Trial reportScientific reports2025
Evaluation of high-nicotine oral products shows potential to reduce tobacco-related harm by offering satisfying alternatives.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05452278 (A Randomised, Cross-over, Single-blind, Relative Bioavailability Study of Nicotine Delivery From Selected Oral Nicotine Products), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
A Randomised, Cross-over, Single-blind, Relative Bioavailability Study of Nicotine Delivery From Selected Oral Nicotine Products
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time-varying mediated effects of the nicotine patch on smoking before and after a quit attempt when it is added to varenicline and counseling.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2026Trial
- CME Expects Transparency and Independence in Research Studies.Journal of CME · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern oral nicotine delivery (MOND) offers potentially reduced harm nicotine delivery for adult smokers who do not wish to quit. Most clinical studies to date have characterised MOND with lower nicotine content, therefore, this study aimed to assess products with higher nicotine strengths. This randomised, open-label, cross-over, confinement study, conducted in Sweden, compared the nicotine pharmacokinetic and subjective effects of three MOND products, zoneX #5 slim (14 mg nicotine/pouch), zoneX #5 (16 mg) and zoneX #6 (20 mg), and a tobacco snus product (Skruf Slim Fresh #5 (16.6 mg)) in 27 adult snus or MOND users. The zoneX #6 product delivered the highest levels of nicotine; however, all products exhibited similar reductions in urge to use nicotine during and following a controlled product use session. Furthermore, the zoneX products generally scored more favourably than the snus on a 7-point Likert product evaluation scale for satisfaction, psychological reward, aversion and relief, assessed 8 h after the start of product use. There was some indication that pouch size may influence nicotine uptake, however, further characterisation is required. All study products demonstrated good short-term tolerability, with no serious adverse events observed. Overall, the findings support that MOND has tobacco harm reduction potential, providing a satisfactory alternative for adult smokers. Clinical Trial identifier: NCT05452278 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ .
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.