Biological responses in rats exposed to mainstream smoke from a heated cigarette compared to a conventional reference cigarette
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The heated cigarette (HC) generates mainstream smoke by vaporizing the components of the tobacco rod using a carbon heat source at the cigarette tip. Mainstream smoke of HC contains markedly less chemical constituents compared to combusted cigarettes. Mainstream smoke from HC was generated under Health Canada Intense regimen and its biological effects were compared to those of Reference (3R4F) cigarettes, using nose-only 5-week and 13-week inhalation studies. In the 13-week study, SD rats were necropsied following exposure to mainstream smoke from each cigarette at 200, 600 or 1000 µg wet total particulate matter/L for 1 h/day, 7 days/week or following a 13-week recovery period. Histopathological changes in the respiratory tract were significantly lesser in HC groups; e.g. respiratory epithelial hyperplasia in the nasal cavity and accumulation of pigmented macrophages in alveoli. After a 13-week recovery, the lesions were completely or partially regressed, except for accumulation of pigmented macrophages in alveoli, in both HC and 3R4F groups. In the 5-week study, SD rats were necropsied following exposure to mainstream smoke of either cigarette at 600 or 1000 µg/L for 1 h, two times/day (with 30 min interval), 7 days/week or following a 4-week recovery period. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) analysis of neutrophil percentages and enzyme levels like γ-GT, ALP and LDH indicated that pulmonary inflammation was significantly less in HC groups compared to 3R4F groups. In conclusion, HC demonstrated significantly lower biological effects compared to 3R4F, based on the BALF parameters and histopathology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".