Biomarker Assessment of Nicotine Exposure Among Adolescent E-Cigarette Users: 2018-2019.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing prevalence of vaping e-cigarettes among adolescents, there remains a lack of population-level assessments regarding the objective measurement of nicotine exposure. METHODS: This study analyzed a nationally representative sample of adolescents aged 13 to 17 years from Wave 5 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study conducted between 2018 and 2019. Urinary nicotine metabolites, including cotinine and trans-3'-hydroxycotinine (3-HC), were assessed among exclusive nonnicotine e-cigarette users (n = 56), exclusive nicotine e-cigarette users (n = 200), and nonusers (n = 1059). We further examined nicotine exposure by past 30-day vaping frequency (ie, occasional [1-5 days], intermittent [6-19 days], and frequent [20+ days]) and flavor types among nicotine e-cigarette users. Multivariable linear regressions tested pairwise group effects, and biomarkers were normalized by the log transformation. RESULTS: Compared with nonusers, both nonnicotine and nicotine e-cigarette users exhibited higher levels of cotinine and 3-HC. Nicotine e-cigarette users had mean cotinine concentrations (61.3; 95% confidence interval, 23.8-158.0, ng/mg creatinine) approximately 146 times higher (P < .0001) than nonusers (0.4; 0.3-0.5), whereas nonnicotine users (4.9; 1.0-23.2) exhibited cotinine concentrations ∼12 times higher (P = .02). Among nicotine e-cigarette users, the levels of cotinine and 3-HC increased by vaping frequency, with cotinine increasing from 10.1 (2.5-40.1) among occasional users to 73.6 (31.8-170.6) among intermittent users and 949.1 (482.5-1866.9) among frequent users. Nicotine exposure was not significantly different by flavor type. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette use poses health-related risks resulting from nicotine exposure among adolescents. Comprehensive regulations of e-cigarette products and marketing, vaping prevention, cessation, and public policies are needed to prevent youth from developing nicotine addiction.

Trends in Urinary Biomarkers of Exposure to Nicotine and Carcinogens Among Adult e-Cigarette Vapers vs Cigarette Smokers in the US, 2013-2019.

This study assesses temporal trends of biomarkers among adult nicotine and nonnicotine e-cigarette users and cigarette smokers.

Urinary volatomic profile of traditional tobacco smokers and electronic cigarettes users as a strategy to unveil potential health issues.

Many harmful and potentially harmful constituents are present in tobacco products. Cigarette smoke is known to cause different forms of cancer and trigger the development of chronic diseases. In the last decade, electronic cigarettes have emerged as a healthier alternative associated to less harmful effects in comparison to traditional tobacco. However, the lack of standardization of electronic cigarettes products makes it difficult to establish and compare the real effects on health of products from different manufacturers. To better understand the impact of smoking and vaping, the volatomic composition of urine samples from traditional tobacco smokers and electronic cigarette users was established and compared with nonsmokers (control group), using headspace solid-phase microextraction combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. A total of 45 urinary volatile organic metabolites belonging to different chemical families were identified in the urine of the studied groups. Benzene derivatives, terpenes, and aromatics were the chemical families that contributed the most to the urinary profile of smokers. The vapers urinary volatomic pattern was also dominated by terpenes and aromatics, in addition to alcohols. The orthogonal partial least squares-discriminant analysis of the data obtained indicated that the urinary profile of vapers is more closely related to the control group, reinforcing the hypothesis of the lowest harmfulness of electronic cigarettes. Further studies recruiting a higher number of subjects are therefore necessary to consolidate the data obtained.

Exposure to Nicotine and Toxicants Among Dual Users of Tobacco Cigarettes and E-Cigarettes: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, 2013-2014.

INTRODUCTION: Concurrent use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes ("dual use") is common among tobacco users. Little is known about differences in demographics and toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users. AIMS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from adult dual users (current every/some day users of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes, n = 792) included in the PATH Study Wave 1 (2013-2014) and provided urine samples. Samples were analyzed for biomarkers of exposure to nicotine and selected toxicants (tobacco-specific nitrosamine NNK [NNAL], lead, cadmium, naphthalene [2-naphthol], pyrene [1-hydroxypyrene], acrylonitrile [CYMA], acrolein [CEMA], and acrylamide [AAMA]). Subsets of dual users were compared on demographic, behavioral, and biomarker measures to exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 2411) and exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 247). RESULTS: Most dual users were predominant cigarette smokers (70%), followed by daily dual users (13%), non-daily concurrent dual users (10%), and predominant vapers (7%). Dual users who smoked daily showed significantly higher biomarker concentrations compared with those who did not smoke daily. Patterns of e-cigarette use had little effect on toxicant exposure. Dual users with high toxicant exposure were generally older, female, and smoked more cigarettes per day. Dual users who had low levels of biomarkers of exposure were generally younger, male, and smoked non-daily. CONCLUSIONS: In 2013-2014, most dual users smoked cigarettes daily and used e-cigarettes occasionally. Cigarette smoking appears to be the primary driver of toxicant exposure among dual users, with little-to-no effect of e-cigarette use on biomarker levels. Results reinforce the need for dual users to stop smoking tobacco cigarettes to reduce toxicant exposure. IMPLICATIONS: With considerable dual use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes in the United States, it is important to understand differences in toxicant exposure among subsets of dual users, and how these differences align with user demographics. Findings suggest most dual users smoke daily and use e-cigarettes intermittently. Low exposure to toxicants was most common among younger users, males, and intermittent smokers; high exposure to toxicants was most common among older users, females, and heavier cigarette smokers. Results underscore the heterogeneity occurring within dual users, and the need to quit smoking cigarettes completely in order to reduce toxicant exposure.

Effect of Pod e-Cigarettes vs Cigarettes on Carcinogen Exposure Among African American and Latinx Smokers: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fourth-generation nicotine salt pod system (NSPS) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are the leading class of e-cigarettes. They contain high nicotine concentrations, which may facilitate switching among smokers, but could also lead to increased exposure to nicotine and biomarkers of potential harm. African American and Latinx smokers experience significant tobacco-related health disparities. The potential of NSPS e-cigarettes to reduce smoking-related harm among these groups is unknown. Objective: To compare the harm reduction potential of NSPS e-cigarette vs combustible cigarettes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This unblinded randomized clinical trial compared 6 weeks of e-cigarette use vs cigarettes as usual from to 2018 to 2019 among smokers in the San Diego, California, and Kansas City, Missouri, areas. Participants included African American and Latinx adult combustible cigarette smokers who smoked at least 5 cigarettes/d on at least 25 of the past 30 days for at least 6 months and were interested in switching to e-cigarettes. Data were analyzed from September 18, 2019, to September 4, 2020. Interventions: 6 weeks of e-cigarette use in a choice of pod flavors (5% nicotine) along with brief education, training, and action planning to completely switch to e-cigarettes from combustible cigarettes. The control group smoked combustible cigarettes as usual. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reduction in urinary 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) concentration at week 6. Secondary outcomes were change in urinary cotinine, expired carbon monoxide (CO), respiratory symptoms, lung function, blood pressure, past 7-day consumption of combustible cigarettes, and switching rates (e-cigarette group only) at weeks 2 and 6. Results: This study included 186 participants, including 92 African American participants and 94 Latinx participants. The mean (SD) age was 43.3 (12.5) years, and 75 (40.3%) were women. Participants smoked a mean (SD) of 12.1 (7.2) cigarettes/d on 6.8 (0.6) d/wk at baseline. A total of 125 participants were randomized to the e-cigarette group and 61 were randomized to the control group. At baseline, median (interquartile range) NNAL was 124 (45-197) pg/mL in the e-cigarette group and 88 (58-197) pg/mL in the control group. At week 6, the e-cigarette group had significantly greater reductions in NNAL (relative risk [RR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.23-0.54]; P < .001), CO (RR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.42-0.68]; P < .001), respiratory symptoms (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.47-0.85]; P = .002), and number of cigarettes smoked in the past 7 days among those still smoking (RR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.20-0.43]; P < .001) than the control group and maintained their cotinine levels (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.58-1.10]; P = .17). Lung function and diastolic and systolic blood pressure remained unchanged and did not differ between groups. For participants randomized to receive e-cigarettes, 32 participants (28.1%) were exclusively using e-cigarettes at week 6, while 66 participants (57.9%) were dual using and 16 participants (14%) resumed exclusively using cigarettes. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that e-cigarettes may be an inclusive harm reduction strategy for African American and Latinx smokers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03511001.

Urinary biomonitoring of subjects with different smoking habits. Part I: Profiling mercapturic acids.

BACKGROUND: While tobacco smoke contains thousands of chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic to humans, the content of electronic cigarette smoke is less known. This work aimed to assess and compare the exposure associated with different smoking habits by profiling urinary mercapturic acids as biomarkers of toxic compounds. METHODS: In this pilot study, sixty-seven healthy adults with different smoking habits were investigated: 38 non-smokers (NS), 7 electronic cigarette users (ECU), and 22 traditional tobacco smokers (TTS). Seventeen urinary mercapturic acids, metabolites of 1,3-butadiene (DHBMA, MHBMA), 4-chloronitrobenze (NANPC), acrolein (3-HPMA), acrylamide (AAMA, GAMA), acrylonitrile (CEMA), benzene (SPMA), crotonaldehyde (CMEMA, HMPMA), ethylating agents (EMA), methylating agents (MMA), ethylene oxide (HEMA), N,N-dimethylformamide (AMCC), propylene oxide (2-HPMA), styrene (PHEMA), and toluene (SBMA), were quantified, along with urinary nicotine and cotinine. RESULTS: Median urinary cotinine was 0.4, 1530 and 1772 µg/L in NS, ECU and TTS, respectively. Most mercapturic acids were 2-165 fold-higher in TTS compared to NS, with CEMA, MHBMA, 3-HPMA and SPMA showing the most relevant increases. Furthermore, some mercapturic acids were higher in ECU than NS; CEMA and 3-HPMA, in particular, showed significant increases and were 1.8 and 4.9 fold-higher, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that tobacco smoking is a major source of carcinogenic chemicals such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene; electronic cigarette use is a minor source, mostly associated with exposure to chemicals with less carcinogenic potential such as acrylonitrile and acrolein.

Correlation between biomarkers of exposure, effect and potential harm in the urine of electronic cigarette users.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if urinary biomarkers of effect and potential harm are elevated in electronic cigarette users compared with non-smokers and if elevation correlates with increased concentrations of metals in urine. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a cross-sectional study of biomarkers of exposure, effect and potential harm in urine from non-smokers (n=20), electronic cigarette users (n=20) and cigarette smokers (n=13). Participant's screening and urine collection were performed at the Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, and biomarker analysis and metal analysis were performed at the University of California, Riverside. RESULTS: Metallothionein was significantly elevated in the electronic cigarette group (3761±3932 pg/mg) compared with the non-smokers (1129±1294 pg/mg, p=0.05). 8-OHdG (8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine) was significantly elevated in electronic cigarette users (442.8±300.7 ng/mg) versus non-smokers (221.6±157.8 ng/mg, p=0.01). 8-Isoprostane showed a significant increase in electronic cigarette users (750.8±433 pg/mg) versus non-smokers (411.2±287.4 pg/mg, p=0.03). Linear regression analysis in the electronic cigarette group showed a significant correlation between cotinine and total metal concentration; total metal concentration and metallothionein; cotinine and oxidative DNA damage; and total metal concentration and oxidative DNA damage. Zinc was significantly elevated in the electronic cigarette users (584.5±826.6 µg/g) compared with non-smokers (413.6±233.7 µg/g, p=0.03). Linear regression analysis showed a significant correlation between urinary zinc concentration and 8-OHdG in the electronic cigarette users. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to investigate biomarkers of potential harm and effect in electronic cigarette users and to show a linkage to metal exposure. The biomarker levels in electronic cigarette users were similar to (and not lower than) cigarette smokers. In electronic cigarette users, there was a link to elevated total metal exposure and oxidative DNA damage. Specifically, our results demonstrate that zinc concentration was correlated to oxidative DNA damage.

Characterization of Volatile Organic Compound Metabolites in Cigarette Smokers, Electronic Nicotine Device Users, Dual Users, and Nonusers of Tobacco.

INTRODUCTION: Limited research exists about the possible cardiovascular effects of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). We therefore sought to compare exposure to known or potentially cardiotoxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in ENDS users, smokers, and dual users. METHODS: A total of 371 individuals from the Cardiovascular Injury due to Tobacco Use study, a cross-sectional study of healthy participants aged 21-45 years, were categorized as nonusers of tobacco (n = 87), sole ENDS users (n = 17), cigarette smokers (n = 237), and dual users (n = 30) based on 30-day self-reported tobacco product use patterns. Participants provided urine samples for VOC and nicotine metabolite measurement. We assessed associations between tobacco product use and VOC metabolite measures using multivariable-adjusted linear regression models. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age of the population was 32 (±6.8) years, 55% men. Mean urinary cotinine level in nonusers of tobacco was 2.6 ng/mg creatinine, whereas cotinine levels were similar across all tobacco product use categories (851.6-910.9 ng/mg creatinine). In multivariable-adjusted models, sole ENDS users had higher levels of metabolites of acrolein, acrylamide, acrylonitrile, and xylene compared with nonusers of tobacco, but lower levels of most VOC metabolites compared with cigarette smokers or dual users. In direct comparison of cigarettes smokers and dual users, we found lower levels of metabolites of styrene and xylene in dual users. CONCLUSION: Although sole ENDS use may be associated with lower VOC exposure compared to cigarette smoking, further study is required to determine the potential health effects of the higher levels of certain reactive aldehydes, including acrolein, in ENDS users compared with nonusers of tobacco. IMPLICATIONS: ENDS use in conjunction with other tobacco products may not significantly reduce exposure to VOC, but sole use does generally reduce some VOC exposure and warrants more in-depth studies.

Short halt in vaping modifies cardiorespiratory parameters and urine metabolome: a randomized trial.

Propylene glycol and glycerol are e-cigarette constituents that facilitate liquid vaporization and nicotine transport. As these small hydrophilic molecules quickly cross the lung epithelium, we hypothesized that short-term cessation of vaping in regular users would completely clear aerosol deposit from the lungs and reverse vaping-induced cardiorespiratory toxicity. We aimed to assess the acute effects of vaping and their reversibility on biological/clinical cardiorespiratory parameters [serum/urine pneumoproteins, hemodynamic parameters, lung-function test and diffusing capacities, transcutaneous gas tensions (primary outcome), and skin microcirculatory blood flow]. Regular e-cigarette users were enrolled in this randomized, investigator-blinded, three-period crossover study. The periods consisted of nicotine-vaping (nicotine-session), nicotine-free vaping (nicotine-free-session), and complete cessation of vaping (stop-session), all maintained for 5 days before the session began. Multiparametric metabolomic analyses were used to verify subjects' protocol compliance. Biological/clinical cardiorespiratory parameters were assessed at the beginning of each session (baseline) and after acute vaping exposure. Compared with the nicotine- and nicotine-free-sessions, a specific metabolomic signature characterized the stop-session. Baseline serum club cell protein-16 was higher during the stop-session than the other sessions (P < 0.01), and heart rate was higher in the nicotine-session (P < 0.001). Compared with acute sham-vaping in the stop-session, acute nicotine-vaping (nicotine-session) and acute nicotine-free vaping (nicotine-free-session) slightly decreased skin oxygen tension (P < 0.05). In regular e-cigarette-users, short-term vaping cessation seemed to shift baseline urine metabolome and increased serum club cell protein-16 concentration, suggesting a decrease in lung inflammation. Additionally, acute vaping with and without nicotine decreased slightly transcutaneous oxygen tension, likely as a result of lung gas exchanges disturbances.

Comparison of Systemic Exposure to Toxic and/or Carcinogenic Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) during Vaping, Smoking, and Abstention.

Comparisons of systemic exposure to toxicants during monitored cigarette smoking, electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use, and abstention are needed to enhance our understanding of the risks of e-cigarette use (vaping). In a cross-over study, we measured 10 mercapturic acid metabolites of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in 24-hour urine samples collected from 36 dual users (8 women) of e-cigarettes and cigarettes during 2 days of ad libitum vaping or cigarette-only use, and 2 days of enforced abstention. Concentrations of VOC metabolites were higher during smoking compared with vaping, except for the methylating agents' metabolite. The fold-difference in concentrations when smoking relative to vaping ranged from 1.31 (1.06-1.61; geometric mean, 95% confidence interval; 1,3-butadiene) to 7.09 (5.88-8.54; acrylonitrile). Metabolites of acrylamide [fold difference of 1.21 (1.03-1.43)] and benzene [1.46 (1.13-1.90)] were higher during vaping compared with abstention. The 1,3-butadiene and propylene oxide metabolites were higher in variable-power tank users compared with users of cig-a-likes. E-cigarettes expose users to lower levels of toxic VOCs compared with cigarette smoking, supporting their harm reduction potential among smokers. However, some e-cigarettes expose users to VOCs such as acrylamide, benzene, and propylene oxide, and may pose health risks to nonsmoking users. The results of our study will inform regulators in assessing e-cigarettes with respect to the balance between its potential harm reduction for adult smokers and risk to nonsmoking users.

Self-Reported Use of Tobacco, E-cigarettes, and Marijuana Versus Urinary Biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Surveys have been instrumental in describing adolescent use of tobacco, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), and marijuana. However, objective biomarker data are lacking. We compared adolescent self-reported use to urinary biomarkers. METHODS: From April 2017 to April 2018, adolescents 12 to 21 years old completed an anonymous questionnaire regarding tobacco, e-cigarette, and marijuana use and provided a urine sample. Urine was analyzed for biomarkers cotinine, total 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol, and tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA). RESULTS: Of 517 participants, 2.9% reported using tobacco, 14.3% e-cigarettes, and 11.4% marijuana in the past week. Only 2% reporting no smoking had total 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol levels above cutoff (14.5 pg/mL); 2% of non-e-cigarette users had cotinine above cutoff (10 ng/mL); 2% of those denying marijuana use had THCA above cutoff (10 ng/mL). Daily e-cigarette users showed significantly higher median cotinine than nondaily users (315.4 [interquartile range (IQR) 1375.9] vs 1.69 ng/mL [IQR 28.2]; P < .003). Overall, 40% who reported using nicotine-free products had cotinine >10 ng/mL. Pod users' median cotinine was significantly higher than in nonpod users (259.03 [IQR 1267.69] vs 1.61 ng/mL [IQR 16.3]; P < .003). Median THCA among daily marijuana users was higher than in nondaily users (560.1 [IQR 1248.3] vs 7.2 ng/mL [IQR 254.9]; P = .04). Sixty-one percent of those with cotinine >10 ng/mL vs 39% of those with cotinine<10 ng/mL had THCA >10 ng/mL (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents' self-report correlated with measured urinary biomarkers, but subjects were unaware of their nicotine exposure. More frequent e-cigarette and pod use correlated with elevated biomarkers. Co-use of tobacco, e-cigarettes, and marijuana was corroborated by higher THCA in those with higher cotinine.

Biomarkers of Tobacco Exposure Decrease After Smokers Switch to an E-Cigarette or Nicotine Gum.

INTRODUCTION: The aerosol composition of electronic cigarettes (ECs) suggests that exposure to toxicants during use is greatly reduced compared to exposure from combustible cigarettes (CCs). METHODS: This randomized, parallel-group, clinical study enrolled smokers to switch to Vuse Solo (VS) Digital Vapor Cigarettes (Original or Menthol) or Nicorette 4 mg nicotine gum (NG) in a controlled setting. Subjects who smoked CCs ad libitum for 2 days during a baseline period were then randomized to ad libitum use of either VS or NG for 5 days. Biomarkers of 23 toxicants were measured in 24-hour urine samples and blood collected at baseline and following product switch. RESULTS: A total of 153 subjects completed the study. Total nicotine equivalents decreased in all groups, but higher levels were observed in the VS groups compared to the NG groups, with decreases of 38% and 60%-67%, respectively. All other biomarkers were significantly decreased in subjects switched to VS, and the magnitude of biomarker decreases was similar to subjects switched to NG. Decreases ranged from 30% to greater than 85% for constituents such as benzene and acrylonitrile. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that exposure to toxicants when using VS is significantly reduced compared to CC smoking, and these reductions are similar to those observed with use of NG. Although statistically significantly decreased, nicotine exposure is maintained closer to CC smoking with VS use compared to NG use. This research suggests that use of VS exposes consumers to fewer and lower levels of smoke toxicants than CCs while still providing nicotine to the consumer. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first study to report changes in nicotine delivery and biomarkers of tobacco exposure following a short-term product switch from CCs to either an EC or NG in a controlled environment. The study shows that nicotine exposure decreased in both groups but was maintained closer to CC smoking with the EC groups. Biomarkers of tobacco combustion decreased to similar levels in both EC and gum groups.

Comparison of Urinary Biomarkers of Exposure in Humans Using Electronic Cigarettes, Combustible Cigarettes, and Smokeless Tobacco.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking is associated with an increase in cardiovascular disease risk, attributable in part to reactive volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). However, little is known about the extent of VOC exposure due to the use of other tobacco products. METHODS: We recruited 48 healthy, tobacco users in four groups: cigarette, smokeless tobacco, occasional users of first generation e-cigarette and e-cigarette menthol and 12 healthy nontobacco users. After abstaining for 48 h, tobacco users used an assigned product. Urine was collected at baseline followed by five collections over a 3-h period to measure urinary metabolites of VOCs, nicotine, and tobacco alkaloids. RESULTS: Urinary levels of nicotine were ≃2-fold lower in occasional e-cigarette and smokeless tobacco users than in the cigarette smokers; cotinine and 3-hydroxycotinine levels were similar in all groups. Compared with nontobacco users, e-cigarette users had higher levels of urinary metabolites of xylene, cyanide, styrene, ethylbenzene, and benzene at baseline and elevated urinary levels of metabolites of xylene, N,N-dimethylformamide, and acrylonitrile after e-cigarette use. Metabolites of acrolein, crotonaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene were significantly higher in smokers than in users of other products or nontobacco users. VOC metabolite levels in smokeless tobacco group were comparable to those found in nonusers with the exception of xylene metabolite-2-methylhippuric acid (2MHA), which was almost three fold higher than in nontobacco users. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking results in exposure to a range of VOCs at concentrations higher than those observed with other products, and first generation e-cigarette use is associated with elevated levels of N,N-dimethylformamide and xylene metabolites. IMPLICATIONS: This study shows that occasional users of first generation e-cigarettes have lower levels of nicotine exposure than the users of combustible cigarettes. Compared with combustible cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and smokeless tobacco products deliver lower levels of most VOCs, with the exception of xylene, N,N-dimethylformamide, and acrylonitrile, whose metabolite levels were higher in the urine of e-cigarette users than nontobacco users. Absence of anatabine in the urine of e-cigarette users suggests that measuring urinary levels of this alkaloid may be useful in distinguishing between users of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes. However, these results have to be validated in a larger cohortcomprised of users of e-cigarettes of multiple brands.

Biomarkers of Exposure Among "Dual Users" of Tobacco Cigarettes and Electronic Cigarettes in Canada.

INTRODUCTION: "Dual use" refers to the concurrent use of tobacco cigarettes (smoking) and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes; vaping). Although dual use is common among e-cigarette users, there is little evidence regarding biomarkers of exposure among dual users and how these change under different conditions of product use. METHODS: A nonblinded within-subjects crossover experiment was conducted with adult daily dual users (n = 48) in Ontario, Canada. Participants completed three consecutive 7-day periods in which the use of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes was experimentally manipulated, resulting in four study conditions: Dual use, Tobacco cigarette use, E-cigarette use, and No product use. Repeated measures models were used to examine changes in product use and biomarkers of exposure. RESULTS: Compared to dual use, cotinine remained stable when participants exclusively smoked (p = .524), but significantly decreased when they exclusively vaped (p = .027), despite significant increases in e-cigarette consumption (p = .001). Levels of biomarkers of exposure to toxicants, including carbon monoxide (CO), 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HOP), and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), were significantly lower when participants exclusively vaped than when they engaged in dual use (CO = -41%, p < .001; 1-HOP = -31%, p = .025; NNAL = -30%, p = .017). Similar findings were observed among participants abstaining from both products as compared to dual use (CO: -26%, p < .001; 1-HOP = -14% [ns]; NNAL = -35%, p = .016). In contrast, levels of biomarkers of exposure increased when participants exclusively smoked as compared to dual use (CO = +21%, p = .029; 1-HOP = +23%, p = .048; NNAL = +8% [ns]). CONCLUSIONS: Although dual use may reduce exposure to tobacco smoke constituents to some extent, abstaining from smoking is the most effective way to reduce such exposure. IMPLICATIONS: Public health authorities should clearly communicate the relative risk of e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes to the general public, focusing on two salient points: (1) e-cigarettes are not harmless, but they are less harmful than tobacco cigarettes; and (2) using e-cigarettes while smoking may not necessarily reduce health risks; therefore, consumers should stop smoking completely to maximize potential health benefits.

The relationship between nicotine metabolism and nicotine and carcinogen exposure among American Indian commercial cigarette smokers and electronic nicotine delivery system users.

BACKGROUND: In American Indian (AI) tobacco users from the southern plains region of the US, we examined the relationship between nicotine and carcinogen exposure and nicotine metabolism. METHODS: Smokers (n = 27), electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) users (n = 21), and dual users (n = 25) of AI descent were recruited from a southern plains state. Urinary biomarkers of nicotine metabolism (nicotine metabolite ratio [NMR]), nicotine dose (total nicotine equivalents [TNE]), and a tobacco-specific lung carcinogen (4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronides [total NNAL] were measured. RESULTS: The geometric mean of NMR was 3.35 (95% Confidence Interval(CI): 2.42, 4.65), 4.67 (95% CI: 3.39, 6.43), and 3.26 (95% CI: 2.44, 4.37) among smokers, ENDS users, and dual users. Each of the three user groups had relatively low levels of TNE, indicative of light tobacco use. Among smokers, there were inverse relationships between NMR and TNE (r = -0.45) and between NMR and NNAL (r = -0.50). Among dual users, NMR and TNE, and NMR and NNAL were not associated. Among ENDS users, NMR and TNE were not associated. CONCLUSIONS: AI tobacco users with higher NMR did not have higher TNE or NNAL exposure than those with lower NMR. This supports prior work among light tobacco users who do not alter their tobacco consumption to account for nicotine metabolism. IMPACT: The high prevalences of smoking and ENDS among AI in the southern plains may not be related to nicotine metabolism. Environmental and social cues may play a more important role in light tobacco users and this may be particularly true among AI light tobacco users who have strong cultural ties.

Adolescent Exposure to Toxic Volatile Organic Chemicals From E-Cigarettes.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to understand the safety of e-cigarettes with adolescents. We sought to identify the presence of chemical toxicants associated with e-cigarette use among adolescents. METHODS: Adolescent e-cigarette users (≥1 use within the past 30 days, ≥10 lifetime e-cigarette use episodes) were divided into e-cigarette-only users (no cigarettes in the past 30 days, urine 4-[methylnitrosamino]-1-[3-pyridyl]-1-butanol [NNAL] level <1 pg/mL of creatinine; n = 67), dual users (use of cigarettes in the past 30 days in addition to e-cigarettes, NNAL level >30 pg/mL; n = 16), and never-using controls (N = 20). Saliva was collected within 24 hours of the last e-cigarette use for analysis of cotinine and urine for analysis of NNAL and levels of 8 volatile organic chemical compounds. Bivariate analyses compared e-cigarette-only users with dual users, and regression analyses compared e-cigarette-only users with dual users and controls on levels of toxicants. RESULTS: The participants were 16.4 years old on average. Urine excretion of metabolites of benzene, ethylene oxide, acrylonitrile, acrolein, and acrylamide was significantly higher in dual users versus e-cigarette-only users (all P < .05). Excretion of metabolites of acrylonitrile, acrolein, propylene oxide, acrylamide, and crotonaldehyde were significantly higher in e-cigarette-only users compared with controls (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Although e-cigarette vapor may be less hazardous than tobacco smoke, our findings can be used to challenge the idea that e-cigarette vapor is safe, because many of the volatile organic compounds we identified are carcinogenic. Messaging to teenagers should include warnings about the potential risk from toxic exposure to carcinogenic compounds generated by these products.

Comparison of Nicotine and Toxicant Exposure in Users of Electronic Cigarettes and Combustible Cigarettes.

Importance: Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasing. Measures of exposure to known tobacco-related toxicants among e-cigarette users will inform potential health risks to individual product users. Objectives: To estimate concentrations of tobacco-related toxicants among e-cigarette users and compare these biomarker concentrations with those observed in combustible cigarette users, dual users, and never tobacco users. Design, Setting, and Participants: A population-based, longitudinal cohort study was conducted in the United States in 2013-2014. Cross-sectional analysis was performed between November 4, 2016, and October 5, 2017, of biomarkers of exposure to tobacco-related toxicants collected by the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Participants included adults who provided a urine sample and data on tobacco use (N = 5105). Exposures: The primary exposure was tobacco use, including current exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 247), current exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 2411), and users of both products (dual users) (n = 792) compared with never tobacco users (n = 1655). Main Outcomes and Measures: Geometric mean concentrations of 50 individual biomarkers from 5 major classes of tobacco product constituents were measured: nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Results: Of the 5105 participants, most were aged 35 to 54 years (weighted percentage, 38%; 95% CI, 35%-40%), women (60%; 95% CI, 59%-62%), and non-Hispanic white (61%; 95% CI, 58%-64%). Compared with exclusive e-cigarette users, never users had 19% to 81% significantly lower concentrations of biomarkers of exposure to nicotine, TSNAs, some metals (eg, cadmium and lead), and some VOCs (including acrylonitrile). Exclusive e-cigarette users showed 10% to 98% significantly lower concentrations of biomarkers of exposure, including TSNAs, PAHs, most VOCs, and nicotine, compared with exclusive cigarette smokers; concentrations were comparable for metals and 3 VOCs. Exclusive cigarette users showed 10% to 36% lower concentrations of several biomarkers than dual users. Frequency of cigarette use among dual users was positively correlated with nicotine and toxicant exposure. Conclusions and Relevance: Exclusive use of e-cigarettes appears to result in measurable exposure to known tobacco-related toxicants, generally at lower levels than cigarette smoking. Toxicant exposure is greatest among dual users, and frequency of combustible cigarette use is positively correlated with tobacco toxicant concentration. These findings provide evidence that using combusted tobacco cigarettes alone or in combination with e-cigarettes is associated with higher concentrations of potentially harmful tobacco constituents in comparison with using e-cigarettes alone.