ArticleArchives of toxicology2026
Differential induction of hepatic CYP enzymes by tobacco products and e-cigarettes: recommendation to rethink smoking status in clinical pharmacology.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CYP1A1 as a conserved metabolic circuit linking environmental sensing to immune regulation.Archives of toxicology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smoking status is often recorded as "Yes/No", but this binary approach overlooks the complexity of tobacco use and limits the precision of clinical data interpretation. Cigarette smoke is a known inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, yet effects of other tobacco products on drug interactions remain poorly understood. This study addresses the gap by evaluating CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8 and CYP3A4 induction in primary human hepatocytes by 6 cigarette brands, 1 heated tobacco product (HTP), 6 cigar brands, 2 smokeless tobacco brands, and 3 e-cigarette brands (20 flavors). Cigarettes and cigars induced CYP1A1 strongest (4-29-fold mRNA; 29-95-fold enzyme activity), but also mRNA of CYP1A2 (4-10-fold), CYP2B6 (2-18-fold) and CYP3A4 (3-18-fold). HTPs demonstrated weaker CYP1A1 induction than cigarettes (3-4-fold mRNA, 6-16-fold enzyme activity), at 10-times higher concentrations, what clearly distinguishes them from cigarettes. Smokeless tobacco led to stronger mRNA induction of CYP1A2 (12-26-fold) than CYP1A1 (4-14-fold). E-cigarettes induced mRNA of CYP3A4 (2-108-fold), CYP2B6 (3-39-fold), and CYP2C8 (2-14-fold) more strongly than CYP1A1/CYP1A2 (2-7-fold), with brand-dependent differences for CYP3A4 and CYP2C8 (p < 0.01). Relevance of e-cigarette interactions was supported by CYP2B6 and CYP3A4 induction on enzyme activity and protein expression levels. Nicotine content did not influence induction outcome. These product-specific differences underscore that tobacco products should be distinguished in clinical pharmacology. It is highly recommended to collect detailed tobacco product use data in clinical studies, as provided in this work in an example. This would enable targeted in vitro testing of prevalent products, population specific trial planning and improve clinical data interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42159749What 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.