Tobacco Documents Online

SMOKING BEKAVIOUR STUDIES AT CAMBRIDGE: DELIVERT AND ~NTAKE OF SMOKE CONSTITUENTS REPORT NO. I%D.1756 RESTRICTED 9.9.1980 AUTHOR: GROUP LEADER: ISSUED BY: C.I. Ayres PROG. REF.: 10.04.000 DISTEI/tnClON: Dr. L.C.F. BLacknan Copy No. 1, 2, 3, 4 Dr. I.W. mushes " " 5 Dr. R.A. 8anford " " 6, 7 I~.M. Gibb, Esq. " " 8 R.S. Wade, Esq. " " 9, I0, 11 R.G. Nicholls, Esq. " " 12, 13 Re:: E. R£tte=shaus " " 14 Dr. F. $oeho~er " " 15 Dr. C.J.P. de $iqueira " " 16 Mr. A.J. Furussynsk:L " " 17 II. Tudor, Esq. " " L8 Dr. D.G. Felton " " 19 L£b~ary " " ZO, 21 COPY NO.: mam~ C~ t~d ~, I Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

Group Research & Development Centre, British-American Tobacco Co. Ltd., SOUTHAMPTON. 9th September 1980. SMOKING BEHAVIOUR STUDIES AT CJ~BKIDGE: DELIVEEY AND INTAKE OF SMOKE CONSTITUENTS (Report No. RD.1756 Restricted) SL~@tARY This report outlines some recent results obtained from a Joint study ~ich Hr. R. Stepney and Professor I.R. Hills at Cambridge. The central Theme is the exploration of the response, by a balanced panel of smokers, c~ low delivery cigarettes. There is particular emphasis on the effects, ,,r smoking behavfour, of chanilng the tar to nicotine ratio in the smoke. TWo observations are of 8eneral Interest: s~ Smokers of "middle-car" cissrettes tended to obtain lower tar deliveries from their usual brands than those determined by standard, machine 8mokln8 (for the leaKue tables). "Low-tar" smokers obtained similar ~tr deliveries to those in the league tables. The Cwo groups did noc d~£fer in the delAverie8 obtained from experimental low delivery cLgaretce8. J ~t,'~ An experimental low-car, mmdlum-t~cottne clgarette timed at "middle- tar" smoker8 is seen Co be potentially aCtract£ve. The panel thought the smoke quality acceptable. It As important to note that, compared vlth "middle-tar" clEarettes on the U.K. market, the experiment cigarette ecudAed has a very low carbon monoxide delivery. It also resulted in low carbon monoxide retention by the smoker. DetaAled results from the study wall be reported later. ~rn ~rn oo %O B ~ ! Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-2- TECHNICAL ABSTRACT This report Eives results from an @xperi~nt with • group of forty habitmsl smokers of mlddle-car and low-tar cigarettes. Subjects, who all lived in Cambridge, were studied on their usual brands and two typas of experimental clgar@tte. One of chase was a low--tar, 1o~-nlcoc£ne cigerette (coded 394B5), the other was a lob-Car, medium--nicotine cigarette (from the GYPS~ series, provided by B.A.T (U.K. b E.), codad 83Z&9). The data presented include TPN, nicotine and carbon monoxlde (CO) dellvered to the subjects and uptake of C0. Xc was found that low-tar smokers obcalned less TPH and nicotlne than mlddle-tar smokers from Chelr usual brands. There was, howmver, little difference between these two groups when smoking the experimental cigarettes. The 83Z49 dellvered similar amounts of nicotine and slightly less TPN than the sctddle-tar usual brands but more TP~and nicotine than the lob--tar brands. This cigarette has a very low standard CO delivery (6 mS) and save low CO retention in the body for both groups of smokers. B ~I C0 LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION QO r~o

-3- I~r~ODUCTION This report contains data on delivery and intake of smoke constituents from a ranBe of commercial cIKarettes and two experimental ciearettes which were smoked by a panel of subjects outside CR&DC. The data were collected by Mr. R. Stepney in the University of Cambr£dee Cl2nical School, Department of Medicine at Addenbrooke's Hospital+ Cambridge. The aim of the study was to £nvestIKate the effects of chanEes in cIEarette desIEn (specifically of alterlng the tar:nicotine ratio), on clgarette acceptability, smoking behmviour, delivery and intake of smoke constlruents. Habitual middle-tar and low-tar smokers were studied on their own brands and than switched to two experimental clgarettes both of which were of low tar, one with low nicotine and the other with medium nicotine dellverie$. A preliminary report on this study has already been issued (I) and further reports sirius full details of all the data and statistical analysis wi21 be issued in the future. This report is intended to sire fairly brief details of the deliveries obtained by the CambridEe smokers. MATERIALS AND ~rHODS Full details of subjects and experimental procedure have already been reported (I) so only brief details will be included here. SUBJECTS 20 habitual low-tar (LT) and 20 habitual middle'tar (MT) smokers were recruited for the study. The numbers In each sub-group for each sta,a of the study (allowinE for subjects who dropped out) is shown in TabLe I. 1~ ~, i Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION oo r,,o ',,o

m~a TABLE I COMPOSITION OF SUBJECT CROUPS Sub-Croup Male MT Male LT Female MT Feana le LT Own Brand Smok/ng 10 9 I0 11 Experimental Cigarettes (Swlcchlns) 9 8 10 10 CIGARETTES The deliveries for the "own brands" were obtained from the Laboratory of the Government Chemist listing for the appropriate time period. Deliveries for the experimental clgarectes were measured at GR&DC and are Cbe means from several dececmlnaclo~. These arm the figures wh/ch will subsequently be referred to as "sCaudard (machlne-smoked) deliveries". Figures for TPM and not tar (PMWNF) are given since these are directly comparable wlth our measurements of human dellverles which are determined as TPM. This Table updates thac given prevlously (Table 2 in ED.1693 (1)). m cr~ c%D %4D ~, [ Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-5- TABLE 2 _STANDARD CIGARETTE DELZVERTES TI"H : Ni¢O C lne ~r bon Hono xt.da (m&) Brand (Mean Figures) 83Z49 384B5 )~tddle Tar "Low N~cotine" 22 1.6 13.8:1 18 Low Tar 10 0.8 12.5:1 11 "Ned£um Nicotine" m , .. 12 13 I .I 0.7 10.9: [ 18.6:1 6 13 Table 3 shovs brands which subjects norually smoked. TABLE 3 LDENTZTY OF OWN BRANDS Brand (All King Size) Benson & Fledges Dunhi11 Dunbi11 Superior Mild Embassy No, l Embassy No.l Extra ~Lild John Player John P1aTer Extra N/id Players No. 6 lo Chamns Silk Cut TOTAL L N, mber of Smokers o£ Each Brand per Sub-Group Hale KT 2 D 2 m 2 o 3 ! I I0 Female S 2 P 1 D o 2 m, l0 Hale LT m m ! m 1 I 3 m l, 9 Female LT m 1 2 2 6 11 ",,,0 I~ A I C,) LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-6- EXPEKD~NTAL DESIGN After famillarlsatlon to the laboratory procedure the subjects smoked their own brand for three weeks. They then smoked 39&B5 and 83Z49 for three consecutive weeks each, according to a balanced cross-over design. visits to the laboratory ware made once a week and butts from all cigarettes smoked durln8 the 24 hours precedlns the visits were collscted. MEASUREMENTS The a~asuremencs can be divided into two categories:_ laboratory and non-laboracor7 (2&-hour). For cigarettes smoked in the laboratory the human smoking pattern can be duplicated (v~in8 the data £rom the portable puf£ recorder (2) co produce a tape for the puff duplicator (3)) and deliveries o£ TPH, nlcoClne and CO measured. In thls experiment there were a large number of smoking recordings (three per person, per cigarette type) so ov_ly one example was dupllcated per person per cigarette type. This was conducted according to a statistical desiL~n to avoid possible bias. The results obtained from duplication give the relationships bet~,een tip nicotine end TPM, nicotine and CO delivered to the subject. Factors were derived for each smoke constituent £or each subject and cigarette type and these were applied to all the tip nicotine figures (4). The use of such laboratory-derived factors Involved some assumptions about smoklnl outside the laboratory but gives us a6 indication of deliveries obcalned under more natural circumstances. The figures presented here are therefore estimates of TPM, nicotine end CO deliveries obtained by subjects in the laboratory end over 24-hour periods and based on three replicates per person per cigarette type. These ere indications o£ delivery Co the mouth and tell us nothing about inhalation. An mmmm~ I~ ~ I Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-7- additional measurement is therefore presented here (made in the laboratory before and after smoking). This is the expired-air CO concentration which is hlghly correlated ~r~ch blood carboxyhaemoElob£n (COHb) level. This gives us lnforwaCion about inhalation and smoke retention since COHb only increases during smoking if the smoke is lnhaledo The pre-smoklng CO level rslates to smoking on the day of the test, before vtsltins the laboratory/. This measure can be standardtsed to take account of the number of cigarettes smoked t~aC day and the time since the last cfgarecte (taken as five cigarettes, the last one smoked one hour before the test). The rise in CO is the difference between pre- and post-smoklng measures and shows the CO absorbed durln8 the smokins of one clgarecce in the laboratory. RESULTS Tables 4, 5 and 6 show est$mated dellverles of TPM, nicotine and CO co subjects from their own brands and each of the experimental cigarettes. Table 7 shows explred-alr CO concentrations for pra-smoklng and rise during smoking. Each figure represents the mean of all smoklngs for all subjects In the Stoup. The ranges are quoted Co show the hlghesc and lowest deliveries obtained In each sub-group (based on the mean of three smoklngs per sub~ecc). This gives an indication of the large amount of variability betvsen subjects and shows the possible deliveries which could readily be obcalned by other subjects smoking these cigarettes. Differences between cigarettes and groups are taken Co be significant if the means are shown Co be d£fferenC using Student's c-test (unpaired) (pC0.O5 and usually p<O.O1). A two-t~y analysis of variance yes also used, to estimate the size of the differences between cigarettes using .mmmdP ,~ ~ Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-8- poolld filures for laboratory end 24-hour deliveries (given as percentage difference + standard error). are quantified. Only sCaCisClcally significant differences TABLE 4 TPM DELIV~eK_D TO SUBJECTS (mE per cigarette) Croup ~'s ~le HT Fe Lie LT . . , ~] L Male A 1 L Female ~11 MT Alt LT J48arl itanse =l Mmsn Mean Mean Mean Own Brand Laboratory 22.0 13-34 12.9 5-24 10.5 2-22 24-hour 16.8 7-26 10.9 6-18 10.3 4-17 7.8 3-13 14.0 9.0 13.5 9.2 83Z49 Laboratory 18.6 11-28 16.7 7-27 12.7 7-22 13.4 8-27 24-hour 13.3 7-21 14.2 9-19 9.2 4-16 9.3 3-13 13.7 9.3 11.2 11.5 394B5 Laboratory 17.8 11-27 16.2 9-27 11.8 8-18 17.7 12.3 18.2 11.6 24-hour 17.7 13.1 15.5 14.9 17.1 12.5 14.7 14.5 13.3 8-19 13.3 9-20 9.5 5-15 10.1 7-14 13.3 9.8 11.3 11.5 There are no s£su~flcanC differences b~tcween 83Z49 (832) and 394B5 (394) for any of the Stoups. These cigarettes delivered 15% ~ 3% less TPM than ICE clgareCtes and 30% ~ 4Z more than LT clgerecces. When All MT end All LT mokers are compared for own brand £c is seen Chac ~rr smokers obtained st|ntflcantly more TPM (50%~ 10%) than LT smokers. For the sub-groups chls difference is mainly shown by males. There are no siEnlf£cant d£fferences between MT and LT smokers for dellverles from 83Z cr~ and 394 r~D B A I Co LTD- MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-9- TABLE 5 mmmmmmmmeemm NICOTZNE DELIVERED TO SUBJECTS (rag per ctEereCCe) ~lt 1 e NT Group Otm Brand Laboratory 24-hour 1.96 I. 3-2.8 1.50 0.8-2.2 ,,d 1.09 0.9-1.5 1.15 F~mJle MT Mean 1.26 0.9-I .8 1.55 Laboratory 1.90 1.3-2.9 1.72 0,8-2.7 1.41 83Z49 24-hour 1.35 0.8-1.0 1.49 1.1-1,9 1.03 394B5 Laboratory 0.90 24-hour 0.90 0.7-1.2 0.73 .......... L f,euu~ Ze LT ]P.anle ' ALII Male Mean A I. i Female Mean a I. NY Mean A I .... LT Nean 1.0-2.6 1.63 1.33 1.75 [.Ig 0.5-1.9 m 0.89 0.6-1.5 1.30 1.01 1.32 0.98 O. 7-2.3 1.82 1.45 1.64 1.59 0.4-1.9 1.03 0.3-1.4 1.42 1.03 1.19 1.24 0.5-1.3 1.17 0.95 1.05 1.05 0.3-1.2 0.77 0.5-1.1 0.92 0.75 i 0.81 0.84 HT smokers obtained significantly more nicotine from their own brands and 83Z Char from 394. LT maskers obCa£ned significantly more nicotine from 83Z than fro-, 394 and their own brands, 83Z delivered only sltshcly less than NT own brands (72: +_ 3%) and considerably more than LT own brands (30% + 4%) and 394 (54% + 3%). 394 delivered 40% + 3% less nicotine than HT ctsarettes and 16% +_. 4% le88 than LT cigarettes. When AJ,1 NT and 411 LT smokers are compared for own brand lC is seen that PiT smokers obtained significantly more nicotine (40% + 6%) than LT smokers. As is the case for TIM, thl8 difference £s part£culerly seen for males. There are no significant differences between K'~ and LT smokers for deliveries from 83Z and 394. C~ B ~, [ Co LTD - MINNF.,..C~TA TOBACCO LITIGATION