Similar uptake of lung carcinogens by smokers of regular, light, and ultralight cigarettes

128Citations
Citations of this article
45Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Cigarette design has changed markedly over the past 60 years and sales-weighed levels of tar and nicotine have decreased. Currently, cigarettes are classified as regular (>14.5 mg tar), light (>6.5-14.5 mg tar), and ultralight (≤6.5 mg tar), based on a Federal Trade Commission-specified machine-smoking protocol. Epidemiologic studies suggest that there is no difference in lung cancer risk among people who smoke light or ultralight cigarettes compared with regular cigarettes, but the uptake of lung carcinogens in smokers of these types of cigarettes has never been reported. We recruited 175 smokers, who filled out a tobacco use questionnaire in which their current brand was identified as regular, light, or ultralight. Urine samples were collected and analyzed for 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HOP), total 4-(methylnitrosamino)- 1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL plus its glucuronides) and total cotinine (cotinine plus its glucuronides). 1-HOP and total NNAL are biomarkers of uptake of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1- butanone, lung carcinogens in cigarette smoke. Total cotinine is a biomarker of nicotine uptake. There were no statistically significant differences in urinary levels of 1-HOP, total NNAL, and total cotinine in smokers of regular, light, and ultralight cigarettes, whether the results were expressed per mg urinary creatinine, per mL of urine, or per mg creatinine divided by cigarettes per day. Levels of machine measured tar were available for the cigarettes smoked by 149 of the subjects. There was no correlation between levels of tar and any of the biomarkers. These results indicate that lung carcinogen and nicotine uptake, as measured by urinary 1-HOP, total NNAL, and total cotinine is the same in smokers of regular, light, and ultralight cigarettes. The results are consistent with epidemiologic studies that show no difference in lung cancer risk in smokers of these cigarettes. Copyright © 2005 American Association for Cancer Research.

References Powered by Scopus

Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method

3090Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Tobacco smoke carcinogens and lung cancer

1700Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Tobacco carcinogens, their biomarkers and tobacco-induced cancer

1232Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Progress and challenges in selected areas of tobacco carcinogenesis

255Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Reduced nicotine content cigarettes: Effects on toxicant exposure, dependence and cessation

201Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cigarette smoke induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and the unfolded protein response in normal and malignant human lung cells

159Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hecht, S. S., Murphy, S. E., Carmella, S. G., Li, S., Jensen, J., Le, C., … Hatsukami, D. K. (2005). Similar uptake of lung carcinogens by smokers of regular, light, and ultralight cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, 14(3), 693–698. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0542

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 11

39%

Researcher 10

36%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

25%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 13

50%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6

23%

Psychology 4

15%

Chemistry 3

12%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
References: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free