| Literature DB >> 25540607 |
Robert Cj Campbell1, W Edryd Stephens1, Andrew A Meharg2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoke is a major risk to the health of its users and arsenic is among the components of smoke present at concentrations of toxicological concern. There are significant variations in human toxicity between inorganic and organic arsenic species and the aim of this study was to determine whether there are predictable relationships among major arsenic species in tobacco that could be useful for risk assessment.Entities:
Keywords: Arsenic; Health; Regulation; Smoking; Speciation; Tobacco
Year: 2014 PMID: 25540607 PMCID: PMC4275931 DOI: 10.1186/s12971-014-0024-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tob Induc Dis ISSN: 1617-9625 Impact factor: 2.600
Samples and results
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| |||||||||||||
| CTA OTL-1 | CRM Oriental Tobacco Leaf (Bulgaria) | 611 ± 41 | 2 | 31 ± 1 | 2 | <LoD | 1 | 127 ± 8 | 2 | 158 | 304 ± 3 | 2 | 25.9 |
| CTA VTL-2 | CRM Virginia Tobacco Leaf (Bulgaria) | 1008 ± 39 | 2 | 54 ± 6 | 2 | <LoD | 1 | 256 ± 17 | 2 | 310 | 569 ± 59 | 2 | 30.8 |
| 1R4F | Research Cigarette typical of US low tar blends | 465 ± 3 | 2 | 24 ± 4 | 2 | <LoD | 1 | 96 ± 2 | 2 | 120 | 209 ± 3 | 2 | 25.8 |
| 1R5F | Research Cigarette typical of US ultra-low tar blends | 318 ± 10 | 2 | 37 ± 5 | 2 | <LoD | 1 | 78 ± 26 | 2 | 115 | 154 ± 8 | 2 | 36.2 |
| GBW 08514 | Chinese tobacco standard | 656 | 1 | 26 | 1 | 30 | 1 | 112 | 1 | 168 | 310 | 1 | 25.6 |
| GBW 08515 | Chinese tobacco standard | 429 | 1 | 23 | 1 | <LoD | 1 | 62 | 1 | 85 | 191 | 1 | 19.8 |
|
| |||||||||||||
| B1 | Major US brand | 443 | 1 | 39 | 1 | <LoD | 1 | 79 | 1 | 118 | 192 | 1 | 26.6 |
| B2 | Major UK brand | 191 | 1 | 23 | 1 | <LoD | 1 | 39 | 1 | 62 | 113 | 1 | 32.5 |
| B3 | Major UK brand | 317 | 1 | 21 | 1 | <LoD | 1 | 66 | 1 | 87 | 162 | 1 | 27.4 |
| B4 | Major UK brand | 144 | 1 | <LoD | 1 | <LoD | 1 | 16 | 1 | 16 | 82 | 1 | 11.1 |
| B5 | Major Chinese brand | 816 | 1 | 49 | 1 | 33 | 1 | 218 | 1 | 300 | 409 | 1 | 36.8 |
| B6 | Counterfeit with unusually high arsenic concentration | 3914 ± 90 | 3 | 150 ± 15 | 4 | 45 ± 12 | 4 | 948 ± 36 | 4 | 1143 | 1791 ± 47 | 4 | 29.2 |
| B7 | Counterfeit with unusually high arsenic concentration | 3504 | 1 | 176 | 1 | 116 | 1 | 846 | 1 | 1138 | 1777 | 1 | 32.5 |
| B8 | Counterfeit with high arsenic concentration | 2339 | 1 | 120 | 1 | 42 | 1 | 487 | 1 | 649 | 1180 | 1 | 27.7 |
Reference materials and samples selected for As species determination with corresponding sample codes and comments on the rationale for selection. Certified values are available for the CTA standards [15,16], information values provided for other samples were determined for this study by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry [17]. Concentrations of total As, DMA, MA, inorganic As, sum of extracted As species and extract total As in six reference tobacco and eight cigarette tobacco samples, with extraction efficiencies (∑ As sp./Totals) and column recovery (∑ As sp./Extracts). The limit of detection (LoD) for MA is 39 μg kg-1.
Figure 1Species concentrations. Concentrations of DMA, MA and inorganic arsenic in six reference tobaccos and eight tobacco products (legal and illicit). Error bars set at one standard deviation.
Figure 2Regression analysis. Regressions analysis of extractable inorganic arsenic and DMA + MA against total arsenic in six reference materials, five legal cigarette brands from the US, UK and China, and three counterfeit samples. Regression lines are significant at p = 0.05, and slopes (m) are indicated (both pass through the origin within error).