Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Department for Continuing Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Addiction. 2023 Mar;118(3):539-545. doi: 10.1111/add.16063. Epub 2022 Oct 21.
AIMS: This study aims to compare biomarkers of potential harm between people switching from smoking combustible cigarettes (CC) completely to electronic cigarettes (EC), continuing to smoke CC, using both EC and CC (dual users) and using neither (abstainers), based on behaviour during EC intervention studies. DESIGN: Secondary analysis following systematic review, incorporating inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis and effect direction plots. SETTING: This study was conducted in Greece, Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1299 adults smoking CC (nine studies) and provided EC. MEASUREMENTS: Measurements were conducted using carbon monoxide (CO) and 26 other biomarkers. FINDINGS: In pooled analyses, exhaled CO (eCO) was lower in EC versus EC + CC [mean difference (MD) = -4.40 parts per million (p.p.m.), 95% confidence interval (CI) = -12.04 to 3.24, two studies] and CC (MD = -9.57 p.p.m., 95% CI = -17.30 to -1.83, three studies). eCO was lower in dual users versus CC only (MD = -1.91 p.p.m., 95% CI = -3.38 to -0.45, two studies). Magnitude rather than direction of effect drove substantial statistical heterogeneity. Effect direction plots were used for other biomarkers. Comparing EC with CC, 12 of 13 biomarkers were significantly lower in EC users, with no difference for the 13th. Comparing EC with dual users, 12 of the 25 biomarkers were lower for EC, and five were lower for dual use. For the remaining eight measures, single studies did not detect statistically significant differences, or the multiple studies contributing to the outcome had inconsistent results. Only one study provided data comparing dual use with CC; of the 13 biomarkers measured, 12 were significantly lower in the dual use group, with no statistically significant difference detected for the 13th. Only one study provided data on abstainers. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from smoking to vaping or dual use appears to reduce levels of biomarkers of potential harm significantly.
目的:本研究旨在比较完全从可燃香烟(CC)转为电子烟(EC)、继续使用 CC、同时使用 EC 和 CC(双重使用者)以及两者都不使用(不使用者)的人群之间潜在危害生物标志物的差异,基于 EC 干预研究中的行为数据。
设计:系统评价后进行二次分析,结合Inverse Variance 随机效应荟萃分析和效应方向图。
地点:这项研究在希腊、意大利、波兰、英国和美国进行。
参与者:共纳入 1299 名使用 CC(9 项研究)并提供 EC 的成年人。
测量方法:使用一氧化碳(CO)和其他 26 种生物标志物进行测量。
结果:在汇总分析中,与 EC+CC 相比,EC 组的呼出 CO(eCO)水平更低[平均差值(MD)=-4.40 个百万分率(p.p.m.),95%置信区间(CI)=-12.04 至 3.24,两项研究],与 CC 相比更低(MD=-9.57 p.p.m.,95%CI=-17.30 至-1.83,三项研究)。与仅使用 CC 相比,双重使用者的 eCO 水平更低(MD=-1.91 p.p.m.,95%CI=-3.38 至-0.45,两项研究)。效应的大小而非方向导致了明显的统计学异质性。效应方向图用于其他生物标志物。与 CC 相比,13 种生物标志物中有 12 种在 EC 使用者中显著降低,而第 13 种标志物没有差异。与双重使用者相比,25 种生物标志物中有 12 种在 EC 组中降低,5 种在双重使用者中降低。对于其余 8 个指标,单个研究未检测到统计学上的显著差异,或者对结果有贡献的多项研究结果不一致。只有一项研究提供了比较双重使用者与 CC 的数据;在测量的 13 种生物标志物中,12 种在双重使用者组中显著降低,第 13 种标志物没有统计学差异。只有一项研究提供了关于不使用者的数据。
结论:从吸烟转为电子烟或双重使用似乎显著降低了潜在危害生物标志物的水平。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-4-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-10-14
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-11-17
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-9-14
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-1-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-10-13
Intern Emerg Med. 2025-8-19
Prev Med Rep. 2025-8-6
Behav Res Ther. 2025-6-28
JAMA Netw Open. 2025-3-3
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2025-5-2
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021-7
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-10-14
Nicotine Tob Res. 2018-1-5
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016-11-15