4.4 Article

The relationship between nicotine dependence scores and biomarkers of exposure in adult cigarette smokers

Journal

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 1, Pages 79-83

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2011.02.008

Keywords

Nicotine dependence; Smoking; Biomarkers of exposure

Funding

  1. Philip Morris USA Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Tobacco dependence is a multidimensional phenomenon. The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) is a widely administered six-item questionnaire used as a measure of nicotine dependence. It has been suggested that this test may not represent the entire spectrum of factors related to dependence. Also the relationship of this test with biomarkers of exposure to cigarette smoke has not been extensively studied. Methods: Data from a multi-center, cross-sectional, ambulatory study of US adult smokers (the Total Exposure Study, TES) was analyzed. The FIND score and a number of additional questions related to smoking behavior, from an adult smoker questionnaire (ASQ) completed by 3585 adult smokers in the TES were analyzed. The 24-h urine nicotine equivalents, serum cotinine and blood carboxyhemoglobin were measured as biomarkers of exposure (BOE) to nicotine and carbon monoxide. Cigarette butts returned were collected during the 24-h urine collection period. Results: The FTND showed moderate correlations with BOE, while selected questions from ASQ although statistically significant, had weaker correlations. FIND scores showed substantially weaker correlations without the question about cigarettes smoked per day (CPD). CPD and time to first cigarette (TTFC) had the most impact on BOE. Conclusion: Additional questions from ASQ did not appear to contribute towards refining the FIND test. The correlation of the FTND scores with nicotine and carbon monoxide seems to be primarily driven by CPD. CPD and TTFC were the most important factors correlating with exposure. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available