Andrew A Strasser1, Rebecca L Ashare, Madeline Kaufman, Kathy Z Tang, A Clementina Mesaros, Ian A Blair. 1. Corresponding Author: Andrew A. Strasser, Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Nicotine Addiction, Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3535 Market Street, Suite 4100, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. strasse3@mail.med.upenn.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As part of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration charged the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee with developing a report and recommendations about the effect of menthol in cigarettes on the public health. The purpose of this study was to examine smoking behaviors, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective responses when switching from a novel menthol cigarette to a non-menthol cigarette to isolate the effect of menthol and to approximate the effect a menthol ban might have on smokers. METHODS:Thirty-two adult smokers completed this 35-day randomized, open-label, laboratory study. After a 5-day baseline period, participants were randomized to the experimental group (n = 22) where they would smoke menthol Camel crush for 15 days followed by 15 days of non-menthol Camel crush, or the control group (n = 10) where they smoked their own brand cigarette across all periods. Participants attended study visits every 5 days and completed measures of smoking rate, smoking topography, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective responses. RESULTS: Although total puff volume tended to increase when the experimental group switched from menthol to non-menthol (P = 0.06), there were no corresponding increases in cigarette consumption or biomarkers of exposure (P > 0.1). Subjective ratings related to taste and smell decreased during the non-menthol period (P < 0.01), compared with the menthol. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest menthol has minimal impact on smoking behaviors, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective ratings. IMPACT: When controlling for all other cigarette design features, menthol in cigarettes had minimal effect on outcome measures.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: As part of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration charged the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee with developing a report and recommendations about the effect of menthol in cigarettes on the public health. The purpose of this study was to examine smoking behaviors, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective responses when switching from a novel menthol cigarette to a non-menthol cigarette to isolate the effect of menthol and to approximate the effect a menthol ban might have on smokers. METHODS: Thirty-two adult smokers completed this 35-day randomized, open-label, laboratory study. After a 5-day baseline period, participants were randomized to the experimental group (n = 22) where they would smoke mentholCamel crush for 15 days followed by 15 days of non-mentholCamel crush, or the control group (n = 10) where they smoked their own brand cigarette across all periods. Participants attended study visits every 5 days and completed measures of smoking rate, smoking topography, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective responses. RESULTS: Although total puff volume tended to increase when the experimental group switched from menthol to non-menthol (P = 0.06), there were no corresponding increases in cigarette consumption or biomarkers of exposure (P > 0.1). Subjective ratings related to taste and smell decreased during the non-menthol period (P < 0.01), compared with the menthol. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest menthol has minimal impact on smoking behaviors, biomarkers of exposure, and subjective ratings. IMPACT: When controlling for all other cigarette design features, menthol in cigarettes had minimal effect on outcome measures.
Authors: N H Caskey; M E Jarvik; W J McCarthy; M R Rosenblatt; T M Gross; C L Carpenter Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 1993-10 Impact factor: 3.533
Authors: Kirsten Lochbuehler; E Paul Wileyto; Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Jordan Z Burdge; Kathy Z Tang; Joseph N Cappella; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Samantha G Farris; Elizabeth R Aston; Teresa M Leyro; Lily A Brown; Michael J Zvolensky Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-04-17 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Megan L Saddleson; Emily Gup; Angela Halstead; Darren Mays; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Robert J Wickham; Eric J Nunes; Shannon Hughley; Phillip Silva; Sofia N Walton; Jinwoo Park; Nii A Addy Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Kenneth A Perkins; Nicole Kunkle; Valerie C Michael; Joshua L Karelitz; Eric C Donny Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Kathy Z Tang; Rachel L Dumont; E Paul Wileyto; Steven G Carmella; Stephen S Hecht; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Andrew A Strasser; Valentina Souprountchouk; Amanda Kaufmann; Sonja Blazekovic; Frank Leone; Neal L Benowitz; Robert A Schnoll Journal: Tob Regul Sci Date: 2016-10
Authors: Ping-Ching Hsu; Renny S Lan; Theodore M Brasky; Catalin Marian; Amrita K Cheema; Habtom W Ressom; Christopher A Loffredo; Wallace B Pickworth; Peter G Shields Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 4.254