Rachel Z Behar1,2,3, Wentai Luo4, Sabrina C Lin2,3, Yuhuan Wang2,3, Jackelyn Valle2,3, James F Pankow4, Prue Talbot2,3. 1. Cell Molecular and Developmental Biology Graduate Program, University of California, Riverside, California, USA. 2. UCR Stem Cell Center, University of California, Riverside, California, USA. 3. Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, University of California, Riverside, California, USA. 4. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution, concentration and toxicity of cinnamaldehyde in electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) refill fluids and aerosols. METHODS: The distribution and concentration of cinnamaldehyde were determined in 39 e-cigarette refill fluids plus 6 duplicates using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GC/MS). A cinnamaldehyde toxicity profile was established for embryonic and adult cells using a live cell imaging assay, immunocytochemistry, the comet assay and a recovery assay. RESULTS: Twenty of the 39 refill fluids contained cinnamaldehyde at concentrations that are cytotoxic to human embryonic and lung cells in the MTT assay. Cinnamon Ceylon aerosol produced in a cartomizer-style e-cigarette was cytotoxic. Cinnamon Ceylon aerosols and refill fluid aerosols (80% propylene glycol or cinnamaldehyde/propylene glycol) made using a tank/boxmod e-cigarette were more cytotoxic at 5 V than 3 V. Using GC/MS, aerosols produced at 5 V contained 10 additional peaks not present in aerosol generated at 3 V. One of these, 2,3-butandione (diacetyl), was confirmed with an authentic standard. Cinnamaldehyde depolymerised microtubules in human pulmonary fibroblasts. At concentrations that produced no effect in the MTT assay, cinnamaldehyde decreased growth, attachment and spreading; altered cell morphology and motility; increased DNA strand breaks; and increased cell death. At the MTT IC50 concentration, lung cells were unable to recover from cinnamaldehyde after 2 hours of treatment, whereas embryonic cells recovered after 8 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Cinnamaldehyde-containing refill fluids and aerosols are cytotoxic, genotoxic and low concentrations adversely affect cell processes and survival. These data indicate that cinnamaldehyde in e-cigarette refill fluids/aerosols may impair homeostasis in the respiratory system. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution, concentration and toxicity of cinnamaldehyde in electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) refill fluids and aerosols. METHODS: The distribution and concentration of cinnamaldehyde were determined in 39 e-cigarette refill fluids plus 6 duplicates using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GC/MS). A cinnamaldehydetoxicity profile was established for embryonic and adult cells using a live cell imaging assay, immunocytochemistry, the comet assay and a recovery assay. RESULTS: Twenty of the 39 refill fluids contained cinnamaldehyde at concentrations that are cytotoxic to human embryonic and lung cells in the MTT assay. Cinnamon Ceylon aerosol produced in a cartomizer-style e-cigarette was cytotoxic. Cinnamon Ceylon aerosols and refill fluid aerosols (80% propylene glycol or cinnamaldehyde/propylene glycol) made using a tank/boxmod e-cigarette were more cytotoxic at 5 V than 3 V. Using GC/MS, aerosols produced at 5 V contained 10 additional peaks not present in aerosol generated at 3 V. One of these, 2,3-butandione (diacetyl), was confirmed with an authentic standard. Cinnamaldehyde depolymerised microtubules in human pulmonary fibroblasts. At concentrations that produced no effect in the MTT assay, cinnamaldehyde decreased growth, attachment and spreading; altered cell morphology and motility; increased DNA strand breaks; and increased cell death. At the MTT IC50 concentration, lung cells were unable to recover from cinnamaldehyde after 2 hours of treatment, whereas embryonic cells recovered after 8 hours. CONCLUSIONS:Cinnamaldehyde-containing refill fluids and aerosols are cytotoxic, genotoxic and low concentrations adversely affect cell processes and survival. These data indicate that cinnamaldehyde in e-cigarette refill fluids/aerosols may impair homeostasis in the respiratory system. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Entities:
Keywords:
Electronic nicotine delivery devices; Global health; Toxicology
Authors: Richard Kanwal; Greg Kullman; Chris Piacitelli; Randy Boylstein; Nancy Sahakian; Stephen Martin; Kathleen Fedan; Kathleen Kreiss Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Giorgio Romagna; Elena Allifranchini; Elena Bocchietto; Stefano Todeschi; Mara Esposito; Konstantinos E Farsalinos Journal: Inhal Toxicol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 2.724
Authors: Audrey A King; Daniel T Shaughnessy; Kanae Mure; Joanna Leszczynska; William O Ward; David M Umbach; Zongli Xu; Danica Ducharme; Jack A Taylor; David M Demarini; Catherine B Klein Journal: Mutat Res Date: 2006-12-18 Impact factor: 2.433
Authors: Mohamad Sleiman; Jennifer M Logue; V Nahuel Montesinos; Marion L Russell; Marta I Litter; Lara A Gundel; Hugo Destaillats Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Peyton A Tierney; Clarissa D Karpinski; Jessica E Brown; Wentai Luo; James F Pankow Journal: Tob Control Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Atena Zahedi; Vincent On; Sabrina C Lin; Brett C Bays; Esther Omaiye; Bir Bhanu; Prue Talbot Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Vivian Y Lin; Matthew D Fain; Patricia L Jackson; Taylor F Berryhill; Landon S Wilson; Marina Mazur; Stephen J Barnes; J Edwin Blalock; S Vamsee Raju; Steven M Rowe Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: Christine D Czoli; Maciej L Goniewicz; Mary Palumbo; Noel Leigh; Christine M White; David Hammond Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: Claire E Otero; Jacob A Noeker; Mary M Brown; Florence D M Wavreil; Wendy A Harvey; Kristen A Mitchell; Sara J Heggland Journal: J Appl Toxicol Date: 2019-01-28 Impact factor: 3.446
Authors: Alexandra Noël; Christina M Verret; Farhana Hasan; Slawomir Lomnicki; John Morse; Annette Robichaud; Arthur L Penn Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Brett R Winters; Tavleen K Kochar; Phillip W Clapp; Ilona Jaspers; Michael C Madden Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Scott R Weaver; Hyoshin Kim; Allison M Glasser; Erin L Sutfin; Jessica Barrington-Trimis; Thomas J Payne; Megan Saddleson; Alexandra Loukas Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Phillip W Clapp; Katelyn S Lavrich; Catharina A van Heusden; Eduardo R Lazarowski; Johnny L Carson; Ilona Jaspers Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 5.464