Assessment of tobacco heating product THP1.0. Part 8: Study to determine puffing topography, mouth level exposure and consumption among Japanese users

Abstract

A four-arm study was undertaken in Japan to determine the puffing topography, mouth level exposure and average daily consumption by consumers of the tobacco heating products (THPs): the non-mentholated THP1.0(T), the mentholated THP1.0(M) and a tobacco heating system (THS). The extent of lip blocking of air inlet holes while using THP1.0(T) was also assessed. Groups 1, 2, and 4 included smokers, and group 3 included regular THP users. Smokers of 7-8 mg ISO nicotine free dry particulate matter (NFDPM) non-mentholated cigarettes took on average larger mean puff volumes from THPs than from conventional cigarettes, but puff numbers and durations were similar. Mouth level exposure to NFDPM and nicotine levels were significantly lower when using THPs than conventional cigarettes. Similar trends were observed among smokers of 7-8 mg ISO NFDPM mentholated cigarettes who used mentholated cigarettes and THP1.0(M). Regular users of commercial THS had similar puffing behaviours irrespective of whether they were using THS or THP1.0(T), except for mean puff volume which was lower with THP1.0(T). No smokers blocked the air inlet holes when using THP1.0(T). The puffing topography results support the machine puffing regime used to generate toxicant emissions data and in vitro toxicology testing.

A cross-category puffing topography, mouth level exposure and consumption study among Italian users of tobacco and nicotine products

“…There were no statistically significant differences seen between Group 1 (smokers) and Group 2 (vapers or dual users), suggesting that a familiarisation period of 5-days was sufficient time to enable collection of www.nature.com/scientificreports www.nature.com/scientificreports/ consumer-representative data. Comparisons between this study and Gee et al 18 highlight the use-behaviour differences between Italian and Japanese consumers of tobacco and nicotine products. Italian smokers using THP1.0(T) were, on average, observed to take more puffs per session (15.4 ± 7.4 vs. 10.9 ± 5.6), lower mean puff volumes (46.6 mL ± 1 6.8 mL vs. 66.7 mL ± 23.7 mL) and longer intervals between puffs (11.1 s ± 5.8 s vs. 7.4 s ± 2.7 s).…”

“…Generally, the machine puffing regimes used for pre-clinical laboratory measurements were broadly supported by the puffing topography measurements, despite the differences between products. This was further supported for THP1.0(T) where the 95th percentile MLE for optical NFDPM in the actual use study was in line with the mHCI (55 mL puff over 2 s every 30 seconds 29 , with no vent blocking 18 ) machine measured NFDPM yield (Table S4). The average MLE to ACM for IS1.0(T) was also in line with the existing 55/3/30 machine testing regime 30 (Table S5).…”

“…A recent study by Forster et al 8 concluded that THP1.0(T) emissions are likely to contain, on average, >90.0% less TobReg 9 toxicants per puff when compared to a reference tobacco cigarette under laboratory conditions. When considering the significant differences in ADC and total puff volumes between THP1.0(T) and tobacco cigarettes (also observed by Gee et al 18 ), it may be suggested that the reduction in consumer exposure to these toxicants is further amplified when comparing exposure per day rather than per stick. Furthermore, the differences seen between IS1.0(T) and C651 puffing topography and consumption data further support the need for assessing toxicological risk through overall exposure per day when conducting cross-category evaluations.…”

New ideas, old problems? Heated tobacco products – a systematic review

“…The tobacco industry has performed multiple studies regarding health consequences of HTP use. The results of in vitro and in vivo studies indicate that HTP aerosols have lower toxicity and no new hazards compared to conventional cigarette smoke [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54]. The results of humanbased studies also suggest that switching from conventional cigarettes to IQOS or glo leads to reductions in exposure to smoke toxicants in a manner comparable to quitting tobacco use [74][75][76][77][78].…”

“…Following the manufacturer recommendations, especially proper cleaning of the device after each 20 tobacco sticks seems to be crucial to provide proper thermal regulation and reduce emissions of harmful substances. Most of the research regarding the chemical composition of generated aerosol was carried out on brand new, never used devices [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54]. Independent researchers showed that the use of 1 IQOS tobacco stick left a significant amount of debris, fluid, and fragments of cast-leaf in the device holder [8].…”