Olfactory cue reactivity in nicotine-dependent adult smokers.

Abstract

Cue-elicited reactivity is a significant factor in relapse during smoking quit attempts. Previous research has focused primarily on visual smoking cues, with very limited research examining reactivity to olfactory triggers. Twenty-six adult, non-treatment seeking, nicotine-dependent smokers were exposed to seven odorants during a cue-reactivity session measuring heart rate, skin conductance, and subjective craving. Cues included 2 cigarette odors (fresh tobacco and cigarette smoke), 2 odors previously identified as smoking-related (freshly mowed grass and coffee), 2 odors previously identified as unrelated to smoking (lavender and burned rubber), and 1 odorless control (propylene glycol). Pairwise comparisons demonstrated that subjective intensity of craving was significantly higher following exposure to the fresh tobacco odor compared to the odorless control (p<.01). A significant main effect for cue type on a physiological measure of arousal was also revealed, with a fresh tobacco odor-elicited significant increase in skin conductance level compared to the odorless control. No main effect of cue type on heart rate, however, was found (p=.25). The results of the present study indicate that cigarette odor is an effective olfactory cue that heightens both subjective craving and increases skin conductance in smokers. Future research is needed to evaluate whether avoidance of these odors, or extinction of responses to them, can reduce relapse risk during smoking quit attempts.

The fMRI BOLD response to unisensory and multisensory smoking cues in nicotine-dependent adults

“…Clusters were determined by Z > 2.3 with a corrected (cluster) significance threshold of p < 0.05 (Worsley, 2001). Previous data acquired in our laboratory revealed that while cigarette odors demonstrated significant effects in subjective and objective measures of cue-reactivity in nicotine-dependent adults, lavender and coffee odors were ineffective in this respect (Cortese et al, 2015). Given those findings, CIG-O was the focus of this preliminary investigation and therefore imaging data gathered during the other odor conditions (LAV-O and COF-O) were not assessed.…”

“…However, the decision to target the cigarette odor in the present analysis was justified, in part, by previous data acquired in our laboratory. We recently reported that cigarette odor, but not other odors including lavender and coffee, were effective elicitors of drug craving and associated physiological responses in nicotine-dependent individuals (Cortese et al, 2015). In the future, a full analysis including that of a neutral odor cue (e.g.…”

“…While the vast majority of drug cue-reactivity studies employ visual cues in their drug craving paradigms, we and other investigators (Kareken et al, 2004, 2010; Bragulat et al, 2008; Lukas et al, 2013; Cortese et al, 2015; Cyders et al, 2014) have begun to demonstrate odors as salient drug cues and that the olfactory system may play a significant role in drug craving and reward. Targeting the olfactory system with the use of odor cues has the potential to contribute more authenticity to studies of drug cue-reactivity.…”

“…In addition, a fan provided continuous airflow through the bore of the magnet to ensure odor evacuation between each odor cue delivery. The odor cues were previously identified as smoking-related or neutral and formulated to be similar in perceived odor intensity according to methods described previously (Hartwell et al, 2012; Cortese et al, 2015). The four odor cues included a cigarette smoke odor (CIG-O), a smoking-related odor (coffee, COF-O), an odor unrelated to smoking (lavender, LAV-O), and propylene glycol (PG-O), an odorless oil that served as a control “odor” as well as the base ingredient of all other odor cues.…”

“…holding/smelling/viewing a cigarette), has revealed the effectiveness of odors as independent cues in eliciting craving (Grusser et al, 2000; McRobbie et al, 2008; Cortese et al, 2015), as well as physiological responses such as increased heart rate and skin conductance (Stormark et al, 1995; Cortese et al, 2015). Studying odor cue reactivity within the functional neuroimaging environment presents its own challenges including the use of an MRI-compatible olfactometer, a sophisticated piece of equipment that delivers precisely timed quantities of odorants.…”