Literature DB >> 10982578

Randomised trial investigating effect of a novel nicotine delivery device (Eclipse) and a nicotine oral inhaler on smoking behaviour, nicotine and carbon monoxide exposure, and motivation to quit.

K O Fagerström1, J R Hughes, T Rasmussen, P W Callas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To monitor the effect of a novel nicotine delivery device that may produce fewer carcinogens (Eclipse) on cigarette smoking, carbon monoxide and nicotine concentrations, and motivation to give up smoking. The smoker's own brand of cigarette and a nicotine replacement product (Nicotrol inhaler) were used as comparisons.
DESIGN: After baseline data were recorded, smokers were randomised to either Eclipse or inhaler for two weeks and then switched to the other product for another two weeks. Thereafter a second baseline was obtained. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifty smokers were included and data are reported for the 40 with complete data sets. The smokers were not trying to quit but were interested in trying a new product to reduce their risk. They visited a smoking clinic 10 times during the six week period of the trial. INTERVENTION: No counselling to aid reduction by Eclipse or inhaler was given. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At each visit smoking status and carbon monoxide concentrations were recorded. In half of the visits withdrawal symptoms, attitudes towards smoking, heart rate, and blood nicotine concentrations were also recorded.
RESULTS: Eclipse use decreased the number of cigarettes smoked per day (cpd) from 19.1 cpd at baseline to 2.1 cpd (p < 0.001), but increased carbon monoxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) from 21.0 ppm to 33.0 ppm (p < 0.001). A similar decrease in cigarettes smoked per day was seen with the Nicotrol inhaler, from 19.1 cpd to 4.8 cpd (p < 0.001), but carbon monoxide decreased from 21.0 ppm to 12.7 ppm (p < 0.001). The blood nicotine concentration remained fairly stable with Eclipse, increasing slightly from 16.8 ng/ml to 18.0 ng/ml, while for the inhaler a significant drop was noted, from 16.8 ng/ml to 12. 2 ng/ml (p < 0.002). Craving and withdrawal did not increase with Eclipse. Few significant adverse events occurred with Eclipse.
CONCLUSIONS: Eclipse can dramatically decrease cigarette consumption without causing withdrawal symptoms or decreases in nicotine concentrations or motivation to quit altogether. Unlike the inhaler, Eclipse produces an increase in carbon monoxide concentration. Thus Eclipse may not be a safer cigarette.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10982578      PMCID: PMC1748373          DOI: 10.1136/tc.9.3.327

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   7.552


  14 in total

1.  Harm-reduction approaches to smoking. The need for data.

Authors:  J R Hughes
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 2.  Nicotine replacement: a new approach to reducing tobacco-related harm.

Authors:  C Jiménez-Ruiz; M Kunze; K O Fagerström
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 16.671

3.  The emerging market for long-term nicotine maintenance.

Authors:  K E Warner; J Slade; D T Sweanor
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-10-01       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Association between atherosclerotic diseases and carboxyhaemoglobin levels in tobacco smokers.

Authors:  N Wald; S Howard; P G Smith; K Kjeldsen
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1973-03-31

5.  Premier 'smokeless cigarettes' can be used to deliver crack.

Authors:  E J Cone; J E Henningfield
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-01-06       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Chemical and biological studies of a cigarette that heats rather than burns tobacco.

Authors:  J D deBethizy; M F Borgerding; D J Doolittle; J H Robinson; K T McManus; C A Rahn; R A Davis; G T Burger; J R Hayes; J H Reynolds
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.126

7.  Effect of nicotine vapour inhalation on the relief of tobacco withdrawal symptoms.

Authors:  E Lunell; L Molander; S J Leischow; K O Fagerström
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  Mortality in relation to tar yield of cigarettes: a prospective study of four cohorts.

Authors:  J L Tang; J K Morris; N J Wald; D Hole; M Shipley; H Tunstall-Pedoe
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-12-09

9.  Human urine mutagenicity study comparing cigarettes which burn or primarily heat tobacco.

Authors:  C J Smith; S C McKarns; R A Davis; S D Livingston; B R Bombick; J T Avalos; W T Morgan; D J Doolittle
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1996-09-26       Impact factor: 2.433

10.  The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire.

Authors:  T F Heatherton; L T Kozlowski; R C Frecker; K O Fagerström
Journal:  Br J Addict       Date:  1991-09
View more
  21 in total

1.  Out of the ashes: the life, death, and rebirth of the "safer" cigarette in the United States.

Authors:  Amy Fairchild; James Colgrove
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Preliminary investigation of the advertising and availability of PREPs, the new "safe" tobacco products.

Authors:  Norval Hickman; Elizabeth A Klonoff; Hope Landrine; Kennon Kashima; Bina Parekh; Senaida Fernandez; Kamala Thomas; Catherine Brouillard; Michele Zolezzi; Jennifer Jensen; Zorahna Weslowski
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2004-08

3.  The time for tobacco industry sponsored PREP evaluation has arrived.

Authors:  T Eissenberg
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 4.  Measures for assessing subjective effects of potential reduced-exposure products.

Authors:  Karen Hanson; Richard O'Connor; Dorothy Hatsukami
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 5.  Postmarketing surveillance for "modified-risk" tobacco products.

Authors:  Richard J O'Connor
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2011-01-20       Impact factor: 4.244

6.  Abuse liability assessment of an electronic cigarette in combustible cigarette smokers.

Authors:  Sarah F Maloney; Alison Breland; Eric K Soule; Marzena Hiler; Carolina Ramôa; Thokozeni Lipato; Thomas Eissenberg
Journal:  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 3.157

7.  Expanding clinical laboratory tobacco product evaluation methods to loose-leaf tobacco vaporizers.

Authors:  Alexa A Lopez; Marzena Hiler; Sarah Maloney; Thomas Eissenberg; Alison B Breland
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 4.492

Review 8.  Assessing consumer responses to potential reduced-exposure tobacco products: a review of tobacco industry and independent research methods.

Authors:  Vaughan W Rees; Jennifer M Kreslake; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Mark Parascandola; Peter G Shields; Gregory N Connolly
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 9.  Clinical trials methods for evaluation of potential reduced exposure products.

Authors:  Dorothy K Hatsukami; Karen Hanson; Anna Briggs; Mark Parascandola; Jeanine M Genkinger; Richard O'Connor; Peter G Shields
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 10.  Developing the science base for reducing tobacco harm.

Authors:  Dorothy K Hatsukami; Anne M Joseph; Mark Lesage; Joni Jensen; Sharon E Murphy; Paul R Pentel; Michael Kotlyar; Eugene Borgida; Chap Le; Stephen S Hecht
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 4.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.