Post-puff respiration measures on smokers of different tar yield cigarettes.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of different tar yield cigarette brands on the post-puff inhalation/exhalation depth and duration for established smokers of the brands. The study was conducted with 74 established smokers of 1-17 mg Federal Trade Commission (FTC) tar products. The subjects were participating in a five-day inpatient clinical biomarker study during which time they were allowed to smoke their own brand of cigarette whenever they wished. On two separate days, the subjects' breathing pattern was measured using respiratory inductive plethysmography while they smoked one cigarette. This enabled the measurement of the post-puff inhalation volume, exhalation volume, inhalation duration, and exhalation duration for each subject after each puff on two of their own brand of cigarettes. The subjects were grouped according to the FTC tar yield of their product: 1-3 mg; 4-6 mg; 7-13 mg; 14 + mg. The post-puff inhalation volume for the 4-6 mg group was significantly lower than both the 7-13 mg and 14+ mg groups, and the 4-6 mg group exhalation volume was significantly lower than the 14+ mg group (p < 0.05). No other differences were found at the 95% confidence level. When volumes were normalized to resting tidal volume (tidal ratio), there were no differences between the groups for any of the respiratory measures. No significant slope was found for correlations with FTC tar yield for inhalation volume (p = 0.11, mean = 833 mL, R = 0.19), inhalation tidal ratio (p = 0.93, mean = 1.73, R = -0.01) or lung exposure time (p = 0.92, mean = 4.1 s, R = -0.01).

A comparison of nicotine dose estimates in smokers between filter analysis, salivary cotinine, and urinary excretion of nicotine metabolites.

RATIONALE: Nicotine uptake during smoking was estimated by either analyzing the metabolites of nicotine in various body fluids or by analyzing filters from smoked cigarettes. However, no comparison of the filter analysis method with body fluid analysis methods has been published. OBJECTIVES: Correlate nicotine uptake estimates between filter analysis, salivary cotinine, and urinary excretion of selected nicotine metabolites to determine the suitability of these methods in estimating nicotine absorption in smokers of filtered cigarettes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 5-day clinical study was conducted with 74 smokers who smoked 1-19 mg Federal Trade Commission tar cigarettes, using their own brands ad libitum. Filters were analyzed to estimate the daily mouth exposure of nicotine. Twenty-four-hour urine samples were collected and analyzed for nicotine, cotinine, and 3'-hydroxycotinine plus their glucuronide conjugates. Saliva samples were collected daily for cotinine analysis. RESULTS: Each method correlated significantly (p < 0.01) with the other two. The best correlation was between the mouth exposure of nicotine, as estimated by filter analysis, and urinary nicotine plus metabolites. Multiple regression analysis implies that saliva cotinine and urinary output are dependent on nicotine mouth exposure for multiple days. Creatinine normalization of the urinary metabolites degrades the correlation with mouth exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The filter analysis method was shown to correlate with more traditional methods of estimating nicotine uptake. However, because filter analysis is less complicated and intrusive, subjects can collect samples easily and unsupervised. This should enable improvements in study compliance and future study designs.