E-Cigarette Use and Regular Cigarette Smoking Among Youth: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (2013–2016)

Osibogun, Olatokunbo; Bursac, Zoran; Maziak, Wasim

doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2020.01.003

Cited by 39 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the six newly-identified studies based on US participants, four [21,[44][45][46] used Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) data from a US nationally representative longitudinal study. Of these, two [45,46] looked at adult (≥ 18 years old) former smokers, one [44] looked at youth (12-17 years old) and one [21] at a more restricted youth group (12-15 years old). Even though these four studies have the same data source, they were all included in this review as they had different outcome or exposure variables, different populations and included the most recent data.…”

Section: Top-up Systematic Review and Integration With Primary Researmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 12 newly identified studies, five [21,22,41,42,45] had outcomes assessing ever smoking among never smokers at baseline, seven [23,24,40,[42][43][44][45] had outcomes assessing current smoking among non-smokers (never or not current smoking) at baseline and three [25,45,46] assessed the odds of relapse in former smokers. Results were separated based on these three categories and combined with the 13 primary research studies identified in the umbrella review.…”

Section: Top-up Systematic Review and Integration With Primary Researmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seven [23,24,40,[42][43][44][45] of the newly-identified primary research studies investigated current (past 30-day) use of combustible cigarettes following the use of e-cigarettes ( Table 2). Four [24,42,43,45] of these studies looked at never smokers at baseline, while three [23,40,44] looked at non-smokers (either never or no current use).…”

Section: Current (Past 30-day) Cigarette Smoking Among Non-smokers (Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two [44,45] of the included studies were based on PATH data. McMillen et al [45] used data on adult (≥18 years old) never smokers from waves 1 to 2 of the PATH study and Osibogun et al [43].…”

Section: Current (Past 30-day) Cigarette Smoking Among Non-smokers (Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Funnel plots corresponding to the studies included in the meta-analyses are presented in Table in S7 Table. The plot for the seventeen smoking initiation studies of never-smokers is somewhat asymmetrical and seven points lie outside the 95% confidence region, suggesting there may be some selection bias across included studies, publication bias or possible heterogeneity (as supported by the I 2 statistic; 86%). With less than ten studies investigating current smoking in non-smokers [23,24,27,40,[42][43][44] and relapse in former smoke r [25,45,46], test for funnel plot asymmetry was not used as the power of the test would be too low for it to be a reliable indicator of publication bias [19].…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Across Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

E-cigarette use and combustible tobacco cigarette smoking uptake among non-smokers, including relapse in former smokers: umbrella review, systematic review and meta-analysis

Baenziger

Ford

Yazidjoglou³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Combustible tobacco smoking is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. E-cigarettes are promoted for smoking cessation, but evidence on how their use relates to smoking uptake is limited. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsychINFO (Ovid), Medline (Ovid) and Wiley Cochrane Library in April 2020. Studies of non-smokers - never, not current, and former smokers - with a baseline measure of e-cigarette use and an outcome measure of combustible smoking uptake were included. Results: Of 6,225 studies identified, 3 systematic reviews (incorporating 13 primary research studies) and 12 additional studies were included in umbrella and top-up systematic reviews, respectively. All 25 studies found increased risk of smoking uptake with e-cigarette exposure, although magnitude varied substantially. Using a random-effects model, comparing e-cigarette users versus non-e-cigarette users, among never-smokers at baseline the odds ratio (OR) for smoking initiation was 3.25 (95%CI 2.61-4.05, I2 85.7%) and among non-smokers at baseline the OR for current smoking was 2.87 (95%CI 1.97-4.19, I2 90.1%). Among former smokers, smoking relapse was higher in e-cigarette users versus non-users (OR=2.40, 95% CI 1.50-3.83, I2 12.3%). Conclusions: Across multiple settings, non-smokers who use e-cigarettes are consistently more likely than non-e-cigarettes users to initiate combustible cigarette smoking and become current smokers; risk magnitude varied, with an average of around three times the odds. Former smokers using e-cigarettes have over twice the odds of relapse as non-e-cigarettes users. This study is the first to our knowledge to review and pool data on the latter topic.

show abstract

Section: Top-up Systematic Review and Integration With Primary Researmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Top-up Systematic Review and Integration With Primary Researmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current (Past 30-day) Cigarette Smoking Among Non-smokers (Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current (Past 30-day) Cigarette Smoking Among Non-smokers (Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk Of Bias Across Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

E-cigarette use and combustible tobacco cigarette smoking uptake among non-smokers, including relapse in former smokers: umbrella review, systematic review and meta-analysis

Baenziger

Ford

Yazidjoglou³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Partial Nicotine Reduction and E-Cigarette Users’ Puffing Behaviors Among Adults Aged 21 to 35 Years

Ferdous,

Roy,

Chowdhury

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceThe advent of salt-based, high-nicotine electronic nicotine delivery systems [e-cigarettes] has contributed to their epidemic use among young people in the US, necessitating the need for policies to address the addictiveness of these products.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of partial nicotine reduction on new-generation e-cigarette users’ puffing behaviors.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis randomized crossover clinical trial was conducted at the Clinical Research Lab for Tobacco Smoking at Florida International University in Miami between April 15, 2022, and October 17, 2023. Using a volunteering sampling method by distributing flyers and advertisements, current e-cigarette users (who preferred 5% nicotine concentration), aged 21 to 35 years, were included.InterventionIn a crossover design, participants completed 2 sessions of the same product (JUUL or NJOY) that differed by nicotine concentration (3% [JUUL] or 2.4% [NJOY] and 5% [JUUL or NJOY]) in random order. In each session, participants vaped up to 60 minutes ad libitum, preceded by 12 hours of nicotine abstinence.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcomes were puffing topography parameters (eg, total session time, puffing time, total puffing number, interpuff interval, total inhaled volume, average puff volume, duration, and flow rate) measured during each session and plasma nicotine measured before and after each session.ResultsAmong 735 participants who were approached for eligibility, 675 were excluded, and 10 did not complete session 2. Of the 50 remaining current e-cigarette users (mean [SD] age, 23 [3] years; 56% men), 23 (46%) were low nicotine dependent. The median topography parameters were significantly higher during the e-cigarette use sessions with 3% or 2.4% nicotine concentration compared with 5% nicotine concentration for 3 outcomes: puffing time (1.3 minutes [IQR, 0.3-9.4 minutes] vs 1.2 minutes [IQR, 0.2-5.6 minutes]; P = .02), puff duration (2.6 seconds [IQR, 0.8-6.9 seconds] vs 2.4 seconds [IQR, 0.4-6.6 seconds]; P = .02), and total inhaled volume (1990.0 mL [IQR, 279.0-24 400.0 mL] vs 1490.0 mL [IQR, 148.0-14 300.0 mL]; P = .05). The median plasma nicotine boost observed in the 5% nicotine concentration condition (0.0060 mg/L [IQR, 0.0001-0.0249 mg/L]) was significantly higher than that in the 3% or 2.4% session (0.0043 mg/L [IQR, 0.0008-0.0225 mg/L]) (P = .001). Additionally, deeper puffing (increased average puff duration and average puff volume) was observed in participants with higher nicotine dependence (1.42 seconds [95% CI, 1.12-1.80 seconds]; P = .03) and male users (1.38 mL [95% CI, 1.09-1.75 mL]; P = .04) in response to nicotine reduction.Conclusions and RelevanceThis randomized crossover clinical trial provides direct evidence that partial nicotine reduction in salt-based e-cigarettes was associated with acute compensatory puffing and the potential for increased exposure to toxicants. However, given the reduced nicotine delivery associated with nicotine reduction, the acute compensatory response observed in this study may not preclude a population benefit due to the marketing of less addictive products. These results suggest that at least for current e-cigarette users, partial nicotine reduction can lead to enhanced exposure to some toxicants in the short term.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05205382

show abstract

Impact of Electronic Cigarettes on the Upper Aerodigestive Tract: A Comprehensive Review for Otolaryngology Providers

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The use and effects of electronic (e)‐cigarettes (e‐cigs) are particularly relevant for otolaryngology providers as tobacco plays a major role in benign and malignant diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract. This review aims to (1) summarize the recent policies regarding e‐cigs and important patterns of use and (2) serve as a comprehensive resource for clinical providers on the known biologic and clinical effects of e‐cigs on the upper aerodigestive tract. Data Sources PubMed/MEDLINE. Review Methods We conducted a narrative review on (1) general information on e‐cig use and informative findings in the lower respiratory system and a comprehensive review on (2) the effects of e‐cigs on cell and animal models and the clinical implications of these products on human health as is relevant to otolaryngology. Conclusions Although e‐cigs are likely less harmful than conventional cigarettes, preliminary research on e‐cigs suggest several deleterious effects including in the upper aerodigestive tract. Due to this, there has been increased interest in restricting e‐cig usage, particularly among the adolescent population, and caution in recommending e‐cigs to current smokers. Implications for Practice Chronic e‐cig use is likely to have clinical implications. It is critical for otolaryngology providers to be aware of the rapidly changing regulations and use patterns regarding e‐cigs and how e‐cigs influence human health, particularly with regards to the upper aerodigestive tract, to accurately council patients regarding potential risks and benefits of use.

show abstract

E-Cigarette Use and Regular Cigarette Smoking Among Youth: Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (2013–2016)

Cited by 39 publications

References 18 publications

E-cigarette use and combustible tobacco cigarette smoking uptake among non-smokers, including relapse in former smokers: umbrella review, systematic review and meta-analysis

E-cigarette use and combustible tobacco cigarette smoking uptake among non-smokers, including relapse in former smokers: umbrella review, systematic review and meta-analysis

Partial Nicotine Reduction and E-Cigarette Users’ Puffing Behaviors Among Adults Aged 21 to 35 Years

Impact of Electronic Cigarettes on the Upper Aerodigestive Tract: A Comprehensive Review for Otolaryngology Providers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About