Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42455573›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2026

Compensatory Smoking With Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Rachel L Denlinger-Apte, Ziyu Ji, Emily A Harwood, Darcy Lockhart, Neal L Benowitz, Dana Mowls Carroll, Rachel N Cassidy, Suzanne M Colby, Eric C Donny, Diann E Gaalema and 14 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

24 authors.

Rachel L Denlinger-ApteDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Ziyu JiDivision of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Emily A HarwoodDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Darcy LockhartDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Neal L BenowitzDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Dana Mowls CarrollDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, School of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Rachel N CassidyCenter for Alcohol & Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Suzanne M ColbyCenter for Alcohol & Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Eric C DonnyDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Diann E GaalemaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Texas-Medical Branch, Galveston.
Brandy W HardyCoy C. Carpenter Library, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Dorothy K HatsukamiDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Sarah H HeilDepartment of Psychiatry, Vermont Center on Behavior and Health, University of Vermont, Burlington.
Stephen T HigginsDepartment of Psychiatry, Vermont Center on Behavior and Health, University of Vermont, Burlington.
Xianghua LuoDivision of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
F Joseph McClernonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Stacey C SigmonDepartment of Psychiatry, Vermont Center on Behavior and Health, University of Vermont, Burlington.
Tracy T SmithDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Andrew A StrasserDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Jennifer W TideyCenter for Alcohol & Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
David M VockDivision of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Cassidy M WhiteDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Jack M WolfDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Joseph S KoopmeinersDivision of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is pursuing a low-nicotine product standard for cigarettes and other combusted tobacco. Very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) contain approximately 95% less nicotine than standard cigarettes. A key concern is that people who smoke may increase their smoking to compensate for the reduced nicotine levels, which would be a major unintended consequence of the regulation. Objective: To examine whether people who smoke increase their smoking behavior and/or smoke exposure when smoking VLNCs for extended periods. Data Sources: A comprehensive search was performed across multiple databases (eg, PubMed Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) on July 5, 2024, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating VLNCs. Study Selection: Eligible RCTs reported treatment conditions comprising smoking VLNCs for 3- to 20-week periods. Control conditions varied but typically included smoking normal nicotine content cigarettes (NNCs). Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Two investigators performed the data extraction. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included the total number of cigarettes smoked per day and exhaled breath carbon monoxide (CO) exposure at the end of the intervention. Results: Seventeen RCTs (16 from the US and 1 from New Zealand) published between 2010 and 2024 met inclusion criteria, representing 5500 adolescents and adults who smoked cigarettes daily or nondaily, with or without quit interest. The pooled meta-analysis included a subset of 2454 participants from 7 US trials. No trials reported increases in the mean number of cigarettes smoked per day or CO exposure at the end of the intervention among participants assigned to VLNCs vs NNCs. It was estimated that 0.8% of participants could expect an increase in smoking, with a maximum expected increase of 3.3 cigarettes smoked per day, and 8.1% could expect an increase in CO exposure, with a maximum expected increase of 4.2 parts per million 6 weeks after randomization if assigned VLNCs vs NNCs. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis of VLNC RCTs found minimal evidence of compensation among people assigned to smoke VLNCs. The findings suggest that widespread compensatory smoking is unlikely to occur if the FDA implements a low-nicotine product standard for cigarettes and other combusted tobacco.

Indexed as

NicotineSmokingTobacco ProductsCarbon MonoxideHumansUnited StatesCarbon MonoxideNicotine

Identifiers

PMID42455573
PMCPMC13373663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.