Electronic versus Combustible Cigarette Effects on Inflammasome Component Release into Human Lung.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tsai M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6444658 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Electronic versus Combustible Cigarette Effects on Inflammasome Component Release into Human Lung.
Tsai MuChun M Song Min-Ae MA McAndrew Christian C Brasky Theodore M TM Freudenheim Jo L JL Mathé Ewy E McElroy Joseph J Reisinger Sarah A SA Shields Peter G PG Wewers Mark D MD
American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine 20190401 7
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSmoking electronic cigarettes (ECIG) is promoted as a safer alternative to smoking combustible cigarettes. This study investigates the effects of ECIG aerosol and cigarette smoke (CS) in an animal model and in human alveolar cell cultures (A549).MethodsMice were divided into Control, ECIG, and CS. Animals were exposed for 6h/d to either lab air, ECIG or CS, for of 3 days. Total particulate matter exposure for the ECIG was set at higher levels compared to CS. Lung injury was determined by: (1) measurement of wet-to-dry ratio; (2) albumin concentration in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid; (3) transcriptional expression of inflammatory mediators IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α; (4) oxidative stress; (5) assessment of cell death; and (6) lung histopathology. Human alveolar cell cultures were treated with various concentrations of ECIG and CS aerosol extracts and the effects on cell proliferation were evaluated.ResultsWet-to-dry ratio was higher in CS when compared to ECIG. Albumin leak in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was evident in CS but not in ECIG. ECIG exposure was only associated with a significant increase in IL-1β. In contrast, CS exposure resulted in significant increases in IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α expression, and oxidative stress. TUNEL staining demonstrated significant cell death in CS but not in ECIG. At the cellular level, ECIG and CS extracts reduced cell proliferation, however, CS exhibited effects at lower concentrations.ConclusionDespite higher exposure conditions, ECIG exhibited less toxic effects on lungs of experimental animals and on A549 cell cultures when compared to CS.
| S-EPMC5942611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Combustible cigarettes produce many toxic substances that have been linked to diseases, such as lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. For those smokers unable or unwilling to quit, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) could be used as an alternative to cigarettes. However, the effects and mechanisms of e-cigarette aerosol (ECA) on respiratory function have not been fully elucidated, and in vivo studies of its safety are limited compared to cigarette smoke (CS). In this article, we chose nicotine levels as dosing references and C57BL/6 mice for a 10-week subchronic inhalation toxicity study. A comprehensive set of toxicological endpoints was used to study the effect of exposure. Both CS (6 mg/kg) and ECA (6 or 12 mg/kg) inhalation had decreased the animal's lung function and increased levels of inflammation markers, along with pathological changes in the airways and lungs, with ECA displaying a relatively small effect at the same dose. Proteomic analysis of lung tissue showed greater overall protein changes by CS than that of ECA, with more severe inflammatory network perturbations. Compared with ECA, KEGG analysis of CS revealed upregulation of more inflammatory and virus-related pathways. Protein-protein interactions (PPI) showed that both ECA and CS significantly changed ribosome and complement system-related proteins in mouse lung tissue. The results support that e-cigarette aerosol is less harmful to the respiratory system than cigarette smoke at the same dose using this animal model, thus providing additional evidence for the relative safety of e-cigarettes.
| S-EPMC9521563 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the SubSeries listed below.
2020-01-14 | GSE138351 | GEO
Project description:E-cig use is continuing to increase, particularly among youth never-smokers, and is used by some smokers to quit. The acute and chronic toxicity of e-cig use is unclear generally in the context of increasing reports of inflammatory-type pneumonia in some e-cig users. To assess lung effects of e-cigs without nicotine or flavors, we conducted a pilot study with serial bronchoscopies over 4 weeks in 30 never-smokers, randomized either to a four-week intervention with the use of e-cigs containing only 50% propylene glycol (PG) and 50% vegetable glycerine (VG) or to a no-use control group. Compliance to the e-cig intervention was assessed by participants sending daily puff counts and by urinary propylene glycol (PG). Inflammatory cell counts and cytokines were determined in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluids. Genome-wide expression, microRNA, and mRNA were determined from bronchial epithelial cells. There were no significant differences in changes of BAL inflammatory cell counts or cytokines between baseline and follow-up, comparing the control and e-cig groups. However, in the intervention but not the control group, change in urinary PG as a marker of e-cig use and inhalation, was significantly correlated with change in cell counts (cell concentrations, macrophages, and lymphocytes) and cytokines (IL-8, IL-13, and TNF-α), although the absolute magnitude of changes was small. There were no significant changes in mRNA or microRNA gene expression. Although limited by study size and duration, this is the first experimental demonstration of an impact of e-cig use on inflammation in the human lung among never-smokers.
2020-01-14 | GSE138348 | GEO
Project description:E-cig use is continuing to increase, particularly among youth never-smokers, and is used by some smokers to quit. The acute and chronic toxicity of e-cig use is unclear generally in the context of increasing reports of inflammatory-type pneumonia in some e-cig users. To assess lung effects of e-cigs without nicotine or flavors, we conducted a pilot study with serial bronchoscopies over 4 weeks in 30 never-smokers, randomized either to a four-week intervention with the use of e-cigs containing only 50% propylene glycol (PG) and 50% vegetable glycerine (VG) or to a no-use control group. Compliance to the e-cig intervention was assessed by participants sending daily puff counts and by urinary propylene glycol (PG). Inflammatory cell counts and cytokines were determined in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluids. Genome-wide expression, microRNA, and mRNA were determined from bronchial epithelial cells. There were no significant differences in changes of BAL inflammatory cell counts or cytokines between baseline and follow-up, comparing the control and e-cig groups. However, in the intervention but not the control group, change in urinary PG as a marker of e-cig use and inhalation, was significantly correlated with change in cell counts (cell concentrations, macrophages, and lymphocytes) and cytokines (IL-8, IL-13, and TNF-α), although the absolute magnitude of changes was small. There were no significant changes in mRNA or microRNA gene expression. Although limited by study size and duration, this is the first experimental demonstration of an impact of e-cig use on inflammation in the human lung among never-smokers.
2020-01-14 | GSE138326 | GEO
Project description:Electronic cigarette (e-cig) use is continuing to increase, particularly among youth never-smokers, and is used by some smokers to quit. The acute and chronic toxicity of e-cig use is unclear generally in the context of increasing reports of inflammatory-type pneumonia in some e-cig users. To assess lung effects of e-cigs without nicotine or flavors, we conducted a pilot study with serial bronchoscopies over 4 weeks in 30 never-smokers, randomized either to a 4-week intervention with the use of e-cigs containing only 50% propylene glycol (PG) and 50% vegetable glycerine or to a no-use control group. Compliance to the e-cig intervention was assessed by participants sending daily puff counts and by urinary PG. Inflammatory cell counts and cytokines were determined in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluids. Genome-wide expression, miRNA, and mRNA were determined from bronchial epithelial cells. There were no significant differences in changes of BAL inflammatory cell counts or cytokines between baseline and follow-up, comparing the control and e-cig groups. However, in the intervention but not the control group, change in urinary PG as a marker of e-cig use and inhalation was significantly correlated with change in cell counts (cell concentrations, macrophages, and lymphocytes) and cytokines (IL8, IL13, and TNFα), although the absolute magnitude of changes was small. There were no significant changes in mRNA or miRNA gene expression. Although limited by study size and duration, this is the first experimental demonstration of an impact of e-cig use on inflammation in the human lung among never-smokers.
| S-EPMC7007320 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsRelative pharmacological effects of e-cigarettes and cigarettes during 24 hours of ad-libitum use have not been described. In this study, 24-hour blood plasma nicotine concentrations and 48-hour subjective effects with use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes were measured among dual users.DesignTwo-arm within-subject cross-over design with preferred e-cigarette or cigarette ad-libitum use over 48 hours.SettingHospital research ward in San Francisco, California, USA.ParticipantsThirty-six healthy dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (n = 8, 25% females).MeasurementsTwenty-four-hour blood plasma nicotine and cotinine concentrations and 48-hour self-reported nicotine withdrawal symptoms and rewarding effects.FindingsAnalyses used analysis of variance (ANOVA)-based mixed models with order of product (e-cigarette or cigarette) and product type (combustible cigarette or type of e-cigarette) as fixed effects, and subject as a repeated effect. During a 24-hour period, e-cigarettes produced lower nicotine exposure than cigarettes for the majority of users, although 25% received more nicotine from e-cigarettes, which was predicted by more frequent e-cigarette use or greater dependence. Compared to cigarette smoking, nicotine exposure for variable-power tank users was similar, while cig-a-like (t(30) = 2.71, P = 0.011, d = 0.745) and fixed-power tank users (t(30) = 3.37, P = 0.002, d = 0.993) were exposed to less nicotine. Cigarettes were rated higher than e-cigarettes on some desirable subjective effects (e.g. psychological reward, t(322) = 7.24 P < 0.001, d = 0.432), but withdrawal symptom reduction was comparable. No differences were found between e-cigarette types, but Bayes factors indicate that these measures were insensitive.ConclusionsDuring a 24-hour period in a hospital setting in the United States, nicotine exposure for dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes was similar when using cigarettes or variable-power tank devices only but was lower for those using cig-a-like or fixed-power devices only. Despite lower nicotine levels, all types of e-cigarette were effective in preventing withdrawal symptoms. E-cigarettes were rated less rewarding than cigarettes.
| S-EPMC7255919 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Electronic cigarettes (EC) are increasing in popularity, but there is only little information on their biologic effects on the oral epithelium, the initial site exposed to EC smoke. We assessed the oral epithelium response to EC by comparing the histology and RNA transcriptome (mRNA and miRNA) of healthy EC vapers to nonsmokers (NS). mRNA was assessed based on: (1) genome-wide; (2) genes previously identified as dysregulated in the oral epithelium of EC vapers vs NS; (3) immune and inflammatory-related genes previously identified as dysregulated in the nasal epithelium of EC vapers compared to NS; (4) genes previously identified as dysregulated in the small airway epithelium of NS following an acute exposure to EC; and (5) genes related to the initial steps of COVID-19 infection. In addition, miRNA was assessed genome-wide. Comparisons were performed using ANOVA, and Benajmini-Hochberg corrected p <0.05 was considered significant. The histology of the epithelium, lamina propria and basal layer in EC vapers appeared normal. Assessment of mRNA and miRNA, based on all gene lists, did not identify any genes significantly modified in the oral epithelium of EC vapers. Assessment of the oral epithelium of healthy EC vapers by histology, mRNA and miRNA demonstrated no abnormalities in response to EC smoke.
2025-06-05 | GSE176492 | GEO
Project description:Although pregnant smokers may perceive electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as safe alternatives to smoking combustible cigarettes, few studies have evaluated perinatal e-cigarette use and its associated health effects. We analyzed data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS, 2016-2018) for 16,022 women who recently gave birth and reported smoking combustible cigarettes prior to pregnancy. Using average marginal predictive values from multivariable logistic regression to produce adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs), we estimated the prevalence of combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes associated with e-cigarette use. In total, 14.8% of smoking women reported using e-cigarettes prior to pregnancy. There was no association between e-cigarette use prior to pregnancy and combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy (aPR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88, 1.02); however, e-cigarette use during pregnancy was associated with higher prevalence of combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy (aPR 1.65; 95% CI 1.52, 1.80). In this sample, we did not observe evidence to support reduced risk of preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and low birthweight compared to combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy. The prevalence of LBW was higher for those who used e-cigarettes, even exclusively, compared to women who quit smoking cigarettes entirely. These results suggest that e-cigarettes should not be considered a safe alternative to combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy.
| S-EPMC8241992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The study aimed to investigate the relationships between current exclusive e-cigarette use, exclusive combustible cigarette smoking, and dual use of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes, and insufficient sleep among U.S. adolescents. We conducted a secondary data analysis of the 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey including 11,296 U.S. high school students. Current (past 30-day) tobacco use groups included exclusive e-cigarette users, exclusive combustible cigarette smokers, and dual-product users. We performed weighted unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses. Insufficient sleep was defined as <8 h/night and < 7 h/night. Overall, 73.4% of adolescents reported insufficient sleep <8 h/night. Compared with non-tobacco users, exclusive e-cigarette users were more likely to report insufficient sleep <8 h/night (odds ratio [OR] = 1.55, 95%CI = 1.12-2.14; adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.57, 95%CI = 1.01-2.43) and < 7 h/night (OR = 1.55, 95%CI = 1.19-2.01; aOR = 1.61, 95%CI = 1.16-2.24). Dual-product users were at increased odds to report insufficient sleep <8 h/night (OR = 3.15, 95%CI = 1.87-5.32) and < 7 h/night (OR = 2.64, 95%CI = 1.87-3.72; aOR = 1.73, 95%CI = 1.14-2.62) than non-tobacco users. Exclusive combustible cigarette smokers were less likely to report insufficient sleep <8 h/night (aOR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.29-0.84) than non-tobacco users, but no differences were found based on insufficient sleep <7 h/night. When comparing current use groups, exclusive e-cigarette users were at 3.20 increased odds (95%CI = 1.65-6.22) and dual-product users were at 3.26 increased odds (95%CI = 1.51-7.03) to report insufficient sleep <8 h/night when compared with exclusive combustible cigarette smokers after covariate adjustment. Dual-product users were 1.89 times more likely (95%CI = 1.01-3.51) to report insufficient sleep <7 h/night when compared with exclusive combustible cigarette smokers. School-based prevention efforts for tobacco use may promote sufficient sleep in youth.
| S-EPMC8096720 | biostudies-literature