CEBP Infection and Cancer: Biology, Therapeutics, and Prevention Cancer Health Disparities Conference 2009
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 Meeting Abstracts Online

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 16, 584-592, March 1, 2007. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0762
© 2007 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pankow, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Austin, D. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pankow, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Austin, D. F.
Related Collections
Right arrow Epidemiology
Right arrow Epidemiology: Classical Epidemiology

Calculated Cancer Risks for Conventional and "Potentially Reduced Exposure Product" Cigarettes

James F. Pankow1,2, Karen H. Watanabe1, Patricia L. Toccalino1, Wentai Luo1 and Donald F. Austin2,3

1 Department of Environmental and Biomolecular Systems, Oregon Graduate Institute School of Science and Engineering; 2 OHSU Cancer Institute; and 3 Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon

Requests for reprints: James F. Pankow, Department of Environmental and Biomolecular Systems, Oregon Graduate Institute School of Science and Engineering, Oregon Health and Science University, 20000 NW Walker Road, Beaverton, OR 97006-8921. Phone: 503-748-1070; Fax: 503-748-1464. E-mail: pankow{at}ebs.ogi.edu

Toxicant deliveries (by machine smoking) are compiled and associated cancer risks are calculated for 13 carcinogens from 26 brands of conventional cigarettes categorized as "regular" (R), "light" (Lt), or "ultralight" (ULt), and for a reference cigarette. Eight "potentially reduced exposure product" (PREP) cigarettes are also considered. Because agency-to-agency differences exist in the cancer slope factor (CSF) values adopted for some carcinogens, two CSF sets were used in the calculations: set I [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)–accepted values plus California EPA–accepted values as needed to fill data gaps] and set II (vice versa). The potential effects of human smoking patterns on cigarette deliveries are considered. Acetaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acrylonitrile are associated with the largest calculated cancer risks for all 26 brands of conventional cigarettes. The calculated risks are proportional to the smoking dose z (pack-years). Using CSF set I and z = 1 pack-year (7,300 cigarettes), the calculated brand-average incremental lifetime cancer risk Formula values are R, 6 x 10–5; Lt, 5 x 10–5; and ULt, 3 x 10–5 (cf. typical U.S. EPA risk benchmark of 10–6). These values are similar, especially given the tendency of smokers to "compensate" when smoking Lt and ULt cigarettes. Formulais the brand-average per pack-year subtotal risk for the measured human lung carcinogens. Using CSF set I, the Formula values for R, Lt, and ULt cigarettes account for ≤2% of epidemiologically observed values of the all-smoker population average per pack-year risk of lung cancer from conventional cigarettes. RPREP (%) is a science-based estimate of the possible reduction in lung cancer risk provided by a particular PREP as compared with conventional cigarettes. Using CSF set I, all RPREP values are <2%. The current inability to account for the observed health risks of smoking based on existing data indicates that current expressed/implied marketing promises of reduced harm from PREPs are unverified: there is little reason to be confident that total removal of the currently measured human lung carcinogens would reduce the incidence of lung cancer among smokers by any noticeable amount. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(3):584–92)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
G M Paszkiewicz and J L Pauly
Spectrofluorometric method for measuring tobacco smoke particulate matter on cigarette filters and Cambridge pads
Tob. Control, September 1, 2008; 17(Suppl_1): i53 - i58.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
M. Givel
FDA legislation
Tob. Control, August 1, 2007; 16(4): 217 - 218.
[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 Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 2007 by the American Association for Cancer Research.