MétaCan
← all works

Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 2: Chemical composition, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, and physical properties of the aerosol

2016· article· en· 372 citations· W2529623586 on OpenAlex· 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.10.001

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

About CanadaIts subject is Canada, wherever its authors sit.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread
0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

The chemical composition, in vitro genotoxicity, and cytotoxicity of the mainstream aerosol from the Tobacco Heating System 2.2 (THS2.2) were compared with those of the mainstream smoke from the 3R4F reference cigarette. In contrast to the 3R4F, the tobacco plug in the THS2.2 is not burnt. The low operating temperature of THS2.2 caused distinct shifts in the aerosol composition compared with 3R4F. This resulted in a reduction of more than 90% for the majority of the analyzed harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs), while the mass median aerodynamic diameter of the aerosol remained similar. A reduction of about 90% was also observed when comparing the cytotoxicity determined by the neutral red uptake assay and the mutagenic potency in the mouse lymphoma assay. The THS2.2 aerosol was not mutagenic in the Ames assay. The chemical composition of the THS2.2 aerosol was also evaluated under extreme climatic and puffing conditions. When generating the THS2.2 aerosol under "desert" or "tropical" conditions, the generation of HPHCs was not significantly modified. When using puffing regimens that were more intense than the standard Health Canada Intense (HCI) machine-smoking conditions, the HPHC yields remained lower than when smoking the 3R4F reference cigarette with the HCI regimen.

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.

The record

Venue
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Topic
Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Field
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Canadian institutions
Funders
Keywords
AerosolGenotoxicityChemistrySidestream smokeEnvironmental chemistryToxicologyFood scienceSmokeToxicityBiologyOrganic chemistry
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes