Summary
Introduction:
This text provides an analysis of a study examining the abuse liability of the JUUL electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) in four flavors compared to combustible cigarettes, nicotine gum, and a comparator ENDS. The study aimed to evaluate the nicotine pharmacokinetics and subjective effects of JUUL use in adult smokers.
Key Points:
* The study used a within-subjects, randomized, open-label, seven-arm crossover design with 66 participants.
* Participants used JUUL in four flavors, their usual brand cigarette, a comparator ENDS, and nicotine gum under controlled conditions.
* Nicotine pharmacokinetics were assessed through plasma nicotine levels, and subjective effects were measured using visual analog scales.
* JUUL delivered less nicotine and resulted in lower peak plasma nicotine levels compared to combustible cigarettes.
* JUUL was rated as more satisfying than nicotine gum and the comparator ENDS.
* The study found no significant differences in nicotine pharmacokinetics between JUUL flavors.
* There were no significant differences in subjective effects between JUUL flavors, except for Mango and Mint, which were rated as more satisfying than Virginia Tobacco and Creme.
Main Message:
The study suggests that JUUL has lower abuse liability than combustible cigarettes and higher abuse liability than nicotine gum. JUUL may provide sufficient nicotine delivery and satisfying effects to support substitution for combustible cigarettes among adult smokers. These findings have implications for regulatory decision-making regarding the JUUL system and other ENDS.
Citation
Goldenson NI, Buchhalter aR, augustson EM, Rubinstein ML, henningfield JE. abuse liability assessment of the JUUL system in four flavors relative to combustible cigarette, nicotine gum and a comparator electronic nicotine delivery system among adult smokers. Drug and alcohol dependence. 2020;217:108395. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108395
