Correction to: Modeling mortality risk effects of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco: results from the national health interview survey linked mortality file data.
Correction to: Modeling mortality risk effects of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco: results from the national health interview survey linked mortality file data.
Project description:BackgroundCigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT) products are among a wide range of tobacco products that are addictive and pose a significant health risk. In this study, we estimated smoking- and SLT use-related mortality hazard ratios (HRs) among U.S. adults by sex, age group, and cause of death, for nine mutually exclusive categories of smoking and/or SLT use.MethodsWe used data from the public-use National Health Interview Survey Linked Mortality with mortality follow-up through 2015. We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate mortality HRs, adjusted by race/ethnicity, education, poverty level, body mass index, and tobacco-use status.ResultsWith never users as reference group, HRs for smoking-related diseases for male exclusive current smokers aged 35-64 and 65+ were 2.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.79-2.65), and 2.45 (95% CI: 2.14-2.79), respectively. Similar significant HR estimates were found for females and for all-cause mortality (ACM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) outcomes. HRs for exclusive current SLT users were only significant for males aged 35-64 for ACM (HR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.27-3.27) and OCM (HR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.50-5.25). HRs for users who switched from cigarettes to SLT products were significant for males aged 65+ for smoking-related diseases (HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.47-2.88), SLT-related diseases (HR: 1.99, 95% CI: 1.36-2.89), and ACM (HR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.21-2.19).ConclusionsMale exclusive current SLT users aged 35-64 had a significant HR for ACM and OCM outcomes, suggesting that deaths not attributed to SLT use could be contributing to the ACM elevated HR for exclusive current SLT users.
Project description:Introduction:While smoking rates have declined, use of smokeless tobacco (ST) has remained constant. ST is heavily marketed to cigarette smokers, and many ST users smoke cigarettes. This study provides updated comparisons of the characteristics, smoking behaviors, and perceptions of US adult dual ST and cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers in 2015-2016. Methods:Data were from nationally representative, cross-sectional surveys from 2015 and 2016. Adult smokers reported past 30-day use of ST, current cigarette smoking, risk perceptions, smoking, and quitting behaviors. We estimated Rao-Scott χ2 and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) to compare dual users and exclusive smokers. Results:Dual users were more likely to be younger, reside in nonmetropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and outside the Northeast United States. Adjusting for covariates, dual users did not differ significantly from exclusive smokers on most smoker characteristics, including number of past year quit attempts. Dual users were more likely to report past 30-day use of novel tobacco products (AORs 2.90 [little cigars and cigarillos] to 11.02 [hookah]). Dual users who reported at least 1 past year cigarette quit attempt were more likely than exclusive smokers to report using ST, traditional cigars, hookah, or heat-not-burn as a past year quit method (AOR: 9.54 [95% CI: 3.22 to 28.23]). Conclusions:Smokers who use ST are more likely than exclusive smokers to attempt to quit smoking cigarettes using other tobacco products. These findings may be attributed to increasing use prevalence of novel products. We recommend further monitoring to assess polytobacco use and differences among these populations. Implications:Many current ST users smoke cigarettes and ST promotions often target cigarette smokers. As the FDA considers ST regulations and implements a nicotine centered regulatory framework, it is imperative to evaluate how these policies and promotion of ST as potentially reduced risk products impact dual and polytobacco use. Our study found that many dual users engage in novel tobacco use in general and as a cessation method. Consideration of ST and polytobacco use among smokers may be helpful in the development of forthcoming FDA regulations, messaging, and interventions.
Project description:BackgroundCigarette smoking is associated with an increase in cardiovascular disease risk, attributable in part to reactive volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). However, little is known about the extent of VOC exposure due to the use of other tobacco products.MethodsWe recruited 48 healthy, tobacco users in four groups: cigarette, smokeless tobacco, occasional users of first generation e-cigarette and e-cigarette menthol and 12 healthy nontobacco users. After abstaining for 48 h, tobacco users used an assigned product. Urine was collected at baseline followed by five collections over a 3-h period to measure urinary metabolites of VOCs, nicotine, and tobacco alkaloids.ResultsUrinary levels of nicotine were ≃2-fold lower in occasional e-cigarette and smokeless tobacco users than in the cigarette smokers; cotinine and 3-hydroxycotinine levels were similar in all groups. Compared with nontobacco users, e-cigarette users had higher levels of urinary metabolites of xylene, cyanide, styrene, ethylbenzene, and benzene at baseline and elevated urinary levels of metabolites of xylene, N,N-dimethylformamide, and acrylonitrile after e-cigarette use. Metabolites of acrolein, crotonaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene were significantly higher in smokers than in users of other products or nontobacco users. VOC metabolite levels in smokeless tobacco group were comparable to those found in nonusers with the exception of xylene metabolite-2-methylhippuric acid (2MHA), which was almost three fold higher than in nontobacco users.ConclusionsSmoking results in exposure to a range of VOCs at concentrations higher than those observed with other products, and first generation e-cigarette use is associated with elevated levels of N,N-dimethylformamide and xylene metabolites.ImplicationsThis study shows that occasional users of first generation e-cigarettes have lower levels of nicotine exposure than the users of combustible cigarettes. Compared with combustible cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and smokeless tobacco products deliver lower levels of most VOCs, with the exception of xylene, N,N-dimethylformamide, and acrylonitrile, whose metabolite levels were higher in the urine of e-cigarette users than nontobacco users. Absence of anatabine in the urine of e-cigarette users suggests that measuring urinary levels of this alkaloid may be useful in distinguishing between users of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes. However, these results have to be validated in a larger cohortcomprised of users of e-cigarettes of multiple brands.
Project description:BackgroundOne published study simultaneously reported the mortality associated with cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco (ST) use in the USA. In this study, we focus only on men ages 40-79 years old and extend the follow-up by 4 years.MethodsWe used selected years (1987-2010) of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Linked Mortality Files to classify 46,104 men age 40-79 years with respect to 7 categories of smoking and/or ST use. We used Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, marital status, education, income, health status, body mass index, and region to estimate hazard ratios (HRs; 95% confidence intervals, CI) for mortality from all causes, heart diseases, malignant neoplasms, and two mutually exclusive categories: smoking-related and other diseases.ResultsThere were 15,540 deaths from all causes, including 3476 never tobacco users, 4782 exclusive smokers, and 210 exclusive ST users. The latter had significant excess mortality from all causes (HR = 1.25, CI = 1.08-1.46), but not from heart diseases (HR = 1.16, CI = 0.85-1.59), malignant neoplasms (HR = 1.17, CI = 0.83-1.67), and all smoking-related diseases (HR = 1.19, CI = 0.97-1.46). However, they had higher mortality for all other causes (1.39, CI = 1.10-1.74), which was largely seen in age 40-59 years (HR = 1.68, CI = 1.11-2.54). Current smokers, with or without ST use, also had significantly elevated HRs for other causes (1.70 and 1.57, respectively), in addition to significant increases in mortality from heart diseases (1.98 and 2.00), malignant neoplasms (2.60 and 2.84), and all smoking-related diseases (2.32 and 2.47).ConclusionsThis is the first simultaneous mortality follow-up study of older American male smokers and ST users. ST users did not have excess mortality from any smoking-related diseases, but younger users had an elevation in deaths from other causes.
Project description:BackgroundAssessments supporting smokeless tobacco (SLT) disease risk are generally decades old. Newer epidemiological data may more accurately represent the health risks associated with contemporary US-based SLT products, many of which contain lower levels of hazardous and potentially hazardous chemicals compared to previously available SLT products.MethodsData from two longitudinal datasets (National Longitudinal Mortality Study-NLMS, and the National Health Interview Survey-NHIS) were analyzed to determine potential associations between SLT use and/or cigarette smoking and all-cause and disease-specific mortality. Mortality hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model applied to various groups, including never users of any tobacco or SLT product, and current and former SLT users and/or cigarette smokers.ResultsThe two datasets yielded consistent findings with similar patterns evident for the specific causes of death measured. All-cause mortality risk for exclusive SLT users was significantly lower than that observed for exclusive cigarette smokers and dual SLT/cigarette users. Similar trends were found for mortality from diseases of the heart, chronic lower respiratory diseases, and malignant neoplasms. Mortality risk for lung cancer in exclusive cigarette smokers was increased by about 12-fold over never-tobacco users but was rarely present in exclusive SLT users in either survey (NHIS, < 5 cases/1,563 observations; NLMS, 3 cases/1,863 observations). While the data in the surveys are limited, SLT use by former cigarette smokers was not associated with an increase in the lung cancer risk HR compared to that by former cigarette smokers who never used SLT.ConclusionsEmerging epidemiological data provides a new perspective on the health risks of SLT use compared to risks associated with cigarette smoking. HR estimates derived from two current US datasets, which include data on contemporary tobacco products, demonstrate a clear mortality risk differential between modern SLT products and cigarettes. Cigarette smokers had an increased overall mortality risk and risk for several disease-specific causes of death, while SLT users consistently had lower mortality risks.
Project description:IntroductionEpidemiological and toxicological evidence suggests lower risk of smokeless tobacco (ST) products compared to cigarettes. Less is known, however, about consumer perceptions and use of novel forms of ST, including snus and dissolvable tobacco.MethodsIn this study, we conducted in-person experimental auctions in Buffalo, NY, Columbia, SC, and Selinsgrove, PA with 571 smokers to test the impact of information and product trials on smokers' preferences. Auctions were conducted between November 2010-November 2011.ResultsWe found no evidence of an impact of product trials on demand in our auctions. Anti-ST information increased demand for cigarettes when presented alone, but when presented with pro-ST information it decreased demand for cigarettes. It did not decrease demand for ST products. Anti-smoking information increased demand for ST products, but did not affect cigarette demand.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that credible and effective communications about tobacco harm reduction should reinforce the negative effects of smoking.
Project description:IntroductionBased on arguments for harm reduction and health benefits, tobacco companies in the United States can apply for regulatory authorization to make "modified risk tobacco product" (MRTP) marketing claims. The impact of future MRTP claims may depend on whether they are noticed, believed, and lead to smokers switching products. This study provides baseline data about smokers' exposure to perceived MRTP claims ahead of any MRTP authorizations.Aims and methodsWe analyzed measures from Wave 3 of the US-based Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study which asked smokers to indicate if they had seen any e-cigarettes, snus, or other smokeless tobacco (SLT) products that claim to be "less harmful" in the past 12 months, and their likelihood of using products with these claims in the next 30 days.ResultsSignificantly fewer smokers noted having seen snus (5.1%) or other SLT (5.6%) with "less harmful" claims compared with e-cigarettes (29.1%). For each product, the prevalence of MRTP claim exposure was higher among smokers who perceived the product to be less harmful than smoking, who currently used the product, and who had higher rates of tobacco advertising exposure at the point of sale. Among smokers who noticed products with "less harmful" claims, about one-quarter said they would use them in the future (24%-27%).ConclusionsAhead of any Food & Drug Administration (FDA) authorization for MRTP claims, some smokers already perceive exposure to "less harmful" claims for e-cigarettes, but few do for SLT. MRTP claims may motivate some smokers to use these products.ImplicationsThis study provides new baseline data about smokers' perceived exposure to MRTP claims in the United States ahead of any regulatory claim authorization. Using data from Wave 3 of the US PATH study, we found that some smokers already perceive exposure to "less harmful" claims for e-cigarettes (29%), but few do for SLT (5%-6%). Among smokers who noticed products with "less harmful" claims, about one-quarter said they would use them in the future (24%-27%), suggesting MRTP claims may motivate some smokers to use products described as "less harmful."
Project description:RationaleOral tobacco-derived nicotine products include on!® nicotine pouches (NPs) which are tobacco-leaf free and available in multiple flavors and nicotine levels. Switching completely to NPs from cigarettes and moist smokeless tobacco (MST) has the potential to reduce harm for adult tobacco consumers. However, the dependence potential of NPs is not established. Therefore, we characterized the abuse potential of NPs with different nicotine levels compared to cigarettes and MST.ObjectivesTo evaluate nicotine pharmacokinetics (PK) and subjective effects of NPs (ranging from 1.5 to 8 mg nicotine) compared to own brand cigarettes (OBCs) and MST (OBMST).MethodsWe used a randomized, in-clinic, partial single-blind, 7-way crossover design to assess nicotine PK and subjective effects in dual users of cigarettes and MST.ResultsThe mean nicotine Cmax for NPs increased with nicotine level, ranging from 3.5 ng/mL (1.5 mg NP) to 15.4 ng/mL (8 mg NP), compared with 12.2 ng/mL for OBCs and 9.8 ng/mL for OBMST. Nicotine tmax was much longer for all NPs and OBMST (32.5-34.4 min) compared to OBCs (8.5 min). Reductions in urges to smoke after use of the 2 mg, 3.5 mg, and 8 mg NPs were not statistically different (p > 0.05) relative to OBC. Also, NPs resulted in lower ratings of positive subjective effects relative to OBCs and OBMST.ConclusionsOverall, based on the study results and literature reported nicotine PK values for cigarettes and MST, the abuse potential of NPs is not likely to be higher than OBCs and OBMST. NPs may be potentially acceptable switching products for users of cigarettes and MST products.
Project description:The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) conducts mortality follow-up for its major population-based surveys. In 2004, NCHS updated the mortality follow-up for the 1986-2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) years, which because of confidentiality protections was made available only through the NCHS Research Data Center. In 2007, NCHS released a public-use version of the NHIS Linked Mortality Files that includes a limited amount of perturbed information for decedents. The modification of the public-use version included conducting a reidentification risk scenario to determine records at risk for reidentification and then imputing values for either date or cause of death for a select sample of records. To demonstrate the comparability between the public-use and restricted-use versions of the linked mortality files, the authors estimated relative hazards for all-cause and cause-specific mortality risk using a Cox proportional hazards model. The pooled 1986-2000 NHIS Linked Mortality Files contain 1,576,171 records and 120,765 deaths. The sample for the comparative analyses included 897,232 records and 114,264 deaths. The comparative analyses show that the two data files yield very similar results for both all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Analytical considerations when examining cause-specific analyses of numerically small demographic subgroups are addressed.