A study to estimate and correlate cigarette smoke exposure in smokers in Germany as determined by filter analysis and biomarkers of exposure

Shepperd, Christopher J.; Eldridge, Alison; Mariner, Derek; McEwan, Michael; Errington, Graham; Dixon, M

doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2009.06.006

Cited by 77 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Smoking behaviour varies widely from person to person, and affects exposure to tobacco smoke toxicants [16,17]. Intervention with an RTP might, therefore, lead to changes in smoking behaviour that could be evaluable in the whole population or in sub-populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reference change values to assess changes in concentrations of biomarkers of exposure in individuals participating in a cigarette-switching study

Camacho

Shepperd

Eldridge

et al. 2013

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In a previous clinical study, levels of biomarkers of exposure (BoEs) for specific toxicants were significantly reduced in smokers who switched from conventional cigarettes to reduced toxicant prototype (RTP) cigarettes. Very little is known about the biological variability of tobacco smoke BoEs within individuals and sub-groups, and the descriptive group-comparison statistics might not be sufficient to understand such changes. Therefore, we assessed how different statistical methods could be used to interpret changes in urine BoE levels at the individual level. Methods: We used non-parametric statistical reference limits, the empirical rule and reference change values (RCVs) to assess changes in levels of BoEs related to four toxicants in cigarettes smoke. Current smokers [of 6 mg and 1 mg International Organization for Standardization (ISO) tar yields] were allocated to switching to RTP groups or non-switching control groups within their respective tar bands. There were two 6 mg tar study groups, with a non-switching group (CC6, n = 46) and a group switching to an RTP containing tobacco-substitute sheet and modified filter (TSS6, n = 49); and three 1 mg tar smoker groups, with one non-switching (CC1, n = 42), a group switching to an RTP containing tobacco-substitute sheet and modified filter (TSS1, n = 44) and one switching to an RTP containing an enzyme-treated tobacco and modified filter (BT1, n = 47). Results: Assessment of the direction of change showed that up to the 100% of subjects experienced a decrease in levels of some BoEs. Between 49% and 64% of subjects in the switching groups were classified as having decreased levels of 3-hydroxy-1-methylpropylmercapturic acid (HMPMA) by the non-parametric criterion, whereas only 2%-6% had reduced levels of N-nitrosoanatabine (NAT). Of non-switchers, in 7%-14% of those smoking 1 mg ISO tar yield cigarettes increases were classified across

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reference change values to assess changes in concentrations of biomarkers of exposure in individuals participating in a cigarette-switching study

Camacho

Shepperd

Eldridge

et al. 2013

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other large studies have either been conducted in a single European population (8,28) or been conducted in the United States (10,29). The subjects in this study were well distributed over the study sites within each country, overall, and for each study group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Exposure to Selected Cigarette Smoke Constituents in Adult Smokers and Nonsmokers in a European, Multicenter, Observational Study

Lindner

Smith

Leroy

et al. 2011

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This multicenter, observational study was conducted in three European countries (Germany, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom) to determine the exposure of adult cigarette smokers and nonsmokers to selected cigarette smoke constituents: 1,3-butadiene, 2-naphthylamine, 4-aminobiphenyl, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), acrolein, benzene, carbon monoxide, nicotine, pyrene, and o-toluidine.Methods: Smokers were grouped by tar category (TC) according to the tar yield of their regular cigarette brand: TC1: 4 mg tar, TC2: 5-7 mg tar, and TC3: !8 mg tar [to the legal tar yield ceiling in the respective countries (10 or 12 mg tar)]. Levels of biomarkers of exposure to the aforementioned cigarette smoke constituents were compared between smokers and nonsmokers, and within smokers across tar categories.Results: The full population consisted of 1,631 subjects (1,223 smokers and 408 nonsmokers). Biomarkers of exposure were analyzed for 1,558 subjects (valid case population) as follows: 1,159 smokers (TC1: n ¼ 402, TC2: n ¼ 379, TC3: n ¼ 378), and 399 nonsmokers. Exposure levels were higher in smokers than nonsmokers and increased with increasing tar yield and cigarette consumption. An association of tar category and exposure level was observed for all smoke constituents, except pyrene, 4-aminobiphenyl, and o-toluidine, whereas only NNK exposure was different in all three tar categories.Conclusions: Smoking status and, among smokers, daily cigarette consumption and tar yield were observed to affect biomarker of exposure levels.Impact: This research provides a comprehensive evaluation of smoke constituent exposure of adult cigarette smokers and nonsmokers in three European countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(7); 1524-36. '2011 AACR.

show abstract

“…Suitable data for comparison are available from a recent series of papers published by the Research and Development Group of Britisch American Tobacco (494)(495)(496). In two studies, "mouth level exposure" and biomarkers of exposure of selected smoke constituents were determined in similarly designed studies in Germany where primarily American blend cigarettes are smoked (495), and Canada where mainly Virginia cigarettes are consumed (496 Table 1. The mouth level exposures for nicotine, estimated for a time interval of 24 hours, were only moderately different between the respective groups of smokers from Germany and Canada.…”

Section: Biomonitoring Studies In Smokers Consuming American Blend CImentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Additives on Cigarette Related Health Risks

Klus¹,

Scherer²,

Müller

2012

Beiträge Zur Tabakforschung International/Contributions to Tobacco Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tobacco additives play an important role in the manufacturing and for the quality of tobacco products, particularly cigarettes and roll-your-own tobaccos. Attention is increasingly given to the potential effects of additives on consumer behavior and health. This review is intended to compile, collate and - to some degree - evaluate the wealth of pertinent scientific information available from the published literature and other special sources. At first, the reasons are set forth for the use of additives in cigarette manufacturing. In response to the growing controversy over the attractiveness and addictiveness of smoking, the clarification of terms and concepts is followed by a detailed discussion of two kinds of substances with particular relevance: Additives like ammonium compounds that are claimed to increase nicotine availability, and additives that are claimed to increase nicotine addictiveness.The composition and toxicity of mainstream smoke of cigarettes with and without additives are assessed in several respects. The potentials of pyrolysis studies are explored by looking at a number of key studies and some basic considerations regarding in vitro and in vivo toxicity testing are addressed. Five major literature reviews on additives published between 1994 and 2004, and the results of several comprehensive experimental studies covering a large range of additives, released between 2002 and 2012, are dealt with in detail. Single tobacco additives of particular importance (menthol, glycerol, 1,2-propylene glycol, sorbitol, sugars, cocoa, licorice, citric acid, triacetin, and ammonium compounds) are discussed in dedicated chapters, which are generally subdivided into special sections: Use and toxicological assessment; inclusion level in cigarettes, transfer and pyrolysis; attractiveness and addictiveness; effect on cigarette mainstream smoke composition; effect on cigarette mainstream smoke toxicity. Epidemiological findings and data obtained by the biomonitoring of smokers consuming cigarettes with and without additives are compiled and interpreted specifically for American blend cigarettes, Virginia cigarettes, “French” (dark) cigarettes and menthol cigarettes whereby the focus is on the effects of additives on smoking topography and potential health risks.Opinionated reviews were published in recent years that are compromised by arbitrary selection of sources and unbalanced views. Leaving those unconsidered, the aggregated scientific knowledge shows that tobacco additives have only occasional and limited effects on cigarette mainstream smoke composition, which are almost never reflected in the results of toxicological in vitro assays or in vivo studies. This supports the conclusion that tobacco additives are not likely to increase the known health risks of smoking. There is also no evidence for sustaining claims that certain additives increase nicotine availability or nicotine addictiveness.

show abstract

A study to estimate and correlate cigarette smoke exposure in smokers in Germany as determined by filter analysis and biomarkers of exposure

Cited by 77 publications

References 27 publications

Reference change values to assess changes in concentrations of biomarkers of exposure in individuals participating in a cigarette-switching study

Reference change values to assess changes in concentrations of biomarkers of exposure in individuals participating in a cigarette-switching study

Comparison of Exposure to Selected Cigarette Smoke Constituents in Adult Smokers and Nonsmokers in a European, Multicenter, Observational Study

Influence of Additives on Cigarette Related Health Risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About