Effect of Pod e-Cigarettes vs Cigarettes on Carcinogen Exposure Among African American and Latinx Smokers: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Kim Pulvers, Nicole L Nollen, Myra Rice, Christopher H Schmid, Kexin Qu, Neal L Benowitz, Jasjit S Ahluwalia, Kim Pulvers, Nicole L Nollen, Myra Rice, Christopher H Schmid, Kexin Qu, Neal L Benowitz, Jasjit S Ahluwalia

Abstract

Importance: Fourth-generation nicotine salt pod system (NSPS) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are the leading class of e-cigarettes. They contain high nicotine concentrations, which may facilitate switching among smokers, but could also lead to increased exposure to nicotine and biomarkers of potential harm. African American and Latinx smokers experience significant tobacco-related health disparities. The potential of NSPS e-cigarettes to reduce smoking-related harm among these groups is unknown.

Objective: To compare the harm reduction potential of NSPS e-cigarette vs combustible cigarettes.

Design, setting, and participants: This unblinded randomized clinical trial compared 6 weeks of e-cigarette use vs cigarettes as usual from to 2018 to 2019 among smokers in the San Diego, California, and Kansas City, Missouri, areas. Participants included African American and Latinx adult combustible cigarette smokers who smoked at least 5 cigarettes/d on at least 25 of the past 30 days for at least 6 months and were interested in switching to e-cigarettes. Data were analyzed from September 18, 2019, to September 4, 2020.

Interventions: 6 weeks of e-cigarette use in a choice of pod flavors (5% nicotine) along with brief education, training, and action planning to completely switch to e-cigarettes from combustible cigarettes. The control group smoked combustible cigarettes as usual.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was reduction in urinary 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) concentration at week 6. Secondary outcomes were change in urinary cotinine, expired carbon monoxide (CO), respiratory symptoms, lung function, blood pressure, past 7-day consumption of combustible cigarettes, and switching rates (e-cigarette group only) at weeks 2 and 6.

Results: This study included 186 participants, including 92 African American participants and 94 Latinx participants. The mean (SD) age was 43.3 (12.5) years, and 75 (40.3%) were women. Participants smoked a mean (SD) of 12.1 (7.2) cigarettes/d on 6.8 (0.6) d/wk at baseline. A total of 125 participants were randomized to the e-cigarette group and 61 were randomized to the control group. At baseline, median (interquartile range) NNAL was 124 (45-197) pg/mL in the e-cigarette group and 88 (58-197) pg/mL in the control group. At week 6, the e-cigarette group had significantly greater reductions in NNAL (relative risk [RR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.23-0.54]; P < .001), CO (RR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.42-0.68]; P < .001), respiratory symptoms (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.47-0.85]; P = .002), and number of cigarettes smoked in the past 7 days among those still smoking (RR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.20-0.43]; P < .001) than the control group and maintained their cotinine levels (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.58-1.10]; P = .17). Lung function and diastolic and systolic blood pressure remained unchanged and did not differ between groups. For participants randomized to receive e-cigarettes, 32 participants (28.1%) were exclusively using e-cigarettes at week 6, while 66 participants (57.9%) were dual using and 16 participants (14%) resumed exclusively using cigarettes.

Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that e-cigarettes may be an inclusive harm reduction strategy for African American and Latinx smokers.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03511001.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Schmid reported serving as a consultant for legal firms representing Eli Lilly, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Gilead outside the submitted work. Dr Benowitz reported receiving personal fees from Pfizer and Achieve Life Sciences and serving as a consultant to pharmaceutical companies that market smoking cessation medications and as an expert witness in litigation against tobacco companies outside the submitted work. Dr Ahluwalia reported receiving personal fees from Lucy Goods outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.. Participant Recruitment Flowchart
Figure.. Participant Recruitment Flowchart
CO indicates carbon monoxide; CPD, cigarettes per day; EC, electronic cigarette; and NRT, nicotine replacement therapy. aIncludes multiple categories. bFour participants missed week 2 but attended week 6. cSeven participants missed week 2 and week 6. dOne participant missed week 2 but attended week 6. eThree participants missed week 2 and week 6. fFour participants missed week 6 but attended week 2. gFour participants missed week 6 but attended week 2.

References

    1. Brady BR, De La Rosa JS, Nair US, Leischow SJ. Electronic cigarette policy recommendations: a scoping review. Am J Health Behav. 2019;43(1):88-104. doi:10.5993/AJHB.43.1.8
    1. Huang J, Duan Z, Kwok J, et al. . Vaping versus JUULing: how the extraordinary growth and marketing of JUUL transformed the US retail e-cigarette market. Tob Control. 2019;28(2):146-151. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054382
    1. Herzog B. Wall Street tobacco industry update. Accessed June 2, 2020.
    1. Duell AK, Pankow JF, Peyton DH. Free-base nicotine determination in electronic cigarette liquids by 1H NMR spectroscopy. Chem Res Toxicol. 2018;31(6):431-434. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00097
    1. Omaiye EE, McWhirter KJ, Luo W, Pankow JF, Talbot P. High-nicotine electronic cigarette products: toxicity of JUUL fluids and aerosols correlates strongly with nicotine and some flavor chemical concentrations. Chem Res Toxicol. 2019;32(6):1058-1069. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00381
    1. Walley SC, Wilson KM, Winickoff JP, Groner J. A public health crisis: electronic cigarettes, vape, and JUUL. Pediatrics. 2019;143(6):e20182741. doi:10.1542/peds.2018-2741
    1. Krishnan-Sarin S, Jackson A, Morean M, et al. . e-Cigarette devices used by high-school youth. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;194:395-400. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.10.022
    1. Stratton K, Kwan LY, Eaton DL. Public Health Consequences of e-Cigarettes: Consensus Study Report. National Academies Press; 2018.
    1. Haiman CA, Stram DO, Wilkens LR, et al. . Ethnic and racial differences in the smoking-related risk of lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(4):333-342. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa033250
    1. Cunningham TJ, Croft JB, Liu Y, Lu H, Eke PI, Giles WH. Vital signs: racial disparities in age-specific mortality among blacks or African Americans—United States, 1999–2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66(17):444-456.
    1. Friedman AS, Horn SJL. Socioeconomic disparities in electronic cigarette use and transitions from smoking. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(10):1363-1370. doi:10.1093/ntr/nty120
    1. Harlow AF, Stokes A, Brooks DR. Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic differences in e-cigarette uptake among cigarette smokers: longitudinal analysis of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(10):1385-1393. doi:10.1093/ntr/nty141
    1. Giovenco DP. Different smokes for different folks: e-cigarettes and tobacco disparities. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(9):1162-1163. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2019.305250
    1. Dumville JC, Hahn S, Miles JN, Torgerson DJ. The use of unequal randomisation ratios in clinical trials: a review. Contemp Clin Trials. 2006;27(1):1-12. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2005.08.003
    1. Avins AL. Can unequal be more fair: ethics, subject allocation, and randomised clinical trials. J Med Ethics. 1998;24(6):401-408. doi:10.1136/jme.24.6.401
    1. Baker TB, Piper ME, McCarthy DE, et al. ; Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center (TTURC) Tobacco Dependence . Time to first cigarette in the morning as an index of ability to quit smoking: implications for nicotine dependence. Nicotine Tob Res. 2007;9(suppl 4):S555-S570. doi:10.1080/14622200701673480
    1. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerström K-O. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict. 1991;86(9):1119-1127. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.x
    1. Xia Y, McGuffey JE, Bhattacharyya S, et al. . Analysis of the tobacco-specific nitrosamine 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol in urine by extraction on a molecularly imprinted polymer column and liquid chromatography/atmospheric pressure ionization tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2005;77(23):7639-7645. doi:10.1021/ac058027u
    1. Byrd GD, Davis RA, Ogden MW. A rapid LC-MS-MS method for the determination of nicotine and cotinine in serum and saliva samples from smokers: validation and comparison with a radioimmunoassay method. J Chromatogr Sci. 2005;43(3):133-140. doi:10.1093/chromsci/43.3.133
    1. Pulvers K, Emami AS, Nollen NL, et al. . Tobacco consumption and toxicant exposure of cigarette smokers using electronic cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;20(2):206-214. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntw333
    1. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Timeline Followback: User's Guide. Addiction Research Foundation; 1996.
    1. Brown RA, Burgess ES, Sales SD, Whiteley JA, Evans DM, Miller IW. Reliability and validity of a smoking timeline follow-back interview. Psychol Addict Behav. 1998;12(2):101-112. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.12.2.101
    1. Riley CM, Wenzel SE, Castro M, et al. . Clinical implications of having reduced mid forced expiratory flow rates (FEF25-75), independently of FEV1, in adult patients with asthma. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0145476. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145476
    1. Cassidy RN, Roberts ME, Colby SM. Validation of a respiratory symptom questionnaire in adolescent smokers. Tob Regul Sci. 2015;1(2):121-128. doi:10.18001/TRS.1.2.2
    1. Comstock GW, Tockman MS, Helsing KJ, Hennesy KM. Standardized respiratory questionnaires: comparison of the old with the new. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1979;119(1):45-53. doi:10.1164/arrd.1979.119.1.45
    1. Goniewicz ML, Smith DM, Edwards KC, et al. . Comparison of nicotine and toxicant exposure in users of electronic cigarettes and combustible cigarettes. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(8):e185937. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.5937
    1. Goniewicz ML, Gawron M, Smith DM, Peng M, Jacob P III, Benowitz NL. Exposure to nicotine and selected toxicants in cigarette smokers who switched to electronic cigarettes: a longitudinal within-subjects observational study. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;19(2):160-167. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntw160
    1. Czoli CD, Fong GT, Goniewicz ML, Hammond D. Biomarkers of exposure among “dual users” of tobacco cigarettes and electronic cigarettes in Canada. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(9):1259-1266. doi:10.1093/ntr/nty174
    1. McRobbie H, Phillips A, Goniewicz ML, et al. . Effects of switching to electronic cigarettes with and without concurrent smoking on exposure to nicotine, carbon monoxide, and acrolein. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015;8(9):873-878. doi:10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-15-0058
    1. Shahab L, Goniewicz ML, Blount BC, et al. . Nicotine, carcinogen, and toxin exposure in long-term e-cigarette and nicotine replacement therapy users: a cross-sectional study. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(6):390-400. doi:10.7326/M16-1107
    1. Piper ME, Baker TB, Benowitz NL, Jorenby DE. Changes in use patterns over 1 year among smokers and dual users of combustible and electronic cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res. 2020;22(5):672-680. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntz065
    1. Piper ME, Baker TB, Benowitz NL, Kobinsky KH, Jorenby DE. Dual users compared to smokers: Demographics, dependence, and biomarkers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(9):1279-1284. doi:10.1093/ntr/nty231
    1. Sakamaki-Ching S, Williams M, Hua M, et al. . Correlation between biomarkers of exposure, effect and potential harm in the urine of electronic cigarette users. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2020;7(1):e000452. doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000452
    1. Inoue-Choi M, Liao LM, Reyes-Guzman C, Hartge P, Caporaso N, Freedman ND. Association of long-term, low-intensity smoking with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(1):87-95. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7511
    1. Inoue-Choi M, Hartge P, Liao LM, Caporaso N, Freedman ND. Association between long-term low-intensity cigarette smoking and incidence of smoking-related cancer in the National Institutes of Health-AARP cohort. Int J Cancer. 2018;142(2):271-280. doi:10.1002/ijc.31059

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner