A study to investigate the reduction in exposure to selected cigarette smoke constituents in healthy Japanese smokers who switched to a novel tobacco vapor product

Kurachi, Takeshi; Nakaya, Kyoko; Takeshige, Yuki; Futamura, Yasuyuki

doi:10.1254/jpssuppl.wcp2018.0_po2-14-22

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…UMIN000017297 63 64 Japan JTI (Industry-affiliated) Crossover RCT HTP (Prototype NTVP), cigarettes (unknown brand) UMIN000025777 [65][66][67] Japan JTI (Industry-affiliated) Parallel RCT HTP (NTVP), cigarettes (OB), smoking cessation UMIN000041539 68 In the two BAT actual use studies, products were allocated in random order within each group, but subject assignment to groups was not randomised. There were no significant associations between affiliation and setting (confinement or ambulatory; p=0.25) or randomisation (p=0.32).…”

Section: Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical appraisal of interventional clinical trials assessing heated tobacco products: a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo critically assess the methodological characteristics and quality of interventional clinical trials investigating the effects of heated tobacco products (HTPs).Data sourcesWeb of Science (Core collection and MEDLINE), Scopus, MedRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP trial databases and transnational HTP manufacturer online publication libraries were searched for clinical trials on HTPs published between January 2010 and April 2022.Study selectionInterventional clinical trials of any design, in which at least one group of adult participants used a currently marketed HTP, were selected by two reviewers with good or very good agreement.Data extractionData relating to trial characteristics and effects of intervention on primary outcomes were extracted using a predesigned form. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool v1.Data synthesis40 trials were included, 29 of which were tobacco industry affiliated. Methodological characteristics, such as registration, design, setting, comparator interventions, participants, outcomes and analyses, varied between trials, though there were few significant differences between industry-affiliated and independent trials. Of the 40 trials, 33 were judged to be at high risk of bias and 6 at unclear risk of bias. Trial findings were not significantly associated with either affiliation or risk of bias.ConclusionsThe conduct and reporting of HTP interventional clinical trials were poor in many respects and limited to investigating effects of short-term exposure. These trials fall short of what is needed to determine whether HTPs are beneficial to public health, meaning they may not be a sound basis for tobacco control policy decisions.

show abstract

Section: Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%