Abstract
AbstractSmoking-related diseases remain a significant public health concern, and heated tobacco products (HTPs) have emerged as a potential alternative to cigarettes. While several studies have confirmed that HTP aerosols contain lower levels of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) than cigarette smoke, less is known about constituents that are intrinsically higher in HTP aerosols. This study provides a comprehensive comparative assessment of an HTP aerosol produced with Tobacco Heating System 2.2 (THS) and comparator cigarette (CC) smoke aiming at identifying all unique or increased compounds in THS aerosol by applying a broad set of LC–MS and GC × GC–MS methods. To focus on differences due to heating versus burning tobacco, confounding factors were minimized by using the same tobacco in both test items and not adding flavorants. Of all analytical features, only 3.5%—corresponding to 31 distinctive compounds—were significantly more abundant in THS aerosol than in CC smoke. A notable subset of these compounds was identified as reaction products of glycerol. The only compound unique to THS aerosol was traced back to its presence in a non-tobacco material in the test item and not a direct product of heating tobacco. Our results demonstrate that heating a glycerol-containing tobacco substrate to the temperatures applied in THS does not introduce new compounds in the resulting aerosol compared to CC smoke which are detectable with the method portfolio applied in this study. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of the chemical composition of HTP aerosols and their potential impact on human health.
Graphical Abstract
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Biochemistry,Analytical Chemistry
Reference27 articles.
1. Smith MR, Clark B, Lüdicke F, Schaller J-P, Vanscheeuwijck P, Hoeng J, Peitsch MC. Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 1: description of the system and the scientific assessment program. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016;81:S17–S26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.07.006.
2. Schaller J-P, Keller D, Poget L, Pratte P, Kaelin E, McHugh D, Cudazzo G, Smart D, Tricker AR, Gautier L, Yerly M, Reis Pires R, Le Bouhellec S, Ghosh D, Hofer I, Garcia E, Vanscheeuwijck P, Maeder S. Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 2: chemical composition, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, and physical properties of the aerosol. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016;81:S27–S47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.10.001.
3. Poget L, Goujon C, Kleinhans S, Maeder S, Schaller J-P. Robustness of HPHC reduction in THS 2.2 aerosol relative to 3R4F reference cigarette smoke under extreme climatic conditions. Contrib Nicotine Tob Res. 2021;30(3):109–126. https://doi.org/10.2478/cttr-2021-0008.
4. Center for Tobacco Reference Products. Composition of 3R4F reference cigarettes: University of Kentucky. Available from: https://ctrp.uky.edu/products/gallery/Reference%20Cigarettes/detail/936. Accessed 4 Oct 2023.
5. Amendment to Philip Morris Products S.A. Modified Risk Tobacco Product Application. Response to 4 Aug 2017 FDA advice and information request letter including non-targeted differential screening, toxicological assessment, and peer review reports. 8 Dec 2017 (MR0000097.zip -20MB; added 12 Jan 2018); Report RLS-ZRH-2016–75 GCxGC-TOFMS.pdf, Report RLS-ZRH-2016–76–82 LC-HRAM-MS.pdf, Report RLS-ZRH-2016–401 GCxGC-TOFMS.pdf, Report RLS-ZRH-2016–403–404 LC-HRAM-MS.pdf. Available from: https://digitalmedia.hhs.gov/tobacco/static/mrtpa/PMP/MR0000097.zip. Accessed 4 Oct 2023.