Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2010
Evaluating oral noncombustible potential-reduced exposure products for smokers.
Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of a Reduced Risk Claim on Adolescents' Smokeless Tobacco Perceptions and Willingness to Use.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2023Trial
- A Randomized, Controlled Study to Assess Biomarkers of Exposure in Adult Smokers Switching to Oral Nicotine Products.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Trial
- Nicotine pharmacokinetics and subjective response among adult smokers using different flavors of on!® nicotine pouches compared to combustible cigarettes.Psychopharmacology · 2021Trial
- Characterization of the Abuse Potential in Adult Smokers of a Novel Oral Tobacco Product Relative to Combustible Cigarettes and Nicotine Polacrilex Gum.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2021Trial
- A longitudinal, naturalistic study of U.S. smokers' trial and adoption of snus.Addictive behaviors · 2016Trial
- Randomised clinical trial of snus versus medicinal nicotine among smokers interested in product switching.Tobacco control · 2016Trial
- Oral tobacco products: preference and effects among smokers.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2011Trial
- Measurement of cigarette smoking: Comparisons of global self-report, returned cigarette filters, and ecological momentary assessment.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2022Article
- Tobacco-use behavior and toxicant exposure among current dual users of electronic cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Perceptions of Snus Among US Adult Smokers Given Free Product.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2017Article
- Clinical Laboratory Evaluation of Electronic Cigarettes/Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Methodological Challenges.Tobacco regulatory science · 2016Article
- Measurement of smoking behavior: Comparison of self-reports, returned cigarette butts, and toxicant levels.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2016Article
- Subjective responses to oral tobacco products: scale validation.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2013Article
- Pathophysiological impact of cigarette smoke exposure on the cerebrovascular system with a focus on the blood-brain barrier: expanding the awareness of smoking toxicity in an underappreciated area.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2010Review
- A clinical laboratory model for evaluating the acute effects of electronic "cigarettes": nicotine delivery profile and cardiovascular and subjective effects.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPotential-reduced exposure products (PREPs) are marketed as a way for smokers to continue using tobacco while possibly lessening their tobacco toxicant intake. Some tobacco-based PREPs are combustible and intended to be smoked, while others are noncombustible and intended to be administered orally (e.g., Camel Snus [CS] tobacco sachets and Ariva tobacco tablets). The ability of these noncombustible PREPs to reduce smokers' exposure to cigarette-delivered toxicants and suppress tobacco abstinence symptoms effectively is unclear. Clinical laboratory methods have been used to measure combustible PREP-associated toxicant exposure and abstinence symptom suppression and could be applied to evaluating the effects of orally administered noncombustible PREPs.
methodsIn this study, 21 smokers (6 women) participated in four 5-day conditions that differed by product used: CS, Ariva, own brand cigarettes, or no tobacco. Measures included expired-air carbon monoxide (CO), the urinary metabolite of nicotine (cotinine), the urinary metabolite of the carcinogen NNK (NNAL-T), and subjective effect ratings.
resultsRelative to own brand, all other conditions were associated with CO and cotinine levels that were lower and abstinence symptom ratings that were greater. Only no-tobacco use was associated with significantly lower NNAL levels. Acceptability ratings were also lower in all conditions relative to own brand. DISCUSSION: Although these oral products reduce exposure to CO, their ineffective abstinence symptom suppression and low acceptability may limit their viability as PREPs. As with combustible PREPs, clinical laboratory study of orally administered noncombustible PREPs will be a valuable part of any comprehensive PREP evaluation strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.