Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25542917›Full record

Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2015

Relationships of PROP Taste Phenotype, Taste Receptor Genotype, and Oral Nicotine Replacement Use.

Karen Ahijevych, Beverly J Tepper, Margaret C Graham, Christopher Holloman, William A Matcham

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Karen AhijevychCollege of Nursing, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; ahijevych.1@osu.edu.
Beverly J TepperDepartment of Food Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ;
Margaret C GrahamCollege of Nursing, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH;
Christopher HollomanStatistical Consulting Service, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH;
William A MatchamCollege of Nursing, Wright State University, Dayton, OH.
The Ohio State University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USWright State University · US

Funding

University of Iowa Clinical and Translational Science Program (TL1)UL1RR025755 · NCRR · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2008 to 2011
$26.3M
The Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6M
Bitter taste phenotype as a risk factor of oral nicotine replacement nonadherenceR21DA024765 · NIDA · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI AHIJEVYCH, KAREN L · 2009 to 2010
$410k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025755NCRR NIH HHS UL1RR025755NIDA NIH HHS DA024765NIDA NIH HHS R21 DA024765
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecommended dosage of oral nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) product is often not achieved in smoking cessation attempts. n-6-propylthiouracil (PROP) bitter taste phenotype may be a potential risk factor for non-adherence to oral NRT products due to their bitter taste. There is limited literature on this phenotype in the context of smoking and none in relation to oral NRT pharmacotherapy.

methodsThe association of PROP taste phenotype with NRT usage and sensory response to products was examined. In a cross-over experimental design, 120 participants received a 1 week supply of nicotine inhalers and 1 week of nicotine lozenges with random assignment to order. Mixed effects linear model analyses were conducted.

resultsPROP taste phenotype and taste receptor genotype were not associated with NRT usage or sensory response to NRT, after adjusting for other factors. However, PROP non-tasters used a higher number of lozenges per day (continuous exposure) than nicotine cartridges (intermittent exposure). Unexpectedly, half of baseline PROP non-tasters shifted to taster phenotype 2 weeks after smoking cessation or reduction. Menthol cigarette smokers identified higher NRT strength of sensation scores than nonmenthol smokers. Taste receptor genotype was related to PROP taste phenotype (Kendall τ = .591, p = .0001).

conclusionsA nonsignificant relationship of PROP phenotype and NRT usage may be associated with NRT under-dosing and limited variance in the outcome variable. PROP non-tasters' greater use of lozenges is consistent with nicotine exposure being less aversive to non-tasters. Further research of this and other factors impacting NRT usage are warranted to effectively inform smoking cessation pharmacotherapy.

Indexed as

PropylthiouracilSmoking PreventionTobacco Use Cessation DevicesAdministration, OralAdultCross-Over StudiesFemaleGenotypeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhenotypeSensory Receptor CellsSmokingSmoking CessationTastePropylthiouracil

Identifiers

PMID25542917
PMCPMC4542738
OpenAlexW2120380890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.