Abstract
Background: Increased cigarette costs have inadvertently strengthened the appeal of discounted brands to price-sensitive smokers. Although smokers perceive discounted brands as having poorer quality, little is known about their delivery of toxic tobacco smoke constituents compared with premium-branded tobacco products. Methods: We investigated the differences between discount and premium brand smokers using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 Special Smoker Sample. Our analyses focused on demographic differences and 27 biomarkers of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHC) listed by the FDA, including volatile organic compounds, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronide [4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol glucuronide; reported as total NNAL (tNNAL)], metals, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Data were analyzed using linear regression models adjusting for potential confounders. Results: A total of 976 non-tobacco users and 578 recent cigarette smokers were eligible for analysis, of which 141 (26.0% weighted) smoked discount brand cigarettes and 437 (74.0% weighted) smoked premium. Discount brand smokers were older, predominantly non-Hispanic white, and had higher serum cotinine. Discount brand smokers had significantly higher levels of 13 smoking-related biomarkers, including tNNAL, uranium, styrene, xylene, and biomarkers of exposure to PAHs (naphthalene, fluorene, and phenanthrene), compared with premium brand smokers. Conclusions: These findings suggest that discount cigarette use is associated with higher exposure to several carcinogenic and toxic HPHCs. Impact: These results may have important regulatory implications for product standards, as higher exposures could lead to a greater degree of harm.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 601-609 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2018 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Epidemiology
- Oncology
Cite this
}
Comparison of biomarkers of tobacco exposure between premium and discount brand cigarette smokers in the NHANES 2011-2012 special sample. / Wasserman, Emily J.; Reilly, Samantha M.; Goel, Reema; Foulds, Jonathan; Richie, John P.; Muscat, Joshua E.
In: Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, Vol. 27, No. 5, 05.2018, p. 601-609.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of biomarkers of tobacco exposure between premium and discount brand cigarette smokers in the NHANES 2011-2012 special sample
AU - Wasserman, Emily J.
AU - Reilly, Samantha M.
AU - Goel, Reema
AU - Foulds, Jonathan
AU - Richie, John P.
AU - Muscat, Joshua E.
PY - 2018/5
Y1 - 2018/5
N2 - Background: Increased cigarette costs have inadvertently strengthened the appeal of discounted brands to price-sensitive smokers. Although smokers perceive discounted brands as having poorer quality, little is known about their delivery of toxic tobacco smoke constituents compared with premium-branded tobacco products. Methods: We investigated the differences between discount and premium brand smokers using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 Special Smoker Sample. Our analyses focused on demographic differences and 27 biomarkers of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHC) listed by the FDA, including volatile organic compounds, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronide [4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol glucuronide; reported as total NNAL (tNNAL)], metals, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Data were analyzed using linear regression models adjusting for potential confounders. Results: A total of 976 non-tobacco users and 578 recent cigarette smokers were eligible for analysis, of which 141 (26.0% weighted) smoked discount brand cigarettes and 437 (74.0% weighted) smoked premium. Discount brand smokers were older, predominantly non-Hispanic white, and had higher serum cotinine. Discount brand smokers had significantly higher levels of 13 smoking-related biomarkers, including tNNAL, uranium, styrene, xylene, and biomarkers of exposure to PAHs (naphthalene, fluorene, and phenanthrene), compared with premium brand smokers. Conclusions: These findings suggest that discount cigarette use is associated with higher exposure to several carcinogenic and toxic HPHCs. Impact: These results may have important regulatory implications for product standards, as higher exposures could lead to a greater degree of harm.
AB - Background: Increased cigarette costs have inadvertently strengthened the appeal of discounted brands to price-sensitive smokers. Although smokers perceive discounted brands as having poorer quality, little is known about their delivery of toxic tobacco smoke constituents compared with premium-branded tobacco products. Methods: We investigated the differences between discount and premium brand smokers using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 Special Smoker Sample. Our analyses focused on demographic differences and 27 biomarkers of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHC) listed by the FDA, including volatile organic compounds, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol and its glucuronide [4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol glucuronide; reported as total NNAL (tNNAL)], metals, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Data were analyzed using linear regression models adjusting for potential confounders. Results: A total of 976 non-tobacco users and 578 recent cigarette smokers were eligible for analysis, of which 141 (26.0% weighted) smoked discount brand cigarettes and 437 (74.0% weighted) smoked premium. Discount brand smokers were older, predominantly non-Hispanic white, and had higher serum cotinine. Discount brand smokers had significantly higher levels of 13 smoking-related biomarkers, including tNNAL, uranium, styrene, xylene, and biomarkers of exposure to PAHs (naphthalene, fluorene, and phenanthrene), compared with premium brand smokers. Conclusions: These findings suggest that discount cigarette use is associated with higher exposure to several carcinogenic and toxic HPHCs. Impact: These results may have important regulatory implications for product standards, as higher exposures could lead to a greater degree of harm.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047726712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047726712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0869
DO - 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0869
M3 - Article
C2 - 29511038
AN - SCOPUS:85047726712
VL - 27
SP - 601
EP - 609
JO - Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention
JF - Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention
SN - 1055-9965
IS - 5
ER -