Mainstream Smoke Levels of Volatile Organic Compounds in 50 U.S. Domestic Cigarette Brands Smoked With the ISO and Canadian Intense Protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A significant portion of the increased risk of cancer and respiratory disease from exposure to cigarette smoke is attributed to volatile organic compounds (VOCs). In this study, 21 VOCs were quantified in mainstream cigarette smoke from 50U.S. domestic brand varieties that included high market share brands and 2 Kentucky research cigarettes (3R4F and 1R5F). METHODS: Mainstream smoke was generated under ISO 3308 and Canadian Intense (CI) smoking protocols with linear smoking machines with a gas sampling bag collection followed by solid phase microextraction/gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (SPME/GC/MS) analysis. RESULTS: For both protocols, mainstream smoke VOC amounts among the different brand varieties were strongly correlated between the majority of the analytes. Overall, Pearson correlation (r) ranged from 0.68 to 0.99 for ISO and 0.36 to 0.95 for CI. However, monoaromatic compounds were found to increase disproportionately compared to unsaturated, nitro, and carbonyl compounds under the CI smoking protocol where filter ventilation is blocked. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, machine generated "vapor phase" amounts (µg/cigarette) are primarily attributed to smoking protocol (e.g., blocking of vent holes, puff volume, and puff duration) and filter ventilation. A possible cause for the disproportionate increase in monoaromatic compounds could be increased pyrolysis under low oxygen conditions associated with the CI protocol. IMPLICATIONS: This is the most comprehensive assessment of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in cigarette smoke to date, encompassing 21 toxic VOCs, 50 different cigarette brand varieties, and 2 different machine smoking protocols (ISO and CI). For most analytes relative proportions remain consistent among U.S. cigarette brand varieties regardless of smoking protocol, however the CI smoking protocol did cause up to a factor of 6 increase in the proportion of monoaromatic compounds. This study serves as a basis to assess VOC exposure as cigarette smoke is a principle source of overall population-level VOC exposure in the United States.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".