Michael F. Weaver

A Clinical Laboratory Model for Evaluating the Acute Effects of Electronic “Cigarettes”: Nicotine Delivery Profile and Cardiovascular and Subjective Effects

Background: Electronic “cigarettes” are marketed to tobacco users as potential reduced exposure products (PREP), albeit with little information regarding electronic cigarette user toxicant exposure and effects. This information may be obtained by adapting clinical laboratory methods used to evaluate other PREPs for smokers. Methods: Thirty-two smokers participated in four independent Latin-square ordered conditions that differed by product: own brand cigarette, “NPRO” electronic cigarettes (NPRO EC; 18 mg cartridge), “Hydro” electronic cigarettes (Hydro EC; 16 mg cartridge), or sham (unlit cigarette). Participants took 10 puffs at two separate times during each session. Plasma nicotine and carbon monoxide (CO) concentration, heart rate, and subjective effects were assessed. Results: Own brand significantly increased plasma nicotine and CO concentration and heart rate within the first five minutes of administration whereas NPRO EC, Hydro EC, and sham smoking did not. Own brand, NPRO EC, and Hydro EC (but not sham) significantly decreased tobacco abstinence symptom ratings and increased product acceptability ratings. The magnitude of symptom suppression and increased acceptability was greater for own brand than for NPRO EC and Hydro EC. Conclusions: Under these acute testing conditions, neither of the electronic cigarettes exposed users to measurable levels of nicotine or CO, although both suppressed nicotine/tobacco abstinence symptom ratings. Impact: This study illustrates how clinical laboratory methods can be used to understand the acute effects of these and other PREPs for tobacco users. The results and methods reported here will likely be relevant to the evaluation and empirically based regulation of electronic cigarettes and similar products. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(8); 1945–53. ©2010 AACR.

Waterpipe tobacco smoking and cigarette smoking: a direct comparison of toxicant exposure and subjective effects.

INTRODUCTION Waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing worldwide and is believed by many users to be less harmful and addictive than cigarette smoking. In fact, waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoke contain many of the same chemicals, and users are exposed to the dependence-producing drug nicotine as well as other smoke toxicants. The subjective effect profile of these 2 tobacco use methods has not been compared directly, though this information is relevant to understanding the risk of dependence development. METHODS Fifty-four participants who reported waterpipe and cigarette smoking completed 2, 45-min, counter-balanced sessions in which they completed a waterpipe use episode (mean smoking time = 43.3 min) or a cigarette (mean = 6.1 min). Outcome measures included plasma nicotine, carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), and subjective effects, including those relevant to predicting dependence potential. RESULTS Mean (±SEM) peak plasma nicotine concentration did not differ by session (waterpipe = 9.8 ± 1.0 ng/ml; cigarette = 9.4 ± 1.0 ng/ml). Mean peak COHb concentration differed significantly (waterpipe = 4.5% ± 0.3%; cigarette = 1.2% ± 0.1%). Subjective effect changes for waterpipe and cigarette were comparable in magnitude but often longer lived for waterpipe. CONCLUSIONS Relative to a cigarette, waterpipe tobacco smoking was associated with similar peak nicotine exposure, 3.75-fold greater COHb, and 56-fold greater inhaled smoke volume. Waterpipe and cigarette influenced many of the same subjective effect measures. These findings are consistent with the conclusion that waterpipe tobacco smoking presents substantial risk of dependence, disease, and death, and they can be incorporated into prevention interventions that might help deter more adolescents and young adults from experimenting with an almost certainly lethal method of tobacco use.

Clinical laboratory assessment of the abuse liability of an electronic cigarette.

AIMS   To provide an initial abuse liability assessment of an electronic cigarette (EC) in current tobacco cigarette smokers. DESIGN   The first of four within-subject sessions was an EC sampling session that involved six, 10-puff bouts (30 seconds inter-puff interval), each bout separated by 30 minutes. In the remaining three sessions participants made choices between 10 EC puffs and varying amounts of money, 10 EC puffs and a varying number of own brand cigarette (OB) puffs, or 10 OB puffs and varying amounts of money using the multiple-choice procedure (MCP). The MCP was completed six times at 30-minute intervals, and one choice was reinforced randomly at each trial. SETTING   Clinical laboratory. PARTICIPANTS   Twenty current tobacco cigarette smokers. MEASUREMENTS   Sampling session outcome measures included plasma nicotine, cardiovascular response and subjective effects. Choice session outcome was the cross-over value on the MCP. FINDINGS   EC use resulted in significant nicotine delivery, tobacco abstinence symptom suppression and increased product acceptability ratings. On the MCP, participants chose to receive 10 EC puffs over an average of

Expired Carbon Monoxide Levels in Self-Reported Smokers and Nonsmokers in Prison

1.06 or three OB puffs and chose 10 OB puffs over an average of

Smoking Cessation Intervention for Female Prisoners : Addressing an Urgent Public Health Need

1.50 (P < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS   Electronic cigarettes can deliver clinically significant amounts of nicotine and reduce cigarette abstinence symptoms and appear to have lower potential for abuse relative to traditional tobacco cigarettes, at least under certain laboratory conditions.

Alcohol-Use Disorders in the Critically Ill Patient

Breath carbon monoxide (CO) is a convenient, widely used method for abstinence validation, with cutoffs of 8-10 ppm commonly employed. The goal of the present study was to determine an appropriate CO cutoff to differentiate nonsmokers and smokers within a large sample (N = 374) of female prisoners incarcerated at a correctional facility in Virginia. Mean age of the population was 34.5 years, 49.2% were White, and 29% had less than a high school education. Smoking prevalence was 74.1% within the prison population. Examination of CO levels versus smoking self-report using a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that a CO cutoff of 3 ppm resulted in the best sensitivity (98.1%) and specificity (95.8%). Overall ROC area under the curve was 99% (95% CI = 98.2%-99.9%). This same cutoff was optimal for smoking subgroups including Black and light (<10 cigarettes/day) smokers. Results suggest that CO cutoffs higher than 3 ppm may misclassify some smokers as nonsmokers and underestimate the prevalence of smoking.

Designer drugs 2015: assessment and management

OBJECTIVES We tested the efficacy of a combined pharmacologic and behavioral smoking cessation intervention among women in a state prison in the southern United States. METHODS The study design was a randomized controlled trial with a 6-month waitlist control group. The intervention was a 10-week group intervention combined with nicotine replacement therapy. Two hundred and fifty participants received the intervention, and 289 were in the control group. Assessments occurred at baseline; end of treatment; 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment; and at weekly sessions for participants in the intervention group. RESULTS The intervention was efficacious compared with the waitlist control group. Point prevalence quit rates for the intervention group were 18% at end of treatment, 17% at 3-month follow-up, 14% at 6-month follow-up, and 12% at 12-month follow-up, quit rates that are consistent with outcomes from community smoking-cessation interventions. CONCLUSIONS Female prisoners are interested in smoking cessation interventions and achieved point-prevalence quit rates similar to community samples. Augmenting tobacco control policies in prison with smoking cessation interventions has the potential to address a significant public health need.

Opioid Treatment of Chronic Pain in Patients with Addiction

Alcohol abuse and dependence, referred to as alcohol-use disorders (AUDs), affect 76.3 million people worldwide and account for 1.8 million deaths per year. AUDs affect 18.3 million Americans (7.3% of the population), and up to 40% of hospitalized patients have AUDs. This review discusses the development and progression of critical illness in patients with AUDs. In contrast to acute intoxication, AUDs have been linked to increased severity of illness in a number of studies. In particular, surgical patients with AUDs experience higher rates of postoperative hemorrhage, cardiac complications, sepsis, and need for repeat surgery. Outcomes from trauma are worse for patients with chronic alcohol abuse, whereas burn patients who are acutely intoxicated may not have worse outcomes. AUDs are linked to not only a higher likelihood of community-acquired pneumonia and sepsis but also a higher severity of illness and higher rates of nosocomial pneumonia and sepsis. The management of sedation in patients with AUDs may be particularly challenging because of the increased need for sedatives and opioids and the difficulty in diagnosing withdrawal syndrome. The health-care provider also must be watchful for the development of dangerous agitation and violence, as these problems are not uncommonly seen in hospital ICUs. Despite studies showing that up to 40% of hospitalized patients have AUDs, relatively few guidelines exist on the specific management of the critically ill patient with AUDs. AUDs are underdiagnosed, and a first step to improving patient outcomes may lie in systematically and accurately identifying AUDs.

Science and electronic cigarettes: current data, future needs.

Recent designer drugs, also known as “legal highs,” include substituted cathinones (e.g., mephedrone, methylone, and methylenedioxypyrovalerone, often referred to as “bath salts”); synthetic cannabinoids (SCs; e.g., Spice); and synthetic hallucinogens (25I-NBOMe, or N-bomb). Compound availability has evolved rapidly to evade legal regulation and detection by routine drug testing. Young adults are the primary users, but trends are changing rapidly; use has become popular among members of the military. Acute toxicity is common and often manifests with a constellation of psychiatric and medical effects, which may be severe (e.g., anxiety, agitation, psychosis, and tachycardia), and multiple deaths have been reported with each of these types of designer drugs. Clinicians should keep designer drugs in mind when evaluating substance use in young adults or in anyone presenting with acute neuropsychiatric complaints. Treatment of acute intoxication involves supportive care targeting manifesting signs and symptoms. Long-term treatment of designer drug use disorder can be challenging and is complicated by a lack of evidence to guide treatment.

Prevalence and impact of alcohol and other drug use disorders on sedation and mechanical ventilation: a retrospective study

Patients with a history of drug or alcohol addiction may present to physicians with pain complaints. The medical literature is weak on the treatment of pain with opioids in patients in recovery or active addiction. This is because inconsistent criteria were used to define addiction and the types of chronic pain. There are clear differences between physical dependence, tolerance, and addiction. Addiction is different from pseudoaddiction and must be determined by the patients behavior after appropriate pain management. Long-acting opioids are often the medications of choice for moderate to severe pain control. Short-acting opioids can be used for breakthrough pain. There are many other medications that can enhance pain control as adjunctive analgesics. Drug-seeking behavior may be seen with either active addiction or pseudoaddiction, or as part of deviant behavior such as drug diversion. A way to distinguish between these conditions is by giving the patient appropriate pain medication and observing the pattern of behavior to determine which is causing the drug-seeking behavior. Safe prescribing of medications with abuse potential includes use of a medication agreement, setting goals with the patient, giving appropriate amounts of pain medication, monitoring with pill counts and drug screens, and careful documentation. Even patients with a history of addiction can benefit from opioid pain medications if monitored appropriately.