Cigarette smoking and cognitive task performance: Experimental effects of very-low nicotine-content cigarettes.

Reductions in the nicotine content of cigarettes decrease smoking rate and dependence severity, but effects on cognition are less well established. The potential impacts of very-low nicotine-content (VLNC) cigarettes on cognitive task performance must be evaluated, especially in vulnerable populations. The aim of the present study is to experimentally examine the effects of VLNC cigarettes on cognitive performance. Adults who smoked daily (n = 775) from three vulnerable populations (socioeconomically disadvantaged reproductive-age women, individuals with opioid use disorder, affective disorders) were examined. Participants were randomly assigned to normal nicotine content (NNC; 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) or VLNC (2.4 mg/g or 0.4 mg/g) cigarettes for 12 weeks. Response inhibition (stop-signal task), working memory (n-back task; n of 2-n of 0), and cognitive interference (nicotine Stroop task) were assessed at baseline, 2, 6, and 12 weeks. Results were analyzed using mixed-model repeated-measures analyses of variance. Extended exposure to VLNC cigarettes produced no significant changes in any measure of cognitive performance compared to NNC cigarettes. Over weeks, response times on the n-back task decreased across doses. No significant effects were observed on the stop-signal or nicotine Stroop tasks. All three vulnerable populations performed comparably on all three cognitive tasks. Extended exposure to VLNC cigarettes produced no impairments in cognitive performance on any of the assessed tasks compared to NNC cigarettes. These findings are consistent with the larger literature detailing other consequences following exposure to VLNC cigarettes and are encouraging for the adoption of a nicotine-reduction policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Examining the predictive utility of behavioral economic demand indices and subjective effects on the actualized reinforcing value of menthol cigarettes and potential alternatives.

INTRODUCTION: Considering recent and proposed bans on menthol cigarettes, methods are needed to understand the substitutability of potential menthol cigarette alternatives (MCAs) for menthol cigarettes. This study examined the prospective relationship between behavioral economic demand indices and subjective effects of usual brand menthol cigarettes (UBMC) and preferred MCAs with subsequent performance on a laboratory-based concurrent-choice task comparing UBMC and MCAs. METHODS: Eighty participants who typically smoked menthol cigarettes completed this clinical lab study. After sampling each product, participants completed the cigarette purchase task (CPT) and modified cigarette evaluation questionnaire (mCEQ). Following one-week of substituting their preferred MCA for their UBMC, participants completed a 90-min concurrent-choice self-administration task comparing their UBMC and preferred MCA. Linear regression models explored associations between CPT demand indices and mCEQ subjective effects in the lab with subsequent response effort for UBMCs on the concurrent-choice task. RESULTS: Three demand indices for UBMC were positively associated with UBMC response effort: Essential Value (EV; p=.02), Omax (p=.02), and breakpoint (p=.04). Four CPT demand indices for the preferred MCA significantly corresponded with UBMC response effort: EV (p=.03), Pmax (p=.04), Omax (p=.03), and breakpoint (p=.03). Subjective effects captured by the mCEQ were not associated with response effort. CONCLUSIONS: Demand indices reflecting Persistence (i.e., sensitivity to escalating price) predicted effort to obtain UBMC puffs on the concurrent-choice task. Among this sample, the CPT captured information on the relative reinforcing value (i.e., addiction potential) of combustible tobacco products similar to the longer self-administration task. IMPLICATIONS: In an ever-changing product market, assessing the reinforcing efficacy of menthol cigarettes and putative substitutes quickly and with validity is an important methodological tool for understanding abuse liability. Results suggest that behavioral economic demand indices of cigarette purchase task efficiently capture information on the relative reinforcing value of usual brand menthol cigarettes and plausible alternative tobacco products, similar to a 90-min in-laboratory self-administration task.

Examining Demand and Substitutability of Usual Brand Little Cigars/Cigarillos and Cigarettes in Young Adults Who Dual Use.

INTRODUCTION: Cigarette and little cigar/cigarillo (LCC) dual use is popular among young people and poses a substantial health risk. What remains unclear is the abuse liability of LCCs vs. cigarettes, LCCs' substitutability for cigarettes, and the influence of flavors on the abuse liability and substitutability of LCCs. METHODS: Sixty-five young adults (18-34 years) who dual use completed hypothetical purchase tasks to measure consumption of usual brand cigarettes and LCCs in 24h at increasing prices (demand), and LCC consumption at increasing cigarette prices (substitution). Three demand indices were calculated from raw data: breakpoint (price after which consumption reaches 0), Omax (maximum daily expenditure), and Pmax (price at maximum expenditure). Two indices were estimated using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling: intensity (consumption when free), and price-sensitivity (rate of decline in consumption as price increases). Substitution, and associations of flavored use with demand and substitution, were estimated using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Results indicated similar abuse liability for LCCs and cigarettes. Intensity was greater for cigarettes, but price-sensitivity was similar. Flavored LCC use was associated with lower price-sensitivity and greater intensity than unflavored. LCCs were significant substitutes for cigarettes, but the effect was small. Flavored use was not associated with substitution. CONCLUSIONS: Among young adults who dual use, LCCs and cigarettes had similar abuse liability, and those who used flavored had higher demand for their LCCs. A flavored cigar ban, as well as targeted prevention and cessation services for those who smoke flavored LCCs, may be important for reducing dual use in young adults. IMPLICATIONS: Cigarette and little cigar/cigarillo (LCC) dual use remains high among young adults. Using hypothetical purchase tasks with young adults who dual use, LCCs had abuse liability similar to cigarettes, but were only modest substitutes for cigarettes. Participants who used flavored LCCs reported greater abuse liability than those who used unflavored, but not greater substitution for cigarettes. Prevention and cessation services are needed to target LCCs in young people, particularly those smoking flavored products. A flavored cigar ban may help to reduce their demand.

Changes in weight among individuals with psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage assigned to smoke very low nicotine content cigarettes.

Nicotine abstinence leads to weight gain, which could be an unintended consequence of a nicotine reduction policy. This secondary analysis used weekly assessments of weight and ratings of "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" collected in three 12-week, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of cigarettes differing in nicotine dose (15.8, 2.4, or 0.4 mg/g) among individuals with affective disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD), and socioeconomically disadvantaged women. Linear mixed models tested differences by dose and time. Analyses first collapsed across populations and then separated out individuals with OUD because biomarkers suggested they used substantially more noncombusted nicotine. Across populations, weight increased significantly over time, averaging 1.03 kg (p < .001), but did not vary by dose nor was there any interaction of dose/time. "Increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly as a function of dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.95 and 1.73, respectively, p = .01), but not by time nor any interaction. In the combined group of individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women, weight and "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly by dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.43 vs. 0.73 kg, p = .003 and 2.00 vs. 1.76, p = .02, respectively). Among individuals with OUD, there were no significant effects of any kind on either outcome. Individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women gained weight and reported more subjective appetite/weight gain when given 0.4, but not 2.4 mg/g cigarettes, despite comparable decreases in nicotine exposure. However, neither change was clinically significant, suggesting minimal short-term adverse consequences of a nicotine reduction policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Substitutability of menthol cigarette alternatives: a clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the substitutability of plausible combustible menthol cigarette alternatives (MCAs) for usual brand menthol cigarettes (UBMCs) in adults who smoke menthol cigarettes. METHODS: Following three in-lab sampling sessions, 80 adults aged 21-50 who smoke menthol cigarettes chose their preferred MCA: (1) a menthol roll-your-own cigarette (mRYO), (2) a menthol filtered little cigar (mFLC) or (3) a non-menthol cigarette (NMC). Participants were instructed to completely substitute their preferred MCA for their UBMC for 1 week and complete daily diaries documenting adherence and subjective effects. At the final lab visit, participants completed concurrent choice and cross-price elasticity tasks with their substitute product and UBMC as the comparator. RESULTS: Most (65%) participants chose mRYO as their preferred product, followed by NMC and mFLC. Adherence to MCA was high for all products across the week (range: 63%-88%). Positive subjective effects for mRYO decreased over time but remained numerically higher than the other MCA products; craving reduction also decreased for NMC across phases. In the progressive ratio task, participants chose their UBMC in 61.7% of choices; this did not differ by preferred MCA, although the median breakpoint was highest for mRYO and similar for mFLC and NMC. Cross-price elasticity comparing UBMC and the preferred product indicated high substitutability of each MCA at phase 3 (I values -0.70 to -0.82). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: mRYOs were the most preferred MCA among the study products, but all MCAs were acceptable substitutes for UBMC using behavioural and economic measures in a short-term trial period.Trial registration number NCT04844762.

Acute effects of exercise among individuals with schizophrenia who smoke cigarettes.

People with schizophrenia (SCZ) have a shorter life expectancy than those without psychiatric conditions. Of note, people with SCZ have high rates of cigarette smoking, physical inactivity, and obesity. These factors all coalesce to contribute to compromised health in this population, with smoking as a primary contributor. Therefore, it is paramount to develop effective smoking cessation strategies for this population. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether walking at a brisk pace, relative to engaging in passive activity, would reduce acute cigarette craving, nicotine withdrawal, and negative affect (NA) among people with SCZ who smoke cigarettes. Using a within-subjects design, twenty participants completed four laboratory sessions with condition sequence counterbalanced: 1) exposure to smoking cues + treadmill walking, 2) exposure to neutral cues + treadmill walking, 3) exposure to smoking cues + passive/sedentary activity, 4) exposure to neutral cues + passive/sedentary activity. Relative to sedentary activity, walking resulted in greater decreases in nicotine withdrawal but did not significantly affect craving or NA. These results did not vary as a function of cue type. These findings suggest that walking may be a helpful strategy to reduce acute nicotine withdrawal symptoms among people with SCZ. However, it should be used in conjunction with other strategies for smoking cessation.

Reactions to using other nicotine and tobacco products instead of menthol cigarettes: A qualitative study of people who smoke menthol cigarettes in the United States.

The US Food and Drug Administration is considering banning menthol cigarettes, which could result in some people who smoke menthol cigarettes switching to other tobacco products (OTPs). This qualitative study explored reactions to using OTPs instead of menthol cigarettes. People who smoke menthol cigarettes (N=40) completed a behavioral economic assessment of the effects of menthol cigarette price increases on OTP purchasing. At the highest price, most participants could not afford menthol cigarettes. Instead, they could purchase non-menthol cigarettes, little cigars/cigarillos (LCCs), e-cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, or medicinal nicotine, or they could abstain from tobacco use. Participants used the OTPs they purchased for three days. During follow-up sessions, participants (n=35) completed semi-structured interviews discussing their purchasing-decisions and experiences using OTPs instead of menthol cigarettes. Interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis methods. Factors influencing purchasing decisions included flavor, price, prior use of OTPs, interest in trying new OTPs, and perceived ability to satisfy nicotine cravings. Participants described positive experiences using e-cigarettes including the "refreshing" menthol flavor, ability to use in places where cigarettes are prohibited, and convenience of use relative to smoking. Among those using non-menthol cigarettes, many reported they were acceptable but less satisfying products compared to menthol cigarettes while others reported negative reactions to them such as tasting like "cardboard". Reactions to smoking LCCs were mostly unfavorable but participants said it gave them "something to light". Multiple considerations may affect switching to OTPs in light of pending menthol cigarette regulation including the availability of menthol-flavored alternatives and (dis)satisfaction with OTPs.

Qualitative reactions to a low nicotine product standard for cigarettes from adolescents and young adults living in the United States who smoke.

The Biden Administration is considering a low nicotine product standard for cigarettes. This qualitative study examined reactions to a nicotine reduction policy among adolescents and young adults (AYA) who smoke cigarettes. After completing a lab study involving masked exposure either to low nicotine or normal nicotine research cigarettes and unmasked exposure to e-cigarettes varying in nicotine concentration and flavor, we conducted follow-up semi-structured interviews (N = 25) to explore participants' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of a low nicotine product standard and their anticipated tobacco use behavior after policy implementation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, double-coded, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Nearly half of participants supported the policy because they thought it would prevent young people from starting smoking and/or would help people quit. Reasons some participants opposed the policy included beliefs that adults should have the choice to smoke or that a nicotine reduction policy is counterintuitive because the government benefits from cigarette sales. Others believed the policy would be ineffective because youth could circumvent the policy (e.g., illicit market) or would increase their smoking to maintain the same nicotine level. Almost half of participants said they would quit smoking while the other half said they would continue smoking, although potentially reduce their smoking. Overall, our qualitative findings point to the need for pre-policy media campaigns targeting AYA who smoke to minimize negative reactions, dispel fears, and correct misperceptions as well as encourage quitting and provide information on accessing cessation resources.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a sample of US young adults who smoke cigarettes: A qualitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased negative mood in youth, and a few reports of changes in tobacco use. We sought to increase the depth of knowledge on the effects of the pandemic on early young adult mood states, access to tobacco products and tobacco use behaviors, and knowledge of risks associated with tobacco use and COVID-19 by learning more about the lived experience of the pandemic among young adults early in their smoking trajectories. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 young adults ages 18-20 (M = 19) who smoked cigarettes daily or nearly every day and had used electronic cigarettes (ECs) on ≥ 2 occasions in their lifetime. RESULTS: Our results uncovered several themes: 1) The majority of teens experienced mental health disturbances as a result of the pandemic, which manifested as depression, anxiety, and/or acute loneliness due to social isolation; 2) tobacco purchasing behaviors sometimes changed, with both greater and less access reported among participants; 3) changes in tobacco use were also reported, with some reporting increases in use, others reporting decreases, and a few reporting quitting; and 4) while some youth reported that tobacco use could increase their risk related to COVID-19, the majority reported confusion and uncertainty about how tobacco use impacted their risk. CONCLUSIONS: The themes identified specific factors that may account for the heterogeneity of impacts of the pandemic on tobacco use, and highlight the value of qualitative work for centering the lived experience of youth for understanding larger trends in substance use.

Subjective experiences, contexts, and risk perceptions of very low nicotine content cigarettes and electronic cigarettes among people with depression and anxiety disorders who smoke.

BACKGROUND: A low-nicotine product standard is currently under consideration by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This standard may be more effective if alternative, non-combusted sources of nicotine are concurrently available. This qualitative study explored the lived experiences of people with depression and anxiety disorders who used very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes with or without e-cigarettes during a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with participants (n = 20) as they completed a 16-week blinded trial of VLNC cigarettes with or without electronic cigarettes. Interviews explored 1) experiences with these products, 2) social and environmental contexts for use and 3) relative risk perceptions. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Concurrent access to e-cigarettes helped to ease the transition from usual-brand cigarettes to VLNC cigarettes. Some participants held misperceptions that VLNC cigarettes could reduce cancer risk whereas others did not. Participants expressed skepticism about the safety of e-cigarettes and the authenticity of the VLNC cigarettes. Smoking restrictions influenced e-cigarette use in some instances, but product preference was the overriding factor that influenced use. Participants did not note effects on psychiatric symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Should a nicotine reduction policy be implemented with e-cigarettes concurrently available on the market, tailored messaging for people with anxiety and depression disorders may be necessary to educate people about and the availability of alternative sources of nicotine, such as e-cigarettes, as well as the relative risk of VLNC cigarettes and e-cigarettes.

The Impact of Reducing Nicotine Content on Adolescent Cigarette Smoking and Nicotine Exposure: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: As the science base around the potential benefits of a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes grows, information on the potential effects on adolescent smokers is a high priority. The aim of this randomized trial was to test the influence of 3-week exposure to reduced nicotine cigarettes in a sample of adolescent daily smokers. AIMS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, two-arm, randomized controlled trial (NCT0258731), following a 1-week baseline, adolescent daily smokers not currently intending to quit (ages 15-19 years, n = 66 randomized) were urn randomized to use either very low nicotine content (VLNC; 0.4 mg/g; n = 33) or normal nicotine content (NNC, 15.8 mg/g; n = 33) research cigarettes for 3 weeks. Participants attended five study sessions at our clinical laboratory. The primary outcome was average total cigarettes smoked per day (CPD; including both study and non-study cigarettes) at week 3. RESULTS: Stepwise regression results demonstrated that compared with NNC cigarettes (n = 31), assignment to VLNC cigarettes (n = 29), was associated with 2.4 fewer CPD on average than NNC assignment (p < .05) week 3 when controlling for covariates (p < .01, Cohen's d = 0.52 n = 60 completed all procedures). VLNC cigarettes were also associated with lower levels of craving reduction than NNC cigarettes (Questionnaire on Smoking Urges Factor 2, p < .05). No group differences were found for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent participants assigned to VLNC use for 3 weeks smoked fewer total CPD relative to the NNC group. Overall, data suggest that a VLNC policy would reduce cigarette smoking in adolescents who smoke, but high rates of incomplete adherence suggest that youth may seek alternative sources of nicotine in this scenario. IMPLICATIONS: The US Food and Drug Administration may enact a reduced-nicotine product standard that would affect all commercially available cigarettes. One important population affected by this policy would be adolescents who smoke. This study, the first clinical trial of VLNC cigarettes in adolescents, demonstrates that adolescents switched to VLNC cigarettes for 3 weeks reduced their CPD relative to the normal-nicotine cigarette control group, without leading to increased respiratory symptoms or increased withdrawal. Biomarkers indicated the use of other sources of nicotine, suggesting that such a policy will need to consider approaches to assist in transitioning away from smoking.

The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Smoking Among Vulnerable Populations.

AIM: While accumulating evidence suggests that people modified their smoking during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it remains unclear whether those most at risk for tobacco-related health disparities did so. The current study examined changes in smoking among several vulnerable smoker populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A web-based survey was distributed in 2020 to 709 adults with socioeconomic disadvantage, affective disorders, or opioid use disorder who participated in a previous study investigating the effects of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes on smoking. Current smoking status and rate, and adoption of protective health behaviors in response to the pandemic (eg social distancing, mask wearing) were examined. RESULTS: Among 332 survey respondents (46.8% response rate), 84.6% were current smokers. Repeated measures ANOVA showed that current cigarettes/day (CPD) was higher during COVID than pre-COVID (12.9 ± 1.0 versus 11.6 ± 1.0; p < .001). Most respondents had adopted protective health behaviors to prevent infection (>79% for all behaviors). More than half indicated that they were still leaving their homes specifically to buy cigarettes (64.6%) and were buying more packs per visit to the store (54.5%) than pre-COVID. Individuals unemployed at the time of the survey experienced greater increases in CPD (from 11.4 ± 1.4 to 13.3 ± 1.4, p = .024) as did those with higher levels of anxiety (from 11.5 ± 1.1 to 13.6 ± 1.1, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in this sample of adults from vulnerable populations, even while most adopted protective health measures to prevent infection. Unemployment and anxiety might identify those at greatest risk for increases in tobacco use. IMPLICATIONS: Individuals from populations especially vulnerable to smoking might be at risk for greater harm from cigarette smoking during times of pandemic-related stress. Public health interventions are warranted to ameliorate increases in smoking among these populations. Special attention should be paid to those experiencing unemployment and high anxiety.

Immediate Switching to Reduced Nicotine Cigarettes in a U.S.-Based Sample: The Impact on Cannabis Use and Related Variables at 20 Weeks.

INTRODUCTION: The FDA proposed rule-making to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels. Research suggests decreasing nicotine levels (i.e. very low nicotine content cigarettes [VLNCs]) produced greater quit attempts, reduced smoking, and reduced exposure to harmful constituents among smokers. The impact of long-term VLNC use among people who co-use cigarettes and cannabis on non-tobacco-specific toxicant and carcinogen exposure has not been investigated. AIMS AND METHODS: This study presents secondary analyses of a controlled clinical trial examining switching to VLNC (versus a normal nicotine cigarettes control group [NNCs]) between people who co-use cigarettes and cannabis (n = 174) versus smoked cigarettes (n = 555). Linear mixed-effects models compared changes in smoking behavior, and tobacco-specific (i.e. total nicotine equivalents [TNE], 4-[methylnitrosamino]-1-[3-pyridyl]-1-butanone [NNK; total NNAL]) and non-tobacco-specific (i.e. carbon monoxide (CO), 2-cyanoethylmercapturic acid [CEMA], phenanthrene tetraol [PheT]) toxicant and carcinogen exposure at week 20 (with random intercept for participants). Cannabis use was measured among co-use groups. RESULTS: CO was significantly lower only among the cigarette-only group assigned VLNCs (interaction: p = .015). Although both VLNC groups demonstrated decreased CEMA, greater decreases emerged among the cigarette-only group (interaction: p = .016). No significant interactions emerged for TNE, cigarettes per day (CPD), NNAL, and PheT (ps > .05); both VLNC groups decreased in TNE, CPD, and NNAL. Only the cigarette-only group assigned VLNCs demonstrated decreased PheT (p < .001). The VLNC co-use group showed increased cannabis use over time (p = .012; 0.5 more days per week by week 20). CONCLUSIONS: Those who co-use cannabis and cigarettes may still be at risk for greater exposure to non-tobacco-specific toxicants and carcinogens compared to those who only smoke cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The present study is the longest longitudinal, prospective comparison study of smoking behavior and exposure to harmful constituents among those who co-use cigarettes and cannabis versus cigarette-only after immediately switching to very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNC). Those who co-use experienced similar reductions in CPD and tobacco-specific exposure, compared to those who only use cigarettes. However, co-use groups experienced smaller reductions in non-tobacco-specific toxicants and carcinogens compared to the cigarette-only group, potentially because of combustible cannabis use. Additionally, those who co-use and switched to VLNC may be susceptible to slight increases in cannabis use (approximately two more days per year).

Addiction potential of combustible menthol cigarette alternatives: a randomised cross-over trial.

INTRODUCTION: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued proposed product standards banning menthol as a characterising flavour in cigarettes and cigars. The public health benefits of these product standards may be attenuated by the role of plausible substitutes in the marketplace. Therefore, the present study examined the addiction potential of plausible combustible menthol alternatives compared with usual brand menthol cigarettes (UBMC). METHODS: Ninety-eight adult menthol cigarette smokers completed four visits, smoking their UBMC at the first session and three menthol cigarette alternatives in random order at the subsequent visits: (1) a preassembled menthol roll-your-own (mRYO) cigarette using menthol pipe tobacco and mentholated cigarette tube, (2) a menthol filtered little cigar (mFLC) and (3) a non-menthol cigarette (NMC). Measures of smoking topography, exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), craving and withdrawal, subjective effects and behavioural economic demand indices were assessed. RESULTS: Compared with UBMC, menthol cigarette alternatives resulted in different puffing topography and CO exposure (except mRYO), and lower levels of positive subjective experience and behavioural economic demand indices. Among the alternative products, participants reported the highest level of positive subjective experience and higher demand for mRYO, compared with mFLC and NMC. Similarly, participants were significantly more likely to want to try again, purchase and use the mRYO product regularly compared with mFLC and NMC. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: mRYO cigarettes were the most highly rated cigarette alternative among study products, suggesting their potential appeal as a menthol cigarette substitute and needed inclusion of menthol pipe tobacco and cigarette tubes in FDA's proposed ban.

Potential effects of nicotine content in cigarettes on use of other substances.

A national nicotine reduction policy has the potential to reduce cigarette smoking and associated adverse health impacts among vulnerable populations. However, possible unanticipated adverse effects of reducing nicotine content in cigarettes, such as increasing the use of alcohol or other abused substances, must be examined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of exposure to varying doses of nicotine in cigarettes on use of other substances. This was a secondary analysis (n = 753) of three simultaneous, multisite, double-blind, randomized-controlled trials examining 12 weeks of exposure to study cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) among daily smokers from three vulnerable populations: individuals with affective disorders (n = 251), individuals with opioid use disorder (n = 256), and socioeconomically-disadvantaged women of reproductive age (n = 246). Effect of study cigarette assignment on urine toxicology screens (performed weekly) and responses to drug and alcohol use questionnaires (completed at study weeks 6 and 12) were examined using negative binomial regression, logistic regression, or repeated measures analysis of variance, controlling for sex, age, and menthol status. The most common substances identified using urine toxicology included tetrahydrocannabinol (THC; 44.8%), cocaine (9.2%), benzodiazepine (8.6%), and amphetamines (8.0%), with 57.2% of participants testing positive at least once for substance use (27.3% if excluding THC). No significant main effects of nicotine dose were found on any of the examined outcomes. These results suggest that reducing nicotine content does not systematically increase use of other substances, even among individuals at increased risk of substance use. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT2250664, NCT2250534.

Relating individual differences in the reinforcing value of smoking and dependence severity to nicotine exposure levels in vulnerable populations.

Cigarette smoking is overrepresented in populations with psychiatric conditions and socioeconomic disadvantage. Greater understanding of the role of reinforcement and nicotine dependence in smoking among vulnerable populations may facilitate development of better targeted interventions to reduce smoking. Prior research demonstrated that individual differences in the reinforcing value of smoking and nicotine-dependence severity predicted total nicotine-exposure in vulnerable populations. The present study uses multivariate regression to address two aims: (1) Quantify the degree to which the reinforcing value of smoking, assessed using the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), and dependence severity assessed using the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence and Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (B-WISDM) each account for individual differences in cotinine-plus-3'-hydroxycotinine (COT+3HC) levels. (2) Explore whether there is overlap in the variance accounted for by the CTP, FTND, and B-WISDM. Participants were 628 adults with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage who smoked daily. The CPT, FTND, and B-WISDM models accounted for 23.76%, 32.45%, and 29.61% of the variance in COT+3HC levels, respectively. Adding CPT to the FTND model failed to increase the variance accounted for and adding it to the B-WISDM model did so by only 1.2% demonstrating considerable overlap in the variance in nicotine exposure levels accounted for by these three instruments. These results provide new knowledge on the relationship between individual differences in the reinforcing value of smoking and nicotine-exposure levels and suggest differences in reinforcing value may underpin a considerable portion of the variance in nicotine exposure accounted for by dependence severity.

Leveraging the cigarette purchase task to understand relationships between cumulative vulnerabilities, the relative reinforcing effects of smoking, and response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes.

We examined if the relative-reinforcing effects of smoking increase with greater cumulative vulnerability and whether cumulative vulnerability moderates response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes. Participants were 775 adults from randomized clinical trials evaluating research cigarettes differing in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg/g). Participants were categorized as having low (0-1), moderate (2-3), or high (≥4) cumulative vulnerability. Vulnerabilities included rural residence, opioid use disorder, affective disorder, low educational attainment, poverty, unemployment, and physical disability. We used the cigarette purchase task (CPT) to assess the relative-reinforcing effects of participants' usual-brand cigarettes at baseline and study cigarettes during the 12-week trial. The CPT is a behavioral-economic task wherein participants estimate likely smoking (demand) over 24 h under escalating cigarette price. Demand is characterized by two factors: Amplitude (demand volume at zero/minimal price) and Persistence (demand sensitivity to price). Greater cumulative vulnerability was associated with greater demand Amplitude (F[2709] = 16.04,p < .0001) and Persistence (F[2709] = 8.35,p = .0003) for usual-brand cigarettes. Demand Amplitude for study cigarettes increased with increasing cumulative vulnerability (F[2619] = 19.59, p < .001) and decreased with decreasing nicotine content ([4879] = 5.45, p < .001). The only evidence of moderation was on demand Persistence (F[8867] = 2.00,p = .04), with larger reductions at the 0.4 mg/g compared to 15.8 mg/g doses among participants with low compared to moderate or high cumulative vulnerability. The relative-reinforcing effects of smoking clearly increase with greater cumulative vulnerability. Reducing nicotine content would likely reduce demand Amplitude across cumulative-vulnerability levels but reductions in demand Persistence may be more limited among those with greater cumulative vulnerability.

Effects of very low nicotine content cigarettes on smoking across vulnerable populations.

There has been long-standing interest in a reduced-nicotine product standard for combusted tobacco, which is within the regulatory purview of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In weighing whether to establish this standard, it is important to consider potential responses among people who are at elevated risk for tobacco-related health harms. In this narrative review, we summarize studies of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes conducted between 2010 and 2021 in groups that the FDA has identified as vulnerable populations. Studies conducted to date in adults with mental health conditions, adults with opioid use disorder, socioeconomically-disadvantaged adults, and youth or young adults indicate that immediate switching to VLNC cigarettes decreases smoking, with minimal or no unintended negative consequences. Few studies have investigated the effects of VLNC cigarettes in racial or ethnic minorities, people who smoke menthol cigarettes, and pregnant women, but initial findings suggest that responses of these individuals are similar to responses observed in other vulnerable populations. We are not aware of studies that have investigated VLNC cigarettes in military/veteran populations, sexual or gender minority individuals, or people living in underserved rural environments. Future research directions include understanding how to promote cessation in the context of a reduced-nicotine standard, and how to correct VLNC misperceptions in vulnerable populations. Nevertheless, the evidence to date indicates that a reduced-nicotine standard is likely to have the same beneficial effects on smoking reductions as it does in less vulnerable populations, which should provide some confidence in pursuing this regulatory approach.

Effects of Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarette use on Cigarette Reinforcement among Smokers with Serious Mental Illness.

BACKGROUND: Among people without psychiatric disorders who smoke, very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarette use reduces cigarette reinforcement. Whether this is true of people with serious mental illness (SMI) who smoke is unknown. Using a hypothetical purchase task, we compared the effects of 6-week use of VLNC versus normal nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes on study cigarette and usual brand (UB) cigarette reinforcement among people with SMI who smoke. METHODS: After a baseline period of UB cigarette use, participants with SMI (n = 58) were randomized to use NNC cigarettes (15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) or VLNC cigarettes (0.4 mg/g) for 6 weeks. At Week 6, they completed the CPT for both their assigned study cigarette and UB. The groups were compared on demand intensity (number of cigarettes purchased at no cost) and elasticity (rate of decline in demand as price increases) using extra sum-of-squares F-tests. The effects of treatment on demand indices while controlling for covariates were assessed using hierarchical regression. RESULTS: At Week 6, intensity of demand for study cigarettes was lower and elasticity was higher for the VLNC group relative to the NNC group (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, intensity of demand for UB cigarettes was lower for participants in the VLNC group relative to participants in the NNC group (p < 0.01). When controlling for baseline cigarettes per day, intensity remained significantly different for study cigarettes and usual brand cigarettes at Week 6. CONCLUSION: A nicotine reduction policy may reduce cigarette reinforcement in this vulnerable population.