Cargando…

Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations

The Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) defines enhanced reporting obligations applying to 15 priority additives added to cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco. A consortium of 12 international tobacco companies submitted 14 reports that were reviewed by an independent scientific body within the Joint A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bolling, Anette K., Mallock, Nadja, Zervas, Efthimios, Caillé-Garnier, Stéphanie, Mansuy, Thibault, Michel, Cécile, Pennings, Jeroen L. A., Schulz, Thomas, Schwarze, Per E., Solimini, Renata, Tassin, Jean-Pol, Vardavas, Constantine, Merino, Miguel, Pauwels, Charlotte G. G. M., van Nierop, Lotte E., Lambré, Claude, Havermans, Anne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9255286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35860505
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/150361
_version_ 1784740892411691008
author Bolling, Anette K.
Mallock, Nadja
Zervas, Efthimios
Caillé-Garnier, Stéphanie
Mansuy, Thibault
Michel, Cécile
Pennings, Jeroen L. A.
Schulz, Thomas
Schwarze, Per E.
Solimini, Renata
Tassin, Jean-Pol
Vardavas, Constantine
Merino, Miguel
Pauwels, Charlotte G. G. M.
van Nierop, Lotte E.
Lambré, Claude
Havermans, Anne
author_facet Bolling, Anette K.
Mallock, Nadja
Zervas, Efthimios
Caillé-Garnier, Stéphanie
Mansuy, Thibault
Michel, Cécile
Pennings, Jeroen L. A.
Schulz, Thomas
Schwarze, Per E.
Solimini, Renata
Tassin, Jean-Pol
Vardavas, Constantine
Merino, Miguel
Pauwels, Charlotte G. G. M.
van Nierop, Lotte E.
Lambré, Claude
Havermans, Anne
author_sort Bolling, Anette K.
collection PubMed
description The Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) defines enhanced reporting obligations applying to 15 priority additives added to cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco. A consortium of 12 international tobacco companies submitted 14 reports that were reviewed by an independent scientific body within the Joint Action on Tobacco Control (JATC). The reports were evaluated in accordance with the TPD with regard to their comprehensiveness, methodology and conclusions. Here we present their significant identified methodological limitations. The toxicological and chemical evaluation in the industry reports was mainly based on comparative testing, which lacks discriminative power for products with high toxicity and variability, like cigarettes. The literature reviews were biased, the comparative chemical studies did not assess previously identified pyrolysis products, the toxicological evaluation did not include the assessment of inhalation toxicity, and pyrolysis products were not assessed in terms of toxicity, including their genotoxic and carcinogenic potential. For both chemistry and toxicity testing, the statistical approach applied to test the difference between test and additive-free control cigarettes resulted in a high chance of false negatives. The clinical study for inhalation facilitation and nicotine uptake had limitations concerning study design and statistical analysis, while addictiveness was not assessed. Finally, the methodology used to assess characterizing flavors was flawed. In conclusion, there are significant limitations in the methodology applied by the industry. Therefore, the provided reports are of insufficient quality and are clearly not suitable to decide whether a priority additive should be banned in tobacco products according to the TPD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9255286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92552862022-07-19 Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations Bolling, Anette K. Mallock, Nadja Zervas, Efthimios Caillé-Garnier, Stéphanie Mansuy, Thibault Michel, Cécile Pennings, Jeroen L. A. Schulz, Thomas Schwarze, Per E. Solimini, Renata Tassin, Jean-Pol Vardavas, Constantine Merino, Miguel Pauwels, Charlotte G. G. M. van Nierop, Lotte E. Lambré, Claude Havermans, Anne Tob Prev Cessat Methodology Paper The Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) defines enhanced reporting obligations applying to 15 priority additives added to cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco. A consortium of 12 international tobacco companies submitted 14 reports that were reviewed by an independent scientific body within the Joint Action on Tobacco Control (JATC). The reports were evaluated in accordance with the TPD with regard to their comprehensiveness, methodology and conclusions. Here we present their significant identified methodological limitations. The toxicological and chemical evaluation in the industry reports was mainly based on comparative testing, which lacks discriminative power for products with high toxicity and variability, like cigarettes. The literature reviews were biased, the comparative chemical studies did not assess previously identified pyrolysis products, the toxicological evaluation did not include the assessment of inhalation toxicity, and pyrolysis products were not assessed in terms of toxicity, including their genotoxic and carcinogenic potential. For both chemistry and toxicity testing, the statistical approach applied to test the difference between test and additive-free control cigarettes resulted in a high chance of false negatives. The clinical study for inhalation facilitation and nicotine uptake had limitations concerning study design and statistical analysis, while addictiveness was not assessed. Finally, the methodology used to assess characterizing flavors was flawed. In conclusion, there are significant limitations in the methodology applied by the industry. Therefore, the provided reports are of insufficient quality and are clearly not suitable to decide whether a priority additive should be banned in tobacco products according to the TPD. European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2022-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9255286/ /pubmed/35860505 http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/150361 Text en © Bolling A. K. et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Methodology Paper
Bolling, Anette K.
Mallock, Nadja
Zervas, Efthimios
Caillé-Garnier, Stéphanie
Mansuy, Thibault
Michel, Cécile
Pennings, Jeroen L. A.
Schulz, Thomas
Schwarze, Per E.
Solimini, Renata
Tassin, Jean-Pol
Vardavas, Constantine
Merino, Miguel
Pauwels, Charlotte G. G. M.
van Nierop, Lotte E.
Lambré, Claude
Havermans, Anne
Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title_full Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title_fullStr Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title_full_unstemmed Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title_short Review of industry reports on EU priority tobacco additives part B: Methodological limitations
title_sort review of industry reports on eu priority tobacco additives part b: methodological limitations
topic Methodology Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9255286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35860505
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/150361
work_keys_str_mv AT bollinganettek reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT mallocknadja reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT zervasefthimios reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT caillegarnierstephanie reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT mansuythibault reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT michelcecile reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT penningsjeroenla reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT schulzthomas reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT schwarzepere reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT soliminirenata reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT tassinjeanpol reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT vardavasconstantine reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT merinomiguel reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT pauwelscharlotteggm reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT vannieroplottee reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT lambreclaude reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations
AT havermansanne reviewofindustryreportsoneuprioritytobaccoadditivespartbmethodologicallimitations