Literature DB >> 15206901

Delivery levels and behavior of 1,3-butadiene, acrylonitrile, benzene, and other toxic volatile organic compounds in mainstream tobacco smoke from two brands of commercial cigarettes.

James F Pankow1, Wentai Luo, Ameer D Tavakoli, Cai Chen, Lorne M Isabelle.   

Abstract

Mainstream tobacco smoke (MTS) was collected from Camel and Marlboro cigarettes for the determination of the delivery levels and equilibrium gas/particle partitioning constants K(p) (m(3) microg(-)(1)) of 26 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) of toxicological interest. K(p) values are important for understanding the fractional distribution of each compound of interest between the gas and the particle phases of MTS. The experimental method involved (i) drawing a smoke sample into a Teflon sampling bag at 20 degrees C, (ii) allowing the smoke particulate matter (PM) to collect on the walls of the bag, (iii) sampling the bag to determine the initial gas phase concentration of each VOC, (iv) removing the gas phase from the bag, (v) refilling the bag with humidified nitrogen gas, (vi) reestablishing the gas/PM equilibrium, and (vii) redetermining the gas phase concentrations. For each smoke sample, a comparison of the initial and redetermined gas phase concentrations allowed calculation of the total (i.e., gas + particle) delivery level (= m(tot), ng cig(-)(1)) and K(p) value (= c(p)/c(g)) at 20 degrees C for each compound, where c(p) (ng microg(-)(1)) = concentration in the PM phase and c(g) (ng m(-)(3)) = concentration in the gas phase. Significant deliveries were observed for a number of carcinogenic VOCs. For the Camel cigarettes tested, the average m(tot) values for 1,3-butadiene, acrylonitrile, and benzene were 10(4.6), 10(4.4), and 10(4.8) ng cig(-)(1), respectively; for Marlboro, the m(tot) values were 10(5.0), 10(4.6), and 10(4.7) ng cig(-)(1), respectively. For each of the 26 VOCs, the smoke PM from the two brands yielded very similar K(p) values at 20 degrees C. In addition, the vapor pressure-dependent K(p) values of the 26 VOCs were in close agreement with predictions made by the Pankow theory of absorptive gas/particle partitioning [Pankow, J. F. (1994) Atmos. Environ. 28, 185-188]. These results can be used in general predictions of chemical behavior in tobacco smoke, including deposition mechanisms and rates in the respiratory tract from inhaled MTS. Example calculations are provided to illustrate how the gas phase fraction at equilibrium (f(g,e)) increases strongly with increasing compound vapor pressure and temperature and with dilution of the inhaled tobacco smoke total PM concentration (microg m(-)(3)).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15206901     DOI: 10.1021/tx0342316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol        ISSN: 0893-228X            Impact factor:   3.739


  8 in total

1.  The consequences of the unregulated cigarette.

Authors:  Nigel Gray
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Nicotelline: a proposed biomarker and environmental tracer for particulate matter derived from tobacco smoke.

Authors:  Peyton Jacob; Maciej L Goniewicz; Christopher M Havel; Suzaynn F Schick; Neal L Benowitz
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2013-10-14       Impact factor: 3.739

3.  Urinary concentrations of PAH and VOC metabolites in marijuana users.

Authors:  Binnian Wei; K Udeni Alwis; Zheng Li; Lanqing Wang; Liza Valentin-Blasini; Connie S Sosnoff; Yang Xia; Kevin P Conway; Benjamin C Blount
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-12-12       Impact factor: 9.621

4.  Gas/Particle Partitioning Constants of Nicotine, Selected Toxicants, and Flavor Chemicals in Solutions of 50/50 Propylene Glycol/Glycerol As Used in Electronic Cigarettes.

Authors:  James F Pankow; Kilsun Kim; Wentai Luo; Kevin J McWhirter
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 3.739

5.  Mainstream Smoke Levels of Volatile Organic Compounds in 50 U.S. Domestic Cigarette Brands Smoked With the ISO and Canadian Intense Protocols.

Authors:  Daniel Y Pazo; Fallon Moliere; Maureen M Sampson; Christopher M Reese; Kimberly A Agnew-Heard; Matthew J Walters; Matthew R Holman; Benjamin C Blount; Clifford H Watson; David M Chambers
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 4.244

6.  Comparison of True and Smoothed Puff Profile Replication on Smoking Behavior and Mainstream Smoke Emissions.

Authors:  Marielle C Brinkman; Hyoshin Kim; Jane C Chuang; Robyn R Kroeger; Dawn Deojay; Pamela I Clark; Sydney M Gordon
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 3.739

7.  Benzene formation in electronic cigarettes.

Authors:  James F Pankow; Kilsun Kim; Kevin J McWhirter; Wentai Luo; Jorge O Escobedo; Robert M Strongin; Anna K Duell; David H Peyton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Thirdhand smoke uptake to aerosol particles in the indoor environment.

Authors:  Peter F DeCarlo; Anita M Avery; Michael S Waring
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 14.136

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.