BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare cotinine determinations in three biological fluids for assessing environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure in female non-smokers (n=1605) in Italy. METHODS: Information about ETS exposure at home, in the workplace, and in other places within the previous week was collected via questionnaire. Plasma, salivary and urinary cotinine levels were measured. Cotinine levels of > or =0.1 ng/mL for plasma, > or =0.2 ng/mL for saliva, and > or =0.5 ng/mL for urine were used to determine biochemical exposure. RESULTS: Median cotinine levels were significantly higher in exposed than in unexposed women (0.21 vs. 0.05 ng/mL in plasma, 0.80 vs. 0.41 ng/mL in saliva, and 9.74 vs. 5.30 ng/mL in urine). Self-reported ETS exposure was significantly related to biochemical exposure [odds ratio 2.99, (95% CI 2.40-3.72) for plasma; 1.90 (1.51-2.39) for saliva; and 2.67 (2.14-3.34) for urine]. Cotinine significantly increased with increasing exposure level, regardless of the exposure source. Among self-reported exposed subjects, higher percentages of cotinine level above the cut-off, i.e., indicating exposure, were found in saliva (76%) and urine (75%) than in plasma (52%). CONCLUSIONS: In general, women correctly reported their ETS exposure status. Both non-invasive salivary and urinary cotinine determinations seem preferable in epidemiological studies, in view of their higher sensitivity, when compared to plasma cotinine.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare cotinine determinations in three biological fluids for assessing environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure in female non-smokers (n=1605) in Italy. METHODS: Information about ETS exposure at home, in the workplace, and in other places within the previous week was collected via questionnaire. Plasma, salivary and urinary cotinine levels were measured. Cotinine levels of > or =0.1 ng/mL for plasma, > or =0.2 ng/mL for saliva, and > or =0.5 ng/mL for urine were used to determine biochemical exposure. RESULTS: Median cotinine levels were significantly higher in exposed than in unexposed women (0.21 vs. 0.05 ng/mL in plasma, 0.80 vs. 0.41 ng/mL in saliva, and 9.74 vs. 5.30 ng/mL in urine). Self-reported ETS exposure was significantly related to biochemical exposure [odds ratio 2.99, (95% CI 2.40-3.72) for plasma; 1.90 (1.51-2.39) for saliva; and 2.67 (2.14-3.34) for urine]. Cotinine significantly increased with increasing exposure level, regardless of the exposure source. Among self-reported exposed subjects, higher percentages of cotinine level above the cut-off, i.e., indicating exposure, were found in saliva (76%) and urine (75%) than in plasma (52%). CONCLUSIONS: In general, women correctly reported their ETS exposure status. Both non-invasive salivary and urinary cotinine determinations seem preferable in epidemiological studies, in view of their higher sensitivity, when compared to plasma cotinine.
Authors: Noel J Aquilina; Juana Mari Delgado-Saborit; Claire Meddings; Stephen Baker; Roy M Harrison; Peyton Jacob; Margaret Wilson; Lisa Yu; Minjiang Duan; Neal L Benowitz Journal: Environ Int Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Neal L Benowitz; John T Bernert; Jonathan Foulds; Stephen S Hecht; Peyton Jacob; Martin J Jarvis; Anne Joseph; Cheryl Oncken; Megan E Piper Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Craig S Parzynski; Maria Jaszyna-Gasior; Frederick H Franken; Eric T Moolchan Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 2007-12-08 Impact factor: 3.533
Authors: John A Cunningham; Scott T Leatherdale; Peter L Selby; Rachel F Tyndale; Laurie Zawertailo; Vladyslav Kushnir Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Mehmet Hakan Ozdener; Karen K Yee; Ryan McDermott; Beverly J Cowart; Aldona A Vainius; Pamela Dalton; Nancy E Rawson Journal: Tob Induc Dis Date: 2009-07-03 Impact factor: 2.600
Authors: Laura Campo; Elisa Polledri; Petra Bechtold; Giulia Gatti; Giulia Quattrini; Luca Olgiati; Michael Romolo; Andrea Ranzi; Paolo Lauriola; Giuliano Carrozzi; Silvia Fustinoni Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 3.390