A modeling approach to gauging the effects of nicotine vaping product use on cessation from cigarettes: what do we know, what do we need to know?

How do users compare the costs between nicotine vaping products and cigarettes? Findings from the 2016-2020 International Tobacco Control United States surveys

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) can potentially help adult tobacco users quit smoking. This study evaluated how adult consumers compare the costs between NVPs and cigarettes.

METHOD

We used data from the US arm of the 2016-2020 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) surveys to perform a multinomial logit model with two-way fixed effects to measure how perceived cost comparisons are associated with NVP and cigarette taxes, use patterns, NVP device types and individual sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Higher cigarette taxes are associated with a greater likelihood of perceiving NVPs and cigarettes as costing the same for the overall population and among people who exclusively smoke, and a lower likelihood of perceiving NVPs as more expensive among people who exclusively vape, compared with lower cigarette taxes. Pre-filled cartridge and tank users are more likely to perceive NVPs as less expensive than cigarettes, compared with people who use other types of NVPs. The associations between taxes and perceived cost comparison were more pronounced among males, younger and low-income populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher cigarette taxes are associated with perceived financial incentives for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) over cigarettes, whereas NVP taxes are not associated with perceived cost comparison between NVPs and cigarettes.

Changing patterns of cigarette and ENDS transitions in the USA: a multistate transition analysis of adults in the PATH Study in 2017-2019 vs 2019-2021

Introduction

The use of cigarettes and electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) has likely changed since 2019 with the rise of pods and disposables, the outbreak of lung injuries related to vaping THC, flavor bans, and the COVID pandemic. We analyzed patterns of initiation, cessation, and transitions between cigarettes, ENDS, and dual use before and after 2019.

Methods

Using the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, we applied a multistate transition model to 28,061 adults in Waves 4-5 (2017-19) and 24,751 adults in Waves 5-6 (2019-21), estimating transition rates for initiation, cessation, and switching products for each period overall and by age group.

Results

Cigarette initiation among adults who never used either product decreased from 2017-19 to 2019-21, but ENDS initiation did not significantly change. Persistence of ENDS-only use remained high, with 75-80% still using ENDS only after 1 year. Cigarette-only use transitions remained similar, with about 88% remaining, 7% transitioning to non-current use, and 5% transitioning to dual or ENDS-only use. In contrast, dual use to ENDS-only transitions increased from 9.5% (95%CI: 7.3-11.7%) to 20.1% (95%CI: 17.5-22.7%) per year from 2017-19 to 2019-21, decreasing the persistence of dual use. The dual use to cigarette-only transition remained at about 25%. These changes were qualitatively similar across adult age groups, though adults ages 18-24 years exhibited the highest probability of switching from cigarette-only use to dual use and from dual use to ENDS-only use.

Conclusions

Persistence of ENDS use among adults remained high in 2019-21, but a larger fraction of dual users transitioned to ENDS-only use compared to 2017-19. Because the fraction of cigarette-only users switching to dual use remained low, the public health implications of the increased dual use to ENDS-only transition are minimal.

Predicting the long-term effects of electronic cigarette use on population health: a systematic review of modelling studies

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and synthesise the findings of modelling studies on the population impacts of e-cigarette use and to identify potential gaps requiring future investigation.

DATA SOURCE AND STUDY SELECTION

Four databases were searched for modelling studies of e-cigarette use on population health published between 2010 and 2023. A total of 32 studies were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on study characteristics, model attributes and estimates of population impacts including health outcomes and smoking prevalence were extracted from each article. The findings were synthesised narratively.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The introduction of e-cigarettes was predicted to lead to decreased smoking-related mortality, increased quality-adjusted life-years and reduced health system costs in 29 studies. Seventeen studies predicted a lower prevalence of cigarette smoking. Models that predicted negative population impacts assumed very high e-cigarette initiation rates among non-smokers and that e-cigarette use would discourage smoking cessation by a large margin. The majority of the studies were based on US population data and few studies included factors other than smoking status, such as jurisdictional tobacco control policies or social influence.

CONCLUSIONS

A population increase in e-cigarette use may result in lower smoking prevalence and reduced burden of disease in the long run, especially if their use can be restricted to assisting smoking cessation. Given the assumption-dependent nature of modelling outcomes, future modelling studies should consider incorporating different policy options in their projection exercises, using shorter time horizons and expanding their modelling to low-income and middle-income countries where smoking rates remain relatively high.

A Decision-Theoretic Public Health Framework for Heated Tobacco and Nicotine Vaping Products

Markets for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) have grown as these products became positioned as harm-reduction alternatives to combusted tobacco products. Herein, we present a public health decision-theoretic framework incorporating different patterns of HTP, NVP, and cigarette use to examine their impacts on population health. Our framework demonstrates that, for individuals who would have otherwise smoked, HTP use may provide public health benefits by enabling cessation or by discouraging smoking initiation and relapse. However, the benefits are reduced if more harmful HTP use replaces less harmful NVP use. HTP use may also negatively impact public health by encouraging smoking by otherwise non-smokers or by encouraging initiation or relapse into smoking. These patterns are directly influenced by industry behavior as well as public policy towards HTPs, NVPs, and cigarettes. While substantial research has been devoted to NVPs, much less is known about HTPs. Better information is needed to more precisely define the health risks of HTPs compared to cigarettes and NVPs, the relative appeal of HTPs to consumers, and the likelihood of later transitioning to smoking or quitting all products. While our analysis provides a framework for gaining that information, it also illustrates the complexities in distinguishing key factors.

The Australia Smoking and Vaping Model: The Potential Impact of Increasing Access to Nicotine Vaping Products

BACKGROUND

We model the potential impact of relaxing current nicotine vaping product (NVP) restrictions on public health in Australia.

AIMS AND METHODS

A Restricted NVP Scenario was first developed to project current smoking and vaping rates, where a U.S. smoking model was calibrated to recent Australian trends. To model less restrictive NVP policies, a Permissive NVP Scenario applied rates of switching from smoking to vaping, initiation into NVP and cigarette use, and cessation from smoking and vaping based on U.S. trends. The model measures vaping risk relative to the excess mortality rate of smoking. The public health impacts are measured as the difference between smoking- and vaping-attributable deaths (SVADs) and life years lost (LYLs) in the Restricted and Permissive NVP Scenarios. Sensitivity analysis is conducted regarding the NVP excess risk and other factors.

RESULTS

Assuming an NVP excess risk of 5% that of smoking, 104.2 thousand SVADs (7.7% reduction) and 2.05 million LYLs (17.3% reduction) are averted during 2017-2080 in the Permissive NVP Scenario compared to the Restricted NVP Scenario. Assuming 40% NVP excess risk, 70 thousand SVADs and 1.2 million LYLs are averted. The impact is sensitive to the rate at which smokers switch to NVPs and quit smoking, and relatively insensitive to the smoking initiation and NVP initiation and cessation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The model suggests the potential for public health gains to be achieved by relaxing NVP access regulations. However, the model would benefit from better information regarding the impact of NVPs on smoking under a relaxation of current restrictions.

IMPLICATIONS

Australia has implemented a strong array of cigarette-oriented policies, but has restricted access to NVPs. The Smoking and Vaping Model offers a framework for modeling hypothetical policy scenarios. The Australian model shows the potential for public health gains by maintaining cigarette-oriented policies while relaxing the current restrictive NVP policy. Modeling results under a permissive NVP policy are particularly sensitive to the estimated rates of smoking cessation and switching to vaping, which are not well established and will likely depend on past and future cigarette-oriented policies and the specific NVP policies implemented in Australia.

E-Cigarette Markets and Policy Responses in Southeast Asia: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The global e-cigarette market has proliferated and is increasingly dominated by transnational tobacco companies. While Southeast Asian countries have received relatively little attention in e-cigarette research, the region represents an area of potentially untapped growth for the industry. We review the e-cigarette situation in Southeast Asia in terms of the e-cigarette markets, advertising and promotion of e-cigarettes, reported health impacts of e-cigarette use, and policy responses in the region.

METHODS

We examined e-cigarette market data from the Euromonitor Global Market Information Database (GMID) Passport database, searched in the academic literature, grey literature and news archives for any reports or studies of e-cigarette related diseases or injuries, e-cigarette marketing, and e-cigarette policy responses in Southeast Asian countries, and browsed the websites of online e-cigarette retailers catering to the region's active e-cigarette markets.

RESULTS

In 2019, e-cigarettes were sold in six Southeast Asian markets with a total market value of $595 million, projected to grow to $766 million by 2023. E-commerce is a significant and growing sales channel in the region, with most of the popular or featured brands in online shops originating from China. Southeast Asian youth are targeted with a wide variety of flavours, trendy designs and point of sale promotions, and several e-cigarette related injuries and diseases have been reported in the region. Policy responses vary considerably between countries, ranging from strict bans to no or partial regulations.

CONCLUSION

Although Southeast Asia's e-cigarette market is relatively nascent, this is likely to change if transnationals invest more heavily in the region. Populous countries with weak e-cigarette regulations, notably Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and the Philippines, are desirable targets for the transnationals. Regulatory action is needed to prevent e-cigarette use from becoming entrenched into these societies, especially among young people.

Improving on estimates of the potential relative harm to health from using modern ENDS (vaping) compared to tobacco smoking

BACKGROUND

Although the harm to health from electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) compared to smoked tobacco remains highly uncertain, society and governments still need to know the likely range of the relative harm to inform regulatory policies for ENDS and smoking.

METHODS

We identified biomarkers with specificity of association with different disease groupings e.g., volatile organic compound (VOCs) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and tobacco-specific N´-nitrosamines (TSNAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) for all cancers. We conducted a review of recent studies (post January 2017) that compared these biomarkers between people exclusively using ENDS and those exclusively smoking tobacco. The percentage differences in these biomarkers, weighted by study size and adjusted for acrolein from other sources, were used as a proxy for the assumed percentage difference in disease harm between ENDS and smoking. These relative differences were applied to previously modelled estimates of smoking-related health loss (in health-adjusted life-years; HALYs).

RESULTS

The respective relative biomarker levels (ENDS vs smoking) were: 28% for respiratory diseases (five results, three studies); 42% for cancers (five results, four studies); and 35% for cardiovascular (seven results, four studies). When integrated with the HALY impacts by disease, the overall harm to health from ENDS was estimated to be 33% that of smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis, suggests that the use of modern ENDS devices (vaping) could be a third as harmful to health as smoking in a high-income country setting. But this estimate is based on a limited number of biomarker studies and is best be considered a likely upper level of ENDS risk given potential biases in our method (i.e., the biomarkers used being correlated with more unaccounted for toxicants in smoking compared to with using ENDS).

[Diversification of smoking cessation programmes-the role of e-cigarettes]

The question of whether e‑cigarettes are a useful tool for smoking cessation is part of an ongoing and highly controversial scientific debate. In practice, however, the number of people trying to quit tobacco consumption by using these products is steadily increasing. This discussion article provides an outline of the current state of research on the issue of whether and to what extent e‑cigarettes can help people quit smoking.Of course, e‑cigarettes also have a certain potential for harm, especially if nicotine dependence is unnecessarily prolonged. Nevertheless, it can make an important contribution to harm reduction in nicotine consumption. Hence, the product should get treated as a serious alternative to nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) in the scientific discussion. Like NRTs, e‑cigarettes offer a less harmful way of consuming nicotine that greatly reduces many of the health risks associated with tobacco consumption, such as the absorption of carcinogenic substances. Recent studies and reviews suggest that the product can be at least as effective as nicotine replacement therapies in helping people quit smoking. Individual studies even demonstrate the increased effectiveness of e‑cigarettes in supporting smoking cessation.Nevertheless, the review of the current literature shows that more high-quality research is needed to further understand the product and its properties. In terms of the harm reduction approach, however, it would already be more appropriate to also rely on e‑cigarettes instead of trying to force immediate and complete nicotine abstinence. After all, in the process of quitting smoking, the fastest possible cessation of the more unhealthy consumption of tobacco should be prioritized in order to immediately minimize unnecessary health risks.

A first pass, using pre-history and contemporary history, at understanding why Australia and England have such different policies towards electronic nicotine delivery systems, 1970s-c. 2018

AIMS

The United Kingdom and Australia have developed highly divergent policy responses to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). To understand the historical origins of these differences, we describe the history of tobacco control in each country and the key roles played in setting ENDS policy in its early stages by public health regulations and policy networks, anti-smoking organizations, 'vaper' activist networks and advocates of harm reduction policies towards injecting drug use.

METHODS

We analysed key government reports, policy statements from public health bodies and non-government organizations (e.g. cancer councils and medical organizations) on ENDS; submissions to an Australian parliamentary inquiry; media coverage of policy debates in medical journals; and the history of tobacco control policy in Australia and England. Key discourses about ENDS were identified for each country. These were compared across countries during a multi-day face-to-face meeting, where consensus was reached on the key commonalities and divergences in historical approaches to nicotine policy. This paper focuses on England, as different policy responses were apparent in constituent countries of the United Kingdom, and Scotland in particular.

RESULTS

Policymakers in Australia and England differ markedly in the priority that they have given to using ENDS to promote smoking cessation or restricting smokers' access to prevent uptake among young people. In understanding the origins of these divergent responses, we identified the following key differences between the two countries' approaches to nicotine regulation: an influential scientific network that favoured nicotine harm reduction in the United Kingdom and the absence of such a network in Australia; the success of different types of health activism both in England and in Europe in opposing more restrictive policies; and the greater influence on policy in England of the field of illicit drug harm reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of the different policy responses to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) in England and Australia requires an appreciation of how actors within the different policy structures, scientific networks and activist organizations in each country and region have interpreted the evidence and the priority that policymakers have given to the competing goals of preventing adolescent uptake and encouraging smokers to use ENDS to quit smoking.

US Nicotine Vaping Product SimSmoke Simulation Model: The Effect of Vaping and Tobacco Control Policies on Smoking Prevalence and Smoking-Attributable Deaths

The public health impact of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) is subject to a complex set of uncertain transitions between NVP and cigarette use. Instead, we apply an indirect method to gauge the impact of NVP use on smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable deaths (SADs) using the well-established SimSmoke tobacco control policy simulation model. Upon validating the model before NVPs were more widely used, we project a No-NVP (i.e., in the absence of NVPs) while controlling for the impact of cigarette-oriented policies. The net impact of NVPs on smoking prevalence is inferred by comparing the projected No-NVP smoking trends to corresponding trends from two US national surveys. Using the TUS-CPS estimates for the period 2012-2018, we estimate that adult smoking prevalence declined in relative terms by 9.7% (95% CI: 7.5-11.7%) for males and 10.7% (95% CI: 9.1-13.0%) for females. Compared to NHIS, smoking prevalence declined by 10.7% (95% CI: 6.8-14.6%) for males and 11.3% (95% CI: 7.4-15.6%) for females. These impacts were confined mainly to ages 18-44. Vaping-related reductions in smoking prevalence were projected to avert nearly 0.4 million SADs between 2012 and 2052. Our analysis indicates that NVP use is associated with substantial reductions in US smoking prevalence among younger adults.

"It's really addictive and I'm trapped:" A qualitative analysis of the reasons for quitting vaping among treatment-seeking young people

BACKGROUND

Debate continues over how e-cigarettes have impacted the health of young people, and what regulatory policies should be enacted. The debate has appropriately been informed by quantitative studies, often focused on initiation, prevalence, and product transition among the general population and demographic segments. Factors driving cessation and subjective experiences that motivate young users to quit have been largely absent from the debate. This qualitative study highlights the range of motivating experiences among a population of treatment-seeking young e-cigarette users.

METHODS

Three researchers coded reasons for quitting provided by a sample of n = 1000 youth (13-17) and n = 1000 young adults (18-24) enrolled in a text message cessation program. Data spanned January 18 - February 22, 2019. Codes were adapted from previous literature.

RESULTS

The most common reasons were health (50.9%; "I want my lungs back"), financial cost (21.7%; "I don't have enough money to feed my addiction"), freedom from addiction (16.0%; "i hate juuling. it's taking over my life"), and social influence (10.1%; "it's affecting my friendships"). Selected quotes highlight a broad range of additional ways in which e-cigarette use negatively impacted young people, including decreased academic performance and mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

Young people trying to quit e-cigarettes are motivated by a diversity of reasons including health, financial, social, and academic. The range of impacts should be considered in discussions of policies intended to protect young people, and incorporated into cessation programs designed to serve them.

Novel microsimulation model of tobacco use behaviours and outcomes: calibration and validation in a US population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Simulation models can project effects of tobacco use and cessation and inform tobacco control policies. Most existing tobacco models do not explicitly include relapse, a key component of the natural history of tobacco use. Our objective was to develop, calibrate and validate a novel individual-level microsimulation model that would explicitly include smoking relapse and project cigarette smoking behaviours and associated mortality risks.

METHODS

We developed the Simulation of Tobacco and Nicotine Outcomes and Policy (STOP) model, in which individuals transition monthly between tobacco use states (current/former/never) depending on rates of initiation, cessation and relapse. Simulated individuals face tobacco use-stratified mortality risks. For US women and men, we conducted cross-validation with a Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) model. We then incorporated smoking relapse and calibrated cessation rates to reflect the difference between a transient quit attempt and sustained abstinence. We performed external validation with the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the linked National Death Index. Comparisons were based on root-mean-square error (RMSE).

RESULTS

In cross-validation, STOP-generated projections of current/former/never smoking prevalence fit CISNET-projected data well (coefficient of variation (CV)-RMSE≤15%). After incorporating smoking relapse, multiplying the CISNET-reported cessation rates for women/men by 7.75/7.25, to reflect the ratio of quit attempts to sustained abstinence, resulted in the best approximation to CISNET-reported smoking prevalence (CV-RMSE 2%/3%). In external validation using these new multipliers, STOP-generated cumulative mortality curves for 20-year-old current smokers and never smokers each had CV-RMSE ≤1% compared with NHIS. In simulating those surveyed by NHIS in 1997, the STOP-projected prevalence of current/former/never smokers annually (1998-2009) was similar to that reported by NHIS (CV-RMSE 12%).

CONCLUSIONS

The STOP model, with relapse included, performed well when validated to US smoking prevalence and mortality. STOP provides a flexible framework for policy-relevant analysis of tobacco and nicotine product use.