| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center and Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Requests for reprints: Stephen S. Hecht, University of Minnesota Cancer Center, Mayo Mail Code 806, 420 Delaware Street Southeast, Minneapolis, MN 55455. Phone: 612-624-7604; Fax: 612-626-5135. E-mail: hecht002{at}umn.edu
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.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. A. Melikian, M. V. Djordjevic, S. Chen, J. Richie Jr., and S. D. Stellman Effect of Delivered Dosage of Cigarette Smoke Toxins on the Levels of Urinary Biomarkers of Exposure Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2007; 16(7): 1408 - 1415. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. Cummings, A. Brown, and R. O'Connor The Cigarette Controversy Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2007; 16(6): 1070 - 1076. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W E Stephens Dependence of tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide yields on physical parameters: implications for exposure, emissions control and monitoring Tob. Control, June 1, 2007; 16(3): 170 - 176. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Hammond, F. Wiebel, L. T Kozlowski, R. Borland, K M. Cummings, R. J O'Connor, A. McNeill, G. N Connolly, D. Arnott, and G. T Fong Revising the machine smoking regime for cigarette emissions: implications for tobacco control policy Tob. Control, February 1, 2007; 16(1): 8 - 14. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. K. Hatsukami, C. T. Le, Y. Zhang, A. M. Joseph, M. E. Mooney, S. G. Carmella, and S. S. Hecht Toxicant Exposure in Cigarette Reducers versus Light Smokers Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2006; 15(12): 2355 - 2358. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. O'Connor, L. T. Kozlowski, R. Borland, D. Hammond, and A. McNeill Relationship between constituent labelling and reporting of tar yields among smokers in four countries J. Public Health Med., December 1, 2006; 28(4): 324 - 329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. O'Connor, G. A. Giovino, L. T. Kozlowski, S. Shiffman, A. Hyland, J. T. Bernert, R. S. Caraballo, and K. M. Cummings Changes in Nicotine Intake and Cigarette Use Over Time in Two Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Samples of Smokers Am. J. Epidemiol., October 15, 2006; 164(8): 750 - 759. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Hammond, G. T. Fong, K. M. Cummings, R. J. O'Connor, G. A. Giovino, and A. McNeill Cigarette yields and human exposure: a comparison of alternative testing regimens. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2006; 15(8): 1495 - 1501. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. K. Proia, G. M. Paszkiewicz, M. A. Sullivan Nasca, G. E. Franke, and J. L. Pauly Smoking and smokeless tobacco-associated human buccal cell mutations and their association with oral cancer--a review. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2006; 15(6): 1061 - 1077. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. R. MunafU Harm reduction: lessons learned from tobacco control J Psychopharmacol, May 1, 2006; 20(3): 329 - 330. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Joseph, S. S. Hecht, S. E. Murphy, S. G. Carmella, C. T. Le, Y. Zhang, S. Han, and D. K. Hatsukami Relationships between Cigarette Consumption and Biomarkers of Tobacco Toxin Exposure Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2005; 14(12): 2963 - 2968. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. S. Hecht Carcinogenicity studies of inhaled cigarette smoke in laboratory animals: old and new Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2005; 26(9): 1488 - 1492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Cell Growth & Differentiation |
