Effect of Smoking Conditions and Methods of Collection on the Mutagenicity and Cytotoxicity of Cigarette Mainstream Smoke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a history for the use of in vitro bioassays to assess the toxicological properties of mainstream cigarette smoke (MSS). The results described in the literature were, for the most part, obtained with MSS collected under Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or International Organization for Standardization (ISO) conditions. However, numerous studies have shown that smokers smoke their cigarettes more intensely (e.g., they take larger puffs and/or more frequent puffs and/or partially occlude filter ventilation) than they are smoked on smoking machines operated under FTC (or ISO) conditions. It has also been reported that MSS composition changes with changes in smoking conditions. Furthermore, some governmental agencies have adopted regulations that specify more intensive protocols (i.e., Health Canada Intensive, HCI) for the collection of MSS for in vitro toxicological assays. Consequently, the performance of the Ames assay (TA98+S9, TA100+S9) and neutral red uptake assay under ISO and HCI protocols was studied with two blended (KR1R4F/KR2R4F, KR1R5F) and one flue-cured (CIM-7) reference cigarettes. The main outcome was when results were reported on a per milligram TPM (that portion of the mainstream smoke which is trapped in the smoke trap, expressed as milligrams per cigarette) basis generated under ISO conditions was more mutagenic and more cytotoxic than was TPM generated under HCI conditions. However, the decrease in biological activity could not be explained only by the increased in the water content of the TPM on going from ISO to HCI smoking conditions, and the results may be influenced by differences in smoke chemistry as a result of differing smoke collection systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".