Journal & Issues

Volume 32 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 3 (November 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 2 (July 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 1 (March 2022)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 4 (November 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 3 (July 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 2 (May 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 1 (March 2021)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 3 (December 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 2 (August 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 1 (April 2020)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 7 (December 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 6 (August 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 5 (May 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 3 (October 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 2 (August 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (April 2018)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 8 (December 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 7 (September 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 6 (April 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 5 (January 2017)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 4 (October 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 3 (July 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 2 (April 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 1 (January 2016)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 7 (September 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 6 (June 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 5 (March 2015)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 2 (July 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 1 (April 2014)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 8 (December 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 7 (September 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 6 (June 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 5 (March 2013)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 4 (December 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 3 (August 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 2 (June 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 1 (February 2012)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 6 (November 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 5 (May 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 4 (January 2011)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 3 (November 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 2 (July 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 1 (April 2010)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 6 (December 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 5 (September 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 4 (May 2009)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 3 (December 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 2 (August 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 1 (April 2008)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 5 (June 2007)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 4 (January 2007)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 3 (October 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 2 (July 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 1 (April 2006)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 8 (December 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 7 (October 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 6 (July 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 5 (April 2005)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 4 (December 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 3 (October 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 2 (July 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 1 (March 2004)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 8 (December 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 7 (November 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 6 (July 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 5 (March 2003)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 4 (December 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 3 (August 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 2 (June 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 1 (February 2002)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 7 (October 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 6 (July 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 5 (April 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 4 (January 2001)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 3 (October 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 2 (July 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 1 (April 2000)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 6 (December 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 5 (July 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 4 (April 1999)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 3 (December 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 2 (August 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 1 (April 1998)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 3 (December 1997)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 2 (September 1997)

Volume 17 (1996): Issue 1 (December 1996)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 4 (November 1995)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 3 (July 1995)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 2 (June 1994)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 1 (May 1994)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 3 (November 1992)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 2 (April 1992)

Volume 15 (1991): Issue 1 (August 1991)

Volume 14 (1990): Issue 6 (June 1990)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 5 (October 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 4 (February 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 3 (January 1989)

Volume 14 (1988): Issue 2 (October 1988)

Volume 14 (1987): Issue 1 (December 1987)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 5 (December 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 4 (August 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 3 (July 1986)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 2 (December 1985)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 1 (January 1985)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 5 (November 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 4 (July 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 3 (February 1984)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 2 (June 1983)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 1 (February 1983)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 5 (November 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 4 (August 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 3 (January 1982)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 2 (September 1981)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 1 (March 1981)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 3 (October 1980)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 2 (July 1980)

Volume 10 (1979): Issue 1 (December 1979)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 5 (December 1978)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 4 (July 1978)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 3 (October 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 2 (June 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 1 (April 1977)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 7 (October 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 6 (June 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 5 (March 1976)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 4 (December 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 3 (August 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 2 (May 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 1 (January 1975)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 5 (September 1974)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 4 (April 1974)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 3 (November 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 2 (June 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 1 (January 1973)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 5 (October 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 4 (August 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 3 (March 1972)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 2 (September 1971)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 1 (July 1971)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 6 (December 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 5 (November 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 4 (August 1970)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 3 (December 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 2 (August 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 1 (June 1969)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 7 (December 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 6 (November 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 5 (July 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 4 (May 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 3 (February 1968)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 2 (October 1967)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 1 (August 1967)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 9 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 8 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 7 (November 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 6 (September 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 5 (May 1966)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 4 (October 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 3 (August 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 2 (May 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 1 (April 1965)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 7 (November 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 6 (October 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 5 (May 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 4 (February 1964)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 3 (October 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 2 (June 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 1 (March 1963)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 10 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 9 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 8 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 7 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 6 (July 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 5 (February 1962)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 4 (November 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 3 (August 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 2 (May 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 1 (January 1961)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 6 (June 2015)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

7 Articles
Open Access

Editors’ Note

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 241 - 241

Abstract

Open Access

Changes in Biomarkers of Exposure and Subjective Effects When Smokers Switch to Dual Use of Cigarettes and Either Snus or a Dissolvable Tobacco Product: A Summary of Three Clinical Studies

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 242 - 260

Abstract

SUMMARY

A series of ambulatory clinical studies were conducted to evaluate changes in biomarkers of tobacco exposure and subjective product ratings when adult smokers switched to dual use of cigarettes with Camel Strips (Strips), Camel Sticks (Sticks), or Camel (SNUS). In all studies, subjects smoked ad libitum for one week (baseline). In incremental stages over three subsequent weeks, subjects were instructed to reduce cigarettes per day (CPD) by at least 75% and include use of one type of smokeless tobacco product (STP). Product use data was recorded by subjects daily, questionnaires were administered and smoked cigarette filters and used snus pouches were collected weekly, and 24-hour urine samples were collected at baseline and the end of dual use for measurement of biomarkers of tobacco exposure. In total, 100 subjects were enrolled, and 88 completed the studies. At the end of dual use, mean CPD reductions of approximately 60% were reported in all studies. Median levels of biomarkers of 4-(methylnitrosamino)- 1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) and acrolein either did not statistically significantly change or showed statistically significant decreases in all studies. Serum and urinary nicotine biomarkers did not significantly change. Twentyfive additional biomarkers were measured only in the SNUS study. Of those, 18 biomarkers statistically significantly decreased 12.4-35.7%. No statistically significant increases in biomarker levels were observed in any of the studies. Decreases in some biomarkers confirmed that smoking reductions occurred but were less than the reported CPD reductions. Mouth-level exposure estimates suggest subjects did not significantly alter their puffing behavior to compensate for decreased CPD. Acceptability ratings of cigarettes decreased significantly during dual use, while ratings of Strips and SNUS increased, suggesting that the change in use behavior affected subjects’ perceptions of the products. Results from these studies suggest that smokers who switch to dual use with either dissolvable tobacco or snus will likely not increase tobacco constituent exposure and may reduce exposure to some tobacco toxicants, especially those associated with combustion.

Open Access

Validation of Part-Filter Analysis to Estimate Smokers' Mouth Level Exposure to ‘Tar’ and Nicotine

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 261 - 268

Abstract

SUMMARY

Part-filter analysis is a method used to assess mouth level exposure (MLE) of cigarette smokers to mainstream smoke constituents. We assessed the robustness of part-filter analysis to compare MLE to nicotine and ‘tar’ between smoker populations and during calibration. Three groups of subjects smoked two batches of the same brand of 1-mg ISO tar yield Hungarian cigarettes three times each. Eighteen calibration curves were produced with three operators using three smoking machines. Within each batch of cigarettes, MLE did not differ significantly between the three smoker groups or after repeated smoking within groups. MLE was marginally higher for cigarettes from Batch 1 than Batch 2. No significant differences were found between the slopes and intercepts of the calibration curves produced using different smoking machines and operators. Part-filter analysis offers a repeatable means of estimating smokers' ‘tar’ and nicotine MLE in large-scale studies in their everyday smoking environments.

KEYWORDS

  • Cigarette
  • smoke
  • smoker
  • ‘tar’
  • nicotine
  • mouth level exposure
Open Access

Search for Non-Volatile Components with Low Polarity Characterizing Tobacco Leaves Using Liquid Chromatography / Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization Mass Spectrometry Detector

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 269 - 283

Abstract

SUMMARY

There has been focus on the components with low polarity in tobacco leaf resin due to their probable relation with taste and aroma of tobacco products, the lack of a feasible analytical method and instrument has long been an obstacle to identifying the components with low polarity. The author thereby paid attention to the analysis employing nonaqueous reversed-phase chromatography hyphenated with a photo diode array detector and an atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry detector which has been considered applicable to the separation of significant but unknown non-volatile. The application succeeded in simultaneously separating, detecting and quantifying more than 100 non-volatile components with different low polarity such as solanesols, triacylglycerols, phytosterols, and chlorophylls. However, their compositional differences among various tobacco leaves still remained partial knowledge based on targeted analysis instead of global knowledge based on comprehensive analysis. No investigation searching for key components elucidating different tastes, aromas, species, cultivars, curing processes, and growing districts among tobacco leaves has been carried out so far. For this reason, all the quantification data were consolidated to form complete multidimensional matrix and were statistically processed to observe the categories and the key components of various tobacco leaves by principal component analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis. Tobacco leaves were first classified into three categories consisting of flue-cured Virginia, air-cured leaf, and Oriental. Solanesyl esters, phytosteryl esters and solanachromene contributed to the category of flue-cured Virginia, while air-cured leaf was characterized by free phytosterols. Oriental was featured by chlorophyll in addition to the contributory components to flue-cured Virginia. Non-volatile components with low polarity seemed to be degraded during curing process and to therefore characterize the different curing processes among various tobacco leaves.

KEYWORDS

  • NARPC
  • LC/APCI-MSD
  • non-volatile component with low polarity
  • resin
  • tobacco leaf
Open Access

Effect of Pore Structure of Cigarette Paper on the Yield of Carbon Monoxide in Mainstream Smoke During Cigarette Burning

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 284 - 293

Abstract

SUMMARY

Two cigarette papers with the same basis weight and permeability but different pore structures were prepared. The effect of the pore structure after pyrolysis on CO yield in mainstream smoke was investigated by heating the papers to 250 °C. Diffusivity, permeability, pore size distribution, and pore volume of the cigarette papers before and after heating were also measured. The pore structures of the completely pyrolyzed cigarette paper in the burning cone and the incompletely pyrolyzed area near the char line were elucidated. CO yield in mainstream and sidestream smoke and the temperature distribution of the burning cone were evaluated. Diffusivity and permeability of the cigarette papers after heating were significantly higher than of the control sample after heating. The volume of pores in the cigarette paper with a size of 0.1-8.0 μm was increased, which decreased CO content in mainstream smoke. An increase in the amount of micropores facilitates CO diffusion from mainstream to sidestream smoke.

KEYWORDS

  • Cigarette paper
  • carbon monoxide
  • pore structure
  • mainstream smoke
  • diffusion.
Open Access

Letter to the Editor

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 294 - 295

Abstract

Open Access

Erratum notice

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 296 - 297

Abstract

7 Articles
Open Access

Editors’ Note

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 241 - 241

Abstract

Open Access

Changes in Biomarkers of Exposure and Subjective Effects When Smokers Switch to Dual Use of Cigarettes and Either Snus or a Dissolvable Tobacco Product: A Summary of Three Clinical Studies

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 242 - 260

Abstract

SUMMARY

A series of ambulatory clinical studies were conducted to evaluate changes in biomarkers of tobacco exposure and subjective product ratings when adult smokers switched to dual use of cigarettes with Camel Strips (Strips), Camel Sticks (Sticks), or Camel (SNUS). In all studies, subjects smoked ad libitum for one week (baseline). In incremental stages over three subsequent weeks, subjects were instructed to reduce cigarettes per day (CPD) by at least 75% and include use of one type of smokeless tobacco product (STP). Product use data was recorded by subjects daily, questionnaires were administered and smoked cigarette filters and used snus pouches were collected weekly, and 24-hour urine samples were collected at baseline and the end of dual use for measurement of biomarkers of tobacco exposure. In total, 100 subjects were enrolled, and 88 completed the studies. At the end of dual use, mean CPD reductions of approximately 60% were reported in all studies. Median levels of biomarkers of 4-(methylnitrosamino)- 1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) and acrolein either did not statistically significantly change or showed statistically significant decreases in all studies. Serum and urinary nicotine biomarkers did not significantly change. Twentyfive additional biomarkers were measured only in the SNUS study. Of those, 18 biomarkers statistically significantly decreased 12.4-35.7%. No statistically significant increases in biomarker levels were observed in any of the studies. Decreases in some biomarkers confirmed that smoking reductions occurred but were less than the reported CPD reductions. Mouth-level exposure estimates suggest subjects did not significantly alter their puffing behavior to compensate for decreased CPD. Acceptability ratings of cigarettes decreased significantly during dual use, while ratings of Strips and SNUS increased, suggesting that the change in use behavior affected subjects’ perceptions of the products. Results from these studies suggest that smokers who switch to dual use with either dissolvable tobacco or snus will likely not increase tobacco constituent exposure and may reduce exposure to some tobacco toxicants, especially those associated with combustion.

Open Access

Validation of Part-Filter Analysis to Estimate Smokers' Mouth Level Exposure to ‘Tar’ and Nicotine

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 261 - 268

Abstract

SUMMARY

Part-filter analysis is a method used to assess mouth level exposure (MLE) of cigarette smokers to mainstream smoke constituents. We assessed the robustness of part-filter analysis to compare MLE to nicotine and ‘tar’ between smoker populations and during calibration. Three groups of subjects smoked two batches of the same brand of 1-mg ISO tar yield Hungarian cigarettes three times each. Eighteen calibration curves were produced with three operators using three smoking machines. Within each batch of cigarettes, MLE did not differ significantly between the three smoker groups or after repeated smoking within groups. MLE was marginally higher for cigarettes from Batch 1 than Batch 2. No significant differences were found between the slopes and intercepts of the calibration curves produced using different smoking machines and operators. Part-filter analysis offers a repeatable means of estimating smokers' ‘tar’ and nicotine MLE in large-scale studies in their everyday smoking environments.

KEYWORDS

  • Cigarette
  • smoke
  • smoker
  • ‘tar’
  • nicotine
  • mouth level exposure
Open Access

Search for Non-Volatile Components with Low Polarity Characterizing Tobacco Leaves Using Liquid Chromatography / Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization Mass Spectrometry Detector

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 269 - 283

Abstract

SUMMARY

There has been focus on the components with low polarity in tobacco leaf resin due to their probable relation with taste and aroma of tobacco products, the lack of a feasible analytical method and instrument has long been an obstacle to identifying the components with low polarity. The author thereby paid attention to the analysis employing nonaqueous reversed-phase chromatography hyphenated with a photo diode array detector and an atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry detector which has been considered applicable to the separation of significant but unknown non-volatile. The application succeeded in simultaneously separating, detecting and quantifying more than 100 non-volatile components with different low polarity such as solanesols, triacylglycerols, phytosterols, and chlorophylls. However, their compositional differences among various tobacco leaves still remained partial knowledge based on targeted analysis instead of global knowledge based on comprehensive analysis. No investigation searching for key components elucidating different tastes, aromas, species, cultivars, curing processes, and growing districts among tobacco leaves has been carried out so far. For this reason, all the quantification data were consolidated to form complete multidimensional matrix and were statistically processed to observe the categories and the key components of various tobacco leaves by principal component analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis. Tobacco leaves were first classified into three categories consisting of flue-cured Virginia, air-cured leaf, and Oriental. Solanesyl esters, phytosteryl esters and solanachromene contributed to the category of flue-cured Virginia, while air-cured leaf was characterized by free phytosterols. Oriental was featured by chlorophyll in addition to the contributory components to flue-cured Virginia. Non-volatile components with low polarity seemed to be degraded during curing process and to therefore characterize the different curing processes among various tobacco leaves.

KEYWORDS

  • NARPC
  • LC/APCI-MSD
  • non-volatile component with low polarity
  • resin
  • tobacco leaf
Open Access

Effect of Pore Structure of Cigarette Paper on the Yield of Carbon Monoxide in Mainstream Smoke During Cigarette Burning

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 284 - 293

Abstract

SUMMARY

Two cigarette papers with the same basis weight and permeability but different pore structures were prepared. The effect of the pore structure after pyrolysis on CO yield in mainstream smoke was investigated by heating the papers to 250 °C. Diffusivity, permeability, pore size distribution, and pore volume of the cigarette papers before and after heating were also measured. The pore structures of the completely pyrolyzed cigarette paper in the burning cone and the incompletely pyrolyzed area near the char line were elucidated. CO yield in mainstream and sidestream smoke and the temperature distribution of the burning cone were evaluated. Diffusivity and permeability of the cigarette papers after heating were significantly higher than of the control sample after heating. The volume of pores in the cigarette paper with a size of 0.1-8.0 μm was increased, which decreased CO content in mainstream smoke. An increase in the amount of micropores facilitates CO diffusion from mainstream to sidestream smoke.

KEYWORDS

  • Cigarette paper
  • carbon monoxide
  • pore structure
  • mainstream smoke
  • diffusion.
Open Access

Letter to the Editor

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 294 - 295

Abstract

Open Access

Erratum notice

Published Online: 16 Jul 2015
Page range: 296 - 297

Abstract