Literature DB >> 27720919

Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 2: Chemical composition, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, and physical properties of the aerosol.

Jean-Pierre Schaller1, Daniela Keller2, Laurent Poget2, Pascal Pratte2, Etienne Kaelin2, Damian McHugh2, Gianluca Cudazzo2, Daniel Smart2, Anthony R Tricker2, Lydia Gautier2, Michel Yerly2, Roger Reis Pires2, Soazig Le Bouhellec2, David Ghosh2, Iris Hofer2, Eva Garcia2, Patrick Vanscheeuwijck2, Serge Maeder2.   

Abstract

The chemical composition, in vitro genotoxicity, and cytotoxicity of the mainstream aerosol from the Tobacco Heating System 2.2 (THS2.2) were compared with those of the mainstream smoke from the 3R4F reference cigarette. In contrast to the 3R4F, the tobacco plug in the THS2.2 is not burnt. The low operating temperature of THS2.2 caused distinct shifts in the aerosol composition compared with 3R4F. This resulted in a reduction of more than 90% for the majority of the analyzed harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs), while the mass median aerodynamic diameter of the aerosol remained similar. A reduction of about 90% was also observed when comparing the cytotoxicity determined by the neutral red uptake assay and the mutagenic potency in the mouse lymphoma assay. The THS2.2 aerosol was not mutagenic in the Ames assay. The chemical composition of the THS2.2 aerosol was also evaluated under extreme climatic and puffing conditions. When generating the THS2.2 aerosol under "desert" or "tropical" conditions, the generation of HPHCs was not significantly modified. When using puffing regimens that were more intense than the standard Health Canada Intense (HCI) machine-smoking conditions, the HPHC yields remained lower than when smoking the 3R4F reference cigarette with the HCI regimen.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aerosol chemistry; Cytotoxicity; HPHC; Harmful and potentially harmful constituents; Heat-not-burn; Modified risk tobacco product; Mutagenicity; THS2.2; Tobacco heating system

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27720919     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.10.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  50 in total

1.  Heat-Not-Burn Tobacco Cigarettes: Smoke by Any Other Name.

Authors:  Reto Auer; Nicolas Concha-Lozano; Isabelle Jacot-Sadowski; Jacques Cornuz; Aurélie Berthet
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 21.873

2.  Estimating the public health impact had tobacco-free nicotine pouches been introduced into the US in 2000.

Authors:  Peter N Lee; John S Fry; Tryggve Ljung
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 4.135

Review 3.  Should IQOS Emissions Be Considered as Smoke and Harmful to Health? A Review of the Chemical Evidence.

Authors:  Clement N Uguna; Colin E Snape
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-06-22

4.  Early adoption of heated tobacco products resembles that of e-cigarettes.

Authors:  Shu-Hong Zhu; Julian Ong; Shiushing Wong; Adam Cole; Yue-Lin Zhuang; Yuyan Shi
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 6.953

5.  A novel clinical method to measure skin staining reveals activation of skin damage pathways by cigarette smoke.

Authors:  Annette Dalrymple; Michael McEwan; Marianne Brandt; Stephan Bielfeldt; Emma-Jayne Bean; Alain Moga; Steven Coburn; George Hardie
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Free Radical Production and Characterization of Heat-Not-Burn Cigarettes in Comparison to Conventional and Electronic Cigarettes.

Authors:  Zachary T Bitzer; Reema Goel; Neil Trushin; Joshua Muscat; John P Richie
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 3.973

Review 7.  The effect of emerging tobacco related products and their toxic constituents on thrombosis.

Authors:  Ahmed B Alarabi; Patricia A Lozano; Fadi T Khasawneh; Fatima Z Alshbool
Journal:  Life Sci       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 6.780

8.  In vitro RNA-seq-based toxicogenomics assessment shows reduced biological effect of tobacco heating products when compared to cigarette smoke.

Authors:  Linsey E Haswell; Sarah Corke; Ivan Verrastro; Andrew Baxter; Anisha Banerjee; Jason Adamson; Tomasz Jaunky; Christopher Proctor; Marianna Gaça; Emmanuel Minet
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Systems toxicology meta-analysis of in vitro assessment studies: biological impact of a candidate modified-risk tobacco product aerosol compared with cigarette smoke on human organotypic cultures of the aerodigestive tract.

Authors:  A R Iskandar; B Titz; A Sewer; P Leroy; T Schneider; F Zanetti; C Mathis; A Elamin; S Frentzel; W K Schlage; F Martin; N V Ivanov; M C Peitsch; J Hoeng
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2017-05-29       Impact factor: 3.524

10.  The use of human induced pluripotent stem cells to screen for developmental toxicity potential indicates reduced potential for non-combusted products, when compared to cigarettes.

Authors:  Liam Simms; Kathryn Rudd; Jessica Palmer; Lukasz Czekala; Fan Yu; Fiona Chapman; Edgar Trelles Sticken; Roman Wieczorek; Lisa Maria Bode; Matthew Stevenson; Tanvir Walele
Journal:  Curr Res Toxicol       Date:  2020-11-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.