4.5 Article

Estimation of Nicotine Dose after Low-level Exposure Using Plasma and Urine Nicotine Metabolites

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume 19, Issue 5, Pages 1160-1166

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-1303

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Flight Attendants Medical Research Institute
  2. U.S. Public Health Service [DA02277, DA12393]
  3. Division of Research Resources (NIH) [RR00083]
  4. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [M01RR000083] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE [R37DA002277, P30DA012393, R01DA002277] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We sought to determine the optimal plasma and urine nicotine metabolites, alone or in combination, to estimate the systemic dose of nicotine after low-level exposure. Methods: We dosed 36 nonsmokers with 100, 200, or 400 mu g p.o. of deuterium-labeled nicotine (doses similar to exposure to secondhand smoke) daily for 5 days and then measured plasma and urine nicotine metabolites at various intervals over 24 hours. Results: The strongest correlations with nicotine dose were seen for the sum of four (cotinine + cotinine-glucuronide + trans-3'-hydroxycotinine + 3HC-glucuronide) or six (including also nicotine + nicotine-glucuronide) of the major nicotine metabolites in 24-hour urine collection (r = 0.96), with lesser correlations for these metabolites using spot urines corrected for creatinine at various times of day (r = 0.72-0.80). The sum of plasma cotinine + trans-3'-hydroxycotine was more highly correlated with nicotine dose than plasma cotinine alone (r = 0.82 versus 0.75). Conclusions: Our results provide guidance for the selection of biomarkers to estimate the dose of nicotine taken in low-level (secondhand smoke) tobacco exposure. Impact: This is probably relevant to active smoking as well. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(5); 1160-6. (C)2010 AACR.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available