Yantao Zuo1, Pradeep K Garg2, Rachid Nazih2, Sudha Garg2, Jed E Rose1, Thangaraju Murugesan1, Alexey G Mukhin3. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 201, Mail code 2701, Durham, NC 27705, USA. 2. Department of Radiological Sciences, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 201, Mail code 2701, Durham, NC 27705, USA. Electronic address: a.mukhin@duke.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: PET imaging with 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarettes is a valuable tool to directly assess fast nicotine kinetics and its neuropharmacological role in tobacco dependence. To eliminate variations among puffs inhaled by subjects, this work aimed to develop a programmable smoke delivery device (SDD) to produce highly reproducible and adjustable puffs of cigarette smoke for PET experiments. NEW METHOD: The SDD was built around a programmable syringe pump as a smoking machine to draw a puff of smoke from a 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarette and make it available for a subject to take the smoke into the mouth and then inhale it during PET data acquisition. Brain nicotine time activity curves and total body absorbed 11C-nicotine doses (TAD) were measured in smokers who inhaled a single puff of smoke via the SDD from a 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarette. RESULTS: Nearly identical brain nicotine kinetics were observed between participants who inhaled a puff of smoke through the SDD and those who inhaled directly from a cigarette. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: This new device minimizes puff variations that exist with earlier smoke delivery apparatuses which could introduce confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: The SDD is effective in delivering 11C-nicotine from the study cigarettes. Despite a 2-s increase in aging of smoke delivered through the SDD versus smoke taken directly from a cigarette, the difference in brain nicotine kinetics after 11C-nicotine delivery with and without use of the SDD is negligible. This refined device may be useful for future research on the deposition and pharmacokinetics of nicotine inhaled with tobacco smoke.
INTRODUCTION: PET imaging with 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarettes is a valuable tool to directly assess fast nicotine kinetics and its neuropharmacological role in tobacco dependence. To eliminate variations among puffs inhaled by subjects, this work aimed to develop a programmable smoke delivery device (SDD) to produce highly reproducible and adjustable puffs of cigarette smoke for PET experiments. NEW METHOD: The SDD was built around a programmable syringe pump as a smoking machine to draw a puff of smoke from a 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarette and make it available for a subject to take the smoke into the mouth and then inhale it during PET data acquisition. Brain nicotine time activity curves and total body absorbed 11C-nicotine doses (TAD) were measured in smokers who inhaled a single puff of smoke via the SDD from a 11C-nicotine-loaded cigarette. RESULTS: Nearly identical brain nicotine kinetics were observed between participants who inhaled a puff of smoke through the SDD and those who inhaled directly from a cigarette. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: This new device minimizes puff variations that exist with earlier smoke delivery apparatuses which could introduce confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: The SDD is effective in delivering 11C-nicotine from the study cigarettes. Despite a 2-s increase in aging of smoke delivered through the SDD versus smoke taken directly from a cigarette, the difference in brain nicotine kinetics after 11C-nicotine delivery with and without use of the SDD is negligible. This refined device may be useful for future research on the deposition and pharmacokinetics of nicotine inhaled with tobacco smoke.
Authors: Marc S Berridge; Scott M Apana; Kenichi K Nagano; Catherine E Berridge; Gregory P Leisure; Mark V Boswell Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Patrik Maurer; Gary T Jennings; Jörg Willers; Franziska Rohner; Ylva Lindman; Kirsten Roubicek; Wolfgang A Renner; Philipp Müller; Martin F Bachmann Journal: Eur J Immunol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Kathleen C Brown; Haley E Perry; Jamie K Lau; Dennie V Jones; Joseph F Pulliam; Brent A Thornhill; Clayton M Crabtree; Haitao Luo; Yi Charlie Chen; Piyali Dasgupta Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 5.157