Comparative and cumulative quantitative risk assessments on a novel heated tobacco product versus the 3R4F reference cigarette

Hirn, Carole; Kanemaru, Yuki; Stedeford, Todd; Paschke, Thilo; Abraham, Irene

doi:10.1016/j.toxrep.2020.10.019

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, the common pollutants released by cigarettes are highly similar to 3R4F, followed by HTPs, and ecigarettes have the lowest similarity. Note: The unit (ug/mL) represents the concentration of the common pollutants per millilitre of aerosol; "ND" represents not detected; " a " and " b "represents the concentration of the common pollutants released from 3R4F according to the research by Hirn and Marcilla et al [21,47].…”

Section: Comparative Analysis Of Common Pollutants Released From Different Types Of Tobacco Products and 3r4fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forster et al compared the levels of potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) in mainstream emissions from IQOS and Glo (two typical HTPs) [16][17][18][19]. Current studies have mostly relied on smoking machines to complete the smoking experiment [2,9,14,20,21], but machine smoking does not necessarily reflect how people actually use the products [22]. Different researchers have used different smoking protocols to answer different questions and have shown that more intense smoking leads to higher yields of smoke-related chemicals [20,21].…”

Section: Introduction 1backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current studies have mostly relied on smoking machines to complete the smoking experiment [2,9,14,20,21], but machine smoking does not necessarily reflect how people actually use the products [22]. Different researchers have used different smoking protocols to answer different questions and have shown that more intense smoking leads to higher yields of smoke-related chemicals [20,21]. The varying VOCs and CO results from different types of tobacco products have been obtained under different smoking regimes (puff volume, puff interval, and puff duration), sampling methods (tenax/sulficarb sorbents, solvent absorption, Tedlar bags, etc.)…”

Section: Introduction 1backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Emission of VOCs and CO from Heated Tobacco Products, Electronic Cigarettes, and Conventional Cigarettes, and Their Health Risk

Chen³

et al. 2021

Toxics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The differences in aerosol composition between new tobacco types (heated tobacco products and electronic cigarettes) and conventional cigarettes have not been systematically studied. In this study, the emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide (CO), nicotine, and tar from heated tobacco products (HTPs), electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and conventional cigarettes were compared, and their health risks were evaluated by applying the same smoking regime and a loss mechanism of smoking. Twenty VOCs were identified in aerosols from HTPs, 18 VOCs were identified in aerosols from e-cigarettes, and 97 VOCs were identified in aerosols from cigarettes by GC–MS and HPLC analysis. The concentrations of total VOCs (TVOCs) emitted by the three types of tobacco products decreased as follows: e-cigarettes (795.4 mg/100 puffs) > cigarettes (83.29 mg/100 puffs) > HTPs (15.65 mg/100 puffs). The nicotine content was 24.63 ± 2.25 mg/100 puffs for e-cigarettes, 22.94 ± 0.03 mg/100 puffs for cigarettes, and 8.817 ± 0.500 mg/100 puffs for HTPs. When using cigarettes of the same brand, the mass concentrations of VOCs, tar, and CO emitted by HTPs were approximately 81.2%, 95.9%, and 97.5%, respectively, lower than the amounts emitted by cigarettes. The health risk results demonstrated that the noncarcinogenic risk of the three types of tobacco products decreased as follows: cigarettes (3609.05) > HTPs (2449.70) > acceptable level (1) > e-cigarettes (0.91). The lifetime cancer risk (LCR) decreased as follows: cigarettes (2.99 × 10−4) > HTPs (9.92 × 10−5) > e-cigarettes (4.80 × 10−5) > acceptable level (10−6). In general, HTPs and e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes when the emission of VOCs and CO was considered.

show abstract

Section: Comparative Analysis Of Common Pollutants Released From Different Types Of Tobacco Products and 3r4fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction 1backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction 1backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Emission of VOCs and CO from Heated Tobacco Products, Electronic Cigarettes, and Conventional Cigarettes, and Their Health Risk

Chen³

et al. 2021

Toxics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the approach evaluating combined exposure to multiple compounds in the emissions of TRP and other complex mixtures is essentially the same as one of the methods described by EFSA (i.e., dose addition), the health impact evaluation of tobacco products differs from the usual goal of risk assessment: it aims to evaluate harm reduction claims and to quantify the change in cumulative exposure. For the assessment of the complex mixtures in cigarette or TRP emissions, various concepts have been proposed, ranging from the hazard index (HI) approach [ 42 ] or the RPF approach [ 12 ], to in vitro or in vivo whole mixture studies [ 27 , 43 , 44 ]. More pragmatic approaches to evaluating combined exposure to multiple chemicals are the Mixture Assessment Factor (MAF), as discussed in the context of REACH [ 45 ], or the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) approach [ 46 , 47 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in Predicting the Change in the Cumulative Exposure of New Tobacco and Related Products Based on Emissions and Toxicity Dose–Response Data

Staal

Bil

Bokkers

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many novel tobacco products have been developed in recent years. Although many may emit lower levels of several toxicants, their risk in the long term remains unclear. We previously published a method for the exposure assessment of mixtures that can be used to compare the changes in cumulative exposure to carcinogens among tobacco products. While further developing this method by including more carcinogens or to explore its application to non-cancer endpoints, we encountered a lack of data that are required for better-substantiated conclusions regarding differences in exposure between products. In this special communication, we argue the case for more data on adverse health effects, as well as more data on the composition of the emissions from tobacco products. Such information can be used to identify significant changes in relevance to health using the cumulative exposure method with different products and to substantiate regulatory decisions.

show abstract

“…Thus, a daily consumer of loose snuff will ingest 15 micrograms/day after 2016, but ingested higher amounts earlier [ 35 ]. For comparison, TSNAs from a pack of low-tar cigarettes causes an exposure of 5 micrograms [ 36 ]. Thus, an average loose snuff user is currently exposed to 3 times higher levels to TSNAs than a pack-a-day smoker, and the difference was higher earlier [ 35 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence trends in bladder and lung cancers between Denmark, Finland and Sweden may implicate oral tobacco (snuff/snus) as a possible risk factor

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The dominant risk factor for urinary bladder cancer has been cigarette smoking, but, as smoking prevalence is decreasing in many populations, other risk factors may become uncovered. Such new risk factors could be responsible for halting the declining incidence of bladder cancer. We hypothesize that snuff use by Swedish men may increase the rate for bladder cancer, as snuff contains carcinogenic nitrosamines. Methods We carried out an ecological study by comparing incidence trends in lung and bladder cancers between Danish, Finnish and Swedish men in order to test if the Swedish bladder cancer rate deviates from the Danish and Finnish ones. We used the NORDCAN database for cancer data from 1960 through 2016 to test the hypothesis. Results In the three countries, the incidence of lung cancer started to decrease after a peak incidence, and this was later followed by declining incidence in bladder cancer in Denmark from 1990 to 2016 by 14.3%, in Finland by 8.3% but not in Sweden (the decline of 1.4% was not significant). The difference in trends can be partly explained by the increasing incidence in Swedish men aged 70 or more years. Sweden differs from the two other countries by low male smoking prevalence but increasing use of snuff recorded by various surveys. Conclusion The stable bladder cancer trend for Swedish men was opposite to the declining trends in Denmark, Finland and globally. We suggest that this unusual finding may be related to the increasing use of snuff by Swedish men. Average users of snuff are exposed to at least 3 times higher levels of carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines than a smoker of one daily pack of cigarettes.

show abstract

Comparative and cumulative quantitative risk assessments on a novel heated tobacco product versus the 3R4F reference cigarette

Abstract: Graphical abstract

Cited by 17 publications

References 34 publications

The Emission of VOCs and CO from Heated Tobacco Products, Electronic Cigarettes, and Conventional Cigarettes, and Their Health Risk

The Emission of VOCs and CO from Heated Tobacco Products, Electronic Cigarettes, and Conventional Cigarettes, and Their Health Risk

Challenges in Predicting the Change in the Cumulative Exposure of New Tobacco and Related Products Based on Emissions and Toxicity Dose–Response Data

Incidence trends in bladder and lung cancers between Denmark, Finland and Sweden may implicate oral tobacco (snuff/snus) as a possible risk factor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About