Literature DB >> 33093163

Impact of Cigarette Filter Ventilation on U.S. Smokers' Perceptions and Biomarkers of Exposure and Potential Harm.

Dana M Carroll1, Irina Stepanov2, Richard O'Connor3, Xianghua Luo4, K Michael Cummings5, Vaughan W Rees6, Warren K Bickel7, Micah L Berman8, David L Ashley9, Maansi Bansal-Travers3, Peter G Shields10, Dorothy K Hatsukami11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Relationships between cigarette filter ventilation levels, biomarkers of exposure (BOE) and potential harm (BOPH), and harm perceptions were examined.
METHODS: Filter ventilation levels in cigarette brands were merged with Wave 1 (2013-2014) Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health study. Data were restricted to smokers who reported a usual brand and not regular users of other tobacco products. BOEs included nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, volatile organic compounds (VOC), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. BOPHs measured inflammation and oxidative stress. Perceived harm was assessed as self-reported risk of one's usual brand compared with other brands.
RESULTS: Filter ventilation ranged from 0.2% to 61.1% (n = 1,503). Adjusted relationships between filter ventilation and BOE or BOPH were nonsignificant except for VOC N-acetyl-S-(phenyl)-L-cysteine (PHMA) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP). In pairwise comparisons, PHMA was higher in quartile (Q) 4 (4.23 vs. 3.36 pmol/mg; P = 0.0103) and Q3 (4.48 vs. 3.36 pmol/mg; P = 0.0038) versus Q1 of filter ventilation and hsCRP comparisons were nonsignificant. Adjusted odds of perceiving one's own brand as less harmful was 26.87 (95% confidence interval: 4.31-167.66), 12.55 (3.01-52.32), and 19.18 (3.87-95.02) times higher in the Q2, Q3, and Q4 of filter ventilation compared with Q1 (P = 0.0037).
CONCLUSIONS: Filter ventilation was not associated with BOE or BOPH, yet smokers of higher ventilated cigarettes perceived their brand as less harmful than other brands compared with smokers of lower ventilated cigarettes. IMPACT: Research to understand the impact of this misperception is needed, and remedial strategies, potentially including a ban on filter ventilation, are recommended. ©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33093163      PMCID: PMC7855960          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0852

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.090


  29 in total

1.  Lung cancer mortality risk for U.S. menthol cigarette smokers.

Authors:  Brian Rostron
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 4.244

2.  Paying more attention to the 'elephant in the room'.

Authors:  Ron Borland
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Filter ventilation levels in selected U.S. cigarettes, 1997.

Authors: 
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  1997-11-07       Impact factor: 17.586

4.  Blocking filter vents increases carbon monoxide levels from ultralight, but not light cigarettes.

Authors:  C T Sweeney; L T Kozlowski
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 3.533

5.  Changes in tar yields and cigarette design in samples of Chinese cigarettes, 2009 and 2012.

Authors:  Liane M Schneller; Benjamin A Zwierzchowski; Rosalie V Caruso; Qiang Li; Jiang Yuan; Geoffrey T Fong; Richard J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 7.552

6.  Can Removing Tar Information From Cigarette Packages Reduce Smokers' Misconceptions About Low-Tar Cigarettes? An Experiment From One of the World's Lowest Tar Yield Markets, South Korea.

Authors:  Hye-Jin Paek; Timothy Dewhirst; Thomas Hove
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 4.244

Review 7.  Reconciling human smoking behavior and machine smoking patterns: implications for understanding smoking behavior and the impact on laboratory studies.

Authors:  Catalin Marian; Richard J O'Connor; Mirjana V Djordjevic; Vaughan W Rees; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Peter G Shields
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Relation of smoking status to a panel of inflammatory markers: the framingham offspring.

Authors:  Yamini S Levitzky; Chao-Yu Guo; Jian Rong; Martin G Larson; Robert E Walter; John F Keaney; Patrice A Sutherland; Aditi Vasan; Izabella Lipinska; Jane C Evans; Emelia J Benjamin
Journal:  Atherosclerosis       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 5.162

9.  Cigarette design features in low-, middle-, and high-income countries.

Authors:  Rosalie V Caruso; Richard J O'Connor
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2012-05-08

10.  Smoking, menthol cigarettes and all-cause, cancer and cardiovascular mortality: evidence from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Miranda R Jones; Maria Tellez-Plaza; Ana Navas-Acien
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  Risk perceptions and continued smoking as a function of cigarette filter ventilation level among US youth and young adults who smoke.

Authors:  Dana Mowls Carroll; Katelyn M Tessier; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor; Sarah Reisinger; Peter G Shields; Irina S Stepanov; Xianghua Luo; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Vaughan W Rees
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 6.953

2.  Cigarette Filter Ventilation and Biomarkers-Reply.

Authors:  Dana Mowls Carroll; Dorothy K Hatsukami
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Smokers' perceptions of different classes of cigarette brand descriptors.

Authors:  Nicholas J Felicione; Kaila J Norton; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Vaughan W Rees; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Prev Cessat       Date:  2021-02-09
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.