MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W974199181 · doi:10.2478/cttr-2013-0912

Mainstream Smoke Chemistry and <i>in Vitro</i> and <i>In Vivo</i> Toxicity of the Reference Cigarettes 3R4F and 2R4F

2012· article· en· W974199181 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. Roemer, Heike Schramke, H. Weiler, Ansgar Buettner, Sandra Kausche, Susanne Weber, An Berges, Markus Stueber, Marcus O. Muench, Edgar Trelles-Sticken, J Pype, K Kohlgrueber, H Voelkel, Sandra Wittke

Bibliographic record

VenueBeiträge zur Tabakforschung international · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSidestream smoketar (computing)SmokeChemistryToxicityIn vivoPharmacologyNicotineToxicologyIn vitroBiochemistryMedicineBiologyBiotechnologyOrganic chemistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new reference cigarette, the 3R4F, has been developed to replace the depleting supply of the 2R4F cigarette. The present study was designed to compare mainstream smoke chemistry and toxicity of the two reference cigarettes under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) machine smoking conditions, and to further compare mainstream smoke chemistry and toxicological activity of the 3R4F cigarette by two different smoking regimens, i.e., the machine smoking conditions specified by ISO and the Health Canada intensive (HCI) smoking conditions. The in vitro cytotoxicity and mutagenicity was determined in the neutral red uptake assay, the Salmonella reverse mutation assay, and the mouse lymphoma thymidine kinase assay. Additionally, a 90-day nose-only inhalation study in rats was conducted to assess the in vivo toxicity. The comparison of smoke chemistry between the two reference cigarettes found practically the same yields of total particulate matter (TPM), ‘tar’, nicotine, carbon monoxide, and most other smoke constituents. For both cigarettes, the in vitro cytotoxicity, mutagenicity, and in vivo toxicity showed the expected smoke-related effects compared to controls without smoke exposure. There were no meaningful differences between the 2R4F and 3R4F regarding these toxicological endpoints. The assessments for the 3R4F cigarette by smoking regimen found as a trivial effect, due to the higher amount of smoke generated per cigarette under HCI conditions, an increased yield of toxicant and higher toxicological activity per cigarette. However, per mg TPM, ‘tar’, or nicotine, the amounts of toxicants and the in vitro toxicity were generally lower under HCI conditions, but the in vivo activity was not different between the two machine smoking conditions. Overall, as the main result, the present study suggests equivalent smoke chemistry and in vitro and in vivo toxicity for the 2R4F and 3R4F reference cigarettes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations119
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBeiträge zur Tabakforschung internationalSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207