Differences in acute reinforcement across reduced nicotine content cigarettes.
Differences in acute reinforcement across reduced nicotine content cigarettes.
复制标题
尼古丁含量降低的香烟的急性强化差异。
DOI：
10.1007/s00213-020-05509-9
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Karelitz,JoshuaL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Perkins,KennethA;Karelitz,JoshuaL
基本原理尚不清楚可以改变吸烟者香烟偏好的尼古丁含量的最小差异。目的有效识别改变香烟偏好所需的尼古丁差异的程序可以帮助为研究提供信息，以衡量尼古丁减少政策的效果。方法使用受试者内设计，我们评估了对不同尼古丁含量的研究香烟的偏好（NIC；18.7、10.8、5.3、2.3 和1.3 毫克/克烟草），相对于极低尼古丁香烟（VLNC；0.4 毫克/克），17 名成人依赖性非薄荷醇吸烟者戒烟过夜。每个会话仅将一个 NIC 与 VLNC 进行比较，五个 NIC 内容的顺序在五天不同的会话中随机排列。每个 NIC 与 VLNC 的偏好是通过经过验证的强制选择程序确定的，那些选择的 NIC 多于 VLNC，表明由于尼古丁本身较多而得到了更大的强化。其次，相对于对最高 NIC（18.7 mg/g（与 VLNC）的选择）而言，对较低 NIC（与 VLNC 相比）的偏好较少，表明强化程度降低。结果总体而言，正如预期的那样，NIC 选择随着尼古丁的增加而增加。相对于 0.4 mg/g VLNC，NIC ≥ 5.3 mg/g 但不≤ 2.3 mg/g 的选择更大。相应地，相对于 18.7 mg/g 的选择，NIC ≤ 2.3 mg/g 的选择较少，但不≥ 5.3 mg/g。结论虽然需要用更大的样本和更长的时间进行复制，但结果表明，将卷烟中的尼古丁减少到 ≤ 2.3 mg/g 会减弱强化作用。这种选择程序可以有效地为未来的临床试验提供信息，以评估吸烟减少尼古丁香烟的相对强化效果。
RationaleThe smallest difference in nicotine that can change a smoker’s cigarette preference is not clearly known.ObjectiveA procedure to efficiently identify the difference in nicotine needed to change cigarette preference could help inform research to gauge effects of a nicotine reduction policy.MethodsUsing a within-subject design, we assessed preference for research cigarettes varying in nicotine contents (NIC; 18.7, 10.8, 5.3, 2.3, and 1.3 mg/g of tobacco), relative to a very low nicotine cigarette (VLNC; 0.4 mg/g), in 17 adult-dependent non-menthol smokers abstinent overnight. Only one NIC was compared vs. the VLNC per session, with order of the five NIC contents randomized across sessions on five separate days. Preference for each NIC vs. VLNC was determined by validated forced choice procedure, with those NIC chosen more than VLNC indicating greater reinforcement due to greater nicotine per se. Secondarily, less preference for lower NIC (vs. VLNC), relative to choice for the highest NIC, 18.7 mg/g (vs. VLNC), indexed reduced reinforcement.ResultsOverall, NIC choices increased as their nicotine increased, as anticipated. Relative to the 0.4 mg/g VLNC, choice was greater for NIC ≥ 5.3 mg/g but not ≤ 2.3 mg/g. Correspondingly, relative to choice for 18.7 mg/g, choice was less for NIC ≤ 2.3 mg/g but not ≥ 5.3 mg/g.ConclusionsAlthough replication with larger samples and longer access is needed, results indicate that nicotine reduction to ≤ 2.3 mg/g in cigarettes would attenuate reinforcement. This choice procedure may efficiently inform future clinical trials to assess relative reinforcing effects of smoking reduced nicotine cigarettes.