assessment of the abuse liability of three menthol Vuse Solo electronic cigarettes relative to combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum

Introduction:
This text provides an in-depth analysis of a study investigating the abuse liability of menthol-flavored Vuse Solo electronic cigarettes (ECs) compared to combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum. Readers will learn about the study design, key findings, and the implications of these results in the context of tobacco control policies.

Key Points:

1. a randomized, open-label, cross-over study design was used, with six-hour nicotine uptake and ratings of subjective effects to determine abuse liability and pharmacokinetics.
2. Three menthol-flavored Vuse Solo ECs with varying nicotine contents (14, 29, and 36 mg) were evaluated against combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum as comparators.
3. Use of menthol Vuse Solo resulted in significantly lower responses to subjective measurements, lower peak and overall extent of nicotine uptake compared to smoking cigarettes, and more similar responses to nicotine gum.
4. Subjective response magnitudes were generally more similar to nicotine gum than cigarettes, but urge to smoke was higher with ECs and nicotine gum compared to cigarettes.
5. Nicotine uptake parameters were significantly lower for menthol Vuse Solo ECs compared to cigarettes and nicotine gum, but early nicotine uptake was higher with Vuse ECs than with nicotine gum.
6. The study population in the menthol ECs study had different demographics compared to the non-menthol ECs study, which could partially explain the differences in nicotine uptake results.
7. The primary intended audience for ECs is established adult smokers of combustible cigarettes, and the study design assessed the products in a real-world setting against two comparators.
8. The results suggest that menthol Vuse Solo ECs have lower abuse liability than menthol cigarettes and potentially greater abuse liability than nicotine gum.

Main Message:
The study offers valuable insights into the abuse liability of menthol-flavored electronic cigarettes, suggesting that they may serve as a lower-risk alternative to menthol cigarettes. The findings can inform regulatory decisions and public health strategies related to the use and marketing of electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction approach for adult smokers.

Stiles, Mitchell F., Leanne R. Campbell, Tao Jin, Donald W. Graff, Reginald V. Fant, and Jack E. henningfield. “assessment of the abuse Liability of Three Menthol Vuse Solo Electronic Cigarettes Relative to Combustible Cigarettes and Nicotine Gum.” Psychopharmacology 235, no. 7 (July 2018): 2077–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-018-4904-x.