Literature DB >> 9809850

A further study of FTC yield and nicotine absorption in smokers.

G D Byrd1, R A Davis, W S Caldwell, J H Robinson, J D deBethizy.   

Abstract

The relationship between nicotine yield as determined by the FTC method and nicotine absorption was examined in 72 smokers in a more rigorous repetition of a previous study of 33 smokers. For this study, 113 smokers evenly distributed across four FTC "tar" yield ranges were recruited, only 72 demonstrated reasonable compliance with the study criteria with regard to sample collections and cigarette brand style consistency. Subjects recorded the number of cigarettes smoked daily and collected a 24-h urine sample and a saliva sample on 3 consecutive days. Nicotine absorption was determined by monitoring urinary excretion of nicotine and its metabolites. In addition, saliva samples were monitored for cotinine using radioimmunoassay (RIA). The correlation of the relationship for nicotine absorbed per cigarette was positive and significant (r = 0.31, P = 0.008) but weaker than in the previous study. Only smokers in the highest yield range showed any statistical difference from smokers in the lower ranges. Our results suggest that FTC nicotine yield is weakly related to nicotine absorption and that smoker-controlled factors exert a great influence on the amount of nicotine absorbed by smokers. Compensation is substantial but incomplete for the minority (by market share) of smokers at the low end of the yield scale. It is uncertain how well any alternative set of machine parameters would predict nicotine absorption for the majority of smokers, even if it were more predictive for the small number of smokers at the lower yield part of the range.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9809850     DOI: 10.1007/s002130050720

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)        ISSN: 0033-3158            Impact factor:   4.530


  11 in total

Review 1.  Cigarette filter ventilation is a defective design because of misleading taste, bigger puffs, and blocked vents.

Authors:  L T Kozlowski; R J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Eclipse: does it live up to its health claims?

Authors:  J Slade; Gregory N Connolly; D Lymperis
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Population use, sales, and design: a multidimensional assessment of "light" cigarettes in the United States, 2009.

Authors:  Ilan Behm; Natasha A Sokol; Ryan David Kennedy; Vaughan W Rees; Gregory N Connolly
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 4.  Scientific assessment of the use of sugars as cigarette tobacco ingredients: a review of published and other publicly available studies.

Authors:  Ewald Roemer; Matthias K Schorp; Jean-Jacques Piadé; Jeffrey I Seeman; Donald E Leyden; Hans-Juergen Haussmann
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 5.635

5.  A comparison of nicotine dose estimates in smokers between filter analysis, salivary cotinine, and urinary excretion of nicotine metabolites.

Authors:  F K St Charles; G R Krautter; M Dixon; D C Mariner
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 4.530

6.  Assessing Discrimination of Nicotine in Humans Via Cigarette Smoking.

Authors:  Kenneth A Perkins; Nicole Kunkle; Valerie C Michael; Joshua L Karelitz; Eric C Donny
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 4.244

Review 7.  Cigarette Filter Ventilation and its Relationship to Increasing Rates of Lung Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Min-Ae Song; Neal L Benowitz; Micah Berman; Theodore M Brasky; K Michael Cummings; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Catalin Marian; Richard O'Connor; Vaughan W Rees; Casper Woroszylo; Peter G Shields
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Whose standard is it, anyway? How the tobacco industry determines the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards for tobacco and tobacco products.

Authors:  S A Bialous; D Yach
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 9.  Methods used in internal industry clinical trials to assess tobacco risk reduction.

Authors:  Vaughan W Rees; Jennifer M Kreslake; Richard J O'Connor; K Michael Cummings; Mark Parascandola; Dorothy Hatsukami; Peter G Shields; Gregory N Connolly
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Using Monte Carlo simulation to assess variability and uncertainty of tobacco consumption in a city by sewage epidemiology.

Authors:  De-Gao Wang; Qian-Qian Dong; Juan Du; Shuo Yang; Yun-Jie Zhang; Guang-Shui Na; Stuart G Ferguson; Zhuang Wang; Tong Zheng
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.