Advertisement

Psychopharmacology

, Volume 235, Issue 12, pp 3435–3441 | Cite as

Do non-daily smokers compensate for reduced cigarette consumption when smoking very-low-nicotine-content cigarettes?

  • Saul Shiffman
  • Jason M. Mao
  • Brenda F. Kurland
  • Sarah M. Scholl
Original Investigation
  • 141 Downloads

Abstract

Rationale

The Food and Drug Administration is considering severely restricting the nicotine in cigarettes, to reduce smoking. A study showed that non-daily, intermittent smokers (ITS) randomized to very-low-nicotine-content cigarettes (VLNCCs) reduced their cigarette consumption.

Objectives

To assess whether increased smoking intensity of VLNCCs compensated for some of the reduced cigarette consumption.

Methods

After a 2-week baseline smoking their own-brand cigarettes, 118 ITS were randomized to VLNCCs (~ 1 mg nicotine/g tobacco), and 120 to normal-nicotine-content cigarettes (NNCCs; ~ 16 mg/g) for 10 weeks. Laboratory measures of smoking intensity—total puff volume and carbon monoxide (CO) boost—assessed single cigarettes smoked in up to three laboratory topography sessions. Field measures assessed returned cigarette butts, averaged over up to five 2-week intervals: the mass of tobacco burned (computed from residual mass of butts) and the intensity of smoking (by scanning of returned filters). Analysis was by mixed model random effects models using baseline values as covariates.

Results

ITS in the VLNCC group puffed less smoke in topography sessions (−38.50 mL [−75.21, −1.78]; p < 0.04), but showed no difference in CO boost. Participants in the VLNCC group burned 0.02 [0.04, 0.002] grams less tobacco per cigarette (p < 0.03). Analysis of filters showed their smoking intensity declined over time, compared to NNCC participants (p < 0.04). “Cheating” by smoking normal cigarettes did not moderate these effects.

Conclusions

ITS did not increase their smoking intensity when switched to VLNCCs; indeed, their smoking intensity decreased. Reductions in cigarette consumption seen when ITS are switched to VLNCCs were not compensated by increased smoking intensity.

Keywords

Tobacco Nicotine Smoking Compensation Low nicotine Non-daily smoking Smoking topography 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Allison Brown for the assistance overseeing the study, to David Colarusso, Corinne Hogge, and Ian Jutsum, research assistants who conducted research sessions, to James Moorehead for the data management and preparation, to Alexsys Hoesch for the administrative assistance, to Dr. Esa Davis for the medical oversight, and to Dr. Clifford Watson for providing the filter-scanning software and training and consultation on the scanning. We also appreciate the contributions of members of the study Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Peter Callas (University of Vermont), Matthew Carpenter (Medical University of South Carolina), Jonathan Foulds (Pennsylvania State University), and John Hughes (University of Vermont).

Funding

This work was supported by a grant (S. Shiffman) from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), awarded as a supplement to grant number P30CA047904. The grant supported use of the UPMC Hillman Cancer Center Biostatistics Shared Resource Facility.

Compliance with ethical standards

The study was approved by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board and participants provided written informed consent.

Conflict of interest

SS, through Pinney Associates, consults on tobacco cessation and harm reduction (including nicotine replacement therapy and digital vapor products; by contract, combusted cigarettes are excluded) to Niconovum USA, RJ Reynolds Vapor Company, and RAI Services Company, all subsidiaries of Reynolds American, Inc. and British American Tobacco. Previously, SS consulted to NJOY on e-cigarettes, and to GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare on smoking cessation medications and treatments. SS holds patents for a novel nicotine smoking cessation medication that is not under commercial development. Other authors report no competing interests.

Disclaimer

NCI and FDA, had no role in design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the FDA.

References

  1. Ashton H, Stepney R, Thompson JW (1979) Self-titration by cigarette smokers. BMJ 2:357–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benowitz N (2010) Nicotine addiction. N Engl J Med 362:2295–2203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benowitz NL, Henningfield JE (1994) Establishing a nicotine threshold for addiction: the implications for tobacco regulation. N Engl J Med 331:123–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benowitz NL, Hall SM, Stewart S, Wilson M, Dempsey D, Pr J (2007) Nicotine and carcinogen exposure with smoking of progressively reduced nicotine content cigarette. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 16:2479–2485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benowitz NL, Hukkanen J, Pr J (2009) Nicotine chemistry, metabolism, kinetics and biomarkers. Handb Exp Pharmacol 192:29–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benowitz NL, Nardone N, Hatsukami DK, Donny EC (2015) Biochemical estimation of noncompliance with smoking of very low nicotine content cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 24:331–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cassidy RN, Tidey, J.W., Cao, Q., Colby, S.M., McClernon, F.J., Koopmeiners, J.S., Hatsukami, D., Donny, E.C. (2018) Age moderates smokers’ subjective response to very-low nicotine content cigarettes: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Nicotine Tob Res Advance online publicationGoogle Scholar
  8. Donny EC, Houtsmuller EJ, Stitzer ML (2007) Smoking in the absence of nicotine: behavioral, subjective and physiological effects over 11 days. Addiction 102:324–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donny EC, Denlinger RL, Tidey JW, Koopmeiners JS, Benowitz NL, Vandrey RG, al'Absi M, Carmella SG, Cinciripini PM, Dermody SS, Drobes DJ, Hecht SS, Jensen J, Lane T, Le CT, McClernon FJ, Montoya ID, Murphy SE, Robinson JD, Stitzer ML, Strasser AA, Tindle H, Hatsukami DK (2015) Randomized trial of reduced-nicotine standards for cigarettes. N Engl J Med 373:1340–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foulds J, Hobkirk, A., Wasserman, E., Richie, J., Veldheer, S., Krebs, N.M., Reinhart, L., Muscat, J. (2018) Estimation of compliance with exclusive smoking of very low nicotine content cigarettes using plasma cotinine. Prev Med. Advance online publicationGoogle Scholar
  11. Hasenfratz M, Baldinger B, Battig K (1993) Nicotine or tar titration in cigarette smoking behavior? Psychopharmacology 112:253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerström KO (1991) The Fagerström test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the Fagerström tolerance questionnaire. Br J Addict 86:1119–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Henningfield JE, Benowitz NL, Slade J, Houston TP, Davis RM, Deitchman SD (1998) Reducing the addictiveness of cigarettes. Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Tob Control 7: 281–293Google Scholar
  14. Inoue-Choi M, Liao LM, Reyes-Guzman C, Hartge P, Caporaso N, Freedman ND (2017) Association of long-term, low-intensity smoking with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. JAMA Intern Med 177:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jamal A, King BA, Neff LJ, Whitmill J, Babb SD, Graffunder CM (2016) Current cigarette smoking among adults - United States, 2005-2015. Mmwr-Morbid Mortal W 65:1205–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kozlowski LT (1981) Applications of some physical indicators of cigarette smoking. Addict Behav 6:213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O'Connor RJ, Kozlowski LT, Hammond D, Vance TT, Stitt JP, Cummings KM (2007) Digital image analysis of cigarette filter staining to estimate smoke exposure. Nicotine Tob Res 9:865–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Polzin G, Xizheng Y, McCraw J, Ashley D, Watson C (2006) Comparison of optical, ultraviolet, and mass spectrometric methods for the determination of cigarette smoking patterns: can lower cost/higher thoughtput methods provide reliable data. Poster presented at The 13th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Reyes-Guzman CM, Pfeiffer RM, Lubin J, Freedman ND, Cleary SD, Levine PH, Caporaso NE (2017) Determinants of light and intermittent smoking in the United States: results from three pooled national health surveys. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 26:228–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schane RE, Ling PM, Glantz SA (2010) Health effects of light and intermittent smoking: a review. Circulation 121:1518–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shiffman S, Scholl SM (2017) Increases in cigarette consumption and decreases in smoking intensity when non-daily smokers are provided with free cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res: Advance online publicationCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shiffman S, Dunbar MS, Scholl SM, Tindle HA (2012a) Smoking motives of daily and non-daily smokers: a profile analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend 126:362–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shiffman S, Tindle H, Li X, Scholl S, Dunbar M, Mitchell-Miland C (2012b) Characteristics and smoking patterns of intermittent smokers. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 20:264–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shiffman S, Dunbar MS, Benowitz NL (2014) A comparison of nicotine biomarkers and smoking patterns in daily and nondaily smokers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 23:1264–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shiffman S, Dunbar MS, Tindle HA, Ferguson SG (2015) Nondaily smokers' experience of craving on days they do not smoke. J Abnorm Psychol 124:648–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shiffman S, Kurland B, Scholl S, Mao J (2018) Non-daily smokers’ changes in cigarette consumption with very-low-nicotine-content cigarettes: a randomized double-blind clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. Advance online publicationGoogle Scholar
  27. Sobell LC, Sobell MB, Maisto SA (1985) Time-line follow-back assessment methods. In: Lettieri DJ, Sayers MA, Nelson JE (eds) NIAA treatment handbook series: Vol 2, alcoholism treatment assessment research instruments. National Institute on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse DHHS Publications, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  28. Stolerman IP, Jarvis MJ (1995) The scientific case that nicotine is addictive. Psychopharmacology 117:2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Strasser AA, O'Connor RJ, Mooney ME, Wileyto EP (2006) Digital image analysis of cigarette filter stains as an indicator of compensatory smoking. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15:2565–2569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014) Results from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: national findings. In: NSDUH Series H-48 HPNS- (ed). Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration, 2014., Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
  31. Tindle HA, Shiffman S (2011) Smoking cessation behavior among intermittent smokers versus daily smokers. Am J Public Health 101:e1–e3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tobacco Product Standard for Nicotine Level of Combusted Cigarettes; HHS Advance notice of proposed rulemaking, 83 Fed. Reg. 11818 (March 16, 2018) (to be codified at 21 C.F.R. pt. 1130)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saul Shiffman
    • 1
  • Jason M. Mao
    • 2
  • Brenda F. Kurland
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sarah M. Scholl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiostatisticsUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  3. 3.UPMC Hillman Cancer CenterPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations