ArticleEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.)2023
Differential Toxicity of Electronic Cigarette Aerosols Generated from Different Generations of Devices
Article in Environment & health (Washington, D.C.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analytical investigation of metal distribution from e-cigarette aerosols to lung deposition using multi-platform mass spectrometry.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Inhibition of Circadian Rhythm GeneEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Ventilation and features of the lung environment dynamically alter modeled intrapulmonary aerosol exposure from inhaled electronic cigarettes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) have become increasingly popular, especially among youth, raising concerns about their potential health risks. JUUL and Tank devices are two common types of e-cigs that deliver aerosols with varying nicotine levels and flavors. However, the differences in the aerosols generated from different devices and their corresponding cytotoxicity and pulmonary injury effects remain poorly understood. This study addresses these knowledge gaps by characterizing the aerosols of JUUL and Tank e-cig devices and testing their toxic effects on THP-1 and BEAS-2B human cell lines as well as the C57BL/6J mouse model. In our study, the lower-voltage device, the 3.7 V JUUL generates 2.72 mg/puff aerosols by using e-liquid containing 3% nicotine salt (i.e., nicotine benzoate), which is less than the 11.06 mg/puff aerosols generated by the 7.5 V Tank using e-liquid containing 2.4% freebase nicotine. Yet, the cytotoxicity results reveal that JUUL aerosols induced higher toxicity and increased production of pro-inflammation cytokines compared to Tank aerosols per puff. Additionally, we observed that JUUL induced more severe pulmonary inflammation and DNA damage compared to Tank after normalizing for cotinine, a nicotine metabolite,
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.