A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association between E-cigarette Use among Cigarette Smokers and Quit Attempts Made to Abstain from Cigarette Smoking.

Objective: Following AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA guidelines, in this synthesis of evidence we sought to identify and characterize any associations between e-cigarette use among cigarette smokers and cigarette smoking quit attempts. Methods: We queried 3 databases from January 1, 2007 to January 5, 2021. Search results were screened using the PICOS review method. Included studies examined e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking quit attempts across e-cigarette use statuses. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-Based Practice Center approach. Finally, 4 random-effects models compared e-cigarette users and non- e-cigarette-users in terms of past year and prospective (6 to 12 months) cigarette smoking quit attempts. Results: We qualitatively synthesized 17 adjusted studies for this review. Two meta-analyses showed past year quit attempts were significantly associated with current e-cigarette users and 2 prospective data analyses found no significant association. Conclusions: The results of the meta- analyses emphasize temporality in the association between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking quit attempts. Numerous methodological limitations, including inadequate definitions of e-cigarette use and non-adjustment for confounding variables, limit the confidence in conclusions that can be drawn on the causal association between e-cigarette use and cigarettes smoking quit attempts.

Assessing the Evidence on the Differential Impact of Menthol versus Non-menthol Cigarette Use on Smoking Dependence in the US Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Menthol's effect on cigarette smoking behaviors is an intensely scrutinized US public health issue. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the question: Does menthol cigarette use have a differential impact on smoking dependence compared with non-menthol cigarette use? Methods: We consulted 6 databases from inception to October 15, 2021. We included articles comparing menthol versus non-menthol cigarette smokers against predefined smoking dependence outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the AHRQ Evidence-Based Practice Center approach. We applied a random-effects model to pool adjusted odds ratios. Results: We synthesized 37 demographically adjusted studies. Meta-analytic results suggested non-menthol smokers were equally/more likely to report daily versus non-daily smoking; menthol use was associated with needing a cigarette within one hour; cigarettes per day was not associated with menthol use; menthol use was associated with a low (vs high) Heaviness of Smoking Index score; and results were either non-significant or associated menthol use with lower TTFC. Conclusions: Despite consistently good or fair quality adjusted studies across several measures, results were discordant depending on measures used and means of measurement. Overall, the evidence is insufficient to draw clear conclusions on a differential association between menthol (vs non-menthol) cigarette use and smoking dependence.

Assessing the Evidence on the Differential Impact of Menthol versus Non-menthol Cigarette Use on Initiation and Progression to Regular Smoking: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Despite numerous assessments of the public health impact of menthol cigarettes, a rigorous synthesis related to menthol cigarettes and behavioral outcomes is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the question: Does menthol cigarette use have a differential impact on initiation and progression to regular smoking compared to non-menthol cigarette use? Methods: We consulted 6 databases from their inception to October 15, 2021. We included articles comparing menthol versus non-menthol smokers among 4 predefined smoking initiation and progression outcomes. We assessed risk of bias was using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-Based Practice Center approach. We applied a random-effects model to pool adjusted odds ratios. Results: We qualitatively synthesized 16 adjusted studies across the outcomes. Results from one meta-analysis suggested no difference between menthol and non-menthol smokers in likelihood to report daily versus non-daily smoking. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis did not identify a consistent, statistically significant, or differential association between menthol use and progression to regular smoking. Varying definitions of outcome measures and lack of longitudinal evidence limited the confident conclusions that could be drawn from this evidence base.

Reporting and methodological quality of systematic literature reviews evaluating the associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking behaviors: a systematic quality review.

INTRODUCTION: Several published systematic reviews have examined the potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking, but their methodological and/or reporting quality have not yet been assessed. This systematic quality review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) 2 to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews investigating potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched from 01 January 2007 to 24 June 2020. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2, and reporting quality was assessed using PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Of 331 potentially relevant systematic reviews, 20 met predefined inclusion criteria. Most reviews (n = 15; 75%) reported on e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking cessation, while three reported on e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking initiation (15%); and two reported on cigarette smoking initiation and cessation (10%). According to AMSTAR 2 guidelines, 18 of the 20 reviews (90%) were "critically low" in overall confidence of the results, while two were ranked "low." Additionally, reporting quality varied across the reviews, with only 60% reporting at least half of the PRISMA items. DISCUSSION: Methodological limitations were identified across reviews examining potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking behaviors, indicating that findings from these reviews should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Future systematic reviews in this field should strive to adhere to AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA guidelines, to provide high quality syntheses of the available data with transparent and complete reporting.

Assessing the evidence on the differential impact of menthol versus non-menthol cigarette use on smoking cessation in the U.S. population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The potential impact of menthol versus non-menthol cigarette use on smoking behaviors is an intensely scrutinized topic in the public health arena. To date, several general literature reviews have been conducted, but findings and conclusions have been discordant. This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines to examine the Key Question, "Does menthol cigarette use have a differential impact on smoking cessation compared with non-menthol cigarette use?" METHODS: Six databases-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycInfo-were queried from inception to June 12, 2020. Articles comparing menthol versus non-menthol cigarette smokers in terms of at least one predefined smoking cessation outcome were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-Based Practice Center approach. A random-effects model utilizing the DerSimonian and Laird method to pool adjusted odds ratio was applied. Variations among pooled studies were assessed using Cochran's Q statistic, and heterogeneity was quantified using the inconsistency index (I2). RESULTS: Forty-three demographically adjusted studies (22 rated "good", 20 rated "fair", and one study rated "poor" individual study quality) comparing menthol and non-menthol smokers were qualitatively synthesized across the following measures (study count; strength of evidence): duration of abstinence (2; low); quit attempts (15; insufficient); rate of abstinence/quitting (29; moderate); change in smoking quantity/frequency (5; insufficient); and, return to smoking/relapse (2; insufficient). Overall, the qualitative synthesis failed to show a consistent trend for an association between menthol cigarette use and smoking cessation across outcomes. Meta-analyses found no difference between menthol and non-menthol cigarette use and either quit attempts or abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: Given the lack of consistency or statistical significance in the findings-combined with a "low" overall strength of evidence grade, based on deficiencies of indirectness and inconsistency-no consistent or significant associations between menthol cigarette use and smoking cessation were identified. Recommendations for future studies include increased focus on providing longitudinal, adjusted data collected from standardized outcome measures of cessation to better inform long-term smoking cessation and menthol cigarette use. Such improvements should also be further considered in more methodologically rigorous systematic reviews characterized by objectivity, comprehensiveness, and transparency with the ultimate objective of better informing public health and policy decision making.

Estimating the Population Health Impact of Recently Introduced Modified Risk Tobacco Products: A Comparison of Different Approaches.

INTRODUCTION: Various approaches have been used to estimate the population health impact of introducing a Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP). AIMS AND METHODS: We aimed to compare and contrast aspects of models considering effects on mortality that were known to experts attending a meeting on models in 2018. RESULTS: Thirteen models are described, some focussing on e-cigarettes, others more general. Most models are cohort-based, comparing results with or without MRTP introduction. They typically start with a population with known smoking habits and then use transition probabilities either to update smoking habits in the "null scenario" or joint smoking and MRTP habits in an "alternative scenario". The models vary in the tobacco groups and transition probabilities considered. Based on aspects of the tobacco history developed, the models compare mortality risks, and sometimes life-years lost and health costs, between scenarios. Estimating effects on population health depends on frequency of use of the MRTP and smoking, and the extent to which the products expose users to harmful constituents. Strengths and weaknesses of the approaches are summarized. CONCLUSIONS: Despite methodological differences, most modellers have assumed the increase in risk of mortality from MRTP use, relative to that from cigarette smoking, to be very low and have concluded that MRTP introduction is likely to have a beneficial impact. Further model development, supplemented by preliminary results from well-designed epidemiological studies, should enable more precise prediction of the anticipated effects of MRTP introduction. IMPLICATIONS: There is a need to estimate the population health impact of introducing modified risk nicotine-containing products for smokers unwilling or unable to quit. This paper reviews a variety of modeling methodologies proposed to do this, and discusses the implications of the different approaches. It should assist modelers in refining and improving their models, and help toward providing authorities with more reliable estimates.

Assessing comprehension and perceptions of modified-risk information for snus among adult current cigarette smokers, former tobacco users, and never tobacco users.

INTRODUCTION: Snus, a low nitrosamine smokeless tobacco product, presents less risks to health than cigarettes. Effectively communicating such risk information could facilitate smokers switching completely to snus, thereby benefiting public health. METHODS: This study assessed comprehension and perceptions of modified-risk information regarding snus. Adult cigarette smokers, former tobacco users, and never tobacco users (N = 3,922) from a US internet panel viewed an advertisement stating that smokers who switched completely to snus could greatly reduce risk of lung cancer, respiratory disease, heart disease, and oral cancer. Respondents answered questions regarding the modified-risk information and rated perceived risks of snus relative to cigarettes and other smokeless tobacco products. RESULTS: Across the four diseases mentioned in the advertisement, most respondents (49.7%-68.6%, across tobacco user groups) understood that snus presents less risk than cigarettes but is not completely safe. Some indicated snus presents the same risk as cigarettes; this was highest for oral cancer (33.7%-42.02%) and lowest for lung cancer (15.4%-23.1%) and respiratory disease (15.6%-23.4%). Majorities understood snus is addictive (77.7%-87.9%), quitting all tobacco is the best option for smokers (83.6%-93.1%), and non-users of tobacco should not use snus (80.4%-87.8%). Only 2.1%-5.8% indicated smokers would receive a health benefit if they continued to smoke while using snus. CONCLUSIONS: The modified-risk information, conveying that snus presents less risk than cigarettes but is not completely safe, was understood by majorities of respondents. Differential risk beliefs across diseases suggest responses were shaped not only by the modified-risk information, but also by intuitions and pre-existing beliefs about tobacco products.

Measures of dependence in menthol and nonmenthol smokers - A comprehensive narrative review.

Introduction. More than a decade ago, concerns were raised that menthol in cigarettes might enhance addiction to smoking. This article provides a comprehensive review of published studies examining cigarette dependence among menthol and nonmenthol smokers. The purpose of the review is to evaluate the scientific evidence to determine if menthol increases cigarette dependence. Materials and Methods. The published literature was searched in 2019 for studies that provide evidence on cigarette dependence among menthol compared to nonmenthol smokers. Included in this review are published studies that compare menthol and nonmenthol smokers based on widely accepted and validated measures of dependence, or other established predictors of dependence (age of smoking initiation [first cigarette]/age of progression [regular/daily smoking]) and indicators of dependence (smoking frequency, cigarettes smoked per day, time to first cigarette after waking, night waking to smoke, smoking duration). Results and Conclusion. Based on a review of the available studies, including those with adjusted results and large representative samples, reliable and consistent empirical evidence supports a conclusion that menthol smokers are not more dependent than nonmenthol smokers and thus menthol in cigarettes does not increase dependence.

Assessing likelihood of product use for snus with modified-risk information among adult current cigarette smokers, former tobacco users, and never tobacco users.

INTRODUCTION: Switching from cigarettes to snus by smokers unlikely to quit would be expected to benefit overall population health, with any potential benefit needing to be weighed against potential harms from snus use by tobacco non-users and smokers likely to quit. This study evaluates likelihood of snus use among tobacco users and non-users provided modified-risk information. METHODS: An online sample of 11,302 U.S. adults was randomized to view advertisements for snus that either provided modified-risk information or only described snus. Intent to purchase ratings were converted to projected purchase (use) rates using an empirically derived algorithm. RESULTS: Projected product use for snus was significantly higher among current smokers than former or never tobacco users (p < 0.0001) for both the modified-risk and control information. A significant interaction effect between information and tobacco user group (p < 0.0001) indicated the modified-risk information differentially increased projected use among smokers (8.2% vs. 6.9%), with much lower projections for both the test and control information among former (1.2%) and never tobacco users (0.4%). Among never users, projected use was highest among those susceptible to smoking. These findings were generally similar for young adults, ages 18-24. Smokers expecting to quit who viewed modified-risk information had lower projected use (4.2%) than those not expecting to quit (8.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that providing modified-risk information for snus is unlikely to increase use among those not using tobacco. Interest in snus was greatest among current smokers who would benefit by switching to snus as communicated in the modified-risk advertisement.

Assessing the Likelihood and Magnitude of a Population Health Benefit Following the Market Introduction of a Modified-Risk Tobacco Product: Enhancements to the Dynamic Population Modeler, DPM(+1).

Researchers and those responsible for evaluating and implementing policies intended to reduce population harm must assess the potential for both intended and unintended consequences associated with those policies. Such assessments should be based on the combined dimensions of magnitude, and thus likelihood, of shifts in exposure patterns needed to produce a population benefit or harm, and magnitude of the expected population benefit or harm. In response to this assessment need, we provide a conceptual description of the dynamic population modeler, DPM(+1), as well as illustrative analyses that estimate the effects on all-cause mortality, life expectancy, and quality of life-adjusted life expectancy if exposure patterns in the population shift from a higher risk product (e.g., cigarettes) to a lower, or modified, risk tobacco product (MRTP) in specified ways. Estimates from these analyses indicate that, within a single birth cohort, switching completely from cigarette smoking to MRTP use is more likely to lead to a population-level survival benefit than initiating tobacco use with an MRTP instead of cigarettes. This is because tobacco initiation rarely occurs beyond young adulthood, whereas continuing smokers exist in all subsequent age categories, leading to a greater cumulative effect. In addition, complete switching to MRTP use among a small proportion of smokers in each age category offsets the survival deficit caused by unintended shifts in exposure patterns, such as MRTP initiation among never tobacco users followed by transitioning to cigarette smoking and/or cigarette smokers switching to MRTP use instead of quitting.

Stroke risk among menthol versus non-menthol cigarette smokers in the United States: Analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).

Though available evidence is relatively consistent in showing no additional health effects among smokers due to menthol in cigarettes, two studies reported conflicting results for stroke risk using different subsets of NHANES data. We investigated reasons for the differences in these reports by analyzing NHANES cycles conducted between 1999 and 2012, combined and in subsets. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from three different survey logistic regression models compare risk of reported stroke diagnoses among menthol and non-menthol cigarette smokers. Depending on timeframe, about 1150 to 8000 U.S. adults (aged ≥ 20 years) who smoked on ≥ 1 of the last 30 days had complete data for cigarette type and all covariates included in each model. Results were not much affected by which covariates were included in the models, but depended strongly on the NHANES cycles included in the analysis. Using NHANES 1999-2012 data combined, AORs and 95% CIs for stroke comparing menthol with non-menthol cigarette smokers were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.65, 1.37), 0.85 (95% CI: 0.59, 1.23) or 0.86 (95% CI: 0.59, 1.25). Collectively, findings illustrate the need for fully reporting research and analytical methods, especially when analyses are meant to develop evidence intended for regulatory decision-making.

Measures of initiation and progression to increased smoking among current menthol compared to non-menthol cigarette smokers based on data from four U.S. government surveys.

There are no large-scale, carefully designed cohort studies that provide evidence on whether menthol cigarette use is associated with a differential risk of initiating and/or progressing to increased smoking. However, questions of whether current menthol cigarette smokers initiated smoking at a younger age or are more likely to have transitioned from non-daily to daily cigarette use compared to non-menthol smokers can be addressed using cross-sectional data from U.S. government surveys. Analyses of nationally representative samples of adult and youth smokers indicate that current menthol cigarette use is not associated with an earlier age of having initiated smoking or greater likelihood of being a daily versus non-daily smoker. Some surveys likewise provide information on cigarette type preference (menthol versus non-menthol) among youth at different stages or trajectories of smoking, based on number of days smoked during the past month and/or cigarettes smoked per day. Prevalence of menthol cigarette use does not appear to differ among new, less experienced youth smokers compared to established youth smokers. While there are limitations with regard to inferences that can be drawn from cross-sectional analyses, these data do not suggest any adverse effects for menthol cigarettes on measures of initiation and progression to increased smoking.

Patterns of menthol cigarette use among current smokers, overall and within demographic strata, based on data from four U.S. government surveys.

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, National Health Interview Survey and Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey provide estimates of the proportions of U.S. smokers who currently use menthol cigarettes, overall and within demographic strata. Among adult past-month, regular and daily smokers, menthol cigarette use ranges from 26% to 30%, with statistically higher proportions of female versus male smokers (8-11 percentage points higher) currently using menthol cigarettes. Compared to adult smokers overall, statistically higher proportions of non-Hispanic Black smokers (72-79%) and statistically lower proportions of non-Hispanic White smokers (19-22%) currently use menthol cigarettes, with no differences among smokers of other race/ethnicity groups (18-20% to 28-30%, depending on the survey). Higher proportions of younger adult past-month, regular and daily smokers (aged 18-25years) currently use menthol cigarettes compared to older adult smokers (aged 26-29years and/or ⩾30years); however, differences are small in magnitude, with the vast majority of adult smokers (70-75%) who currently use menthol cigarettes being aged ⩾30years. Comparisons between youth and adult smokers are provided, although data for youth smokers are less available and provide less consistent patterns of menthol cigarette use.

Evaluating the association between menthol cigarette use and the likelihood of being a former versus current smoker.

Menthol in cigarettes has been examined for its potential to affect smoking dependence, measured primarily as number of cigarettes smoked per day and time to first cigarette after waking; the ability to quit smoking constitutes an additional measure of dependence. Successful quitting among menthol compared to non-menthol cigarette smokers is difficult to determine from the literature, due in part to the various definitions of quitting used by researchers. Nevertheless, intervention and follow-up studies of smoking cessation treatments generally indicate no differences in quitting success among menthol compared to non-menthol smokers, while cross-sectional studies suggest some differences within race/ethnicity groups. The association between menthol cigarette use and likelihood of being a former versus current smoker was examined based on data from the National Health Interview Survey and Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. Analyses stratified by race/ethnicity and limited to smokers who had quit at least one year prior to survey participation provided inconsistent results with regard to menthol cigarette use and quitting, both within surveys (i.e., comparing race/ethnicity groups) and between surveys (i.e., same race/ethnicity group across surveys). Evidence suggesting the existence or direction of an association between menthol in cigarettes and quitting depended on the data source.

Primary measures of dependence among menthol compared to non-menthol cigarette smokers in the United States.

Previously published studies provide somewhat inconsistent evidence on whether menthol in cigarettes is associated with increased dependence. The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, National Health Interview Survey, and Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey collect data on current cigarette type preference and primary measures of dependence, and thus allow examination of whether menthol smokers are more dependent than non-menthol smokers. Analyses based on combined data from multiple administrations of each of these four nationally representative surveys, using three definitions for current smokers (i.e., smoked ⩾1day, ⩾10days and daily during the past month), consistently demonstrate that menthol smokers do not report smoking more cigarettes per day than non-menthol smokers. Moreover, two of the three surveys that provide data on time to first cigarette after waking indicate no difference in urgency to smoke among menthol compared to non-menthol smokers, while the third suggests menthol smokers may experience a greater urgency to smoke; estimates from all three surveys indicate that menthol versus non-menthol smokers do not report a higher Heaviness of Smoking Index. Collectively, these findings indicate no difference in dependence among U.S. smokers who use menthol compared to non-menthol cigarettes.

Safety assessment of diammonium phosphate and urea used in the manufacture of cigarettes.

A tiered testing strategy has been employed to evaluate the potential for new ingredients, tobacco processes, and technological developments to alter the mainstream smoke or biological activity that results from burning cigarette tobacco. The foundation of this evaluation strategy is comparative testing, typically including chemical and biological assessments. In the manufacture of cigarettes, diammonium phosphate (DAP) and urea have been historically used as ingredients added to tobacco, to reconstituted tobacco sheet, and to other processed tobaccos. As part of ongoing stewardship efforts, a toxicological assessment of cigarettes with and without DAP and urea was conducted. Chemical and biological analyses were conducted for test cigarettes added 0.5% DAP and 0.2% urea in the final blend and also for those added 1.0% DAP and 0.41% urea in the final blend compared to reference cigarettes without added DAP or urea. Principal components of this evaluation included a determination of selected mainstream smoke constituent yields, an Ames assay in Salmonella typhimurium strains TA98 and TA100, a sister chromatid exchange assay in Chinese hamster ovary cells, a 13-week inhalation study of mainstream cigarette smoke in Sprague-Dawley rats, and a 30-week dermal tumor-promotion evaluation of mainstream cigarette smoke condensate in SENCAR mice. Comparative evaluations demonstrated that the addition of DAP and urea to cigarettes at up to 1% and 0.41%, respectively, does not alter the biological activity compared to reference cigarettes without DAP or urea.

DBA/2 mouse skin is unresponsive to dermal tumor promotion by cigarette smoke condensate.

Previous studies demonstrated that repetitive application of cigarette smoke condensate (CSC) to 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA)-initiated SENCAR mouse skin for 29 weeks at doses of 10, 20 and 40 mg "tar"/application results in time- and dose-dependent dermal tumor formation. To evaluate CSC-induced tumor promotion in other mouse skin models, male DBA/2 mice were treated with N-methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine (MNNG) (300 microg) or DMBA (75 or 150 microg) followed by promotion with 1R4F CSC at concentrations ranging from 9 to 45 mg "tar"/application. Both MNNG and DMBA have previously been shown to adequately initiate tumor development. Study end-points included clinical signs, body weights, and mass tracking. Neither the DMBA-initiated/acetone-promoted control groups, nor DMBA-initiated/CSC-promoted groups produced grossly observable skin tumors. For MNNG-initiated groups, a total of four tumors were observed. Based on these findings, it would appear the DBA/2 mouse was unresponsive to CSC dermal tumor promotion. It is not possible, based on the study design employed, to determine the underlying basis for the apparent resistance exhibited by this mouse strain to CSC-induced tumor promotion.

Altered methylation in gene-specific and GC-rich regions of DNA is progressive and nonrandom during promotion of skin tumorigenesis.

Altered DNA methylation, an epigenetic mechanism, likely contributes to tumorigenesis, with an inverse relationship existing between methylation in a promoter region and transcription. Using the SENCAR two-stage mouse skin tumorigenesis model, altered methylation was characterized in precancerous tissue and in tumor tissue. Mouse skin was initiated with 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene and promoted three times a week with 3, 9, 18, or 27 mg cigarette smoke condensate (CSC) for 4, 8, or 29 weeks; tumors were collected at 29 weeks. In addition, reversibility of changes in methylation was assessed following cessation of the promoting stimulus. DNA was isolated, and GC-rich methylation was assessed quantitatively via methylation-sensitive restriction digestion, arbitrarily primed PCR, and electrophoretic separation of PCR products. Analysis focused on regions of altered methylation (RAMs), which persisted from 4 to 8 weeks and from 8 weeks to tumor tissue. Persistent RAMs (i.e., seen in precancerous tissue and carried forward to tumors) are likely to play a key role in tumorigenesis. Twenty-two CpG sites in the upstream region of the Ha-ras promoter were unmethylated in control skin, 27 mg CSC, and tumor tissue. At two CpG sites closer to the transcriptional start site the incidence of hypomethylation increased with the dose of CSC. Hypomethylation was detected in all tumor samples. Expression of Ha-ras increased with 18 and 27 mg CSC promotion and more so in tumor tissue. These data support our hypothesis that tumor promotion involves instability of the epigenome, providing an environment where changes in the methylation status of specific regions of the genome accumulate progressively and contribute to the clonal expansion of initiated cells that leads to tumor formation.

Short-term biomarkers of cigarette smoke condensate tumor promoting potential in mouse skin.

Previous studies demonstrated that cigarette smoke condensates (CSCs) possessing significantly different tumorigenic potentials according to a standardized 30-week mouse skin tumor-promotion protocol could likewise be discriminated utilizing short-term indices of sustained hyperplasia and/or inflammation (G. M. Curtin et al., 2004, Toxicol. Sci. 81, 14-25). The current study employed a truncated initiation-promotion protocol to further evaluate CSC-induced hyperplasia, examining issues related to time course of induction, existence of a threshold and suitable dynamic range for detectable responses, and reversibility. Condensate application (9-36 mg "tar"/200-microl application, thrice-weekly for 3-15 weeks) induced treatment-related increases for epidermal thickness, proliferative index as assessed by 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdU) labeling, and ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) expression. Interestingly, observed increases for interfollicular BrdU labeling and ODC expression were partially reversed but still elevated upon cessation of promotion, while increases within the perifollicular epidermis remained elevated at a level similar to that observed during CSC application. In particular, assessments based on perifollicular ODC expression would appear to provide a greater opportunity for test article discrimination based on a rapid time to induction, a low threshold and expanded dynamic range of responses, and the potential to account for irreversible changes. These findings are particularly intriguing based on reports suggesting that ODC expression may be necessary for tumor promotion and that mouse skin tumors originate primarily within the perifollicular epidermis.