Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34193607›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2022

Flavour chemicals, synthetic coolants and pulegone in popular mint-flavoured and menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes.

Esther E Omaiye, Wentai Luo, Kevin J McWhirter, James F Pankow, Prue Talbot

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Preventive medicine reports · 2026
    Article
  8. Influence of e-cigarettes and their constituents on cardiac rhythm and arrhythmias.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2026
    Review
  9. Artificial Sweeteners in US-Marketed Oral Nicotine Pouch Products: Correlation With Nicotine Contents and Effects on Product Preference.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Esther E OmaiyeDepartment of Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, USA.
Wentai LuoDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Kevin J McWhirterCivil and Environmental Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
James F PankowDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Prue TalbotDepartment of Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, USA talbot@ucr.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8833-0845
Portland State University · USUniversity of California, Riverside · US

Funding

Identification and toxicity of chemicals that are linked to EVALIR01ES029741 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI TALBOT, PRUDENCE · 2018 to 2022
$3.7M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES029741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently banned flavours from pod-style electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), except for menthol and tobacco. JUUL customers have quickly discovered that flavoured disposable e-cigarettes from other manufacturers, such as Puff, are readily available. Our goal was to compare flavour chemicals, synthetic coolants and pulegone in mint-flavoured/menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes from JUUL and Puff, evaluate the cytotoxicity of the coolants and perform a cancer risk assessment for pulegone, which is present in both JUUL pods and disposable Puff products.

methodsIdentification and quantification of chemicals were performed using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Cytotoxicity of the coolants was evaluated with BEAS-2B cells using the MTT 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay. The cancer risk of pulegone was calculated using the margin of exposure (MOE).

resultsMenthol was the dominant flavour chemical (>1 mg/mL) in all products from both manufacturers. Minor flavour chemicals (<1 mg/mL) differed in the JUUL and Puff fluids and may produce flavour accents. The concentrations of WS-3 and WS-23 were higher in Puff than in JUUL. WS-23 was cytotoxic in the MTT assay at concentrations 90 times lower than concentrations in Puff fluids. The risk of cancer (MOE<10 000) was greater for mint than for menthol products and greater for Puff than for JUUL.

conclusionsSwitching from flavoured JUUL to Puff e-cigarettes may expose users to increased harm due to the higher levels of WS-23 and pulegone in Puff products. Cancer risk may be reduced in e-cigarettes by using pure menthol rather than mint oils to produce minty-flavoured e-cigarette products.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsMenthaTobacco ProductsCyclohexane MonoterpenesFlavoring AgentsHumansMentholCyclohexane MonoterpenesFlavoring AgentsMentholpulegonecarcinogenselectronic nicotine delivery devicesglobal healthtoxicology

Identifiers

PMID34193607
PMCPMC8716610
OpenAlexW3176096675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.