Effects of environmental tobacco smoke exposure on brain functioning in never‐smoking adolescents

Abstract

Introduction Brain functioning, as indexed by event‐related potentials (ERPs) representing smoking cue reactivity, inhibitory control, and reward processing, has been found to be compromised in smokers. However, whether environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure in never smokers results in similar brain changes is unknown. This question is particularly relevant during adolescence, given ongoing brain maturation and a high risk of smoking initiation. The present study tested the associations between ETS exposure and ERPs reflecting cue reactivity (P3, LPP), inhibitory control (N2, P3), and reward processing (anticipation P3 (P3), feedback‐related negativity (FRN)) among never‐smoking adolescents. Methods Eighty‐four never‐smoking adolescents (nonexposed = 32, exposed = 52) performed a smoking cue reactivity, a Go/NoGo, and a monetary incentive delay (MID) task while ERPs were measured. Results Exposed and nonexposed groups did not differ in ERPs reflecting smoking cue reactivity, inhibitory control, and reward processing. A negative correlation between ETS exposure and the anticipatory P3 suggests reduced anticipatory reward sensitivity for nondrug rewards with increased levels of ETS exposure. However, since this effect was not consistent across analyses, no strong conclusions can be formulated. In the current study, few participants reported high levels of ETS exposure; therefore, further study is necessary. Conclusions Nevertheless, from this study, it can be concluded that low‐to‐moderate exposure to ETS during adolescence does not result in functional brain changes related to smoking cue reactivity, inhibitory control, and reward processing.

Investigating the association between smoking, environmental tobacco smoke exposure and reward‐related brain activity in adolescent experimental smokers

“…To obtain an estimate of participants' familial vulnerability to develop nicotine dependence, we created a familial risk score 26 . The questionnaire, completed by one of the parents, addressed three domains: (1) parents' current smoking behaviour and frequency, (2) the level of nicotine dependence for the period during which parents smoked the most (could either be now or in the past) and (3) smoking behaviour of their parents (i.e., grandparents of participants).…”

“…Confirm earlier work of our group, 26 participants were instructed to fill out the Pubertal Development Scale (PDS), containing questions on secondary sexual characteristics 29 …”

“…Participants were asked to report on the frequency of ETS exposure in their environment 26 . Frequency of ETS exposure was measured with the following question ‘How often does X smoke when you are around?’, where X were relatives (father, mother and siblings), friends (best friend and friends in general) and ‘others’ in their environment (i.e., six questions in total).…”

“…To obtain an estimate of participants' familial vulnerability to develop nicotine dependence, we created a familial risk score. 26 The questionnaire, completed by one of the parents, addressed three domains:…”

Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure and Brain Functioning Associated with Smoking Cue-Reactivity and Inhibitory Control in Nonsmoking Adolescents

“…Increased neuronal activity for smoking cues in similar brain regions, regardless of ETS exposure, for nonsmokers may suggest that smoking cues are perceived as salient in nonsmokers as well. However, 2 recent studies indicate that never-smokers might perceive cigarette cues as unpleasant [54,55] so the observed brain activation for smoking cues may also be interpreted as reflecting the aversive nature of these stimuli. Future (longitudinal) research including valence and arousal ratings is needed to investigate participants' attitude toward smoking cues as well as related brain activity and its relation with ETS exposure in nonsmokers, as well as potential consequences for future smoking behavior.…”