Heavy smokers who cut back still take in more toxins than light smokers

December 13, 2006

University of Minnesota tobacco researchers have found that heavy smokers who reduce their number of daily cigarettes still take in two to three times more total toxins per cigarette than light smokers.

The study, published in the December issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, cites compensatory smoking as the chief reason for the increased exposure despite decreased cigarette use.

"We found that the more that heavy smokers reduced their smoking, the more likely they were to increase their intake of toxicants per cigarette, presumably because they took more frequent puffs or inhaled deeper or longer on each cigarette to compensate for fewer cigarettes smoked," said Dorothy Hatsukami, Ph.D., lead researcher on the study. "This indicates that they are trying to maintain a specific level of nicotine in their bodies."

Hatsukami is a professor and researcher with the University of Minnesota Medical School and Cancer Center. She also directs the University's Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center.

"Our results are consistent with other studies that show that people who decrease their smoking by 50 percent or more do not experience a comparable reduction in risk for lung cancer because they tend to smoke their fewer cigarettes more intensely," Hatsukami said. "The best way to lower the risk for tobacco-caused premature death is to stop smoking altogether."

The study participants included a group of 64 heavy smokers who had reduced their smoking to levels similar with a group of 62 light smokers. The heavy smokers had smoked on average 26 cigarettes per day before their cigarette reduction. All of the heavy smokers had reduced their smoking by at least 40 percent and smoked five cigarettes per day within six months of enrolling in their study. The light smokers used on average 5.6 cigarettes per day.

Hatsukami and her colleagues created a mathematical formula to calculate the degree of smoking compensation in the heavy smokers compared with the light smokers. They measured a biological marker, total NNAL, which indicates the amount of exposure to the tobacco-specific lung cancer-causing agent NNK.

Their findings showed that the average level of NNAL in the reduced heavy smokers was more than twice that of the light smokers. This was true even when the two groups smoked about the same number of cigarettes per day. The amount of smoking reduction was shown to be a strong predictor of compensatory smoking, with greater cigarette reduction associated with more compensation.

Based on these findings, Hatsukami said, "Heavy smokers would fare better health-wise by quitting smoking rather than decreasing their cigarette use. Although light smokers have lower levels of disease risk than heavy smokers, a low rate of smoking still means increased risk of disease and death compared to non-smokers and quitters."

A previous study by Hatsukami substantiates that fact. The study focused on smoking reduction using nicotine replacement therapies such as gum or patches. It showed that smokers who reduced their cigarette intake by 73 percent only received a 30 percent reduce in carcinogens because of compensatory smoking. Another study indicated that a reduction of 62 percent in tobacco consumption was associated with only a 27 percent reduction in lung cancer risk.
-end-
This study was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. Others from the University of Minnesota Cancer Center and Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center who collaborated on this study included Chap T. Le, Ying Zhang, Anne Joseph, Marc Mooney, Steven Carmella, and Stephen Hecht.

University of Minnesota

Related Lung Cancer Articles from Brightsurf:

State-level lung cancer screening rates not aligned with lung cancer burden in the US
A new study reports that state-level lung cancer screening rates were not aligned with lung cancer burden.

The lung microbiome may affect lung cancer pathogenesis and prognosis
Enrichment of the lungs with oral commensal microbes was associated with advanced stage disease, worse prognosis, and tumor progression in patients with lung cancer, according to results from a study published in Cancer Discovery, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

New analysis finds lung cancer screening reduces rates of lung cancer-specific death
Low-dose CT screening methods may prevent one death per 250 at-risk adults screened, according to a meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled clinical trials of lung cancer screening.

'Social smokers' face disproportionate risk of death from lung disease and lung cancer
'Social smokers' are more than twice as likely to die of lung disease and more than eight times as likely to die of lung cancer than non-smokers, according to research presented at the European Respiratory Society International Congress.

Lung cancer therapy may improve outcomes of metastatic brain cancer
A medication commonly used to treat non-small cell lung cancer that has spread, or metastasized, may have benefits for patients with metastatic brain cancers, suggests a new review and analysis led by researchers at St.

Cancer mortality continues steady decline, driven by progress against lung cancer
The cancer death rate declined by 29% from 1991 to 2017, including a 2.2% drop from 2016 to 2017, the largest single-year drop in cancer mortality ever reported.

Cancer-sniffing dogs 97% accurate in identifying lung cancer, according to study in JAOA
The next step will be to further fractionate the samples based on chemical and physical properties, presenting them back to the dogs until the specific biomarkers for each cancer are identified.

Lung transplant patients face elevated lung cancer risk
In an American Journal of Transplantation study, lung cancer risk was increased after lung transplantation, especially in the native (non-transplanted) lung of single lung transplant recipients.

Proposed cancer treatment may boost lung cancer stem cells, study warns
Epigenetic therapies -- targeting enzymes that alter what genes are turned on or off in a cell -- are of growing interest in the cancer field as a way of making a cancer less aggressive or less malignant.

Are you at risk for lung cancer?
This question isn't only for people who've smoked a lot.

Read More: Lung Cancer News and Lung Cancer Current Events
Brightsurf.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.