Anna Phillips-Waller1, Dunja Przulj2, Katie Myers Smith2, Francesca Pesola2, Peter Hajek2. 1. Health and Lifestyle Research Unit, Queen Mary University of London, 2 Stayner's Road, London, E14AH, UK. a.phillips-waller@qmul.ac.uk. 2. Health and Lifestyle Research Unit, Queen Mary University of London, 2 Stayner's Road, London, E14AH, UK.
Abstract
RATIONALE: The degree to which the EU version of Juul with 20 mg/ml nicotine (Juul EU) delivers nicotine to users is likely to determine its treatment potential. OBJECTIVES: To compare the pharmacokinetic profile and user ratings of Juul EU, Juul US (59 mg/ml nicotine), cigarettes and other e-cigarette (EC) products. METHODS: In a within-subjects crossover design, 18 vapers used, at separate sessions, their own brand cigarette (OBC), Juul US and Juul EU for 5 min ad libitum, after overnight abstinence. Seven of the participants also tested eight other EC previously. Blood samples were taken at baseline and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 30 min after initiating product use. Products were rated on a range of characteristics. RESULTS: Juul EU delivered less nicotine than OBC (t(13) = -4.64 p < .001) and than Juul US (t(13) = -6.40, p < .001): AUC0 ≥ 30 77.3, 324.8 and 355.9, respectively. Maximum nicotine concentration (Cmax) was also much lower for Juul EU than Juul US (z = -3.59, p < .001): Cmax 3.8 ng/ml vs 21.1 ng/ml, respectively. Juul EU was perceived to relieve urges to smoke less than Juul US (z = -2.29, p = .022) and to provide less nicotine (z = -2.57. p = 0.010). Juul EU delivered less nicotine than refillable EC (Cmax: t(6) = 3.02, p = 0.023; AUC0 ≥ 30: z = -2.20, p = 0.028) and also less than cig-a-like EC, though the difference did not reach significance (Cmax: t(6) = 2.49, p = 0.047; AUC0 ≥ 30: z = -1.99, p = 0.046). Subjective ratings of Juul EU and other EC products were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Juul EU delivers much less nicotine to users than Juul US, and also less than refillable EC products. It may thus have more limited potential to help smokers quit.
RCT Entities:
RATIONALE: The degree to which the EU version of Juul with 20 mg/ml nicotine (Juul EU) delivers nicotine to users is likely to determine its treatment potential. OBJECTIVES: To compare the pharmacokinetic profile and user ratings of Juul EU, Juul US (59 mg/ml nicotine), cigarettes and other e-cigarette (EC) products. METHODS: In a within-subjects crossover design, 18 vapers used, at separate sessions, their own brand cigarette (OBC), Juul US and Juul EU for 5 min ad libitum, after overnight abstinence. Seven of the participants also tested eight other EC previously. Blood samples were taken at baseline and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 30 min after initiating product use. Products were rated on a range of characteristics. RESULTS: Juul EU delivered less nicotine than OBC (t(13) = -4.64 p < .001) and than Juul US (t(13) = -6.40, p < .001): AUC0 ≥ 30 77.3, 324.8 and 355.9, respectively. Maximum nicotine concentration (Cmax) was also much lower for Juul EU than Juul US (z = -3.59, p < .001): Cmax 3.8 ng/ml vs 21.1 ng/ml, respectively. Juul EU was perceived to relieve urges to smoke less than Juul US (z = -2.29, p = .022) and to provide less nicotine (z = -2.57. p = 0.010). Juul EU delivered less nicotine than refillable EC (Cmax: t(6) = 3.02, p = 0.023; AUC0 ≥ 30: z = -2.20, p = 0.028) and also less than cig-a-like EC, though the difference did not reach significance (Cmax: t(6) = 2.49, p = 0.047; AUC0 ≥ 30: z = -1.99, p = 0.046). Subjective ratings of Juul EU and other EC products were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Juul EU delivers much less nicotine to users than Juul US, and also less than refillable EC products. It may thus have more limited potential to help smokers quit.
Authors: Jenny E Ozga; Nicholas J Felicione; Ashley Douglas; Margaret Childers; Melissa D Blank Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 5.825
Authors: Peter Hajek; Dunja Przulj; Francesca Pesola; Chris Griffiths; Robert Walton; Hayden McRobbie; Tim Coleman; Sarah Lewis; Rachel Whitemore; Miranda Clark; Michael Ussher; Lesley Sinclair; Emily Seager; Sue Cooper; Linda Bauld; Felix Naughton; Peter Sasieni; Isaac Manyonda; Katie Myers Smith Journal: Nat Med Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 87.241
Authors: Nadja Mallock; Andrea Rabenstein; Solveig Gernun; Peter Laux; Christoph Hutzler; Susanne Karch; Gabriele Koller; Frank Henkler-Stephani; Maria Kristina Parr; Oliver Pogarell; Andreas Luch; Tobias Rüther Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Natalia Peraza; Mariel S Bello; Sara J Schiff; Junhan Cho; Yi Zhang; Carly Callahan; Alayna Tackett; Adam M Leventhal Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Anders Wall; Sara Roslin; Beatrice Borg; Simon McDermott; Tanvir Walele; Thomas Nahde; Grant O'Connell; Joseph Thompson; Mark Lubberink; Gunnar Antoni Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-03-17