Respiratory symptoms and outcomes among cigar smokers: findings from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study waves 2-5 (2014-2019).

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms by which cigarette smoking increases the risk of respiratory disease have been studied. However, less is known about risks of respiratory symptoms and outcomes associated with smoking cigars, and risks by cigar types have not been previously explored. The aim of this study was to examine associations between cigar use, including traditional cigars, cigarillos, filtered cigars, and dual cigar and cigarette use, and functionally important respiratory symptoms (FIRS), lifetime asthma diagnosis, uncontrolled asthma, and new cases of FIRS. METHODS: Data from Waves 2-5 (2014-19) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative longitudinal study, were analyzed in two ways. For cross-sectional analysis, the analytic sample included adults 18 and older at each wave, resulting in 44,040 observations. Separately, longitudinal analyses were assessed among adults 18 and older at Wave 2, resulting in 7,930 individuals. Both analyses excluded adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or non-asthma respiratory disease. RESULTS: Current established cigarillo smokers had higher odds of having FIRS (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.72; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.74) compared to never smokers of cigarillos and cigarettes, after adjusting for covariates. Current established filtered cigar smokers had higher odds of asthma diagnosis (AOR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.66) while current established dual smokers of filtered cigars and cigarettes had higher odds of uncontrolled asthma (AOR: 5.13; 95% CI: 1.75, 15.02) compared to never smokers of filtered cigars or cigarettes. Both current established cigar smokers and current established dual smokers of cigarettes and cigars had higher odds of new FIRS compared to never cigar or cigarette smokers (AORs: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.60 for exclusive cigars and 2.55; 95% CI 1.57, 4.14 for dual smokers). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that cigar smokers or dual smokers of cigars and cigarettes have greater odds of FIRS, asthma, and uncontrolled asthma and that new incidence of FIRS is higher among any cigar smokers compared to never cigar or cigarette smokers. Understanding health impacts associated with cigar use provides information for supporting policy development, as well as for designing clinical interventions focused on smoking cessation for cigars.

Self-reported knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol concentration in cannabis products among cancer patients and survivors.

PURPOSE: Cannabis use may introduce risks and/or benefits among people living with cancer, depending on product type, composition, and nature of its use. Patient knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) concentration could provide information for providers about cannabis use during and after treatment that may aide in risk and benefit assessments. This study aimed to examine knowledge of THC or CBD concentration among patients living with cancer who consume cannabis, and factors associated with knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations. METHODS: People living with cancer who consumed cannabis since their diagnosis (n = 343) completed an anonymous, mixed-mode survey. Questions assessed usual mode of delivery (MOD), knowledge of THC/CBD concentration, and how source of acquisition, current cannabis use, and source of instruction are associated with knowledge of THC/CBD concentration. Chi-square and separate binary logistic regression analyses were examined and weighted to reflect the Roswell Park patient population. RESULTS: Less than 20% of people living with cancer had knowledge of THC and CBD concentration for the cannabis products they consumed across all MOD (smoking- combustible products, vaping- vaporized products (e-cigarettes), edibles-eating or drinking it, and oral- taking by mouth (pills)). Source of acquisition (smoking-AOR:4.6, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR:5.8, p < 0.00, edibles-AOR:2.6, p < 0.04), current cannabis use (edibles-AOR:5.4, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR: 11.2, p < 0.00, and oral-AOR:9.3, p < 0.00), and source of instruction (vaping only AOR:4.2, p < 0.05) were found to be variables associated with higher knowledge of THC concentration. CONCLUSION: Self-reported knowledge of THC and CBD concentration statistically differed according to MOD, source of acquisition, source of instruction, and current cannabis use.

Cardiovascular disease outcomes among established cigar users 40 years and older: Findings from the population assessment of tobacco and health (PATH) study, waves 1-5 (2013-2019).

This study examined associations between established cigar use and prevalence and incidence of cardiovascular diseases (CVD; congestive heart failure, stroke, or heart attack/needed bypass surgery) among U.S. adults, 40 years or older. Using Waves 1-5 (2013-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, incidence (Nindividuals (Nind) = 6,692; Nobservations (Nobs) = 23,738) and prevalence (Nind = 7,819; Nobs = 33,952) of CVD outcomes were examined using weighted generalized estimating equations (WGEEs) among adults who were exclusive current/former established cigar smokers (ever cigar smokers who have smoked fairly regularly), exclusive current/former established cigarette smokers (lifetime smokers of 100 or more cigarettes), dual current/former established cigarette and cigar smokers compared with never smokers of cigars or cigarettes, adjusting for covariates. The population-averaged incidence of CVD from one wave to next among exclusive current/former established cigar smokers during a six-year period based on WGEEs was low (overall average rate of 3.0 %; 95 % CI: 1.2, 7.0). Compared with never users, exclusive current/former established cigar smokers (OR = 1.67, 95 % CI: 1.11, 2.51) and exclusive current/former established cigarette smokers (OR = 2.12, 95 % CI: 1.45, 3.09) were more likely to have any CVD outcome in unadjusted analyses. When adjusted for covariates, only exclusive current/former established cigarette use was associated with CVD outcomes (AOR = 1.60, CI: 1.07, 2.40). Results suggest that exclusive established use of cigars or duration of exclusive cigar use was not associated with lifetime CVD prevalence compared with never cigar or cigarette smokers, which is important in understanding health outcomes in cigar users.

Perceptions of harmfulness of heated tobacco and nicotine vaping products compared to cigarettes, and the association of advertising exposure on harm perceptions among adults who smoke in South Korea: Cross-sectional findings from the 2020 ITC Korea Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Heated tobacco products (HTPs) and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) both are legal consumer products in the Republic of Korea. Little is known about perceptions of harmfulness of HTPs and NVPs relative to cigarettes in South Korea among adults who smoke, and how exposure to marketing may be associated with harmfulness perceptions. METHODS: This study used data from the 2020 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Korea Survey, and included 3713 adult (aged 19 years) cigarette smokers who were: 1) exclusive smokers (n=1845); 2) dual HTP + cigarette consumers (n=1130); 3) dual NVP + cigarette consumers (n=224); and 4) triple consumers (all three products, n=514). Weighted multinomial regression models were conducted to estimate smokers' perceptions of harmfulness of HTPs and NVPs compared to cigarettes, NVPs to HTPs, and self-reported exposure to HTP/NVP advertising. Analyses compared the perceptions of harmfulness between the four different consumer groups, and tested whether exposure to HTP/NVP advertising was associated with perceptions of lower relative harm. RESULTS: Among all respondents, 27.5% believe that HTPs are less harmful than cigarettes and 23.4% believe that NVPs are less harmful than cigarettes. Exclusive cigarettes smokers were significantly less likely to perceive that HTPs and NVPs are less harmful than cigarettes compared to dual HTP + cigarette consumers, dual NVP + cigarette consumers, and triple consumers (all p<0.001). Half of respondents perceive NVPs as equally harmful as HTPs (14.1% perceive NVPs as more harmful than HTPs). Exposure to HTP/NVP advertising was associated with perceiving these products as less harmful than cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: About one-quarter of Korean cigarette smokers perceive HTPs and NVPs as less harmful than cigarettes. Further investigation is required to understand how harm perceptions and HTP/NVP advertising are related to changes in product use, such as switching between products, using multiple products, or discontinuing all product use.

Perceived Truthfulness of Reduced Lung Cancer Risk Advertising Claims Influences Consumers' Intention to try and to Purchase Snus.

The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of a reduced risk claim about lung cancer, presented in various formats, on smokers' and non-smokers' interest in trying Camel Snus and intention to purchase Camel Snus. We varied claim formats by varying advertising messages for Camel Snus in 4 ways (1) text only; (2) bar chart; (3) text/testimonial; and (4) bar chart/testimonial. 3001 participants were recruited from a web-based consumer specialty panel via an email invitation. In 2015, a second study was conducted, using similar methods, where 3001 additional participants were recruited. Overall, controlling for other factors, the presence of an MRTP claim was not significantly related to interest in trying snus [X2 (4) = 8.567, P = .073], or purchase intentions [X2 (4) = 1.148, P = .887]. Relative to a control ad where no explicit health risk claim was made, the Graphic + testimonial [OR = 1.29] or Text only [OR = 1.41] claims did significantly increase interest in trying Camel Snus. However, the adverting format did not impact interest in purchasing Camel Snus. While current smokeless tobacco users (95%) and smokers (59%) expressed interest in trying Camel Snus, non-tobacco users (7%) showed low interest in trying or purchasing Camel Snus (P < .001). Interest in trying Camel Snus was stronger in younger smokers compared to older smokers. Among current smokers, worry about lung cancer (the key focus of the reduced risk claim) was not associated with interest in trying Camel Snus or with purchase intention [OR = .91, 95% CI: .72, 1.14] or intention to purchase snus [OR = 1.07, 95% CI: .86, 1.32]. Future research should evaluate how claim and messaging formats influence perceived truthfulness and whether this effect differs among sub-groups of consumers, such as adolescents, those with tobacco-related disease, and former smokers. It will also be helpful to understand whether perceptions of ad truthfulness result in changes in product use patterns over time. In sum, giving people truthful, credible information about relative product risks, such as through authorized MRTP claims, is important, but such information is likely insufficient to get smokers to switch.

Patterns of Premium and Nonpremium Cigar Use in the United States: Findings from Wave 6 (2021) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the characteristics of premium cigar use patterns is essential for minimizing public health harms. Typically, premium cigars are handmade, larger, more expensive, and without the characterizing flavors that are present in other cigar types: Nonpremium traditional cigars, cigarillos, and filtered cigars. AIMS AND METHODS: Self-reported brand and price data were used from Wave 6 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study to define and estimate premium versus nonpremium cigar use among U.S. adults, as well as to explore cigar smoking patterns, purchasing behavior, and reasons for use by cigar type. RESULTS: In 2021, 0.9% (95% CI = 0.7-1.0) of adults were premium cigar users, compared to 0.4% of nonpremium traditional cigar users (95% CI = 0.3-0.5), 1.1% of cigarillo users (95% CI = 1.0-1.2), and 0.6% filtered cigar users (95% CI = 0.5-0.7). Premium cigar users were overwhelmingly male (97.7%), and 35.8% were aged ≥55 years. The average premium cigar price/stick was $8.67, $5.50-7.00 more than other cigar types. Compared to other cigar types, significantly fewer premium cigar users had a regular brand with a flavor other than tobacco (~15% vs. 38%-53%). Though flavors remained the top reason for premium cigar use, they were less likely to endorse flavors as a reason for use than other cigar users (~40% vs. 68-74%). Premium cigar users had a lower prevalence (aRR: 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25-0.55) of dual use of cigars and cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Although <1% of U.S. adults use premium cigars, their use and purchasing characteristics continue to differ from other cigar types, highlighting the importance of capturing data specific to premium cigar use. IMPLICATIONS: This manuscript extends previous research from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report, "Premium cigars: Patterns of use, marketing, and health effects" by utilizing the most recent PATH Study data (Wave 6) to examine patterns of cigar use, including purchasing behavior and reasons for use, by cigar type (eg, premium traditional cigars, nonpremium traditional cigars, cigarillos, and filtered cigars). The findings support continued research on patterns of premium cigar use, which differ from use patterns of other cigar types.

Support for pictorial health warning labels on cigarette packages in the United States among adults who currently smoke or quit smoking: Findings from the ITC US Smoking and Vaping Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finalized new pictorial health warnings (PHWs), covering 50% of the front and back of the pack; however, legal challenges from cigarette manufacturers have prevented the new warnings from being implemented. About 70% of adults in the general US population support PHWs. This study assessed support for PHWs in 2016, 2018 and 2020 among US adults (aged ≥18 years) who currently smoke or formerly smoked cigarettes. We also assessed factors related to support. METHODS: Respondents included adults who currently or formerly smoked cigarettes and participated in at least one wave of the US ITC Smoking and Vaping Surveys: Wave 1 (2016, n=2557); Wave 2 (2018, n=2685); and Wave 3 (2020, n=1112). We assessed changes in support for PHWs between 2016 and 2020, and assessed factors related to support (support vs oppose/don't know). Analyses were conducted on weighted data. RESULTS: Overall, 38.0% of respondents supported PHWs in 2016, with a significant increase to 44.7% in 2018 (p<0.001), and leveling off to 45.0% in 2020 (2018 vs 2020, p=0.91). Support was highest among former smokers and lowest among daily smokers in all three survey years. Support for PHWs at all survey years was significantly higher among those who formerly smoked, were younger (aged 18-39 vs ≥40 years), those who identified as Black (vs White), and planned to quit smoking (vs not planning to quit). There were no differences by income level, education level, or sex. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of US adults who smoke cigarettes or quit smoking supported PHWs in 2020, with support being higher among younger adults, ethnic minorities, and those who formerly smoked. Support increased between 2016 and 2018, but not between 2018 and 2020. Similar to other studies, fewer current and former smokers supported PHWs compared to the US adult general population.

Differences in demographics and behaviors across two web-based survey platforms: Observations from a study of risk perceptions of heated tobacco products (HTPs).

With an escalating popularity of online surveys in behavioral research, it is critical to understand how different sources of participants can yield differing outcomes. While Mturk has been used for online surveys for almost two decades, a recent introduction of online panels allows researchers to choose participants from variety of pools. This study aims to contribute to existing knowledge of how participants from different online platforms differ in their characteristics and behavioral responses which might affect the outcomes. 300 participants were recruited each from Mturk and Prime panels for a 20 mins long survey assessing perceptions and intentions to use Heated tobacco products (HTPs). Participants answered demographic and tobacco-use related questions including their vaccination and masking for COVID-19. They were shown a picture and description of a recently launched HTP. Further, participants answered questions about their awareness of HTPs, risk perception of health conditions from use of different tobacco products (cigarettes, e-cigarettes and HTPs) and perceived severity of COVID-19 infection in smokers, vapers and HTP users. Results showed significant differences in Mturk and Prime panel participants' demographics and tobacco-use. Prime panels showed more racially diverse population (chi-sq = 10.07, p < 0.02) and significantly more current smokers (chi-sq = 44.74, p < 0.01) and current e-cigarette users (chi-sq = 38.04, p < 0.01) compared with Mturk. Mean perception scores for COVID risk in tobacco users were significantly different between Prime panels and Mturk. Study highlights significant differences in sample composition and responses that might be helpful in choosing one online platform over another based on specific study requirements.

Common Measures to Evaluate Flavored Tobacco Products: Recommendations From the Tobacco Centers for Regulatory Science (TCORS) Flavored Tobacco Products Measurement Subcommittee.

INTRODUCTION: Flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and tobacco products are associated with the initiation and progression of tobacco use. With recent restrictions around flavored products, it is critical to measure both the product and the flavor being used. The Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS) Flavored Tobacco Products Measurement Subcommittee (FTPMS) was established to develop core measures to assess flavored tobacco and ENDS product usage, facilitate data harmonization, replicability, and comparisons across studies. AIMS AND METHODS: The FTPMS used a mixed-method approach to inform the development of recommended measures (first use, current use, reasons for use) to assess tobacco and ENDS product flavors. This included reviewing existing surveys, identifying priority areas, developing new measures, cognitive testing, and finalization of recommended measures. RESULTS: Recommended measures were selected from national surveys (e.g. PATH study) and survey items used in TCORS studies to evaluate first use, current use, and reasons for use of tobacco and ENDS products. Response options were expanded for questions about specific flavors and adapted to allow for assessments relevant to recent federal policies. Supplemental measures were developed for researchers conducting more in-depth research around flavored products. CONCLUSIONS: Using an expert consensus process supplemented with cognitive testing, the FTPMS developed recommendations for core and supplemental measures for flavored tobacco and ENDS products. Harmonizing data on these factors for flavored tobacco and ENDS products are critical for researchers and may provide actionable evidence to federal, state, and local regulators and policymakers, as well as support evaluations of policies restricting flavors in these products. IMPLICATIONS: The development of core measures to assess first use, current use, and reasons for use of flavored tobacco and ENDS products will facilitate data harmonization, replicability, and comparisons across studies conducted in different samples or across communities with varying levels of regulation for these products. Use of these standardized measures will allow for a greater understanding of the role of flavors and helps to build a more robust evidence base to inform regulatory decisions to reduce tobacco and ENDS use at the population level.

Adapting Community Educational Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing the Feasibility and Efficacy of a Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention by Mode of Delivery.

Few eligible patients receive lung cancer screening. We developed the Lung AIR (awareness, information, and resources) intervention to increase community education regarding lung cancer screening. The intervention was designed as an in-person group intervention; however, the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated adapting the mode of delivery. In this study we examined intervention feasibility and efficacy overall and by mode of delivery (in-person group vs. one-on-one phone) to understand the impact of adapting community outreach and engagement strategies. Feasibility was examined through participant demographics. Efficacy was measured through pre/post knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about lung cancer screening, and intention to complete screening. We reached N = 292 participants. Forty percent had a household income below $35,000, 58% had a high school degree or less, 40% were Hispanic, 57% were Black, and 84% reported current or past smoking. One-on-one phone sessions reached participants who were older, had lower incomes, more current smoking, smoked for more years, more cigarettes per day, lower pre-intervention lung cancer screening knowledge, and higher pre-intervention fear and worry. Overall pre/post test scores show significant increases in knowledge, salience, and coherence, and reduced fear and worry. Participants in the one-on-one phone sessions had significantly higher increases in salience and coherence and intention to complete screening compared to participants in the in-person group sessions. The Lung AIR intervention is a feasible and effective community-based educational intervention for lung cancer screening. Findings point to differences in reach and efficacy of the community-based intervention by mode of delivery.

Electronic cigarette use intensity measurement challenges and regulatory implications.

Assessing tobacco use intensity allows researchers to examine tobacco use in greater detail than assessing ever or current use only. Tobacco use intensity measures have been developed that are specific to tobacco products, such as asking smokers to report number of cigarettes smoked per day. However, consensus on electronic cigarette use intensity measures that can be used for survey research has yet to be established due to electronic cigarette product and user behavior heterogeneity. While some survey measures that attempt to assess electronic cigarette use intensity exist, such as examining number of 'times' using an electronic cigarette per day, number of puffs taken from an electronic cigarette per day, volume of electronic cigarette liquid consumed per day, or nicotine concentration of electronic cigarette liquid, most measures have limitations. Challenges in electronic cigarette measurement often stem from variations across electronic cigarette device and liquid characteristics as well as the difficulty that many electronic cigarette users have regarding answering questions about their electronic cigarette device, liquid, or behavior. The inability for researchers to measure electronic cigarette use intensity accurately has important implications such as failing to detect unintended consequences of regulatory policies. Development of electronic cigarette use intensity measures, though not without its challenges, can improve understanding of electronic cigarette use behaviors and associated health outcomes and inform development of regulatory policies.

Price promotion receipt and use progression of any tobacco, cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars among US youth between 2016 and 2018.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco price promotions may prompt tobacco trials among youth. We assessed whether receiving price promotions for any tobacco, cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars was associated with product use progression. METHODS: The analysis included a nationally representative sample of youth never tobacco users (aged 12-16; n=9405) from wave 4 (2016-2018) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. We assessed past-year receipt of price promotions and use progression (initiation, current use and ever regular use) for any tobacco, cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars 1 year later at wave 4.5 (2017-2018). Multivariable logistic regressions were used to examine the associations between receiving price promotions and use progression by product type, controlling for covariates. RESULTS: At wave 4.5, 9.4% of youth initiated any tobacco (1.8%, 7.8% and 0.9% for cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars), and 5.4% received any price promotions (3.8%, 3.1% and 0.9% for cigarettes, e-cigarettes and cigars). Receiving any tobacco price promotions was associated with any tobacco initiation (adjusted OR (AOR)=1.77; 95% CI 1.30 to 2.41), current use (AOR=1.54; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.23) and ever regular use (AOR=1.76; 95% CI 1.04 to 3.10). Receiving e-cigarette price promotions was associated with e-cigarette initiation (AOR=1.78; 95% CI 1.18 to 2.26), current use (AOR=1.88; 95% CI 1.17 to 3.02) and ever regular use (AOR=2.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 4.40). The associations specific to cigarettes and cigars were only found for product initiation. DISCUSSION: Receiving price promotions for any tobacco and e-cigarettes was respectively associated with the use progression of any tobacco and e-cigarettes. Continuous monitoring of tobacco marketing activities is needed to identify youth-appealing price promotion tactics.

Predictors of E-cigarette and Cigarette Use Trajectory Classes from Early Adolescence to Emerging Adulthood Across Four Years (2013-2017) of the PATH Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study examines predictors of trajectories of cigarette and e-cigarette use among a cohort of US adolescents transitioning into young adulthood. Comparing trajectories of each tobacco product is important to determine if different intervention targets are needed to prevent progression to daily use. METHODS: Latent trajectory class analyses identified cigarette and e-cigarette use (never, ever excluding past 12-month, past 12-month (excluding past 30-day (P30D)), P30D 1-5 days, P30D 6+ days) trajectory classes, separately, among US youth (12-17; N = 10,086) using the first 4 waves (2013-2017) of data from the nationally representative PATH Study. Weighted descriptive analyses described the class characteristics. Weighted multinomial logistic regression analyses examined demographic, psychosocial, and behavioral predictors of class membership. RESULTS: Younger adolescents 12-15 years had lower tobacco use compared to 16-17 year olds and less stable classes. In the 16-17 year group, there were five unique trajectories of cigarette smoking, including a Persistent High Frequency class. Four e-cigarette use trajectories were identified; but not a persistent use class. Shared predictors of class membership for cigarettes and e-cigarettes included mental health problems, other tobacco use, marijuana use, and poorer academic achievement. Male sex and household tobacco use were unique e-cigarette trajectory class predictors. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that initiation with e-cigarettes as the first product tried was associated with cigarette progression (nor cigarettes as first product and e-cigarette progression). Interventions should focus on well-established risk factors such as mental health and other substance use to prevent progression of use for both tobacco products. IMPLICATIONS: Using nationally representative data and definitions of use that take into account frequency and recency of use, longitudinal 4-year trajectories of e-cigarette and cigarette use among US adolescents transitioning into young adulthood were identified. Results among 16-17-year olds revealed a class of persistent high frequency cigarette smoking that was not identified for e-cigarette use. Cigarette use progression was not associated with e-cigarettes as the first product tried. Risk factors for progression of use of both products included mental health and other substance use, which are important prevention targets for both tobacco products.

Exposure to IQOS ads and reduced exposure claims, and association with perceived risk from COVID-19 on IQOS purchase and use intentions: results from a web-based survey.

Introduction: IQOS was authorized to be marketed as a reduced exposure product by the Food and Drug Administration in October 2020 during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Those who smoke may be more sensitive to reduced exposure marketing claims and may have an increased inclination toward IQOS use. We evaluated the likelihood of trying and purchasing IQOS as a function of exposure to ads, product appeal, and COVID-19 risk perceptions using the original IQOS ads with reduced exposure marketing. Method: An online cross-sectional survey recruited 604 US adults (18-45 years), both who smoke and do not smoke. Participants saw one of the six randomly assigned IQOS ads with or without reduced exposure claims, and they answered questions about product appeal and likelihood to try and purchase IQOS. Generalized linear models were used to examine associations. Results: A per unit increase in product appeal was associated with a greater likelihood of purchasing (B = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.15-0.18) and trying IQOS (B = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.14-0.18). Current smokers and former e-cigarette users reported greater intentions to try IQOS than never-smokers and never e-cigarette users, respectively. Likelihood to purchase IQOS was associated with greater confidence in not contracting COVID-19 (B = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.21). No significant differences were observed between different ad conditions. Current (B = -0.34, 95% CI = -0.50-(-0.19)) and former (B = -0.92, 95% CI = -0.15-(-0.68)) cigarette smokers who were someday e-cigarette users reported less intentions to purchase IQOS than never e-cigarette users. However, never smokers who were someday (B = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.27-0.89; B = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.39-0.98) and former e-cigarette (B = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15-0.61) users reported greater intentions to purchase and try IQOS, respectively. Discussion: IQOS may have a higher product appeal, especially for those who currently smoke and those who have lower risk perceptions from COVID-19. Among never smokers, those who currently use or have used e-cigarettes in the past may be more receptive to IQOS marketing. The data are informative for potential trends in the use of IQOS in the future and may have implications for marketing regulations of heated tobacco products (HTPs).

Impact of the FDA flavour enforcement policy on flavoured electronic cigarette use behaviour changes.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use behaviour changes after the implementation of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restriction on the sale of all unauthorised flavoured cartridge-based e-cigarettes other than tobacco and menthol flavour on 6 February 2020, as well as factors associated with these changes. METHODS: Through Amazon's Mechanical Turk service, 3533 current adult flavoured e-cigarette users (who were not exclusive tobacco-flavoured or menthol-flavoured e-cigarette users) were recruited for an online survey from 8 July to 29 July 2021. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify significant factors associated with quitting e-cigarette use, switching to other flavoured electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products, switching to combustible tobacco products, switching to menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes and switching to tobacco-flavoured e-cigarettes. RESULTS: Resulting from the FDA flavour enforcement policy, the top four e-cigarette use behaviour changes were: (1) switching to other flavoured ENDS products such as the tank system or disposable e-cigarettes (29.24%), (2) switching to menthol-flavoured pod systems (18.09%), (3) switching to combustible tobacco products (14.12%) and (4) switching to tobacco-flavoured pod systems (12.03%). There were 4.9% participants who indicated that they quit e-cigarette use. Overall, multiple factors, especially past 30-day use of certain flavours, were associated with different behaviour changes. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the FDA flavour enforcement policy on cartridge-based e-cigarette was associated with significant e-cigarette behaviour changes, with multiple factors being associated with these changes. These results provide important information for future regulations of flavoured e-cigarette products.

E-cigarette and tobacco product use among NYS youth before and after a state-wide vaping flavour restriction policy, 2020-2021.

SIGNIFICANCE: Reducing youth e-cigarette use is a New York State (NYS) public health priority. In May 2020, a state-wide restriction on flavoured e-cigarettes, except tobacco flavour, was passed. This study examines changes in nicotine product use behaviour among youth around the time of the state-wide vaping flavour restriction. METHODS: NYS data from the US International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Youth Tobacco and E-cigarette Tobacco and Vaping Survey were analysed cross-sectionally from February 2020 (n=955), August 2020 (n=946), February 2021 (n=1030) and August 2021 (n=753). Online surveys were conducted among youth 16-19 years. Weighted descriptive statistics and regression models were used to describe changes in nicotine product use behaviour. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity and perceived family socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Significant decreases in past 30-day e-cigarette use (20%-11%), cigarette (7%-4%), and dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (5%-2%) were observed over the 2-year period in NYS. Over 95% of vapers still reported using a non-tobacco-flavoured e-cigarette following the restriction, with fruit-flavoured being the most popular at each time point. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all NYS youth continued to vape flavours that were restricted in NYS. While youth past 30-day vaping prevalence decreased significantly from 2020 to 2021, increased flavour restriction compliance could result in an even greater decrease. Continuous monitoring is important to better understand perceptions, use patterns and access at the individual level, retail level and population level to inform future enforcement and restrictions.

Exploring the psychometric properties of a tripartite model of risk perception (TRIRISK) in a general U.S. population sample.

Objective: Risk perceptions are key constructs in some theories of health behavior. A tripartite model of risk perception, the TRIRISK model, was developed to assess deliberative, affective, and experiential components of risk perception. The current paper attempts to replicate the factor structure of the TRIRISK measure for cancer and extend the structure to respiratory illness. Methods and Measures: Participants 18 or older were recruited using an address-based sample in New York State to participate in a Web-based survey. We employed the TRIRISK questionnaire with respect to cancer and respiratory illness. Confirmatory Factor Analyses were conducted in Mplus to validate the TRIRISK model in our sample. TRIRISK model fit across demographic and behavioral groups was tested using multiple-group models. Results: Of the 704 people included in the analysis, the mean age of participants was 46.9, the majority reported being female (58.5%), and most were White (81.7%). For cancer and respiratory illness, items loaded on the respective constructs as expected. Overall, the TRIRISK model framework fits well across differing subgroups, suggesting that this is a valid model of risk perception to use in a general population sample. Conclusion: These results provide further evidence that the TRIRISK model is a good model to use for risk perceptions in tobacco control research. The TRIRISK model can be used to communicate risk to encourage positive health behaviors among most sociodemographic groups.

Do Current Smokers and Ex-Smokers Who Use Nicotine Vaping Products Daily Versus Weekly Differ on Their Reasons for Vaping? Findings from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey.

This study examined reasons why adults who currently smoke or formerly smoked cigarettes use nicotine vaping products (NVPs) by vaping frequency (daily vs. weekly) stratified by smoking status. This cross-sectional study included 3070 adults from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (Australia, Canada, England, United States) who reported using a NVP (vaping) at least weekly and who either currently smoke (n = 2467) or formerly smoked (n = 603). Respondents were asked to select the reason(s) they use NVPs, including to manage their smoking (reduce/quit or remain quit) and/or for reasons unrelated to managing smoking (e.g., to save money, enjoyment, flavours). We found that both current and former smokers endorsed an average of six reasons for vaping, with those vaping daily reporting significantly more reasons than those vaping weekly. Among current smokers, 72.8% reported vaping may help them quit smoking, 13.0% reported vaping to reduce smoking but not to quit, and 14.2% reported vaping only for reasons other than to reduce or quit smoking. The most common reason for vaping among current smokers was to reduce smoking (81.3%). Current smokers vaping daily were significantly more likely than those vaping weekly to report using a NVP to reduce smoking, for enjoyment, to reduce harm to themselves and others, to quit smoking, likeable flavours, and to save money. The most common reason cited for vaping by respondents who formerly smoked was enjoyment, with those who vaped daily more likely than those who vaped weekly to report vaping for enjoyment and to reduce harm to themselves. Nearly all reported vaping to help stay abstinent from smoking (92.3%), with no significant difference by vaping frequency. In conclusion, a majority of respondents reported using NVPs to manage their smoking (reduce/quit smoking or remain quit), particularly those vaping daily. Those who were vaping daily also endorsed a greater number of reasons other than managing smoking relative to those who were vaping weekly.

Evaluating the Immediate Impact of Graphic Messages for Vaping Prevention among Black and Latino Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the immediate impact of vaping prevention graphic messages on the susceptibility to future vaping among Black and Latino adolescents (ages 12 to 17). Graphic messages (available in English and Spanish) were developed using participatory research procedures with Black and Latino adolescents. Recruitment was conducted by a team of diverse, bilingual (English and Spanish), trained recruiters. Participants (n = 362) were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 schema to receive one of four graphic messages (health rewards, financial rewards, autonomy, and social norms). Overall, all graphic messages but one showed a slight decrease in the number of participants susceptible to future vaping, though none of these differences was statistically significant. The graphic message on health rewards decreased the number of participants susceptible to future vaping the most (55.7% vs. 50%, at pre- vs. post-viewing, p = 0.125), followed by the graphic messages on social norms and autonomy (55.1% vs. 52.8%, p = 0.687; 55.4% vs. 52.2%, p = 0.435; respectively). The graphic message on financial rewards increased the number of participants susceptible to future vaping slightly (52.7% vs. 53.8%, p = 1.00). Future research is needed to evaluate susceptibility to future vaping before and after exposure to different and/or repeated vaping prevention graphic messages.

Oral Nicotine Product Awareness and Use Among People Who Smoke and Vape in the U.S.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco-free oral nicotine products are an emerging class of noncombustible nicotine products. Oral nicotine product sales have increased since 2016, although little research has investigated consumer awareness, use, or correlates of oral nicotine product use. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the prevalence and correlates of oral nicotine product awareness and use. METHODS: This paper is a cross-sectional analysis of 2,507 U.S. participants from Wave 3 (February-June 2020) of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey, a population-based survey of current and former cigarette smokers and nicotine vaping product users in the U.S. Oral nicotine product awareness and use prevalence were compared with those of heated tobacco products. Analyses conducted in late 2021 assessed the correlates of oral nicotine product awareness and use such as demographic characteristics, tobacco use (cigarettes, nicotine vaping products, smokeless tobacco), and tobacco quit attempts. RESULTS: Almost 1 in 5 respondents claimed to have heard of oral nicotine products, 3.0% reported ever use, and 0.9% were current users, all of which were lower than for heated tobacco products. Ever use of oral nicotine products was more common among younger adults (e.g., aged 18-24 years), males, and current users of smokeless tobacco. Oral nicotine product prevalence was higher among those who reported having made attempts to stop smoking or vaping. CONCLUSIONS: Oral nicotine product use was low among current and former smokers and nicotine vaping product users. Oral nicotine product users were demographically similar to use among individuals who smoke/vape and also use smokeless tobacco. Future studies are needed to understand emerging oral nicotine products, particularly whether they are being used as product supplements (dual use), replacements (switching), or cessation aids (quitting).