Literature DB >> 29511038

Comparison of Biomarkers of Tobacco Exposure between Premium and Discount Brand Cigarette Smokers in the NHANES 2011-2012 Special Sample.

Emily J Wasserman1, Samantha M Reilly1, Reema Goel1, Jonathan Foulds1, John P Richie1, Joshua E Muscat2.   

Abstract

Background: Increased cigarette costs have inadvertently strengthened the appeal of discounted brands to price-sensitive smokers. Although smokers perceive discounted brands as having poorer quality, little is known about their delivery of toxic tobacco smoke constituents compared with premium-branded tobacco products.
Methods: We investigated the differences between discount and premium brand smokers using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 Special Smoker Sample. Our analyses focused on demographic differences and 27 biomarkers of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHC) listed by the FDA, including volatile organic compounds, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronide [4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol glucuronide; reported as total NNAL (tNNAL)], metals, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Data were analyzed using linear regression models adjusting for potential confounders.
Results: A total of 976 non-tobacco users and 578 recent cigarette smokers were eligible for analysis, of which 141 (26.0% weighted) smoked discount brand cigarettes and 437 (74.0% weighted) smoked premium. Discount brand smokers were older, predominantly non-Hispanic white, and had higher serum cotinine. Discount brand smokers had significantly higher levels of 13 smoking-related biomarkers, including tNNAL, uranium, styrene, xylene, and biomarkers of exposure to PAHs (naphthalene, fluorene, and phenanthrene), compared with premium brand smokers.Conclusions: These findings suggest that discount cigarette use is associated with higher exposure to several carcinogenic and toxic HPHCs.Impact: These results may have important regulatory implications for product standards, as higher exposures could lead to a greater degree of harm. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(5); 601-9. ©2018 AACR. ©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29511038      PMCID: PMC5932221          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0869

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  36 in total

1.  Use of discount cigarettes by smokers in 20 communities in the United States, 1988-1993.

Authors:  K M Cummings; A Hyland; E Lewit; D Shopland
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Smoking by blacks and whites: socioeconomic and demographic differences.

Authors:  T E Novotny; K E Warner; J S Kendrick; P L Remington
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Current tobacco use among adults in the United States: findings from the National Adult Tobacco Survey.

Authors:  Brian A King; Shanta R Dube; Michael A Tynan
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 4.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the diet.

Authors:  D H Phillips
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1999-07-15       Impact factor: 2.433

5.  Determination of two mercapturic acids related to crotonaldehyde in human urine: influence of smoking.

Authors:  G Scherer; M Urban; H W Hagedorn; S Feng; R D Kinser; M Sarkar; Q Liang; H J Roethig
Journal:  Hum Exp Toxicol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  Toxicokinetics of acrylamide in humans after ingestion of a defined dose in a test meal to improve risk assessment for acrylamide carcinogenicity.

Authors:  Uwe Fuhr; Melanie I Boettcher; Martina Kinzig-Schippers; Alexandra Weyer; Alexander Jetter; Andreas Lazar; Dirk Taubert; Dorota Tomalik-Scharte; Panagiota Pournara; Verena Jakob; Stefanie Harlfinger; Tobias Klaassen; Albrecht Berkessel; Jürgen Angerer; Fritz Sörgel; Edgar Schömig
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Cyanide and thiocyanate levels in blood and urine of workers with low-grade exposure to cyanide.

Authors:  A C Maehly; A Swensson
Journal:  Int Arch Arbeitsmed       Date:  1970

8.  Comparison of Puff Volume With Cigarettes per Day in Predicting Nicotine Uptake Among Daily Smokers.

Authors:  Nicolle M Krebs; Allshine Chen; Junjia Zhu; Dongxiao Sun; Jason Liao; Andrea L Stennett; Joshua E Muscat
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Urinary creatinine concentrations in the U.S. population: implications for urinary biologic monitoring measurements.

Authors:  Dana B Barr; Lynn C Wilder; Samuel P Caudill; Amanda J Gonzalez; Lance L Needham; James L Pirkle
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 10.  Overview of Cotinine Cutoff Values for Smoking Status Classification.

Authors:  Sungroul Kim
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 3.390

View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of Carcinogen Biomarkers in Smokers of Menthol and Nonmenthol Cigarettes: The 2015-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Special Sample.

Authors:  Wenxue Lin; Junjia Zhu; John E Hayes; John P Richie; Joshua E Muscat
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 4.090

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.