Evaluating the Role of Nicotine Stereoisomer on Nicotine Pouch Abuse Liability: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Many oral nicotine pouch (ONP) brands use synthetic nicotine, which typically contains a racemic (50:50) mixture of nicotine's two stereoisomers: S-nicotine and R-nicotine. Because tobacco-derived nicotine contains more than 99% S-nicotine, the effects of R-nicotine in humans are not well known. We compared systemic nicotine exposure and product appeal of ONPs containing more than 99% S-nicotine versus racemic nicotine. AIMS AND METHODS: N = 18 adult smokers (Mage = 45 years, 66.7% male, 77.8% White) enrolled in a three-visit single-blind, randomized crossover study. During each visit, participants used one wintergreen-flavored, 3 mg nicotine ONP for 30 min following at least12 h nicotine abstinence. Study ONP #1 contained more than 99% S-nicotine and the other two study ONPs contained racemic nicotine (collapsed for analyses). Plasma nicotine assessments and measures of withdrawal relief occurred at t = 0, 5, 15, 30, 60, and 90 min; measures of product appeal were assessed following ONP use. RESULTS: Using the ONP with more than 99% S-nicotine resulted in greater plasma nicotine concentration from 15 to 90 min (p < .0001) and greater maximum plasma nicotine concentration than the ONPs with racemic nicotine (M = 9.9 ng/mL [SD = 2.5] vs. M = 5.7 ng/mL [SD = 2.8], respectively; p < .0001). Product liking and withdrawal relief were similar across ONPs, although participants reported more "bad effects" when using the ONP with more than 99% S-nicotine. CONCLUSIONS: Participants reported few subjective differences in ONPs according to nicotine stereoisomer, but plasma nicotine concentration was greater for ONPs using more than 99% S-nicotine. ONPs with more than 99% S-nicotine (vs. racemic nicotine) might be better substitutes for cigarettes, but research into other ONP characteristics (eg flavors, freebase nicotine) is needed to inform regulation. IMPLICATIONS: Little is known about the effects of racemic (vs. S-) nicotine in humans. In a sample of adults who smoke cigarettes, we identified that oral nicotine pouches containing racemic nicotine exposed participants to less nicotine than oral nicotine pouches containing only S-nicotine, but both types of oral nicotine pouches held similar, moderate appeal. Additional research evaluating the roles that flavorings, total nicotine concentration, and freebase nicotine play in the abuse liability of oral nicotine pouches would inform comprehensive product regulations to support public health.

Evaluating the effects of nicotine concentration on the appeal and nicotine delivery of oral nicotine pouches among rural and Appalachian adults who smoke cigarettes: A randomized cross-over study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) probably offer reduced harm compared with cigarettes, but independent data concerning their misuse liability are lacking. We compared nicotine delivery and craving relief from ONPs with different nicotine concentrations to cigarettes. DESIGN: This was a single-blind, three-visit (≥ 48-hour washout), randomized-cross-over study. Participants were encouraged to complete all study visits in less than 1 month. SETTING: The study took place in Rural/Appalachian Ohio. PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised 30 adults who smoke cigarettes. Participants (meanage = 34.5) were 60% men and 90% White. INTERVENTION: Participants who were ≥ 12-hour tobacco-abstinent used: (1) a 3-mg nicotine concentration ONP, (2) a 6-mg nicotine concentration ONP and (3) usual brand cigarette in separate visits. ONPs (wintergreen Zyn) were used for 30 minutes; cigarettes were puffed every 30 sec for 5 minutes. MEASUREMENTS: Plasma nicotine and self-reported craving were assessed at t = 0, 5, 15, 30, 60 and 90 minutes. The primary outcome was plasma nicotine concentration at t = 30 minutes. A secondary outcome was craving relief at t = 5 minutes. FINDINGS: At t = 30, mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] plasma nicotine was 9.5 ng/ml (95% CI = 7.1, 11.9 ng/ml) for the 3 mg nicotine ONP, 17.5 ng/ml (95% CI = 13.7, 21.3) for the 6 mg nicotine ONP and 11.4 ng/ml (95% CI = 9.2, 13.6 ng/ml) for the cigarette. Mean plasma nicotine at t = 30 minutes differed between the 3- and 6-mg nicotine ONPs (P = 0.001) and between the 6-mg nicotine ONP and cigarette (P = 0.002). Mean (95% CI) craving at t = 5 minutes was lower for the cigarette (mean = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.61, 1.39) than either the 3 mg (mean = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.68, 2.82; P < 0.0001) or 6 mg nicotine (mean = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.60, 2.79; P < 0.0001) ONP. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult smokers, using 6-mg nicotine concentration oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) was associated with greater plasma nicotine delivery at 30 minutes than 3-mg ONPs or cigarettes, but neither ONP relieved craving symptoms at 5 minutes as strongly as a cigarette. Accelerating the speed of nicotine delivery in ONPs might increase their misuse liability relative to cigarettes.

Perceptions of oral nicotine pouches & their marketing among Ohio Appalachia smokers and smokeless tobacco users.

BACKGROUND: Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are novel products, gaining popularity and marketed as "tobacco-free" alternatives to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT), but their public health impact is unknown. This study qualitatively examined ONP appeal and perceptions among cigarette smokers and SLT users from Ohio Appalachia. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted 10 virtual focus groups with smokers (n = 19) and smokeless tobacco users (n = 18) from Appalachia Ohio aged ≥21 to examine perceptions of risks and benefits, substitutability for cigarettes and SLT, and ONP marketing. We transcribed focus groups verbatim, thematically coded transcripts, and analyzed coded data for prominent themes. RESULTS: Participants perceived ONPs to have similar or less risk than cigarettes/SLT but prominently discussed gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks. Addiction risk was thought to be comparable to cigarettes/SLT, citing "nicotine is nicotine." Participants viewed ONPs to be situational rather than complete substitutes for cigarettes/SLT, viewing them as "cleaner," more socially acceptable, and discrete. Despite appealing features of ONP marketing, participants surmised ads would appeal to youth, new users, tobacco users seeking to cut down/quit, or to "high class," "white-collar" demographics. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' perceptions of ONPs and their marketing suggest ONPs are more likely to be used as situational versus complete substitutes for cigarettes and SLT. While situational substitution could exacerbate disparities in Appalachia by facilitating more frequent tobacco/nicotine use, complete substitution could reduce disparities. Research is needed to understand how perceptions, the appeal of ONP marketing, and novel product features translate to patterns of use to understand ONPs' potential impact.

Awareness of alcohol as a breast cancer risk factor and intentions to reduce alcohol consumption among U.S. young adult women.

Alcohol consumption is prevalent in young adult women and linked with breast cancer risk. Research to inform interventions targeting alcohol consumption as a breast cancer prevention strategy is limited. We examined young women's awareness of alcohol use as a breast cancer risk factor, identified correlates of awareness, and determined how awareness and conceptual predictors relate to intentions to reduce drinking. Women aged 18-25 years who drank alcohol in the past month (N = 493) completed a cross-sectional survey. Measures captured sociodemographics, breast cancer risk factors, awareness of alcohol use as a breast cancer risk factor, intentions to reduce drinking, and conceptual predictors. Analyses examined correlates of awareness and associations between awareness, conceptual predictors, and intentions to reduce drinking. Awareness was low (28%) and intentions to reduce drinking were moderate (M = 2.60, SD = 0.73, range 1-4). In multivariable analyses, awareness was associated with greater worry about cancer, beliefs that there's not much one can do to reduce cancer risk and everything causes cancer, higher perceived breast cancer risk, and stronger beliefs that reducing drinking reduces breast cancer risk. Awareness was not associated with intentions to reduce drinking. Younger age, older age of alcohol initiation, negative attitudes towards alcohol, fewer friends consuming alcohol, and stronger self-efficacy were associated with intentions to reduce drinking. Few young women recognize alcohol consumption as a breast cancer risk factor. Researchers and policymakers can apply our findings to design new or refine existing interventions to optimize their impact on awareness and alcohol consumption in young women.

Alcohol use is common among young adult women and is linked to an increased risk of breast cancer later in life. This study aimed to identify factors linked to young women's awareness of alcohol as a breast cancer risk factor and factors linked to intentions to reduce drinking. We surveyed 493 women aged 18­25 who resided in Ohio and reported drinking alcohol in the past month. Only 28% of the women were aware that alcohol use increases breast cancer risk, and intentions to reduce drinking were moderate. Factors associated with awareness of alcohol use as a breast cancer risk factor included cancer worry, believing there's not much you can do to lower your risk of cancer, believing everything causes cancer, higher perceived risk of breast cancer, and stronger beliefs that drinking less reduces breast cancer risk. Factors linked to intentions to reduce drinking included younger age, older age at first drinking, more negative attitudes about alcohol, believing fewer friends drink, and higher confidence to reduce drinking. The findings can help researchers and policymakers create new interventions to educate young women about the link between alcohol consumption and breast cancer risk and reduce alcohol use as a breast cancer prevention strategy.