4.5 Article

Comparison of Urine 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3)Pyridyl-1-Butanol and Cotinine for Assessment of Active and Passive Smoke Exposure in Urban Adolescents

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 254-261

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0671

关键词

-

资金

  1. UCSF Bland Lane Center of Excellence on Secondhand Smoke - Flight Attendants Medical Research
  2. National Institute on Drug Abuse of the NIH [P30 DA012393]
  3. National Center for Research Resources of the NIH [S10 RR026437]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Many adolescents are exposed to tobacco smoke, from either active smoking (CS) or secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Tobacco-specific biomarkers of exposure include cotinine (detects use in past 2-4 days) and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL; detects use for a month or longer). NNAL is expected to detect more intermittent tobacco exposure. We compared NNAL and cotinine as biomarkers of exposure to tobacco in urban adolescents and determined the optimal NNAL cutoff point to distinguish CS from SHS exposure. Methods: Surplus urine samples, collected from 466 adolescents attending pediatric well or urgent care visits at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital in 2013 to 2014, were assayed for cotinine and NNAL. Results: Ninety-four percent of adolescents had measurable levels of NNAL compared with 87% for cotinine. The optimal NNAL cutoff point to distinguish CS from SHS was 9.6 pg/mL by latent class or 14.4 pg/mL by receiver-operating characteristic analysis. Cotinine and NNAL were strongly correlated, but the correlation slopes differed for active versus SHS-exposed adolescents. Among nonsmokers, NNAL levels were significantly higher in African American (median, 3.3 pg/mL) compared with other groups (0.9-1.9 pg/mL), suggesting greater exposure to SHS. Conclusions: Urine NNAL screening finds a large majority (94%) of urban adolescents are exposed to tobacco. African Americans are exposed to higher levels of SHS than other ethnic/racial groups. (C) 2018 AACR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据