Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco as an Outgrowth of the 1988 Surgeon General's Report on Nicotine Addiction: Reflections of the Early Presidents.

INTRODUCTION: The Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco began in the United States as a scientific organization "to stimulate the generation and dissemination of new knowledge concerning nicotine and tobacco in all its manifestations." Now in its 30th year, the Society is taking on new challenges in tobacco control, nicotine vaping, product regulation, and public policy. AIMS AND METHODS: This Review describes the formative years of the Society from the perspective of researchers who were in leadership positions during that time, documenting how biobehavioral and clinical research in the first 10 years was a continuation of the scientific mission of the 1988 United States Surgeon General's Report on Nicotine Addiction and summarizing organizational innovations during each president's term of office. CONCLUSIONS: The Society's promotion of scientific research served as a catalyst for funding, policy, and regulation, setting the stage for its influence and credibility. IMPLICATIONS: This Commentary provides context and an overview of the scientific research and the organizational innovations that occurred during the early years of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco using publications and available documentation. The Society was able to thrive because biobehavioral research on nicotine addiction provided the scientific underpinnings for the tobacco control enterprise as a whole. The objective of this Commentary is to describe formative events in the Society's history based on the accomplishments of its early leaders.

The 2022 Ferno Award Address: CrEATE, an Efficient Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy.

Dozens of drugs have been evaluated in recent decades for initial evidence of efficacy to aid smoking cessation (i.e. "early Phase 2" testing, according to U.S. FDA terminology), with the vast majority failing to show efficacy. Even small randomized clinical trials (RCTs), the most common early Phase 2 tests, are costly undertakings, made more unappealing by their high likelihood of failure. At the same time, another early Phase 2 approach, acute tests of drug effects on surrogate endpoints such as withdrawal or craving severity, are more practical but have little predictive clinical validity. Described here is an innovative procedure that optimally combines the validity of clinical trials with the practical advantages of surrogate endpoint studies to more efficiently determine whether or not a novel drug warrants continued clinical development. This CrEATE procedure, or Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy, does so by assessing short-term quit success in smokers highly motivated to quit when briefly treated with active drug versus placebo in a crossover design, so that quit efficacy from both conditions is compared within participants. The program to develop and evaluate CrEATE demonstrates its sensitivity to efficacy from all three FDA-approved first-line cessation medications (NRT, varenicline, bupropion), tested here as model drugs, as well as specificity in identifying lack of efficacy with a drug known to be ineffective for cessation (modafinil). CrEATE has subsequently been used to evaluate a few novel interventions, concluding they lack efficacy in increasing quit success. Future directions for the potential utility of CrEATE are provided. Implications: The ability of CrEATE to reach a Go/No Go decision more quickly and with far less cost lowers the risk of failure, meaning widespread use of the procedure should encourage the evaluation of more novel candidate drugs. With its greater efficiency, failed tests, unfortunately the most likely outcome in early Phase 2 studies, will cause less waste of resources. At the same time, CrEATE tests that indicate a novel treatment has efficacy will justify the substantial time and expense of moving forward to evaluate the drug in late Phase 2 RCTs.

Balancing Consideration of the Risks and Benefits of E-Cigarettes.

The topic of e-cigarettes is controversial. Opponents focus on e-cigarettes' risks for young people, while supporters emphasize the potential for e-cigarettes to assist smokers in quitting smoking. Most US health organizations, media coverage, and policymakers have focused primarily on risks to youths. Because of their messaging, much of the public-including most smokers-now consider e-cigarette use as dangerous as or more dangerous than smoking. By contrast, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that e-cigarette use is likely far less hazardous than smoking. Policies intended to reduce adolescent vaping may also reduce adult smokers' use of e-cigarettes in quit attempts. Because evidence indicates that e-cigarette use can increase the odds of quitting smoking, many scientists, including this essay's authors, encourage the health community, media, and policymakers to more carefully weigh vaping's potential to reduce adult smoking-attributable mortality. We review the health risks of e-cigarette use, the likelihood that vaping increases smoking cessation, concerns about youth vaping, and the need to balance valid concerns about risks to youths with the potential benefits of increasing adult smoking cessation.

A Procedure to Standardize Puff Topography During Evaluations of Acute Tobacco or Electronic Cigarette Exposure.

INTRODUCTION: Documenting factors that influence differential sensitivity to acutely inhaled nicotine products requires carefully controlling the amount of exposure (dose), and thus a procedure by which to control such exposure. METHODS: We evaluated consistency of puff volume from intermittent acute exposures to smoked tobacco cigarettes (study 1, n = 45, plus a comparison study of uninstructed use with n = 59) and to vaped electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes; study 2, n = 27 naive to e-cigarettes) in adult-dependent smokers. All in primary studies 1 and 2 participated in research administering different nicotine levels in each product under blind conditions, one per session using within-subject designs. In both studies, participants followed an automated instructional procedure on a computer monitor standardizing the timing and amount of exposure to each product during a given trial, with four trials per session, each separated by 20 minutes. Puff volume per trial via Clinical Research Support System (CReSS) was the primary dependent measure to determine consistency across trials via intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: Control over topography with both inhaled products was demonstrated by highly significant ICCs for puff volume across trials. Instructed control with own brand was generally better in study 1 than with uninstructed smoking in the comparison sample, as expected. As intended, reliability of puff volume generally did not differ by menthol preference or sex in either study, but ICCs in study 2 tended to be lower for some men using the placebo e-cigarette. CONCLUSIONS: This instructional procedure may substantially improve control over amounts of acute exposure to tobacco or e-cigarette use. IMPLICATIONS: Control over topography in studies of acute exposure to these inhaled products can potentially aid validity of research into differential sensitivity to use, so findings can be attributed to factors of interest and not to variable exposure. Our procedure minimized variability in exposure to the same product and between moderate nicotine products, but remaining differences suggest that compensation for very low or no nicotine commercial products may be difficult to totally eliminate with these instructions alone. Further study is needed to determine this procedure's utility with other inhaled products among experienced users and when comparing different products in between-groups analyses.

A Forced-Choice Procedure to Assess the Acute Relative Reinforcing Effects of Nicotine Dose per se in Humans.

INTRODUCTION: A method to assess acute reinforcement due to nicotine may aid identification of doses needed to maintain dependence. After describing development of a forced-choice procedure, results are presented from two studies using it to determine the relative reinforcing effects of nicotine dose per se. AIMS AND METHODS: Choice between a higher versus a very low or no nicotine option, via smoking (Study 1, n = 59) and via nasal spray (Study 2, n = 42), was assessed in nontreatment-seeking dependent smokers abstinent overnight. Using a within-subject design, different nicotine levels for each product were administered under blind conditions, initially to assess their discriminability (Study 1: 1.3-17 mg/g each vs. 0.4 mg/g nicotine Spectrum cigarettes; Study 2: 2.5 µg/kg vs. 0 µg/kg nicotine per spray). At the end of sessions for each study, participants engaged in forced-choice trials to assess preference, requiring a fixed number of puffs/sprays for one and/or the other. RESULTS: Confirming the procedure's validity, the choice of the higher nicotine option was significantly greater than that for the very low or no nicotine option in both studies. In Study 1, choice relative to 0.4 mg/g was greater for cigarettes 5.3 mg/g or more but not 2.3 mg/g or less (p = .003 for the interaction of higher content vs. 0.4 mg/g comparison). In Study 2, choice was greater for the nicotine versus placebo spray (p < .005), as nicotine was preferred nearly twice as much as the placebo. CONCLUSION: This forced-choice procedure may efficiently determine the relative reinforcing value of a nicotine dose per se. IMPLICATIONS: The forced-choice procedure described here may identify nicotine doses that are acutely reinforcing in dependent smokers. A priori research of choice comparisons between small versus zero nicotine doses could inform clinical research in larger and more diverse samples to determine nicotine contents in cigarettes, and perhaps in other commercial products, that are not reinforcing and, thus, likely to reduce the risk of their addictiveness. This procedure may also be applicable to assessing changes in acute nicotine reinforcement due to different product formulations, novel drugs, or other manipulations, perhaps helping inform development of new interventions for cessation or harm reduction.

Research on Behavioral Discrimination of Nicotine May Inform FDA Policy on Setting a Maximum Nicotine Content in Cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: The Food and Drug Administration may set a maximum nicotine content in cigarettes to minimize smoking's addictiveness. Our recent research may indirectly support setting levels applicable to the population of dependent smokers below 1 mg/g (mg nicotine/g of tobacco filler). METHODS: Using a within-subjects design in laboratory-based studies totaling 61 nontreatment seeking adult dependent smokers, Spectrum research cigarettes with nicotine contents ranging from 1.3 to 17 mg/g (just one per session) were compared with the lowest content available, 0.4 mg/g. Identified for each participant was the smallest difference in nicotine content, or "threshold," between cigarettes that still supported behavioral discrimination (ie, ability to objectively distinguish their difference). The next lower nicotine content cigarette, not discriminated (by definition), was labeled their "subthreshold." Subjective perceptions and choice behavior were also assessed. RESULTS: Thresholds varied widely among all 61 smokers but, importantly, fewer than 7% of smokers could discriminate the two lowest, 1.3 versus 0.4 mg/g nicotine, meaning more than 90% could not do so. Moreover, we found a consistent association between their nicotine discrimination threshold and their subjective perceptions and subsequent reinforcement behavior later in the session. Specifically, a participant's discrimination threshold cigarette was also more highly rated and preferred (ie, self-administered), whereas their subthreshold cigarette was rated similarly to the 0.4 mg/g and not preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette nicotine content below the threshold for perceiving nicotine's effects (ie, its discriminability) in nearly all smokers from a no nicotine comparison is likely below 1.0 mg/g, or less than or equal to 10% of that in typical commercial cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: Cigarettes with nicotine contents able to be discriminated (threshold) are also reinforcing, and those unable to be discriminated are not reinforcing, as anticipated. Yet, research explicitly comparing cigarettes with contents below 1.0 mg/g versus no nicotine (ie, a "placebo") is needed with larger samples. Results may confirm what nicotine content lower than 1.0 mg/g is below the threshold for discrimination (and self-administration) in the vast majority (>95%) of adult dependent smokers as well as teens beginning to smoke. Identifying that content would strongly support the Food and Drug Administration policy to establish a maximum nicotine content in cigarettes that will not maintain dependence.

Reinforcement Enhancing Effects of Nicotine Via Patch and Nasal Spray.

INTRODUCTION: Confirming preclinical findings, nicotine in humans (via smoking) enhances reinforcement from nondrug rewards. Recent demonstration of similar effects with nicotine via e-cigarettes suggests they may also occur when using nicotine replacement therapies (NRT). METHODS: Effects of nicotine via NRT patch or nasal spray were assessed on responding reinforced by music, video, or monetary rewards, or for no reward (control). Nontreatment seeking smokers (N = 31) participated in three virtually identical experimental sessions, each following overnight abstinence (CO ≤ 10 ppm). In a fully within-subjects design using a double-dummy procedure, these sessions involved: (1) nicotine patch (Nicoderm 14 mg) plus placebo spray, (2) placebo patch plus nicotine spray (Nicotrol, 2 × 1 mg/trial), or (3) placebo patch plus placebo spray. Session order was counter-balanced. RESULTS: Relative to placebo, reinforced responding due to nicotine via spray or patch was greater for video reward (both p < .01) but not for music reward (both p > .10). Similar results for NRT spray and patch confirms preclinical findings indicating no difference between fast and slow nicotine delivery, respectively, on reinforcement enhancing effects. Withdrawal relief was unrelated to these effects of nicotine via NRT on nondrug reinforcement. CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine from NRT has some reinforcement enhancing effects in humans, possibly in a manner consistent with nicotine via e-cigarettes but not tobacco smoking. Our findings could suggest differential dose-dependency of available rewards to enhanced reinforcement by nicotine. Such effects may help contribute to the efficacy of NRT for aiding smoking cessation, but more research focusing on dose-dependency of these nicotine actions is needed. IMPLICATIONS: Acute nicotine from smoking enhances reinforced responding for nondrug sensory rewards. Yet, nonsmoked nicotine, including from NRT medications of patch and nasal spray, may act more selectively across rewards, perhaps due to lower dosing exposure. Our results suggest that nicotine via NRT enhances responding for visual (video) reward, but not from auditory (music) reward, just as in prior results using e-cigarettes. Withdrawal relief from NRT was unrelated to reinforced responding, consistent with positive (and not negative) reinforcement from this nicotine. Further research evaluating the dose-response effects of nicotine may clarify differences in enhanced reinforcement depending on the type of available reward.

Acute perceptions of preferred cigarettes when blinded to brand.

BACKGROUND: Marketing claims often have promoted specific perceptions that users should expect from acutely smoking that cigarette brand. Yet, little controlled study has determined the degree to which actual perceptions are based on the cigarette's tobacco constituents in the absence of knowledge about the brand's identity. METHODS: 194 adult dependent smokers rated their perceptions on 'liking', 'satisfying', 'strong' and perceived amount of 'nicotine' after smoking ad lib one of their preferred brands of cigarettes. All did so either when blinded (n=118) or unblinded (n=76) to the brand they were given, with the blinding conditions from separate studies. These between-groups secondary analyses determined differences in perceptions based on blinding to brand, controlling for age and cigarettes/day. RESULTS: All perceptions were lower for those smoking own brand under blinded versus unblinded conditions, as hypothesised. Consistent with lowered perceptions for smoking one's own brand obtained from the 118 blinded to brand, their 'somewhat' ratings for a 'how similar to own brand' item indicated uncertainty, just mid-way between 'not at all' and 'very much' on the 0-100 visual analogue scale. (The 76 unblinded were already informed it was their own brand.) CONCLUSIONS: Acute perceptions of one's own cigarette are substantially lower when smokers are simply unaware of brand, relative to those aware it is their preferred brand. Results support the notion that perceptions of smoking own brand are enhanced by marketing efforts to associate brands with expectations of pleasurable subjective effects, beyond the impact due solely to the cigarette's manufactured product constituents.

Sex Differences in Subjective Responses To Moderate Versus Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes.

Introduction: Men and women may be differentially sensitive to the acute perceptual responses to smoking cigarettes that vary in nicotine content ("dose") but are matched on non-nicotine constituents. Methods: Dependent adult smokers (43 M, 31 F) took four controlled puffs from Spectrum research cigarettes that were moderate (16-17 mg/g) or very low (0.4 mg/g) in nicotine content, and matched on "tar." To ensure reliable responses, each cigarette was administered singly five times in random order under blind conditions, with one or the other provided every 15 minutes over a 2.5-hour session following overnight abstinence. Subjective perceptions (eg, "satisfying", "how much nicotine") were rated after each cigarette. Results: Subjective ratings differed due to cigarette nicotine content, as expected, and did so differentially between men and women. The interaction of nicotine content by sex was significant for most rated subjective perceptions of the cigarette, as multivariate analyses showed that differences due to nicotine content were highly significant for men (p < .001) but only marginal for women (p = .08). Conclusions: Relative to men, women's subjective responses to acute smoking are less sensitive to differences in cigarette nicotine content. To our knowledge, this is the first comparison of sex differences in response to very carefully controlled doses of smoked nicotine per se. Further research should examine possible sex differences in nicotine dosing administered by other smoked and nonsmoked methods, as well as the developmental pattern of these differences during onset and during cessation of dependent smoking. Implications: Subjective perceptions of smoking cigarettes varying in nicotine contents differ between men and women. These results with research cigarettes are similar to other studies with carefully dosed nicotine administration by other means, supporting the notion that women, relative to men, are less sensitive to pharmacological factors and more sensitive to nonpharmacological factors in acute cigarette smoking. Future studies are warranted to examine sex differences in other responses to controlled nicotine intake via smoking, and via other smoked and nonsmoked methods of administering nicotine doses.

Validating Use of Internet-Submitted Carbon Monoxide Values by Video to Determine Quit Status.

INTRODUCTION: Daily visits to biochemically verify continuous smoking abstinence via expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) may deter participation in cessation trials. One way to reduce need for daily visits while continuing to monitor abstinence success may be use of a recent procedure to verify abstinence from daily CO values via the Internet. This method requires participants submit to study staff video recordings of themselves correctly using a CO monitor. However, it has not been clearly demonstrated that those classified quit via Internet-submitted videos of CO would be reliably classified quit when assessed in lab. METHODS: Our study examined agreement in quit status from Internet-submitted CO values with quit status via CO collected in later same-day lab visits. Participants (n = 23) were from a short-term cessation study who agreed to record and submit videos of offsite CO testing, in addition to attending daily lab visits. All CO values were obtained via Bedfont pico+ Smokerlyzer monitors, with CO < 8 ppm indicating quit. During two 4-day practice quit attempts, a video was submitted before daily lab visits, up to eight videos each. RESULTS: Of the total of 150 videos submitted, 97 videos indicated "not quit" and 53 "quit." Cohen's Kappa indicated substantial agreement in quit status between assessments, 0.70, p < .001, as 85% of the videos indicating "quit" CO were also "quit" CO in lab. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, these results are the first validation of daily Internet-submitted CO values to confirm daily quit status, supporting the utility of this approach for close monitoring of continuous abstinence. IMPLICATIONS: This study compared consistency between quit status from CO values submitted over the Internet and quit status via CO collected in later same-day lab visits. Findings indicate substantial agreement in quit status between these two methods of CO assessment. Our results validate the use of Internet-submitted CO values to verify daily quit status. This method can be used in future cessation trials as a means to biochemically validate continuous abstinence without the burden of daily lab visits or relying on self-report of recent smoking lapses.

Assessing Discrimination of Nicotine in Humans Via Cigarette Smoking.

INTRODUCTION: Nicotine's interoceptive stimulus effects likely help explain smoking's reinforcing efficacy, but human studies have been limited by difficulties controlling dosing via tobacco inhalation. Our objective was to describe a procedure to study nicotine discrimination via smoking. METHODS: Dependent smokers abstinent overnight (>12 hours) were first "trained" to discriminate between two cigarettes differing in nicotine content, based on four puffs of exposure, and then tested on whether they successfully acquired that discrimination. After piloting with Quest brand commercial cigarettes, 29 subjects engaged in the main study with cigarettes available through NIDA (Spectrum; 16mg vs. 0.4mg nicotine content). Discrimination training first involved two trials, one with each cigarette, prior to six testing trials. Due to results with the first 20 subjects, the remaining nine received two training trials with each cigarette (four total). Subjective perceptions were also assessed during each testing trial, and puff choice between the two cigarettes available concurrently was assessed after testing, on the last two trials. RESULTS: All five pilot subjects successfully discriminated Quest 1 versus Quest 3 (defined by at least five out of six trials correct, ie, >80%). Yet, only 10 of 20 subjects (50%) were able to discriminate the two Spectrum cigarettes based on two training trials. After changing to four training trials, eight of nine subjects were able to discriminate (89%). Subjective perceptions and puff choice differed between cigarettes more in those able versus unable to discriminate them. CONCLUSIONS: With sufficient training exposures, smokers can discriminate nicotine between cigarettes differing in nicotine contents. IMPLICATIONS: The interoceptive stimulus effects of nicotine are critical to understanding reinforcement from cigarette smoking behavior. Because of the very recent availability of Spectrum research cigarettes from NIDA, with specific known amounts of nicotine content, the study of nicotine discrimination in humans via cigarette smoking may now be feasible. Our results demonstrate that, with sufficient training, smokers can behaviorally discriminate nicotine from four puffs' exposure between cigarettes differing in nicotine contents. Future research should evaluate human discrimination of nicotine from greater amounts of cigarette smoke exposure, as well as in response to other procedural variations.

Initial Evaluation of Fenofibrate for Efficacy in Aiding Smoking Abstinence.

INTRODUCTION: Primate and rodent models show that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-alpha (PPAR-α) ligands, including fibrate medications, reduce nicotine reinforcement, reward, and related effects. We tested fenofibrate, the most common U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved fibrate for lipid control versus placebo for initial evidence of efficacy in smoking cessation using a validated cross-over procedure for early Phase 2 evaluations. METHODS: Adult dependent smokers (N = 38) in this 4-week within-subjects study were those already intending to try to quit in the next 2 months. All smoked ad libitum during weeks 1 (baseline) and 3 (washout) and began fenofibrate (160 mg/d; dosing approved for lipid control) or placebo near the end of weeks 1 and 3. Following each 4-day dose run-up, they were then instructed to try to quit for 4 days (Tuesday-Friday) during weeks 2 and 4, with the order of medication conditions counter-balanced and administered double-blind. Abstinence was verified daily in each 4-day quit period by self-report of no smoking in the prior 24 hours and carbon monoxide < 5 ppm. Secondary measures of acute smoking reinforcement and cue reactivity prior to quitting, and smoking reduction when trying to quit, were also assessed. RESULTS: No differences between fenofibrate versus placebo were found on days quit (means ± SEM of 1.8±0.3 vs. 1.9±0.3, respectively). Similarly, there were no differences in any of the secondary measures (all P > .20). CONCLUSIONS: Although higher dosing or other proliferator-activated receptor-alpha agonists may show efficacy, this study indicates that fenofibrate does not aid ability to stop smoking during a brief practice quit period in dependent smokers high in current quit interest.

Sex differences in acute relief of abstinence-induced withdrawal and negative affect due to nicotine content in cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: Acute cigarette smoking may relieve withdrawal and negative affect due to tobacco abstinence to a greater extent in women versus men. Yet, the relative contribution of the cigarette's nicotine content to this sex difference is not clear. METHODS: Non-quitting dependent adult smokers (N = 44; 21 males, 23 females) participated in 2 virtually identical sessions, each after abstaining overnight (CO < 10 ppm) and differing only in the nicotine content of the designated cigarette. While blind to brand markings, they consumed a total of 24 puffs in controlled fashion for 2 hr in each session, either from a nicotine (Quest 1, 0.6 mg) or denicotinized (Quest 3, 0.05 mg) cigarette. Withdrawal symptoms were obtained before and after smoking, and negative affect was assessed after each period of cigarette exposure consisting of 6 puffs every 25 min. RESULTS: Men and women did not differ in baseline withdrawal and negative affect due to overnight abstinence, but reductions in each symptom were significantly influenced by the interaction of sex × nicotine/denicotinized cigarette (both p < .05). In men, but not in women, each symptom was generally decreased more by the nicotine versus denicotinized cigarette, and the nicotine cigarette reduced each to a greater degree in men versus women. CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences in relief of abstinence-induced withdrawal and negative affect due to the nicotine content in cigarettes are consistent with prior research indicating that nicotine per se, compared to non-nicotine smoke stimuli, is less rewarding in women versus men.

Optimal carbon monoxide criteria to confirm 24-hr smoking abstinence.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation is typically verified biochemically by expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) levels below 9 ppm (i.e., ≤8 ppm), but this CO criterion may lead many who have smoked within 24hr to be misclassified as abstinent. METHODS: Adult dependent smokers (N = 261; 124 men, 137 women) prospectively recorded each cigarette smoked and provided CO on five consecutive days during each of two short-term attempts to quit smoking. Participants were those recruited for crossover tests of the effects of placebo versus medication (nicotine patch or varenicline) on the ability to initiate 24-hr abstinence. All had either a high or low interest in permanently quitting smoking soon (within 3 months) and were randomized to the presence or absence of daily ($12) monetary reinforcement of abstinence. RESULTS: Total accuracy of sensitivity to detect smoking (83%) plus specificity to verify abstinence (87%) was optimal at a CO criterion for abstinence below 5 ppm (≤4 ppm), compared with below 9 ppm (sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 97%). Overall CO detection of sensitivity and specificity was higher in those with high versus low quit interest, but reinforcement of abstinence made no difference. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate a CO criterion half that used in most clinical research may optimally validate 24-hr cessation and reduce misclassification of smokers as "abstinent."

Possible reinforcement enhancing effects of bupropion during initial smoking abstinence.

INTRODUCTION: Due to a drop in nicotine, smoking cessation may attenuate reinforcement from sensory stimuli unrelated to nicotine intake. Recent rodent research suggests that bupropion may reverse this attenuation, perhaps helping explain its efficacy in aiding cessation. METHODS: In a within-subjects, crossover study, smokers responded on a simple computer task for brief music reward available on a progressive ratio 50% schedule. Testing was done on three separate occasions: after ad lib smoking during prequit baseline and on the first day of two brief quit attempts while taking bupropion or placebo, in counter-balanced order. Number of operant responses was the measure of reinforcement. To more clearly assess abstinence and medication effects, those meeting 24-hr abstinence criteria (CO < 5 ppm; n = 5) or clearly failing to abstain (CO > 10 ppm; n = 5) during both medication conditions were compared. RESULTS: Among abstainers, repeated measures ANOVA showed that reinforced responding decreased by nearly 50% from baseline after quitting on placebo (p = .03), while responding after quitting on bupropion was similar to that during baseline (-17%; p = .20). In contrast, those unable to abstain showed virtually identical reinforced responding due to either medication or baseline. CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory findings confirm that responding for a reward unrelated to smoking decreases after abstinence and are consistent with animal research showing bupropion effects on enhancing reinforced responding.

Do people serve as cues to smoke?

INTRODUCTION: Recent research has identified that the environments in which smoking has previously occurred can alone, in the absence of any explicit smoking stimuli (e.g., cigarettes, lighters), serve as cues that induce robust craving to smoke. The goal of the present study was to determine if people can similarly function as smoking and nonsmoking cues capable of directly affecting smokers' cue-induced craving. METHODS: Smokers (N = 72) borrowed cameras to take photos of the people in their lives around whom they do and do not smoke ("personal" smoking and nonsmoking people, PS and PN, respectively). Self-report and physiological cue reactivity to those photos were compared with smokers' reactivity to photos of people unknown to them ("standard" smoking and nonsmoking people, SS and SN, respectively). RESULTS: Results suggest that the people around whom smokers regularly smoke (PS) can alone function as cues capable of eliciting patterns of reactivity similar to that evoked by proximal and environment smoking cues, namely, increased craving to smoke, negative affect, and excitement. In contrast, the people around whom smokers do not smoke become associated with not smoking (PN) and serve a potential protective function by reducing craving and increasing calm. CONCLUSIONS: This novel investigation and its results have implications for promoting smoking cessation by developing strategies to manage a smoker's social environment.

CYP2A6 genotype and smoking behavior in current smokers screened for lung cancer.

Functional CYP2A6 genetic variation partially determines nicotine metabolism. In 2005, we examined functional CYP2A6 variants associated with reduced metabolism (CYP2A6*2, CYP2A6*9, CYP2A6*4), smoking history, and change in smoking in 878 adult smokers undergoing lung cancer screening in an urban setting. At one year, 216 quit smoking for more than 30 days while 662 continued smoking. Compared to subjects who smoked 30 cigarettes per day at baseline, the odds of a reduced metabolism genotype was 52% higher in subjects smoking 20-29 cigarettes per day and 86% higher in subjects smoking less than 20 cigarettes per day (p-trend = 0.016). Reduced metabolism genotypes appeared unrelated to quitting. Though related to smoking dose, CYP2A6 may not influence cessation.