Eaton Anne A, Hatsukami Dorothy K, Stepanov Irina, Shields Peter G, Carroll Dana Mowls
Division of Biostatistics & Health Data Science, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2025 Jan 22;27(2):192-198. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntae191.
Cigarettes with higher levels of filter ventilation (FV) are misperceived as less harmful and may be more appealing to consumers. Setting limits on FV has been considered as a policy, but a better understanding of any potential unintended consequences is needed.
FV (0.2%-61.1%) measured for 114 subbrands was merged with Wave 1 (2012-2013) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) data, restricted to adults 25+ years of age who smoked daily, and examined by quartiles. Inverse probability of exposure weights were used to estimate the causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at subsequent waves while accounting for potential confounders including demographics, menthol, heaviness of smoking, and past quit attempts.
Compared to those in the first (lowest) quartile of FV, those in the second, third, and fourth quartiles had 1.02 (95% confidence interval = 0.57, 1.82), 0.86 (0.42, 1.73), and 1.52 (0.90, 2.56) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 2 (approximately 1 year later, p = .163), and 1.28 (0.80, 2.07), 1.11 (0.67, 1.83), and 1.65 (1.01, 1.24) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 4 (3 years later, p = .238).
This observational study found no strong evidence of a causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at approximately 1 and 3 years follow-up. However, our effect size estimates were not precise and thus an increase in the ability to quit smoking due to higher FV levels cannot be ruled out.
Setting a maximum limit on FV in cigarettes could address the misperception that highly ventilated cigarettes are less harmful and the link between FV and lung adenocarcinoma. It is important to understand whether such a policy would have unintended consequences on longer-term smoking behavior. We found no strong evidence that FV affects past 30-day smoking 1-3 years later, but could not rule out the possibility that higher FV increases cessation rates. If future studies confirm these epidemiologic findings, this could mean that setting a limit on FV would not lead to reductions in the ability to quit smoking.
过滤嘴通风(FV)水平较高的香烟被错误地认为危害较小,可能对消费者更具吸引力。设定FV限制已被视为一项政策,但需要更好地了解任何潜在的意外后果。
对114个副品牌测量的FV(0.2%-61.1%)与烟草使用和健康人口评估(PATH)数据的第1波(2012 - 2013年)合并,数据仅限于25岁及以上的每日吸烟成年人,并按四分位数进行检查。使用暴露权重的逆概率来估计FV对后续波次过去30天吸烟情况的因果效应,同时考虑潜在的混杂因素,包括人口统计学特征、薄荷醇、吸烟量和过去的戒烟尝试。
与FV处于第一(最低)四分位数的人群相比,第二、第三和第四四分位数的人群在第2波(约1年后,p = 0.163)时过去30天未吸烟的几率分别为1.02倍(95%置信区间 = 0.57, 1.82)、0.86倍(0.42, 1.73)和1.52倍(0.90, 2.56);在第4波(3年后,p = 0.238)时过去30天未吸烟的几率分别为1.28倍(0.80, 2.07)、1.11倍(0.67, 1.83)和1.65倍(1.01, 2.44)。
这项观察性研究在约1年和3年的随访中未发现FV对过去30天吸烟情况有因果效应的有力证据。然而,我们的效应大小估计并不精确,因此不能排除因FV水平较高而导致戒烟能力增加的可能性。
设定香烟FV的最大限制可以解决对高通风香烟危害较小的误解以及FV与肺腺癌之间的联系。了解这样一项政策是否会对长期吸烟行为产生意外后果很重要。我们没有发现FV在1 - 3年后影响过去30天吸烟情况的有力证据,但不能排除较高FV会提高戒烟率的可能性。如果未来的研究证实这些流行病学发现,这可能意味着设定FV限制不会导致戒烟能力下降。