Various experiments have been performed to investigate the chemical, physiological, and biological properties of cigarette smoke. Some marketed tobacco products have been employed for such tobacco research; however, the properties of cigarette smoke vary depending on the product specification (e.g., blend of tobacco leaf and filter ventilation). Such variations lead to inconsistent and misleading results in tobacco research when independent results obtained using different tobacco products are compared. To avoid such difficulties, reference cigarettes (e.g., 1R5F, 2R4F, or 3R4F) are manufactured by the Center for Tobacco Reference Products at the University of Kentucky as an international standard for cigarettes used for research purposes. Reference cigarettes are useful as a standard research cigarette because they are designed to approximate the typical commercially available cigarettes in the US (1). Consequently, reference cigarettes are widely used in a variety of tobacco research as a basis for comparison with other tobacco products (2,3,4), and recently reference cigarettes have come to play a key role as comparators for next generation tobacco and nicotine delivery products (NGPs), such as heat-not-burn type products and e-cigarettes, to investigate their reduced-risk potential (5,6,7,8,9,10,11). Reference cigarettes are also used as internal laboratory controls in ongoing analytical work and as a common factor during the comparison and interpretation of results from different laboratories in a variety of tobacco research (1).
Over the last decade, researchers have adopted the 3R4F cigarette as a reference cigarette; however, the stock of 3R4F is being depleted. Since 2015, a new-generation reference cigarette, the 1R6F, has been produced as a replacement for 3R4F. J
In the present study, we analyzed the chemical and biological characteristics of the mainstream smoke of 3R4F and 1R6F under International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard and intense smoking regimens (13, 14). Forty-five priority chemicals referred to in the Tobacco Reporting Regulations published by Health Canada were analyzed, and the standard
As described above, reference cigarettes are also currently used as comparators for NGPs to investigate their reduced-risk potential. In these comparative studies, oxidative stress assays are often employed because the oxidative stress response is a key toxicological pathway induced by exposure to conventional cigarette smoke (16, 17). Thus, in the present study, we carried out additional toxicological assessments to examine the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F in the oxidative stress assay. We assessed the level of oxidative stress induced by each reference cigarette using the reduced glutathione (GSH) / oxidized glutathione (GSSG) assay and antioxidant response element (ARE)-luciferase reporter assay (18) with the human bronchial epithelial cell line, BEAS-2B.
Here we show the inter-laboratory reproducibility of 1R6F compared with 3R4F in chemical analysis and standard toxicological assessments and provide an insight into the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F as a comparator for NGPs.
Kentucky reference cigarettes, 3R4F and 1R6F, were purchased from the Kentucky Tobacco Research and Development Center (Lexington, KY, USA). The specifications of these reference cigarettes are shown in Table 1 (12, 19, 20). The cigarettes were stored at 4 °C and conditioned for at least 48 h at 22 ± 1 °C and 60 ± 3% relative humidity before use, according to ISO 3402 (21).
Parameter | 3R4F | 1R6F |
---|---|---|
Cigarette length (mm) | 84 | 83 |
Tobacco rod length (mm) | 57 | 56 |
Filter length (mm) | 27 | 27 |
Tobacco rod circumference (mm) | 24.8 | 24.6 |
Cigarette weight (g) | 1.1 | 0.89 |
Filter ventilation (%) | 29 | 33 |
Paper permeability (CU) | 24 | 45 |
Resistance to draw (mm H2O) | 128 | 107 |
Flue cured (%) | 35 | 34 |
Burley (%) | 22 | 24 |
Maryland (%) | 1.4 | – |
Oriental (%) | 12 | 12 |
Reconstituted (%) | 29.6 | 20 |
Expanded flue cured (%) | – | 7 |
Expanded Burley (%) | – | 3 |
Glycerol (%) | 2.7 | 1.7 |
Propylene glycol (%) | – | 1 |
Isosweet (%) | 6.4 | 6.3 |
Puff count | 9.0 | 7.5 |
TPM (mg/cig) | 11 | 10 |
“Tar” (mg/cig) | 9.4 | 8.6 |
Nicotine (mg/cig) | 0.73 | 0.72 |
Carbon monoxide (mg/cig) | 12.0 | 10.1 |
Puff count | a | 8.7 |
TPM (mg/cig) | a | 46.8 |
“Tar” (mg/cig) | a | 29.1 |
Nicotine (mg/cig) | a | 1.90 |
Carbon monoxide (mg/cig) | a | 28.0 |
TPM: total particulate matter, cig: cigarette,
CU: CORESTA unit (22)
no published data
Mainstream cigarette smoke from 3R4F and 1R6F was generated according to the ISO standard (13) and ISO intense smoking regimens (14). The total particulate matter (TPM) was calculated from the difference in the weight of the glass-fiber filter used for smoke collection before and after smoking (23). The nicotine yield was determined by gas chromatography using an Agilent 7890A GC system (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) with flame ionization detection from a 2-propanol extract of the TPM filter (24). Carbon monoxide was determined by nondispersive infrared photometry using a COA205 (CERULEAN, Milton Keynes, UK) (25). The methods for the other chemical analyses are summarized in Table 2. The analysis of each constituent was repeated five times, and the comparison between 1R6F and 3R4F was performed on a per-cigarette basis.
Analysis methods used for specific analytes in mainstream cigarette smoke.
Analytes | Fraction (smoking machine) | Trap | Chromatograph, detection | Notes | Ref. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NNK, NNN, NAB, NAT | TPM (RM20Ha) | A glass-fiber filter | HPLC; Agilent 1290 infinity system c, Triple Quad 4500 MS system d | The extract with ammonium acetate solution was syringe filtered. | 26 |
Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, crotonaldehyde, acetone, propionaldehyde, |
WS (SM450RHb) | Two impingers with 2, 4-dinitrophenyl-hydrazine solution | HPLC; Agilent 1290 Infinity system c, Diode array detection | Deribatized solution was stabilized with Tris base. | 27 |
1,3-Butadiene, benzene, isoprene, acrylonitrile, toluene | GVP (SM450RHb) | Two cryogenic impingers with methanol | GC/MS; 5975C GC/MSD c, Electron impact ionization | – | 28 |
HCN | GVP TPM (SM450RHb) | A glass-fiber filter and an impinger with NaOH solution | Continuous flow analyzer; STAT-2000 e | The extract with NaOH was syringe filtered. | 29 |
B[ |
TPM (SM450RHb) | A glass-fiber filter | HPLC; HPLC-1100 system c, Fluorescence detection | The extract with cyclohexane was syringe filtered and purified using SPE by passing through a silica cartridge and an NH2 cartridge, followed by the elution with hexane. | 30 |
Hydroquinone, resorcinol, catechol, phenol, |
TPM (SM450RHb) | A glass-fiber filter | HPLC; Agilent 1290 Infinity system c, Fluorescence detection | The extract with acetic acid was syringe filtered. | 31 |
Ammonia | GVPTPM (RM20Ha) | A glass-fiber filter and two impingers with sulfuric acid | Cation exchange chromatograph; ICS-3000 f, Suppressed ion conductivity detection | The extract with ultrapure water was syringe filtered. | 32 |
NO, NOx | GVP (RM20Ha) | – | Online gas phase chemiluminescence analyzer; CLD822Mh g | – | 33 |
Pyridine, quinoline, styrene | GVP TPM (RM20Ha) | A glass-fiber filter and two cyrogenic impingers with methanol | GC/MS; 5975C GC/MSD c, Electron impact ionization | TPM was extracted with the impinger solution. | 34 |
1-Aminonaphthalene, 2-aminonaphthalene, 3-aminobiphenyl, 4-aminobiphenyl | TPM (RM20Ha) | A glass-fiber filter | GC/MS; 5975C GC/MSD c, Chemical ionization source (selected ion monitoring) | The extract with hydrochloric acid solution was syringe filtered and loaded to the conditioned SPE-I with ammonia solution and methanol, and then loaded to the SPE-II with toluene. The derivatized solution with heptafluorobutyric acid anhydride solution was loaded to SPE-III. | 35 |
Mercury | GVP (RM20Ha) | An inpinger with acidified potassium permanganate | AAS; FIMS 400 h, cold vapor atomic absorption spectrometry | Hydrogen peroxide and ultrapure water were added for microwave digestion. Hydroxlyamine hydrochloride was added. Mercury ions in the sample were reduced by stannous chloride. | 36 |
Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, nickel, lead, selenium, beryllium, cobalt | TPM (RM20Ha) | Glass electrostatic precipitate tube | ICP/MS; Agilent 7500cxc | Collected metals with methanol were mixed with Nitric acid solution, TritonX-100 solution by ultrosonication. | – |
TPM: total particulate matter, GVP: gas vapor phase, WS: whole smoke.
TSNA: tobacco specific
Borgwaldt, Hamburg, Germany;
CERULEAN, Milton Keynes, UK;
Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA;
SCIEX, Framingham, MA, USA;
BL TEC, Osaka, Japan;
Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA;
ECOPHYSICS, Dürnten, Switzerland;
PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA.
Mainstream cigarette smoke was generated using the automatic smoking machine, RM20H (Borgwaldt, Hamburg, Germany), under ISO standard and intense smoking regimens (13, 14). The TPM was trapped on 44 mm-diameter glass-fiber filter pads and extracted with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) (Fujifilm Wako Pure Chemical, Osaka, Japan) to a final concentration of 10 mg/mL for the Ames assay and NRU assay and 40 mg/mL for the MN assay and additional toxicological assays with BEAS-2B. The gas-vapor phase (GVP) passing through the filter was collected by bubbling into ice-cold phosphate buffered saline (PBS) in an impinger and subjected to the NRU assay. The concentration of the GVP was adjusted to be a 6 mg TPM weight equivalent / mL (mg TPM equiv. / mL) solution based on the yield of the TPM concurrently collected on the glass-fiber filter pad. The GVP was subjected to the assay within 1 h after the completion of smoking. Three independent processes of the sample preparation were carried out for each
The Ames assay was performed according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guideline 471 (37).
The
Logistic regression analysis was performed with data up to the dose at which the relative population doubling (38) was greater than 40%. The slope parameter of the logistic function was defined as the measure for genotoxic activity.
The NRU assay was performed using the Chinese hamster ovary cell line (CHO-K1) in general accordance with Health Canada Official Method T-502 (39). Ten doses up to 200 μg/mL (TPM) and 200 μg TPM equiv./mL (GVP) were tested for each sample. DMSO and PBS were used as the solvent controls for the TPM and GVP samples, respectively.
The cells were maintained with Ham's F-12 nutrient mixture medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) in a 5% CO2 incubator at 37 °C. The cell suspension (5 × 104 cells/mL) was pre-incubated for 24 h in 96-well plates (Sumitomo Bakelite, Tokyo, Japan). The cells were exposed to each smoking fraction for 24 h. After removal of the supernatant including the TPM or GVP, the cells were further incubated in serum-free medium containing 18 μg/mL neutral red dye for 3 h. The cells were then fixed with 1% formalin solution for 2 min. After removal of the fixative, the neutral red dye taken up by the viable cells was extracted by adding 50% ethanol containing 1% acetic acid solution, and the absorbance at 540 nm was measured using a microplate reader (CORONA ELECTRIC, Ibaraki, Japan). The absorbance value at each dose level was normalized to the solvent control.
Non-linear regression analysis for the relationship between the normalized absorbance and concentration was performed based on the least squares method using a logistic function. The half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values were calculated by inverse estimation of the effective concentration at which the normalized absorbance was reduced by 50% as the indicator of toxicity.
The methods for the cell viability assay, GSH/GSSH assay, and ARE-luciferase reporter assay have been described in detail previously (5). The experiments were conducted three times independently.
Immortalized normal human bronchial epithelial BEAS-2B cells, obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA, USA), were cultured in Dulbecco's MEM (Thermo Fisher Scientific) supplemented with 10% FBS (MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, CA, USA) in a 5% CO2 incubator at 37 °C. The cells were seeded at 5 × 103 cells/well in a 96-well plate (Corning, NY, USA) followed by pre-incubation for 24 h. Then, the cells were exposed to the medium containing each TPM up to 400 μg/mL (1% DMSO) in a 5% CO2 incubator at 37 °C.
Cell viability was determined using a CellTiter-Fluor cell viability assay kit (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Briefly, cells were exposed to each concentration of TPM in a 96-well plate (Corning) for 24 h, and the constitutive protease activity within living cells as cell viability was measured with an Infinite 200 PRO microplate reader (Tecan, Männedorf, Switzerland). Tween (3%) was used as a positive control to induce complete cell death. The value of the positive control was deducted from the original values at each dose level, then obtained values were normalized to the concurrent solvent control. The IC50 values were calculated as for the NRU assay.
The GSH/GSSG ratio was determined using a GSH/GSSG-Glo assay kit (Promega) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, after exposure to each TPM for 2 h, cells were lysed with GSH and GSSG lysis buffer to measure total glutathione and GSSG, respectively. Subsequently, enzyme and substrate were added, and then luciferase activity was measured using an Infinite 200 PRO microplate reader. Then, the GSH/GSSG ratio was calculated by interpolation of glutathione concentrations from standard curves. The values at each dose level were normalized to the solvent control. The IC50 values were calculated as for the NRU assay.
BEAS-2B cells were transfected with the luciferase gene as the reporter under the transcriptional regulation of ARE (18). The ARE-luciferase reporter assay was carried out using a Luciferase Assay System (Promega) following the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, cells were lysed after exposure to each TPM for 24 h in a 96-well plate (Corning). Then, the substrate was added, and luciferase activity was measured using an Infinite 200 PRO micro-plate reader to determine the ARE gene activity. The values at each dose level were normalized to the solvent control. The ARE gene activity for each TPM was evaluated based on the slope values calculated by linear regression analysis over the dose range where cell viability was higher than 50%.
All the statistical evaluations were conducted using JMP version 10.0.2 (SAS Institute Japan, Tokyo, Japan). The comparison of 1R6F and 3R4F was performed based on the critical difference (CD) calculated using 3R4F data variations. The CD value is equivalent to discriminatory power, which is the smallest statistically significant difference that can be detected with an assay based on the variability of data with the significance level of α = 0.05 (40).
The range of CD values of 3R4F has been previously described (12);
We calculated the CD values in the chemical analysis using the 3R4F data sets in the current and J
The amount of TPM, nicotine, carbon monoxide, and 45 other chemical constituents in the mainstream cigarette smoke of 1R6F and 3R4F was analyzed under ISO standard and intense smoking regimens (Supplementary Table A1). To compare the mainstream smoke chemistry of 1R6F and 3R4F, the relative differences in the yields of each constituent in 1R6F compared with 3R4F were calculated (circles in Figures 1 and 2), then these differences were compared with the CD range calculated using the data from 3R4F (boxes in Figures 1 and 2). The relative differences for most of the chemicals were out of the CD range under both smoking regimens (filled circles in Figures 1 and 2). Thus, these constituents in the mainstream cigarette smoke of 1R6F were determined to be significantly different from those of 3R4F in the current study.
To investigate the inter-laboratory reproducibility, the results obtained in the current study (circles in Figures 1 and 2) were compared with those from the J
Under the ISO intense smoking regimen, the yields of TSNAs, acetaldehyde, acetone, MEK,
Similar to the ISO standard smoking regimen, some constituents showed significant differences only in one of the studies but there was a consistent trend, except for acrolein and pyridine. The other constituents not mentioned above were similar in both the studies regardless of the smoking regimen.
The mutagenicity of each TPM was investigated using TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537, and TA102, with or without S9 metabolic activation. In the current study, the 1R6F and 3R4F TPM elicited dose-dependent increases in the number of revertants in TA98 with S9, TA100 with and without S9, and TA1537 with S9, regardless of the smok ing regimen (Supplementary Table A2). Consequently, the slope values were calculated as the mutagenic activities in these conditions. In the remaining strains and conditions, both the 1R6F and 3R4F TPM showed no reproducible increases in the number of revertants.
To examine the interchangeability of 1R6F and 3R4F regarding the mutagenicity, the relative differences in the slope values between 1R6F and 3R4F in the current study were analyzed (circles in Figure 3A and B for the ISO standard and intense smoking regimens, respectively). Then, these values were compared with the CD range calculated based on historical variations in 3R4F (boxes in Figure 3A and B). The results indicated that the relative differences were within the range of the CD in TA98 with S9, TA100 with and without S9, and TA1537 with S9, regardless of the smoking regimen (“empty” circles in Figure 3A and B).
The inter-laboratory reproducibility was then examined by comparing the results obtained in the current study (circles in Figure 3A and B) and J
The
To compare the genotoxicity between 1R6F and 3R4F in the current study, the relative differences in the slope parameter of the logistic function of 1R6F compared with 3R4F were calculated (circles in Figure 4A and B for the ISO standard and intense smoking regimens, respectively), then compared with the CD range calculated based on historical variations in 3R4F (boxes in Figure 4A and B).
The relative differences were within the range of the CD in “Short” with S9, and “Long” without S9 under the ISO standard smoking regimen (“empty” circles in Figure 4A) and in all conditions under the ISO intense smoking regimen (“empty” circles in Figure 4B), while the relative difference was out of the range of the CD in “Short” without S9 under the ISO standard smoking regimen (“filled” circles in Figure 4A). Inter-laboratory reproducibility was then analyzed by a comparison of the results obtained in the current study (circles in Figure 4A and B) and J
Both the TPM and GVP collected from 3R4F and 1R6F elicited dose-dependent decreases in the absorbance, regardless of the smoking regimen. The IC50 values for the reference cigarettes are shown in Supplementary Table A4. For a comparison of the cytotoxicity of 1R6F and 3R4F in the current study, the relative differences in the IC50 values of 1R6F compared with 3R4F were calculated (circles in Figure 5A and B for the ISO standard and intense smoking regimens, respectively), then compared with the CD range calculated based on historical variations in 3R4F (boxes in Figure 5A and B).
The relative difference was out of the CD range for the TPM under the ISO intense smoking regimen (filled circles in Figure 5B), while the relative differences in the remaining conditions were within the range of the CDs (empty circles in Figure 5A and B).
We further analyzed the inter-laboratory reproducibility by comparing the results obtained in the current study (circles in Figure 5A and B) and J
For the TPM under the ISO intense smoking regimen, the trend in the relative difference in the IC50 values was different from the J
Under the remaining conditions, the results in the current and J
We carried out some additional
Smoking regimen | 1R6F IC50 (μg/mL) | 3R4F IC50 (μg/mL) | Relative difference (1R6F/3R4F) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | ||
Standard | 75.0 | 2.44 | 73.3 | 2.19 | 1.02 | 0.0281 | 0.62 |
Intense | 79.5 | 3.98 | 82.2 | 4.06 | 0.975 | 0.0836 | 0.67 |
The GSH/GSSG ratio and ARE gene activity were used as indicators of oxidative stress, and changes in these parameters following exposure to the TPM of 3R4F or 1R6F were evaluated under the ISO standard and intense smoking regimens. All the TPM exposures induced reduction of the GSH/GSSG ratio in a dose-dependent manner (Figure 7). A significant difference in the IC50 values between 1R6F and 3R4F was not observed, regardless of the smoking regimen (Table 4).
Smoking regimen | 1R6F IC50 (μg/mL) | 3R4F IC50 (μg/mL) | Relative difference (1R6F/3R4F) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | ||
Standard | 35.0 | 7.74 | 40.0 | 9.36 | 0.877 | 0.0128 | 0.70 |
Intense | 66.5 | 8.25 | 73.4 | 18.9 | 0.970 | 0.139 | 0.76 |
Exposure to the TPM resulted in significant increases in ARE gene activity regardless of the condition (Figure 8). The decline in luciferase activity observed at a high dose level was possibly because of cytotoxicity. Although 1R6F tended to show higher activity than 3R4F in the ARE-luciferase reporter assay, no significant difference was observed between the slope activities of 3R4F and 1R6F under both smoking regimens, as calculated using Student's
Smoking regimen | 1R6F slope value | 3R4F slope value | Relative difference (1R6F/3R4F) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | Mean | S.E. | ||
Standard | 0.394 | 0.0441 | 0.305 | 0.0456 | 1.32 | 0.133 | 0.23 |
Intense | 0.377 | 0.0682 | 0.266 | 0.0376 | 1.46 | 0.292 | 0.23 |
Reference cigarettes have been widely used for research purposes related to tobacco as the standard monitor cigarette. Recently, 1R6F reference cigarettes have been produced as a replacement for 3R4F because of the depletion of 3R4F stock. Thus, verification that 1R6F can perform the same functions as 3R4F in various tobacco research is required. A comparison study of the chemical and biological characteristics of 1R6F and 3R4F has been reported by J
Some significant differences in the results of the chemical analyses between 1R6F and 3R4F were observed in the current study (Figure 1A and B), as expected, because the 1R6F reference cigarette is produced with a different blend design from 3R4F. These results were mostly consistent with the J
The results of the Ames assay under the conditions with S9 in the current study were also consistent with the J
In the current study, the MN induction by 1R6F was significantly higher compared with 3R4F in “Short” without S9 under the ISO standard smoking regimen (Figure 4A). The J
A significant difference in the IC50 values was observed between the 1R6F and 3R4F TPM under the ISO standard smoking regimen in the NRU assay only in the current study (Figure 5B).
However, the relative difference between the 1R6F and 3R4F TPM under the ISO standard smoking regimen was within ± 10%, and a significant difference was not observed in the ISO intense smoking regimen. In addition, the difference between the lower limit of the CD (−9.4%) and relative difference compared with 1R6F (−9.9%) was less than 0.5%. Accordingly, the difference in the NRU assay was considered to be not consequential. Thus, inter-laboratory reproducibility in the results of the NRU assay was almost achieved. The results for the GVP in the NRU assay were comparable between the current and J
We also investigated the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F in oxidative stress assays because such assays are often employed for the comparative assessment of NGPs. No significant differences were observed between 1R6F and 3R4F in dose-related responses in the GSH/GSSG assay and ARE-luciferase reporter assay.
These results were in accordance with a previous report that demonstrated that the yields of free radicals, which are known to cause the oxidative stress, were comparable between 1R6F and 3R4F (47). However, the interchangeability of 1R6F should be studied further in various other assays and investigations, including
In addition, the inter-laboratory reproducibility of the oxidative stress assays was not assessed in this study and requires further investigation.
Overall, our results suggested that the chemical analysis and standard toxicological assays of 1R6F, as compared with 3R4F, could be sufficiently reproducible in inter-laboratory studies for the use of 1R6F as a reference cigarette. Both reference cigarettes could be used interchangeable, although some slight but reproducible differences were observed in the chemical analysis and genotoxicity assay. In addition, 1R6F could replace 3R4F and most likely should be useful for general tobacco research, including the study of NGPs.