A Pilot Study to Test the Feasibility for a Randomized Controlled Trial of E-cigarettes as Harm Reduction Tools Among People Who Smoke and Previously Failed to Quit with Pharmacotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a pilot study to test the feasibility of a future randomized controlled trial comparing e-cigarettes to traditional pharmacotherapy among people who smoke daily, were motivated to quit, and failed to quit within the past 5 years using pharmacotherapy. METHODS: Eligible participants were assigned to either: 1) an e-cigarette (n=20) or 2) combination nicotine replacement therapy (patches and lozenges) (n=10). Participants received 5 weeks of product and selected a quit date 1 week later. Assessments were completed weekly, and electronic diaries were completed each day. As a pilot randomized controlled trial, outcomes focus on effects sizes and not statistical significance. RESULTS: Participants in the e-cigarette and NRT groups had a mean age of 51 (SD=13) and 50 (SD=10) years old, were 55% and 60% female, and were 15% and 0% non-white, respectively. At least 90% of participants completed each weekly assessment, and 77% of participants completed at least 80% of daily diaries. Mean cigarettes smoked per day reduced from 18 (SD=6.2) to 2.4 (SD=4.4) per day in the e-cigarette group and 16.5 (SD=8.5) to 4.9 (SD=5.9) per day in the NRT group. Rates of biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of treatment were numerically, but not statistically, higher in the e-cigarette group than the NRT group (35% vs. 10%, OR=4.8, 95% CI=0.5-46.5). CONCLUSIONS: Among current daily cigarette smokers who have previously tried to quit and failed using standard pharmacotherapies, provision of an e-cigarette is a feasible intervention. A larger adequately powered trial is warranted. IMPLICATIONS: This pilot study suggests that e-cigarettes may serve as an acceptable harm reduction intervention for people who smoke who cannot quit smoking with traditional pharmacotherapy, but adequately powered randomized controlled trials are needed.

Support for nicotine reduction in cigarettes: findings from the 2016 and 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: The USA and New Zealand have sought to establish a product standard to set a maximum nicotine level for cigarettes to reduce their addictiveness. This study examined support for very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) in Australia, Canada, England and the USA between 2016 and 2020. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional data were analysed from participants who currently smoke, formerly smoked or vaped and/or currently vape in the 2016 (n=11 150) and/or 2020 (n=5432) International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Respondents were asked if they would support a law that reduces the amount of nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive. Adjusted and weighted logistic regression analyses estimated the prevalence and predictors of support, such as country, age, sex, education, income, race and smoking/vaping status for VLNCs (support vs oppose/do not know). RESULTS: A majority of respondents supported a VLNC law, with support highest in Canada (69%; 2016 and 2020 combined), followed by England (61%), Australia (60%) and the USA (58%). Overall, support decreased from 62% in 2016 to 59% in 2020 (p=0.004), which did not differ by country. Levels of support differed by smoking/vaping status, where those who exclusively smoked daily showed the lowest level of support (59%) and those who exclusively vaped non-daily had the highest level of support (72%). CONCLUSION: More than half of respondents in all four countries-including those who smoked daily-supported a hypothetical VLNC standard to render cigarettes less addictive. It is important to examine if support is sustained after policies are implemented.

A Bayesian hierarchical model for individual participant data meta-analysis of demand curves.

Individual participant data meta-analysis is a frequently used method to combine and contrast data from multiple independent studies. Bayesian hierarchical models are increasingly used to appropriately take into account potential heterogeneity between studies. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical model for individual participant data generated from the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT). Data from the CPT details how demand for cigarettes varies as a function of price, which is usually described as an exponential demand curve. As opposed to the conventional random-effects meta-analysis methods, Bayesian hierarchical models are able to estimate both the study-specific and population-level parameters simultaneously without relying on the normality assumptions. We applied the proposed model to a meta-analysis with baseline CPT data from six studies and compared the results from the proposed model and a two-step conventional random-effects meta-analysis approach. We conducted extensive simulation studies to investigate the performance of the proposed approach and discussed the benefits of using the Bayesian hierarchical model for individual participant data meta-analysis of demand curves.

Reappraising Choice in Addiction: Novel Conceptualizations and Treatments for Tobacco Use Disorder.

The introduction of alternative nicotine and tobacco products (such as e-cigarettes, heat-not-burn devices, nicotine pouches) warrants an updated framework from which to conceptualize tobacco use disorder (TUD). The following review provides considerations for TUD within the context of novel products. Historically, the tobacco industry falsely claimed that cigarettes were not addictive or harmful and that those who smoked simply chose to do so. This generated an inaccurate lay perception that smoking is a free or informed choice. Research on nicotine pharmacology demonstrates the powerful addictive potential of nicotine, which is shaped by dose, speed of delivery, and other constituents generated. In addition, non-pharmacologic reinforcers motivate and maintain tobacco use behaviors for both traditional cigarettes and novel products. The negative consequences of combustible tobacco use are well known; however, these outcomes may differ for alternative products. Strategies used for combustible product cessation may be adapted for novel products, and treatment recommendations for TUD should be made within the context of a harm reduction framework wherein alternative product use may be the desired outcome. Providers must therefore be willing to modify their perceptions of products and treatment recommendations accordingly. Better public health outcomes are accomplished through promotion of abstinence from combustible smoking. For those who cannot wean from nicotine entirely, switching to less risky modes of delivery might be a secondary goal, with an eventual aim of stopping use of the alternative product. Implications: Given the advent of novel, alternative tobacco products, tobacco use disorder (TUD) must be conceptualized within a contemporary framework that includes harm reduction and alternative outcomes. The unique contributions of nicotine pharmacology, non-pharmacologic reinforcers, and consequences of use can be used to inform treatments for TUD with the ultimate goal of improving the health of individuals who use tobacco.

Early Changes in Puffing Intensity When Exclusively Using Open-Label Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: In response to reducing cigarette nicotine content, people who smoke could attempt to compensate by using more cigarettes or by puffing on individual cigarettes with greater intensity. Such behaviors may be especially likely under conditions where normal nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes are not readily accessible. The current within-subject, residential study investigated whether puffing intensity increased with very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarette use, relative to NNC cigarette use, when no other nicotine products were available. AIMS AND METHODS: Sixteen adults who smoke daily completed two four-night hotel stays in Charleston, South Carolina (United States) in 2018 during which only NNC or only VLNC cigarettes were accessible. We collected the filters from all smoked cigarettes and measured the deposited solanesol to estimate mouth-level nicotine delivery per cigarette. These estimates were averaged within and across participants, per each 24-h period. We then compared the ratio of participant-smoked VLNC and NNC cigarette mouth-level nicotine with the ratio yielded by cigarette smoking machines (when puffing intensity is constant). RESULTS: Average mouth-level nicotine estimates from cigarettes smoked during the hotel stays indicate participants puffed VLNC cigarettes with greater intensity than NNC cigarettes in each respective 24-h period. However, this effect diminished over time (p < .001). Specifically, VLNC puffing intensity was 40.0% (95% CI: 29.9, 53.0) greater than NNC puffing intensity in the first period, and 16.1% (95% CI: 6.9, 26.0) greater in the fourth period. CONCLUSION: Average puffing intensity per cigarette was elevated with exclusive VLNC cigarette use, but the extent of this effect declined across four days. IMPLICATIONS: In an environment where no other sources of nicotine are available, people who smoke daily may initially attempt to compensate for cigarette nicotine reduction by puffing on individual cigarettes with greater intensity. Ultimately, the compensatory behavior changes required to achieve usual nicotine intake from VLNC cigarettes are drastic and unrealistic. Accordingly, people are unlikely to sustain attempts to compensate for very low cigarette nicotine content.

Which tobacco control policies do smokers support? Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey.

As governments consider policy action to reduce smoking, a key factor in creating political will is the level of public support, particularly among smokers who are most affected by the policies. The goal of this paper is to assess and compare the level of support in Canada, the United States, England, and Australia for five smoking control policies: 1) banning menthol in cigarettes, 2) banning cigarette additives, 3) reducing nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive, 4) raising the minimum age to purchase cigarettes to 21 years and older, and 5) requiring pictorial warning labels on cigarette packs (examined in the US only). Data for these analyses come from 8165 daily cigarette smokers who responded to the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. In all countries, the highest level of support was for raising the legal age for purchase to 21 years and older (62-70%) and reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes to make them less addictive (57-70%). Smokers who were less dependent on cigarettes and those expressing interest in quitting were more likely to support all policies. When asked how they would respond to a nicotine reduction policy, the most common response given was to try the non-nicotine cigarettes to see how they liked them (42-48%), with the next most common response being to quit smoking entirely (16-24%). The high level of support for these proposed policies among daily smokers provides important evidence for policymakers to counteract claims that such policies would be unpopular.

The Public Health Gains Had Cigarette Companies Chosen to Sell Very Low Nicotine Cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed lowering the nicotine content of cigarettes to a minimally addictive level to increase smoking cessation and reduce initiation. This study has two aims: (1) to determine when cigarette manufacturers had the technical capability to reduce cigarette nicotine content and (2) to estimate the lost public health benefits of implementing a standard in 1965, 1975, or 1985. METHODS: To determine the technical capability of cigarette companies, we reviewed public patents and internal cigarette company business records using the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents. To evaluate the impact of a very low nicotine content cigarette (VLNC) standard on smoking attributable deaths (SADs) and life-years lost (LYLs), we applied a validated (CISNET) model that uses past smoking data, along with estimates of the potential impact of VLNCs derived from expert elicitation. RESULTS: Cigarette manufacturers recognized that cigarettes were deadly and addictive before 1964. Manufacturers have had the technical capability to lower cigarette nicotine content for decades. Our model projected that a standard implemented in 1965 could have averted 21 million SADs (54% reduction) and 272 million LYLs (64% reduction) from 1965 to 2064, a standard implemented in 1975 could have averted 18.9 million SADs and 245.4 million LYLs from 1975 to 2074, and a standard implemented in 1985 could have averted 16.3 million SADs and 211.5 million LYLs from 1985 to 2084. CONCLUSIONS: Millions of premature deaths could have been averted if companies had only sold VLNCs decades ago. FDA should act immediately to implement a VLNC standard. IMPLICATIONS: Prior research has shown that a mandated reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes could reduce the prevalence of smoking and improve public health. Here we report that cigarette manufacturers have had the ability to voluntarily implement such a standard for decades. We use a well-validated model to demonstrate that millions of smoking attributable deaths and life-years lost would have been averted if the industry had implemented such a standard.

A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial of Remote Varenicline Sampling to Promote Treatment Engagement and Smoking Cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Medication sampling is a clinically useful tool to engage smokers in the quitting process. Whether varenicline is suitable for sampling purposes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility, uptake, and preliminary outcomes of varenicline sampling. METHODS: Smokers (N = 99), both motivated to quit and not, were recruited and randomized to varenicline sampling versus not, with 12 week follow-up. The intervention consisted of mailing one-time samples of varenicline (lasting 2-4 wks), with minimally suggestive guidance on use. RESULTS: Uptake of varenicline was strong, at 2 weeks (54% any use, 66% daily use) and 4 weeks (38%, 46%), with 58% of medication users seeking additional medication. Most users followed conventional titration patterns, self-titrating from 0.5 mg to 2 mg. Relative to control, varenicline sampling increased motivation (p = 0.006) and confidence to quit (p = 0.02), and decreased cigarette smoking (p = 0.02). Smokers receiving varenicline samples were significantly more likely to achieve 50% reduction in cigarettes per day (CPD), both immediately following the sampling exercise (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 4.12; 95% CI: 1.39 to 12.17) and at final follow-up (AOR = 4.50; 95% CI: 1.56 to 13.01). Though cessation outcomes were not statistically significant, there was a 1.5 to 3-fold increase in quit attempts and abstinence from varenicline sampling throughout follow-up. These outcomes were comparable among smokers motivated to quit and not. CONCLUSIONS: Unguided, user-driven sampling of varenicline sampling is a concrete behavioral exercise that is feasible to do and seems to suggest clinical utility. Sampling is a pragmatic clinical approach to engage more smokers in quitting. IMPLICATIONS: Use of evidence-based pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation is low. Medication sampling is a pragmatic behavioral exercise that allows smokers to experience the benefits of using them, while promoting positive downstream effects towards quitting. While previous studies have shown that nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sampling is viable and effective, whether this extends to varenicline is unclear. Results from this trial demonstrate that varenicline sampling is feasible, safe, and suggestive of clinically important steps toward quitting, deserving of a larger trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT #03742154.

Responses to Gradual and Immediate Reduction of Nicotine in Cigarettes in Young Versus Older Adult Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: As the FDA works to determine whether a nicotine reduction policy would benefit public health, one key question is whether to mandate an immediate or gradual reduction in nicotine levels in cigarettes. The aim of this study was to determine whether the effects of gradual versus immediate nicotine reduction on cigarettes per day (CPD), total nicotine equivalents, and subjective responses differed in younger adults versus older adults. METHODS: Using data from a recent randomized trial conducted in the United States (N = 1250) that switched smokers over a 20-week period to very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes either immediately, gradually (via monthly reductions in nicotine content), or not at all (control condition, normal nicotine content research cigarette), we analyzed the moderating effect of age (age 18-24 or 25+). RESULTS: For both age groups, CPD in the immediate condition was significantly lower relative to gradual condition (estimated mean difference of 6.3 CPD in young adults, 5.2 CPD in older adults; p's < .05). Younger and older adults in the immediate and gradual reduction conditions had lower total nicotine equivalents at Week 20 (all p's < .05) than those in the control condition; age group did not moderate this effect. Positive subjective responses to cigarettes were lower among young adults relative to older adults in the immediate condition. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that an immediate reduction in nicotine would result in beneficial effects in both young and older adults. Young adults show less positive subjective effects of smoking following switching to VLNC cigarettes relative to older adults. IMPLICATIONS: As researchers work to understand how a potential reduced-nicotine product standard for cigarettes may affect public health, one question is whether nicotine should be reduced immediately or gradually. This study demonstrates that both young and older adults who were switched immediately to the lowest content of nicotine smoked fewer CPD and had lower nicotine intake than those in the gradual condition. Furthermore, young adults appear to show lower positive subjective effects following switching to VLNC cigarettes relative to older adults. This is consistent with previous work demonstrating that young people appear to show lower abuse liability for VLNC cigarettes.

Detecting participant noncompliance across multiple time points by modeling a longitudinal biomarker.

INTRODUCTION: Participant noncompliance, in which participants do not follow their assigned treatment protocol, has long complicated the interpretation of randomized clinical trials. No gold standard has been identified for detecting noncompliance, but in some trials participants' biomarkers can provide objective information that suggests exposure to non-study treatments. However, existing methods are limited to retrospectively detecting noncompliance at a single time point based on a single biomarker measurement. We propose a novel method that can leverage participants' full biomarker history to detect noncompliance across multiple time points. Conditional on longitudinal biomarker data, our method can estimate the probability of compliance at (1) a single time point of the trial, (2) all time points, and (3) a future time point. METHODS: Across time points, we model the biomarker as a mixture density with (latent) components corresponding to longitudinal patterns of compliance. To estimate the mixture density, we fit mixed effects models for both compliance and the biomarker. We use the mixture density to derive compliance probabilities that condition on the longitudinal biomarker data. We evaluate our compliance probabilities by simulation and apply them to a trial in which current smokers were asked to only smoke low nicotine study cigarettes (Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes Project 1 Study 2). In the simulation, we investigated three different effects of compliance on the biomarker, as well as the effect of misspecification of the covariance structures. We compared probability estimators (1) and (2) to those that ignore the longitudinal correlation in the data according to area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. We evaluated estimator (3) by plotting its calibration lines. For Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes Project 1 Study 2, we compared estimators (1) and (3) to a probability estimator of compliance at the last time point that ignores the longitudinal correlation. RESULTS: In the simulation, for both compliance at the last time point and at all time points, conditioning on the longitudinal biomarker data uniformly raised area under the receiver operating characteristic curve across all three compliance effect scenarios. The gains in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were smaller under misspecification. The calibration lines for the prediction of compliance closely followed 45°, though with additional variability under misspecification. For compliance at the last time point of Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes Project 1 Study 2, conditioning on participants' full biomarker history boosted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve by three percentage points. The prediction probabilities somewhat accurately approximated the non-longitudinal compliance probabilities. DISCUSSION: Compared to existing methods that only use a single biomarker measurement, our method can account for the longitudinal correlation in the biomarker and compliance to more accurately identify noncompliant participants. Our method can also use participants' biomarker history to predict compliance at a future time point.

The differential impact of nicotine replacement therapy sampling on cessation outcomes across established tobacco disparities groups.

Cigarette smoking is increasingly concentrated among marginalized populations with limited access to evidence-based cessation treatment. This includes racial/ethnic minorities, lower income individuals, those with lower educational attainment, and residents of rural areas. To reach Healthy People 2020 objectives, successful cessation interventions must narrow these disparities. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sampling is an easily translatable and scalable intervention that could enhance treatment access and thus narrow disparities. The present study examined individual-level demographic moderators of the impact of NRT sampling on cessation-related behaviors including: 1) use of a cessation medication, 2) making a 24-hour quit attempt, 3) floating abstinence, and 4) 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6-months. Study participants included N = 1245 adult smokers enrolled in the Tobacco Intervention in Primary Care Treatment Opportunities for Providers (TIP TOP) study, a recently concluded large-scale clinical trial of NRT sampling relative to standard care within 22 primary care clinics across South Carolina. Generalized linear models examined individual-level demographic moderators of treatment effect. Results suggest that NRT sampling may be more effective among some of the most disadvantaged groups of smokers, including smokers with lower income and education, as well those who live in more rural areas. The effects of NRT sampling did not differ by race. In sum, NRT sampling is a low-cost, low-burden intervention that could be disseminated broadly to reach large numbers of smokers and potentially narrow cessation disparities.

Impact of E-cigarette Sampling on Cigarette Dependence and Reinforcement Value.

INTRODUCTION: E-cigarettes have risen in prevalence in recent years, and most public health experts agree they deliver fewer toxicants than combustible tobacco products such as cigarettes. Thus, it is important to understand how use of e-cigarettes by current smokers impacts dependence on combustible cigarettes. METHODS: The present study is a secondary analysis of a randomized pilot trial of e-cigarette sampling. Nontreatment seeking current smokers were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either receive or not receive a weekly supply of e-cigarettes for 3 weeks. Participants completed the Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM) scale and the cigarette purchase task before and after the sampling period and at monthly follow-up visits for 3 months. RESULTS: Individuals assigned to receive an e-cigarette had significantly lower mean WISDM scores at the end of sampling and the end of the follow-up period compared with those in the control group. Both frequency of e-cigarette use as well as nicotine concentration of the e-cigarette given to smokers were significant predictors of changes in the mean WISDM score. E-cigarette sampling significantly reduced the demand parameter Omax, which measures the maximum amount of money participants estimate they would spend on cigarettes in a single day. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that current smokers who try using an e-cigarette may experience reductions in dependence on combustible cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The present analysis suggests that providing an e-cigarette to current cigarette smokers is likely to reduce cigarette dependence, especially if the e-cigarette delivers sufficient nicotine and is used frequently.

The Impact of E-liquid Propylene Glycol and Vegetable Glycerin Ratio on Ratings of Subjective Effects, Reinforcement Value, and Use in Current Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) vary on a wide range of characteristics that may affect reinforcement value and use. One characteristic is the ratio of two solvents commonly used in most e-liquids: propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG). The goal of this study was to understand how PG/VG ratio affects subjective effects, reinforcement value, and tobacco use patterns among current smokers who try using ENDS. AIMS AND METHODS: Current smokers with minimal ENDS use history (n = 30) sampled, in a double-blind fashion, three different e-liquids that varied in PG/VG ratio (70/30, 50/50, 0/100) while holding constant other aspects of the e-liquid and ENDS. Participants tried each e-liquid before rating the subjective effects on a modified version of the Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire. Reinforcement value was assessed using a preference task where participants chose between the three e-liquids. The impact of each e-liquid on cigarette reinforcement was assessed using a modified version of the Cigarette Purchase Task. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one e-liquid to take home for 1 week. RESULTS: PG/VG ratio had minimal impact on most of the tested outcomes. Participants rated the highest PG concentration as having a stronger "throat hit" than the other two. There was no significant difference between the number of participants who preferred each of the PG/VG ratios in the preference assessment. PG/VG ratio did not affect cigarette or ENDS use during the sampling week. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that PG/VG ratio has minimal impact on subjective effects and reinforcement value in ENDS naive current smokers. IMPLICATIONS: These data suggest that PG/VG ratio, within the range that is commonly used, has minimal impact on subjective effects, reinforcement value, or uptake in current smokers with minimal ENDS experience.

Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes Disrupt the Feedback Loop of Affective States and Smoking Behavior.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking to reduce negative affect has been identified as a key motivational feature of tobacco use. Our recent work suggests that smoking very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes reduces the relationship between negative affect and smoking behavior over a 6-week period. Here, we sought to extend our findings by evaluating whether a gradual or immediate approach to switching to VLNC cigarettes led to a differential reduction in the relationship between affect and smoking behavior over a longer (20-week) period. AIMS AND METHODS: Participants (n = 1250) were adult smokers from 10 US sites randomized to one of three groups: gradual nicotine reduction (15.5, 11.7, 5.2, 2.4, and 0.4 mg of nicotine per gram of tobacco [mg/g]), immediate nicotine reduction (0.4 mg/g), or standard nicotine content cigarettes (15.5 mg/g; control), for 20 weeks. We examined whether the relationship between affect-both negative and positive-and cigarettes per day differed as a function of reduction group. RESULTS: We found that both negative and positive affect were associated with cigarette consumption in the control group, but not in the gradual or immediate reduction groups across the 20 weeks of exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Our results extend previous findings that switching to VLNC cigarettes disrupts the relationship between affect and cigarette consumption by showing that either gradually or immediately reducing cigarette nicotine content achieves this disruption. These findings provide further evidence that switching to VLNC cigarettes reduces nicotine-related reinforcement of cigarette smoking. IMPLICATIONS: These findings support the notion that switching to very low nicotine content cigarettes reduces the association between affect and smoking behavior, and that either a gradual or immediate nicotine reduction approach achieves this reduction. This provides further evidence that switching to very low nicotine content cigarettes weakens reinforcement mechanisms associated with nicotine dependence.

The Role of Compensation in Nicotine Reduction.

The available research on switching from normal nicotine to very low nicotine content cigarettes shows minimal evidence of compensatory smoking. Mathematical estimations suggest that substantial compensation after switching to very low nicotine cigarettes would be impossible. It is likely that smokers who are unable to tolerate the extent of proposed nicotine reduction would switch to other sources of nicotine, rather than try to compensate by smoking more very low nicotine content cigarettes more intensely.

Anticipated Effects of Nicotine Reduction on Youth Smoking Initiation and Maintenance.

This commentary summarizes emerging findings on the potential impact of a nicotine reduction policy on youth and young adults. We conclude that: (1) adolescent smokers and nonsmokers alike are likely to be less sensitive to reinforcement from very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes compared with adults; (2) reducing nicotine in cigarettes to 0.4 mg/g would reduce the abuse potential of cigarettes in adolescents and young adults; (3) findings to date do not support concerns that nicotine reduction leads to compensatory smoking in young smokers; and (4) if the scope of a reduced nicotine product standard were applied to all combusted tobacco products, that would likely maximize public health benefit of this policy.

Effects of Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes on Smoking Behavior and Biomarkers of Exposure in Menthol and Non-menthol Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Because 30% of cigarettes sold in the United States are characterized as menthol cigarettes, it is important to understand how menthol preference may affect the impact of a nicotine reduction policy. METHODS: In a recent trial, non-treatment-seeking smokers were randomly assigned to receive very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNC; 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) or normal nicotine cigarettes (NNC; 15.5 mg/g) for 20 weeks. On the basis of preference, participants received menthol or non-menthol cigarettes. We conducted multivariable regression analyses to examine whether menthol preference moderated the effects of nicotine content on cigarettes per day (CPD), breath carbon monoxide (CO), urinary total nicotine equivalents (TNE), urinary 2-cyanoethylmercapturic acid (CEMA), and abstinence. RESULTS: At baseline, menthol smokers (n = 346) reported smoking fewer CPD (14.9 vs. 19.2) and had lower TNE (52.8 vs. 71.6 nmol/mg) and CO (17.7 vs. 20.5 ppm) levels than non-menthol smokers (n = 406; ps < .05). At week 20, significant interactions indicated that menthol smokers had smaller treatment effects than non-menthol smokers for CPD (-6.4 vs. -9.3), TNE (ratio of geometric means, 0.22 vs. 0.10) and CEMA (ratio, 0.56 vs. 0.37; ps < .05), and trended toward a smaller treatment effect for CO (-4.5 vs. -7.3 ppm; p = .06). Odds ratios for abstinence at week 20 were 1.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.8 to 4.4) for menthol and 9.11 (95% CI = 3.3 to 25.2) for non-menthol VLNC smokers (p = .02) relative to the NNC condition. CONCLUSIONS: Although menthol smokers experienced reductions in smoking, toxicant exposure, and increases in quitting when using VLNC cigarettes, the magnitude of change was smaller than that observed for non-menthol smokers. IMPLICATIONS: Results of this analysis suggest that smokers of menthol cigarettes may respond to a nicotine reduction policy with smaller reductions in smoking rates and toxicant exposure than would smokers of non-menthol cigarettes.

The Impact of Gradual and Immediate Nicotine Reduction on Subjective Cigarette Ratings.

BACKGROUND: A recent clinical trial showed that an immediate transition to very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes, compared with a gradual transition, produced greater reductions in smoking behavior, smoke exposure, and dependence. However, there was less compliance with the instruction to smoke only VLNC cigarettes in the immediate versus gradual reduction condition. The goal of this study was to test whether nicotine reduction method alters subjective ratings of VLNC cigarettes, and whether subjective ratings mediate effects of nicotine reduction method on smoking behavior, smoke exposure, dependence, and compliance. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized trial conducted across 10 sites in the United States. Smokers (n = 1250) were randomized to either a control condition, or to have the nicotine content of their cigarettes reduced immediately or gradually to 0.04 mg nicotine/g of tobacco during a 20-week study period. Participants completed the modified Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire (mCEQ). RESULTS: After Week 20, the immediate reduction group scored significantly lower than the gradual reduction group on multiple subscales of the mCEQ (ps < .001). The Satisfaction subscale of the mCEQ mediated the impact of nicotine reduction method on smoke exposure, smoking behavior, dependence, compliance, and abstinence. Other subscales also mediated a subset of these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: An immediate reduction in nicotine content resulted in lower product satisfaction than a gradual reduction, suggesting that immediate reduction further reduces cigarette reward value. This study will provide the Food and Drug Administration with information about the impact of nicotine reduction method on cigarette reward value. IMPLICATIONS: These data suggest that an immediate reduction in nicotine content will result in greater reductions in cigarette satisfaction than a gradual reduction, and this reduction in satisfaction is related to changes in smoking behavior and dependence.

Correlates of support for a nicotine-reduction policy in smokers with 6-week exposure to very low nicotine cigarettes.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration recently issued an advanced notice of proposed rule-making for reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes to a minimally addictive level. Very little is known about whether use of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes affects support for a nicotine reduction policy. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of using VLNC versus usual brand (UB) cigarettes on support for a nicotine reduction policy and determined whether participant characteristics and responses to VLNC cigarettes were associated with policy support. METHODS: Participants from a cigarette trial who were assigned to either 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco research cigarettes or their UB for 6 weeks were asked about their support for the policy. χ2 tests were used to compare support for the policy between cigarette conditions and logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess covariates associated with policy support. FINDINGS: Policy support did not differ by condition. After 6 weeks of using VLNC cigarettes, 50% of participants supported the policy, 26% opposed and 24% responded 'Don't Know'. Support was higher among those adherent to smoking only VLNC cigarettes (65%) compared with those who were non-adherent (44%). Older participants and those interested in quitting had increased odds of support. Cigarette satisfaction, perceived harm and perceived nicotine content were not significantly associated with support. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking VLNC cigarettes did not affect support for a nicotine reduction policy. Understanding predictors of policy support and opposition will help public health officials to maximise the public health acceptance and impact of this policy (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01681875 Post-Results).

Whether to push or pull? Nicotine reduction and non-combusted alternatives - Two strategies for reducing smoking and improving public health.

Combustible cigarettes remain the most harmful and addictive tobacco product, and reducing the prevalence of smoking continues to be a critical public health goal. While nicotine is the constituent primarily responsible for addiction to cigarettes, most of the harm associated with smoking comes from byproducts of tobacco combustion. Recently, two different approaches for reducing the harms of smoking have emerged, both of which focus on breaking the link between the addiction to nicotine and the harms caused by smoking. First, the addictive potential of cigarettes could be minimized by requiring a large reduction in the nicotine content of cigarettes. Evidence for a nicotine reduction policy thus far shows that the use of very low nicotine content cigarettes results in a reduction in the number of cigarettes people smoke per day and a reduction in cigarette dependence. Second, emerging alternative nicotine delivery systems (ANDS) like electronic cigarettes may provide sufficient nicotine to act as substitutes for cigarettes while delivering much lower levels of toxicants. Evidence suggests that the emergence of ANDS has increased the percentage of smokers who are able to quit. The present paper will briefly review the evidence for each of these approaches, and consider what contemporary reinforcement and addiction theories can tell us about their likely success. We argue that the most effective endgame approach is one that pursues both nicotine reduction and alternative nicotine delivery systems as complementary.