A comparative study by electron paramagnetic resonance of free radical species in the mainstream and sidestream smoke of cigarettes with conventional acetate filters and 'bio-filters'.

Tobacco smoking is the most important extrinsic cause, after the diet, for increasing morbidity and mortality in humans. Unless current tobacco smoking patterns in industrialised and non-industrialised countries change, cigarettes will kill prematurely 10 million people a year by 2025. Greece is at the top of the list of European countries in cigarette consumption. In 1997, a Greek tobacco company introduced a new 'bio-filter' (BF) claiming that it reduces substantially the risks of smoking. In a recent publication [Deliconstantinos G, Villiotou V, Stavrides J. Scavenging effects of hemoglobin and related heme containing compounds on nitric oxide, reactive oxidants and carcinogenic volatile nitrosocompounds of cigarette smoke. A new method for protection against the dangerous cigarette constituents. Anticancer Res 1994; 14: 2717-2726] it was claimed that the new 'bio-filter' (activated carbon impregnated with dry hemoglobin) reduces certain toxic substances and oxidants (like NO, CO, NOx, H2O2, aldehydes, trace elements and nitroso-compounds) in the gas-phase of the mainstream smoke. We have investigated by electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) the mainstream and sidestream smoke of the BF cigarette, in comparison with three other cigarettes with similar tar and nicotine contents, that have conventional acetate filters. We found that BF cigarette smoke has similar tar radical species with the same intensity EPR signals to those of the other cigarettes. The ability of the aqueous cigarette tar extracts to produce hydroxyl radicals (HO*), which were spin trapped by DMPO, was very similar to, or even higher than, the other 3 brands. The gas-phase of the mainstream smoke of the BF cigarette showed a 30-35% reduction in the production of oxygen-centered radicals (spin trapped with PBN). In the case of the sidestream smoke, BF cigarettes produced substantially higher concentrations of gas-phase radicals, compared to the other brands. These results suggest that BF is partially effective at removing some of the gas-phase oxidants but not effective in the reduction of tar and its radical species in the mainstream and sidestream smoke. It is well known from epidemiological studies that tar content is strongly associated with increasing risk to smokers of lung cancer. In our experiments, BF cigarettes produce a higher amount of tar and stable free radical species than the other 3 brands in the sidestream smoke (between puffs), thus potentially increasing risk to the smoker and passive smoker.