacco control measures.

Regulation of Electronic Cigarette Use in Public and Private Areas in 48 Countries Within the WHO European Region: A Survey to In-country Informants.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to describe the legislation regulating the use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in various places in European countries. METHODS: A survey among experts from all countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region was conducted in 2018. We collected and described data on legislation regulating e-cigarette use indoors and outdoors in public and private places, the level of difficulties in adopting the legislation, and the public support and compliance. Factors associated with the legislation adoption were identified with Poisson and linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Out of 48 countries, 58.3% had legislation on e-cigarette use at the national level. Education facilities were the most regulated place (58.3% of countries), while private areas (eg, homes, cars) were the least regulated ones (39.6%). A third of countries regulated e-cigarette use indoors. Difficulty and support in adopting the national legislation and its compliance were all at a moderate level. Countries' smoking prevalence and income levels were linked to legislation adoption. CONCLUSIONS: Although most WHO European Region countries had introduced e-cigarette use legislation at the national level, only a few of the legislation protect bystanders in indoor settings.

Electronic cigarette use among adolescents in 17 European study sites: findings from the Global Youth Tobacco Survey.

BACKGROUND: As new findings on public health implications of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use emerge, its surveillance remains of utmost importance. This study examined the latest state of e-cigarette use in youth in 17 European study sites (i.e. 16 countries and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina) using the Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS). METHODS: This was an observational study. Cross-sectional data on students aged 11-17 years from the latest available GYTS round completed in 17 study sites were used to estimate crude and adjusted prevalence of e-cigarette use by sex and pocket money. Panel GYTS data from five countries were used for the trend analyses. All analyses were weighted to account for the survey design and non-response. RESULTS: Compared to 2014, the age-adjusted prevalence of e-cigarette use more than doubled in Georgia and Italy, and nearly doubled in Latvia. Significantly more male than female students aged 11-17 years reported use of e-cigarettes, with little to no confounding by age, grade and pocket money across countries. Youth with medium or higher amount of pocket money was 20-200% more likely to use e-cigarettes than those with fewer to no pocket money in 14 study sites. DISCUSSION: As e-cigarette use is becoming widespread throughout the world, there is variation in use among and between countries. Expanded and consistent surveillance of e-cigarette use by all World Health Organization member states is essential to generate data on the extent and correlates of youth e-cigarette use for evidence-based planning and evaluation of the electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems national and global control programmes.

The role of smoking in COVID-19 progression: a comprehensive meta-analysis.

The association between current smoking and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) progression remains uncertain. We aim to provide up-to-date evidence of the role of cigarette smoking in COVID-19 hospitalisation, severity and mortality. On 23 February 2022 we conducted an umbrella review and a traditional systematic review via PubMed/Medline and Web of Science. We used random-effects meta-analyses to derive pooled odds ratios of COVID-19 outcomes for smokers in cohorts of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected individuals or COVID-19 patients. We followed the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology reporting guidelines. PROSPERO: CRD42020207003. 320 publications were included. The pooled odds ratio for current versus never or nonsmokers was 1.08 (95% CI 0.98-1.19; 37 studies) for hospitalisation, 1.34 (95% CI 1.22-1.48; 124 studies) for severity and 1.32 (95% CI 1.20-1.45; 119 studies) for mortality. Estimates for former versus never-smokers were 1.16 (95% CI 1.03-1.31; 22 studies), 1.41 (95% CI: 1.25-1.59; 44 studies) and 1.46 (95% CI 1.31-1.62; 44 studies), respectively. Estimates for ever- versus never-smokers were 1.16 (95% CI 1.05-1.27; 33 studies), 1.44 (95% CI 1.31-1.58; 110 studies) and 1.39 (95% CI 1.29-1.50; 109 studies), respectively. We found a 30-50% excess risk of COVID-19 progression for current and former smokers compared with never-smokers. Preventing serious COVID-19 outcomes, including death, seems the newest compelling argument against smoking.

Association between electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems with initiation of tobacco use in individuals aged < 20 years. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review described the association between electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems (ENDS/ENNDS) use among non-smoking children and adolescents aged <20 years with subsequent tobacco use. METHODS: We searched five electronic databases and the grey literature up to end of September 2020. Prospective longitudinal studies that described the association between ENDS/ENNDS use, and subsequent tobacco use in those aged < 20 years who were non-smokers at baseline were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Data were extracted by two reviewers and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. We generated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (ARRs) describing associations between ENDS/ENNDS and tobacco use. FINDINGS: A total of 36 publications met the eligibility criteria, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (23 in the meta-analysis) after exclusion of overlapping studies. Sixteen studies had high to moderate risk of bias. Ever users of ENDS/ENNDS had over three times the risk of ever cigarette use (ARR 3·01 (95% CI: 2·37, 3·82; p<0·001, I2: 82·3%), and current cigarette use had over two times the risk (ARR 2·56 (95% CI: 1·61, 4·07; p<0·001, I2: 77·3%) at follow up. Among current ENDS/ENNDS users, there was a significant association with ever (ARR 2·63 (95% CI: 1·94, 3·57; p<0·001, I2: 21·2%)), but not current cigarette use (ARR 1·88 (95% CI: 0·34, 10·30; p = 0·47, I2: 0%)) at follow up. For other tobacco use, ARR ranged between 1·55 (95% CI 1·07, 2·23) and 8·32 (95% CI: 1·20, 57·04) for waterpipe and pipes, respectively. Additionally, two studies examined the use of ENNDS (non-nicotine devices) and found a pooled adjusted RR of 2·56 (95% CI: 0·47, 13·94, p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for policies that regulate the availability, accessibility, and marketing of ENDS/ENNDS to children and adolescents. Governments should also consider adopting policies to prevent ENDS/ENNDS uptake and use in children and adolescents, up to and including a ban for this group.

Prevalence of electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns that the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems (ENNDS) in children and adolescents could potentially be harmful to health. Understanding the extent of use of these devices is crucial to informing public health policy. We aimed to synthesise the prevalence of ENDS or ENNDS use in children and adolescents younger than 20 years. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we undertook an electronic search in five databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and Wiley Cochrane Library) from Jan 1, 2016, to Aug 31, 2020, and a grey literature search. Included studies reported on the prevalence of ENDS or ENNDS use in nationally representative samples in populations younger than 20 years and collected data between the years 2016 and 2020. Studies were excluded if they were done in those aged 20 years or older, used data from specialist panels that did not apply appropriate weighting, or did not use methods that ensured recruitment of a nationally representative sample. We included the most recent data for each country. We combined multiple national estimates for a country if they were done in the same year. We undertook risk of bias assessment for all surveys included in the review using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist (by two reviewers in the author list). A random effects meta-analysis was used to pool overall prevalence estimates for ever, current, occasional, and daily use. This study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020199485. FINDINGS: The most recent prevalence data from 26 national surveys representing 69 countries and territories, with a median sample size of 3925 (IQR 1=2266, IQR 3=10 593) children and adolescents was included. In children and adolescents aged between 8 years and younger than 20 years, the pooled prevalence for ever (defined as any lifetime use) ENDS or ENNDS use was 17·2% (95% CI 15-20, I2=99·9%), whereas for current use (defined as use in past 30 days) the pooled prevalence estimate was 7·8% (6-9, I2=99·8%). The pooled estimate for occasional use was 0·8% (0·5-1·2, I2=99·4%) for daily use and 7·5% (6·1-9·1, I2=99·4%) for occasional use. Prevalence of ENDS or ENNDS use was highest in high-income geographical regions. In terms of study quality, all surveys scored had a low risk of bias for the sampling frame used, due to the nationally representative nature of the studies. The most poorly conducted methodological feature of the included studies was subjects and setting described in detail. Few surveys reported on the use of flavours or types of ENDS or ENNDS. INTERPRETATION: There is significant variability in the prevalence of ENDS and ENNDS use in children and adolescents globally by country income status. These findings are possibly due to differences in regulatory context, market availability, and differences in surveillance systems. FUNDING: World Health Organization and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide yield of UK cigarettes and the risk of non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Cigarette smoking is a major risk factor for bladder cancer (BC); however, the impact of cigarette content remains unclear. This study aims to investigate tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide (TNCO) yields of different filtered cigarettes in relation to BC risk. From the Bladder Cancer Prognosis Programme 575 non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) cases, 139 muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) cases and 130 BC-free controls with retrospective data on smoking behaviour and cigarette brand were identified. Independently measured TNCO yields of cigarettes sold in the UK were obtained through the UK Department of Health and merged with the Bladder Cancer Prognosis Programme dataset to estimate the daily intake of TNCO. BC risk increased by TNCO intake category for NMIBC cases (P <0.050 in all multivariate models), but only for the daily intake of tar for MIBC cases (P=0.046) in multivariate models. No difference in risk was observed between smokers of low-tar/low-nicotine and high-tar/high-nicotine cigarettes compared with never smokers, either for NMIBC (P=0.544) or MIBC (P=0.449). High daily intake of TNCO additionally increases the risk of both NMIBC and MIBC compared with low daily intake. However, as there is no difference in BC risk between low-tar/low-nicotine and high-tar/high-nicotine cigarette smokers, it remains unclear whether smoking behaviour or TNCO yield of cigarettes explains this association.