Abstract
Background:
Given the rapid increase in the popularity of e-cigarettes and the paucity of associated longitudinal health-related data, the need to assess the potential risks of long-term use is essential.
Objective:
To compare exposure to nicotine, tobacco-related carcinogens, and toxins among smokers of combustible cigarettes only, former smokers with long-term e-cigarette use only, former smokers with long-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use only, long-term dual users of both combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and long-term users of both combustible cigarettes and NRT.
Design:
Cross-sectional study.
Setting:
United Kingdom.
Participants:
The following 5 groups were purposively recruited: combustible cigarette–only users, former smokers with long-term (≥6 months) e-cigarette–only or NRT-only use, and long-term dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette or combustible cigarette–NRT users (n = 36 to 37 per group; total n = 181).
Measurements:
Sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed. Participants provided urine and saliva samples and were analyzed for biomarkers of nicotine, tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNAs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Results:
After confounders were controlled for, no clear between-group differences in salivary or urinary biomarkers of nicotine intake were found. The e-cigarette–only and NRT-only users had significantly lower metabolite levels for TSNAs (including the carcinogenic metabolite 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol [NNAL]) and VOCs (including metabolites of the toxins acrolein; acrylamide; acrylonitrile; 1,3-butadiene; and ethylene oxide) than combustible cigarette–only, dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette, or dual combustible cigarette–NRT users. The e-cigarette–only users had significantly lower NNAL levels than all other groups. Combustible cigarette–only, dual combustible cigarette–NRT, and dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette users had largely similar levels of TSNA and VOC metabolites.
Limitation:
Cross-sectional design with self-selected sample.
Conclusion:
Former smokers with long-term e-cigarette–only or NRT-only use may obtain roughly similar levels of nicotine compared with smokers of combustible cigarettes only, but results varied. Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette–only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.
Primary Funding Source:
Cancer Research UK
Given the rapid increase in the popularity of e-cigarettes and the paucity of associated longitudinal health-related data, the need to assess the potential risks of long-term use is essential.
Objective:
To compare exposure to nicotine, tobacco-related carcinogens, and toxins among smokers of combustible cigarettes only, former smokers with long-term e-cigarette use only, former smokers with long-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use only, long-term dual users of both combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and long-term users of both combustible cigarettes and NRT.
Design:
Cross-sectional study.
Setting:
United Kingdom.
Participants:
The following 5 groups were purposively recruited: combustible cigarette–only users, former smokers with long-term (≥6 months) e-cigarette–only or NRT-only use, and long-term dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette or combustible cigarette–NRT users (n = 36 to 37 per group; total n = 181).
Measurements:
Sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed. Participants provided urine and saliva samples and were analyzed for biomarkers of nicotine, tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNAs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Results:
After confounders were controlled for, no clear between-group differences in salivary or urinary biomarkers of nicotine intake were found. The e-cigarette–only and NRT-only users had significantly lower metabolite levels for TSNAs (including the carcinogenic metabolite 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol [NNAL]) and VOCs (including metabolites of the toxins acrolein; acrylamide; acrylonitrile; 1,3-butadiene; and ethylene oxide) than combustible cigarette–only, dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette, or dual combustible cigarette–NRT users. The e-cigarette–only users had significantly lower NNAL levels than all other groups. Combustible cigarette–only, dual combustible cigarette–NRT, and dual combustible cigarette–e-cigarette users had largely similar levels of TSNA and VOC metabolites.
Limitation:
Cross-sectional design with self-selected sample.
Conclusion:
Former smokers with long-term e-cigarette–only or NRT-only use may obtain roughly similar levels of nicotine compared with smokers of combustible cigarettes only, but results varied. Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette–only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.
Primary Funding Source:
Cancer Research UK
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 390-400 |
| Journal | Annals of Internal Medicine |
| Volume | 166 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| Early online date | 7 Feb 2017 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 21 Mar 2017 |
