Search

Nicotine abstinence leads to weight gain, which could be an unintended consequence of a nicotine reduction policy. This secondary analysis used weekly assessments of weight and ratings of "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" collected in three 12-week, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of cigarettes differing in nicotine dose (15.8, 2.4, or 0.4 mg/g) among individuals with affective disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD), and socioeconomically disadvantaged women. Linear mixed models tested differences by dose and time. Analyses first collapsed across populations and then separated out individuals with OUD because biomarkers suggested they used substantially more noncombusted nicotine. Across populations, weight increased significantly over time, averaging 1.03 kg ( p < .001), but did not vary by dose nor was there any interaction of dose/time. "Increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly as a function of dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.95 and 1.73, respectively, p = .01), but not by time nor any interaction. In the combined group of individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women, weight and "increased appetite/hunger/weight gain" ratings increased significantly by dose, with differences between low and high doses (1.43 vs. 0.73 kg, p = .003 and 2.00 vs. 1.76, p = .02, respectively). Among individuals with OUD, there were no significant effects of any kind on either outcome. Individuals with affective disorders and socioeconomically disadvantaged women gained weight and reported more subjective appetite/weight gain when given 0.4, but not 2.4 mg/g cigarettes, despite comparable decreases in nicotine exposure. However, neither change was clinically significant, suggesting minimal short-term adverse consequences of a nicotine reduction policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Introduction: This study examined whether exposure to reduced-nicotine-content cigarettes (RNCCs) for 12 weeks alters respiratory health using Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO), a validated biomarker of respiratory epithelial health, and the Respiratory Health Questionnaire (RHQ), a subject-rated questionnaire on respiratory symptoms. Participants were 747 adult daily smokers enrolled in three double-blind, randomized clinical trials evaluating effects of cigarette nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) in people with affective disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD), or socioeconomic disadvantage., Aims and Methods: FeNO levels and RHQ ratings were collected at baseline and Weeks 6 and 12 following randomization. Multiple regression was used to assess associations of FeNO and RHQ with smoking characteristics. Mixed-model repeated-measures ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of nicotine content on FeNO and RHQ outcomes over the 12-week study period., Results: FeNO levels but not RHQ ratings varied inversely with smoking characteristics at baseline (Ps < 0.0001) in smokers with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage but less so in those with OUD. Participants with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage, but not those with OUD, who were assigned to RNCCs had higher FeNO levels at Week 12 than those assigned to the 15.8 mg/g dose [F(2,423) = 4.51, p = .01, Cohen's d = 0.21]. No significant dose-related changes in RHQ scores were identified., Conclusions: Use of RNCCs across a 12-week period attenuates smoking-related reductions in FeNO levels in smokers with affective disorders and socioeconomic disadvantage although not those with OUD. FeNO changes were not accompanied by changes in respiratory-health ratings., Trial Registration: Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample and experimental manipulation of the nicotine content of assigned cigarettes are registered: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534. The FeNO measure reported in this manuscript is an exploratory outcome that was not registered., Implications: Should a reduced nicotine content standard be implemented; these results suggest that reduced nicotine content in cigarettes will not exacerbate and instead may attenuate smoking-related decreases in FeNO. This is significant as NO is an important component in maintaining a healthy respiratory system and necessary to defend against infection. Furthermore, the results of the current study demonstrate that the adoption of the reduced nicotine content standard may result in beneficial impacts on respiratory epithelial health among vulnerable populations that are disproportionally affected by the adverse health outcomes precipitated by combustible tobacco use., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Risk for smoking increases in a summative manner corresponding to the number of co-occurring vulnerabilities present (cumulative vulnerability). We examined whether cumulative vulnerabilities moderate response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes in a secondary analysis of results from 775 participants in three 12-week randomized clinical trials examining research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco). Participants were categorized as having 0-1, 2-3, or ≥ 4 cumulative vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities included: rural residence, current substance use disorder, current affective disorder, low educational attainment, poverty, unemployment, physical disability. The primary outcome was total cigarettes per day (CPD) during Week 12; secondary outcomes included CPD across weeks, toxin exposure, dependence severity, craving/withdrawal (17 dependent measures). Results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of covariance and growth-curve modeling. Total CPD during Week 12 increased as cumulative-vulnerability increased (P = 0.004), and decreased as nicotine content decreased (P < 0.001), with no significant interaction of cumulative vulnerability and dose (P = 0.67). Effects on other outcomes generally followed that same pattern. The only exception across the other outcomes was on Questionnaire-on-Smoking-Urges Factor-2 ratings for usual-brand cigarettes where cumulative vulnerability, dose, and time interacted (P = 0.007), with craving at the 0.4 and 2.4 mg/g doses decreasing over time, but inconsistently across vulnerability categories. Overall, we saw little evidence that cumulative vulnerabilities moderate response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes suggesting that a policy reducing nicotine content in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels could benefit even highly vulnerable smokers including those residing in rural or other regions with overrepresentation of co-occurring vulnerabilities. Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Adolescents are using e-cigarettes at high rates and there is limited information on how to help them quit. We aimed to inform e-cigarette cessation interventions by understanding why adolescents use and dislike e-cigarettes and their quit experiences., Methods: Six focus groups with current users (i.e., past-month use) and 2 focus groups with past users (i.e., no past-month use) were conducted in Fall 2019 in Connecticut (N = 62). We used a focus group guide and an iterative approach to identify themes., Results: Adolescents used e-cigarettes because of social reasons and to relieve stress and reported disliking e-cigarettes due to the cost, negative health effects, and addiction. They reported both intentional and unintentional experiences with quitting e-cigarettes. Reasons for unintentional quitting included lack of access to e-cigarettes. Reasons for intentional quitting included short-term "tolerance breaks" and health concerns. Of those who tried to quit, common quitting methods were "cold turkey," giving away their device, and limiting interactions with peer users. The most common withdrawal symptom was negative mood. Notable barriers to quitting included exposure to social influences at school, easy access to e-cigarettes, and lack of motivation to quit., Discussion: Our qualitative evidence suggests that e-cigarette cessation interventions need to motivate youth to quit, and teach them to manage social influences, stress and other negative mood, and withdrawal symptoms. Interventions that address social norms related to use of e-cigarettes in school and reduce cues related to e-cigarette use may also be beneficial., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Accumulating evidence suggests that the hypothetical Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), especially its demand Intensity index (i.e., estimated cigarettes participants would smoke if free), is associated with individual differences in smoking risk. Nevertheless, few studies have examined the extent to which hypothetical CPT demand Intensity may differ from consumption when participants are provided with free cigarettes. That topic is the overarching focus of the present study. Participants were 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. CPT was administered for usual-brand cigarettes prior to providing participants with seven days of their usual-brand cigarettes free of cost and consumption was recorded daily via an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System. Demand Intensity was correlated with IVR smoking rate (rs 0.670-0.696, ps < 0.001) but estimates consistently exceeded IVR smoking rates by an average of 4.4 cigarettes per day (ps < 0.001). Importantly, both measures were comparably sensitive to discerning well-established differences in smoking risk, including greater cigarettes per day among men versus women (F(1,732) = 18.74, p < 0.001), those with versus without opioid-dependence (F(1,732) = 168.37, p < 0.001), younger versus older adults (F(2,730) = 32.93, p < 0.001), and those with lower versus greater educational attainment (F(1,732) = 38.26, p < 0.001). Overall, CPT demand Intensity appears to overestimate consumption rates relative to those observed when participants are provided with free cigarettes, but those deviations are systematic (i.e., consistent in magnitude and direction, Fs all <1.63; ps > 0.19 for all interactions with subgroups). This suggests that demand Intensity was sensitive to established group differences in smoking rate, supporting its utility as an important measure of addiction potential., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Importance: This study is part of a programmatic effort evaluating the effects of reducing nicotine content of cigarettes to minimally addictive levels., Objective: To examine whether very low-nicotine-content (VLNC) cigarettes decrease smoking rates and dependence severity among smokers with psychiatric disorders or socioeconomic disadvantage., Design, Setting, and Participants: These 3 randomized clinical trials were performed at the University of Vermont, Brown University, and Johns Hopkins University between October 2016 and September 2019. Participants received 12 weeks of exposure to study cigarettes with nicotine content ranging from levels representative of commercial cigarettes (15.8 mg nicotine/g tobacco) to less than a hypothesized addiction threshold (2.4 mg/g and 0.4 mg/g). Daily smokers from 3 at-risk populations participated: individuals with affective disorders, exemplifying smokers with mental illness; individuals with opioid use disorder, exemplifying smokers with substance use disorders; and women with high school educations or less, exemplifying smokers with socioeconomic disadvantage. Data were analyzed from September 2019 to July 2020., Interventions: Random assignment to 1 of 3 study cigarettes provided weekly at no cost for 12 weeks., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was between-group differences in mean total cigarettes smoked daily (CPD) during week 12; secondary outcomes included CPD for study and nonstudy cigarettes and dependence severity across weeks analyzed using analysis of covariance, random coefficients growth modeling, or repeated measures analysis of variance., Results: A total of 775 participants were included (mean [SD] age, 35.59 [11.05] years; 551 [71.10%] women [owing to 1 population being exclusively women]); participants smoked a mean (SD) of 17.79 (9.18) CPD at study intake. A total of 286 participants were randomized to 0.4 mg/g, 235 participants were randomized to 2.4 mg/g, and 254 participants were randomized to 15.8 mg/g. Participants randomized to VLNC cigarettes had decreased mean [SEM] total CPD during week 12 across populations (Cohen d = 0.61; P < .001). At week 12, mean (SEM) CPD decreased to 17.96 (0.98) CPD in the 0.4 mg/g group and to 19.53 (1.07) CPD in the 2.4 mg/g group, both of which were significantly different from the 15.8 mg/g group (25.08 [1.08] CPD at week 12) but not each other (0.4 mg/g adjusted mean difference: -7.54 [95%CI, -9.51 to -5.57]; 2.4 mg/g adjusted mean difference: -5.34 [95% CI, 7.41 to -3.26]). Several secondary outcomes differed across populations randomized to VLNCs, including mean total CPD across weeks, with linear trends lower in participants receiving 0.4 mg/g (-0.28 [95%CI, -0.39 to -0.18]; P < .001) and 2.4 mg/g (-0.13 [95%CI, -0.25 to -0.01]; P < .001) doses compared with those receiving the 15.8 mg/g dose (0.30 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.41]). Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence mean total scores were significantly lower in participants who received VLNCs (Cohen d = 0.12; P < .001), with those who received the 0.4 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 3.99 [0.06]; P < .001 vs 15.8 mg/g) or 2.4 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 4.07 [0.06]; P = .01 vs 15.8 mg/g) differing from those who received the 15.8 mg/g dose (mean [SD] score, 4.31 [0.06]) but not from each other., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings demonstrate that decreasing the nicotine content of cigarettes to very low levels reduced smoking rate and nicotine-dependence severity in these high-risk populations, effects that may facilitate successful cessation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534.

Introduction: Reports in relatively healthy smokers suggest men are more sensitive than women to the subjective effects of reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCCs). We know of no reports examining sex differences in the relative reinforcing effects of RNCCs, an important outcome in assessing smoking's addiction potential. The aim of the present study is to address this gap by examining sex/gender differences on reinforcing effects while examining whether sex differences in subjective effects are discernible in vulnerable populations., Methods: Secondary analysis of a within-subject, double-blinded experiment examining acute effects of cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among 169 adult smokers with psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. Effects of dose, sex, and their interaction were examined on reinforcing (concurrent-choice and Cigarette Purchase Task [CPT] testing), and subjective effects (Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire [CEQ] and craving/withdrawal ratings)., Results: Reducing nicotine content decreased the relative reinforcing effects of smoking in concurrent-choice and CPT testing (p's < .05) with no significant effects of sex nor dose × sex/gender interactions. Reducing nicotine content decreased CEQ ratings with only a single significant effect of sex (higher Psychological Reward scores among women than men, p = .02) and no significant dose × sex/gender interactions. Results on craving/withdrawal paralleled those on the CEQ., Conclusions: Reducing nicotine content decreases the addiction potential of smoking independent of sex in populations highly vulnerable to smoking and addiction, with no indication that women are less sensitive to subjective effects of RNCCs or would benefit less from a policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes., Implications: A policy reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes has the potential to reduce the addiction potential of smoking across men and women who are especially vulnerable to smoking, addiction, and tobacco-related adverse health impacts., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Diversifying the workforce is an important strategy to reducing health disparities. Since 2007, the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) Health Disparities Network has funded a travel scholarship to promote inclusion, professional development, and diversity among investigators interested in tobacco-related health disparities research. This study examined indicators of productivity among former scholarship recipients.Methods: Scholarship recipients between 2007 and 2014 were invited to complete a survey online. The survey assessed demographic characteristics, academic productivity, and perceived professional benefit resulting from the scholarship.Results: Of the 117 scholarships recipients, 89 (77%) responded. Respondents were 67% female and had a mean age of 37.8 years. Twenty eight percent were African American, 25% Asian American, and 17% Latino. Most respondents worked in academia (80%) and nearly three-quarters (74%) reported publishing manuscripts on tobacco-related disparities, with a mean of 3.8 (SD 4.4) disparities-related publications since receiving the scholarship. Respondents' work focused on a wide range of health disparities topics and nearly all respondents reported that the scholarship removed barriers to attending the meeting and reported professional benefit from receiving the travel scholarship. Following receipt of the SRNT travel scholarship, a diverse group of scientists demonstrated scholarly productivity, professional development, and advancement of health disparities research. Similar efforts are encouraged in other professional societies., Implications: This study examines the productivity of early career recipients of the SRNT Health Disparities Scholarship. Results suggest that the investment in annual travel scholarships by a professional organization is an important support system for emerging scientists from diverse backgrounds. This investment may help to advance the science of health disparities and engage researchers in an area where there are critical gaps in the research workforce., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Given FDA's authority to implement a cigarette nicotine reduction policy, possible outcomes of this regulation must be examined, especially among those who may be most affected, such as those with comorbid psychiatric disorders., Methods: In this secondary analysis of a multisite, randomized, clinical laboratory study, we used analyses of variance to examine the effects of nicotine dose (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, and 15.8 mg/g of tobacco), depressive and anxiety diagnoses (depression only, anxiety only, both, or neither), and depressive and anxiety symptom severity on cigarette choice, smoke exposure, craving, and withdrawal across three vulnerable populations: socioeconomically disadvantaged women of reproductive age, opioid-dependent individuals, and those with affective disorders (n = 169)., Results: Diagnosis and symptom severity largely had no effects on smoking choice, total puff volume, or CO boost. Significant main effects on craving and withdrawal were observed, with higher scores in those with both anxiety and depression diagnoses compared with depression alone or no diagnosis, and in those with more severe depressive symptoms (p's < .001). These factors did not interact with nicotine dose. Cigarettes with <15.8 mg/g nicotine were less reinforcing, decreased total puff volume, and produced significant but lower magnitude and shorter duration reductions in craving and withdrawal than higher doses (p's < .01)., Conclusions: Reducing nicotine dose reduced measures of cigarette addiction potential, with little evidence of moderation by either psychiatric diagnosis or symptom severity, providing evidence that those with comorbid psychiatric disorders would respond to a nicotine reduction policy similarly to other smokers., Implications: Thus far, controlled studies in healthy populations of smokers have demonstrated that use of very low nicotine content cigarettes reduces cigarette use and dependence without resulting in compensatory smoking. These analyses extend those findings to a vulnerable population of interest, those with comorbid psychiatric disorders. Cigarettes with very low nicotine content were less reinforcing, decreased total puff volume, and produced significant but lower magnitude and shorter duration reductions in craving and withdrawal than higher doses. These nicotine dose effects did not interact with psychiatric diagnosis or mood symptom severity suggesting that smokers in this vulnerable population would respond to a nicotine reduction strategy similarly to other smokers., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Introduction: Young adults (aged 18-24 years) have a higher smoking prevalence than younger and older age groups and young adulthood is an important developmental period during which long-term behavior patterns like cigarette smoking are established. The aim of the current study was to examine how young adult smokers with additional vulnerabilities to smoking respond to reduced nicotine content cigarettes., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a double-blind, within-subject experiment conducted with 169 cigarette smokers recruited from populations with comorbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage assessing acute effects of research cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g). Participants were dichotomized by chronological age (18-24 vs. ≥25 years). Across 14 laboratory sessions effects of nicotine content were examined on measures of relative reinforcing efficacy (Cigarette Purchase Task [CPT] and Concurrent Choice testing), subjective effects, craving/withdrawal, and smoking topography. Repeated measures analysis of variances were used to examine potential moderating effects of age., Results: Young adults exhibited lower demand for reduced nicotine content cigarettes than older adults across three of five CPT indices (ps < .05). No differences by age were observed on other measures of reinforcing efficacy, subjective effects, craving/withdrawal, or smoking topography where effects generally decreased as an orderly function of decreasing nicotine content (ps <.05)., Conclusion: Overall, these findings suggest that reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes would decrease the addiction potential of cigarette smoking in young adult smokers as much or perhaps more than older adult smokers from populations at increased vulnerability to smoking, addiction, and smoking-related health consequences., Implications: Reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes to lower addiction potential of smoking has been proposed as a means to improve overall population health. It is imperative to examine how young adults may respond to a nicotine reduction policy. We saw minimal evidence that age moderates acute response and where there was evidence it was in the direction of reduced nicotine content cigarettes having less addictive potential among young versus older adults (eg, steeper decreases in demand for very low nicotine content cigarettes among young versus older adults). Overall, a nicotine reduction policy has the potential to reduce smoking across age groups., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Research in the general population of smokers indicates that across various measures of nicotine dependence, time to first cigarette (TTFC) is the strongest single-item predictor of quitting success. Whether those findings generalize to pregnant smokers is unclear. To investigate this matter, we compared TTFC with cigarettes per day (CPD) and the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI; Kozlowski, Porter, Orleans, Pope, & Heatherton, 1994) in predicting late-pregnancy abstinence among 289 pregnant women enrolled in 4 smoking-cessation trials assessing the efficacy of financial incentives. Logistic regression was used to compare predictors, with model fit measured using the c statistic (range = 0.5, poor prediction to 1.0, perfect prediction). In simple regressions, model fit was comparable across the 3 measures although strongest for CPD alone (c = 0.70, 0.68, 0.66 for CPD, HSI, and TTFC, respectively). In a stepwise multiple regression, treatment was entered first (c = 0.67), then CPD (c = 0.77), quit attempts prepregnancy (c = .81), TTFC (c = .82), and quit attempts during pregnancy (c = .83). We saw no evidence supporting TTFC as the optimal predictor of quitting among pregnant smokers. Instead, the evidence supported using CPD and TTFC together or CPD alone if using only a single predictor., (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved.)

Objective: We estimated whether recent cannabis use moderates response to cigarettes varying in nicotine content (0.4, 2.4, 5.2, 15.8 mg/g) among smokers with concurrent affective disorders, opioid dependence, or socioeconomic disadvantage. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site, double-blind, laboratory study examining acute response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes (RNCC) in 169 adult smokers with co-morbid conditions. Participants positive for recent cannabis use or self-reported past 30-day cannabis use at baseline were categorized as current cannabis users (N = 63). Repeated measures analysis of variance tests assessed whether baseline cannabis use moderated cigarette reinforcement, tobacco withdrawal, craving, smoking topography, or carbon monoxide boost. Results: Cannabis users were younger, less educated, and had more depression and anxiety than non-users (p < .05). Cannabis use status did not moderate the effects of nicotine dose on concurrent choice testing, subjective effects of RNCCs, or smoking topography. After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, cannabis users had higher ratings on Smoking Satisfaction, Enjoyment of Respiratory Tract Sensations, and Craving Reduction across all nicotine doses. Cannabis users reported longer withdrawal symptom duration and more rapid decline of carbon monoxide boost than non-users. Conclusions: Findings suggest RNCCs decrease the addiction potential of cigarettes in vulnerable populations independent of cannabis use status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: A national policy is under consideration to reduce the nicotine content of cigarettes to lower nicotine addiction potential in the United States.Objective: To examine how smokers with psychiatric disorders and other vulnerabilities to tobacco addiction respond to cigarettes with reduced nicotine content.Design, Setting, and Participants: A multisite, double-blind, within-participant assessment of acute response to research cigarettes with nicotine content ranging from levels below a hypothesized addiction threshold to those representative of commercial cigarettes (0.4, 2.3, 5.2, and 15.8 mg/g of tobacco) at 3 academic sites included 169 daily smokers from the following 3 vulnerable populations: individuals with affective disorders (n = 56) or opioid dependence (n = 60) and socioeconomically disadvantaged women (n = 53). Data were collected from March 23, 2015, through April 25, 2016.Interventions: After a brief smoking abstinence, participants were exposed to the cigarettes with varying nicotine doses across fourteen 2- to 4-hour outpatient sessions.Main Outcomes and Measures: Addiction potential of the cigarettes was assessed using concurrent choice testing, the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), and validated measures of subjective effects, such as the Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale.Results: Among the 169 daily smokers included in the analysis (120 women [71.0%] and 49 men [29.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.6 [11.4] years), reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes decreased the relative reinforcing effects of smoking in all 3 populations. Across populations, the 0.4-mg/g dose was chosen significantly less than the 15.8-mg/g dose in concurrent choice testing (mean [SEM] 30% [0.04%] vs 70% [0.04%]; Cohen d = 0.40; P < .001) and generated lower demand in the CPT (α = .027 [95% CI, 0.023-0.031] vs α = .019 [95% CI, 0.016-0.022]; Cohen d = 1.17; P < .001). Preference for higher over lower nicotine content cigarettes could be reversed by increasing the response cost necessary to obtain the higher dose (mean [SEM], 61% [0.02%] vs 39% [0.02%]; Cohen d = 0.40; P < .001). All doses reduced Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale total scores (range of mean decreases, 0.10-0.50; Cohen d range, 0.21-1.05; P < .001 for all), although duration of withdrawal symptoms was greater at higher doses (η2 = 0.008; dose-by-time interaction, P = .002).Conclusions and Relevance: Reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes may decrease their addiction potential in populations that are highly vulnerable to tobacco addiction. Smokers with psychiatric conditions and socioeconomic disadvantage are more addicted and less likely to quit and experience greater adverse health impacts. Policies to reduce these disparities are needed; reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes should be a policy focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present systematic review examines whether very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes ameliorate withdrawal-induced impairments in behavioral/cognitive performance. PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science were searched for performance effects of VLNC cigarettes. For inclusion, reports had to be in English, published in a peer-reviewed journal through June 2017, examine VLNC cigarettes (<0.2mg nicotine yield), include ≥2hour smoking abstinence or reduced nicotine exposure, and examine performance. 19 of 1243 articles reviewed met inclusion criteria. Poorer performance after smoking VLNC versus normal nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes was observed across 7 of 10 domains, including reaction time (8/11), short-term memory (3/10), sustained attention (4/6), inhibitory control (1/4), long-term memory (3/3 studies), and response variability (2/2). In two studies, combining VLNC smoking with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in performance that was comparable to performance after NNC smoking. VLNC versus NNC differences were not discerned in motor control/functioning (0/2), visuospatial processing (0/2), learning (0/1), or verbal fluency (0/1). Eleven of nineteen (58%) studies were rated of Good or Excellent quality. Overall, VLNC cigarettes may not fully ameliorate withdrawal-induced disruptions in performance, although this varies by domain, with the strongest evidence for reaction time. Importantly, combining VLNC cigarettes with NRT appears to ameliorate withdrawal that is not reduced by VLNC cigarettes alone. As only 19 studies were identified, many domains are under-investigated. A more thorough evaluation of the extent to which VLNC cigarettes affect withdrawal-impaired performance may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined whether elucidating underpinning smoking motivation and related pharmacological processes enhances understanding of nicotine dependence among smokers from vulnerable populations. Data were obtained between Oct, 2016 and Sept, 2019 from 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage at University of Vermont, Brown University, Johns Hopkins University. Smoking motivation was assessed using the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), a behavioral-economic task that models the relative reinforcing value of smoking under varying monetary constraint. Dependence severity was measured using the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI), Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence total scores (FTND), and FTND total scores minus items 1 and 4 (FTND2,3,5,6). We also assessed associations between dependence severity and smoking motivation with nicotine levels and metabolism rate. Principal Component Analysis was used to examine the latent structure of the conventional five CPT indices; bivariate and multivariable modeling was used to test associations. Factor analysis resulted in a two-factor solution, Amplitude (demand unconstrained by price) and Persistence (price sensitivity). CPT latent factors were associated with each dependence-severity measure (ps ≤ 0.0001), with associations stronger for Amplitude than Persistence across each, especially HSI which was exclusively associated with Amplitude. Amplitude and each dependence measure were associated with nicotine intake (ps ≤ 0.0002); Persistence was not (p = .19). Demand Amplitude more than Persistence appears key to understanding individual differences in dependence severity. Regarding potential application, the results suggest a need for interventions that more effectively target demand Amplitude to make greater headway in reducing smoking in vulnerable populations. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02232737, NCT02250664, NCT02250534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]