Abuse liability of two electronic nicotine delivery systems compared with combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum from an open-label randomized crossover study

Abstract

Abstract An assessment of the likelihood of use and abuse potential for new tobacco products is an important part of tobacco product regulation in the United States and abroad. This paper reports the results of a randomized, open-label, crossover clinical study that assessed factors related to product adoption and abuse liability (AL), comparing two closed electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products to combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum, high- and low-AL comparator products, respectively. During an 11-day confinement period that included multiple product familiarization sessions, healthy adult smokers participated in AL test sessions to evaluate the abuse liability of each product. During these test sessions, changes in subjective measures; speed and amount of nicotine uptake; and maximum changes in physiological effects before, during, and after use of each assigned product were assessed over 4 h. Positive subjective effects measures scores such as product-liking and overall intent to use again were highest for cigarettes, followed by the Vuse ENDS, with nicotine gum consistently having the lowest scores. The PK results (Cmax and Tmax) of the Vuse ENDS products are between UB cigarettes and nicotine gum, which correlates with the subjective effects. All nicotine uptake measures for the Vuse ENDS products were lower than that of usual brand (UB) cigarettes, including peak nicotine uptake and overall nicotine uptake, and were either similar to or lower than nicotine gum. The time course of nicotine uptake after use of the ENDS was more similar to that of combustible cigarettes than nicotine gum. The results indicate that the AL of each ENDS product is lower than that of UB cigarettes and similar to that of nicotine gum.