Summary
2006, Vol. 11, No. 3, Pages 201-220

Biomarkers of exposure and potential harm in adult smokers of 3–7 mg tar yield (Federal Trade Commission) cigarettes and in adult non-smokers

B. K. Zedler, R. Kinser, J. Oey, B. Nelson, H.-J. Roethig, R. A. Walk, P. Kuhl, K. Rustemeier, G. Schepers, K. Von Holt and A. R. Tricker
Philip Morris USA, Richmond, VA, USA
Philip Morris Research Laboratories GmbH, Cologne, Germany
Philip Morris International R&D, Philip Morris International, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

Philip Morris USA, PO Box 26583, Richmond, VA, 23261, USA, 1-804-274-2799, 1-804-274-3982



Abstract

The paper reports levels of 24-h urine nicotine and five of its major metabolites (expressed as nicotine-equivalents) and blood carboxyhaemoglobin as biomarkers of exposure to particulate- and gas-phase cigarette smoke, respectively, from an exploratory pilot study of adult smokers of 3.0–6.9 mg tar delivery (Federal Trade Commission (FTC) method) cigarettes. On multiple occasions over 6 weeks, blood high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), fibrinogen, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, and 24-h urine 8-epi-prostaglandin F (8-epi-PGF) and 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 (11-dehydro-TxB2) were also evaluated as biomarkers of potential harm. All the biomarkers examined, except for LDL-cholesterol, discriminated with high sensitivity and specificity between adult smokers and non-smokers overall. Except for HDL-cholesterol, all biomarker medians were greater in adult smokers than in non-smokers: urine nicotine-equivalents 64.514 versus<0.034 nmol mg−1 creatinine (p<0.001), carboxyhaemoglobin 4.0 versus 0.4% saturation (p<0.001), hs-CRP 0.27 versus 0.12 mg dl−1 (p=0.05), fibrinogen 292 versus 248 mg dl−1 (p<0.001), HDL-cholesterol 46 versus 53 mg dl−1 (p=0.003), LDL-cholesterol 119 versus 109 mg dl−1 (p=0.18), urine 8-epi-PGF 1935 versus 1034 pg mg−1 creatinine (p<0.001) and urine 11-dehydro-TxB2 973 versus 710 pg mg−1 creatinine (p<0.001). All the biomarkers of exposure and most of the biomarkers of potential harm showed no time of sampling (by visit week) effect.

Full Text | PDF (193 KB) | PDF Plus (223 KB)

 

Prev. Article | Next Article
View/Print PDF (193 KB)
View PDF Plus (223 KB)
Add to favourite
Email to a friend
TOC Alert | Citation Alert What is RSS?

 
 
Quick Search
for 
Authors:
B. K. Zedler
R. Kinser
J. Oey
B. Nelson
H.-J. Roethig
R. A. Walk
P. Kuhl
K. Rustemeier
G. Schepers
K. Von Holt
A. R. Tricker