Sex Differences in Subjective Responses To Moderate Versus Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes

Abstract

Subjective perceptions of smoking cigarettes varying in nicotine contents differ between men and women. These results with research cigarettes are similar to other studies with carefully dosed nicotine administration by other means, supporting the notion that women, relative to men, are less sensitive to pharmacological factors and more sensitive to nonpharmacological factors in acute cigarette smoking. Future studies are warranted to examine sex differences in other responses to controlled nicotine intake via smoking, and via other smoked and nonsmoked methods of administering nicotine doses.

Association of Reduced Nicotine Content Cigarettes With Smoking Behaviors and Biomarkers of Exposure Among Slow and Fast Nicotine Metabolizers

“…Models included fixed-effect terms for study period (baseline vs RNC1 vs RNC2), NMR (slow vs fast), and their interaction. Given prior associations with RNC cigarette and NMR outcomes, 18 , 19 , 20 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 covariates included sex, race (white vs nonwhite), body mass index, Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence total score (excluding CPD item for daily consumption analyses), and years smoking. All models used an unstructured covariance structure and Bonferroni-corrected pairwise comparisons for significant findings.…”

“…Because the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act states that FDA regulations must yield public health benefits, another critical question is whether nicotine reduction would negatively affect subgroups of smokers. 17 Studies have evaluated sex, 18 , 19 , 20 cannabis use, 21 and mental health issues 22 , 23 as possible moderators of RNC cigarette effects to identify at-risk subgroups, with only sex influencing responses. Another factor requiring examination is rate of nicotine metabolism, assessed using the nicotine-metabolite ratio (NMR; the ratio of trans -3′-hydroxycotinine to cotinine 24 , 25 , 26 ), a heritable, 27 stable 28 trait that also reflects environmental and hormonal factors.…”

Evaluating the utility of the modified cigarette evaluation questionnaire and cigarette purchase task for predicting acute relative reinforcing efficacy of cigarettes varying in nicotine content

“…In a concurrent choice SA procedure, two doses of a drug or a drug and a non-drug reinforce are available at the same time and can be voluntarily administered after a participant performs a given behavior (e.g., clicking on a mouse, pulling a plunger). There are a number of reports using this arrangement under double-blind conditions that show that smokers prefer nicotine content closest to what is found in commercially available cigarettes compared to lower-nicotine content cigarettes, and that as the dose decreases, preference for the product also decreases (Boren et al, 1990;Higgins et al, 2017a;Higgins et al, 2017b;Perkins et al, 1996;Perkins et al, 2017;Perkins et al, 2018;Shahan et al, 1999).…”

A Procedure to Standardize Puff Topography During Evaluations of Acute Tobacco or Electronic Cigarette Exposure

“…Relevant studies here are far more common for tobacco smoking, such as those examining variable responding to specific levels of smoking exposure as functions of individual differences, concurrent environmental conditions, differences in the cigarette's constituents, or other manipulations. Examples include research on responding due to static individual difference factors of high or low dependence, 6 menthol or nonmenthol preference, 7 or subject sex 8 ; contextual factors of testing location, 9 concurrently engaging in exercise, 10 or pretreatment with medications 11 ; and controlled variations in nicotine or other content of tobacco in test cigarettes. 12,13 Similarly observed variations in amount of self-administered exposure and in differential responses to exposure have been found in acute tests with electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).…”

“…19 Without tightly controlling amounts of smoke or vape exposure, this research may not easily distinguish between factors affecting differential pharmacodynamic responses (sensitivity) to the same specific amount of exposure versus those altering intensity of smoking or vaping behavior, or differential amount of exposure (ie, puff topography). 8,20 Therefore, an instructional procedure that can elicit standardized volumes for puffs may be of considerable utility for research seeking to assess responses to fixed amounts of acute exposure to these inhaled products.…”