DNA methylation differentiates smoking from vaping and non-combustible tobacco use

References

• Walley SC, Wilson KM, Winickoff JP, et al. A public health crisis: electronic cigarettes, vape, and JUUL. Pediatrics. 2019;143(6):e20182741.
   Google Scholar
• Miech R, Johnston L, O’Malley PM, et al. Adolescent vaping and nicotine use in 2017–2018—US national estimates. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:192–193.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer JB, McQuown SC, Leslie FM. The dynamic effects of nicotine on the developing brain. Pharmacol Ther. 2009;122:125–139.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee K, Alzghoul B, Innabi A, et al. Is vaping a gateway to smoking: a review of the longitudinal studies. Int J Adolesc Med Health. 2016;30(3):20160033.
   Google Scholar
• Chaumont M, van de Borne, P., Bernard, A., et al. Fourth generation e-cigarette vaping induces transient lung inflammation and gas exchange disturbances: results from two randomized clinical trials. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2019;316(5):L705–L719
   Google Scholar
• Blount BC, Karwowski MP, Shields PG., et al. Vitamin E acetate in bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid associated with EVALI. N Engl J Med. 2019;382(8):697–705
   Google Scholar
• Traboulsi H, Cherian M, Abou Rjeili M, et al. Inhalation toxicology of vaping products and implications for pulmonary health. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(10):3495
   Google Scholar
• US. Department of health human services. The health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease …, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Creamer MR, Wang TW, Babb S, et al. Tobacco product use and cessation indicators among adults—United States, 2018. Morbidity Mortality Weekly Rep. 2019;68(45):1013
   Google Scholar
• Florescu A, Ferrence R, Einarson T, et al. Methods for quantification of exposure to cigarette smoking and environmental tobacco smoke: focus on developmental toxicology. Ther Drug Monit. 2009;31(1):14–30
   Google Scholar
• Jacob P, Hatsukami D, Severson H, et al. Anabasine and anatabine as biomarkers for tobacco use during nicotine replacement therapy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11:1668–1673
   Google Scholar
• Schick SF, Blount BC, Jacob 3rd P, et al. Biomarkers of exposure to new and emerging tobacco delivery products. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2017;313(3):L425–L452
   Google Scholar
• Andersen AM, Philibert RA, Gibbons FX, et al. Accuracy and utility of an epigenetic biomarker for smoking in populations with varying rates of false self‐report. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2017;174(6):641–650.
   Google Scholar
• Gao X, Jia M, Zhang Y, et al. DNA methylation changes of whole blood cells in response to active smoking exposure in adults: a systematic review of DNA methylation studies. Clin Epigenetics. 2015;7(1):113.
   Google Scholar
• Monick MM, Beach SR, Plume J, et al. Coordinated changes in AHRR methylation in lymphoblasts and pulmonary macrophages from smokers. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2012;159B(2):141–151
   Google Scholar
• Zeilinger S, Kühnel B, Klopp N, et al. Tobacco smoking leads to extensive genome-wide changes in DNA methylation. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(5):e63812
   Google Scholar
• Esser C. Biology and function of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor: report of an international and interdisciplinary conference. Arch Toxicol. 2012;86:1323–1329.
   Google Scholar
• Benowitz NL, Swan GE, Jacob P III, et al. CYP2A6 genotype and the metabolism and disposition kinetics of nicotine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006;80(5):457–467.
   Google Scholar
• Wahlberg I, Ringberger T. Smokeless tobacco. In: D. Layten Davis, Mark T. Nielsen (eds.). Tobacco production, chemistry and technology. Blackwell Science; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Besingi W, Johansson Å. Smoke related DNA methylation changes in the etiology of human disease. Hum Mol Genet. 2013;23(9):2290–2297.
   Google Scholar
• Philibert R, Hollenbeck N, Andersen E, et al. A quantitative epigenetic approach for the assessment of cigarette consumption. Front Psychol. 2015;6:656
   Google Scholar
• Philibert R, Dogan M, Noel A, et al. Dose response and prediction characteristics of a methylation sensitive digital PCR assay for cigarette consumption in adults. Front Genet. 2018;9. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00137
   Google Scholar
• Dawes K, Andersen A, Vercande K, et al. Saliva DNA methylation detects nascent smoking in adolescents. J Child Adol Psychopharm. 2019;29(7):535–544
   Google Scholar
• Philibert R, Dogan M, Beach SRH, et al. AHRR methylation predicts smoking status and smoking intensity in both saliva and blood DNA. Am J Genet. 2019;183(1):51–60.
   Google Scholar
• Dawes K, Andersen A, Papworth E, et al. Refinement of cg05575921 demethylation response in nascent smoking. Clin Epigenetics. 2020;12(1):1–11
   Google Scholar
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton CM, Strader LC, Pratt JG, et al. The phenx toolkit: get the most from your measures. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174(3):253–260
   Google Scholar
• Philibert RA, Penaluna B, White T, et al. A pilot examination of the genome-wide DNA methylation signatures of subjects entering and exiting short-term alcohol dependence treatment programs. Epigenetics. 2014;9(9):1212–1219
   Google Scholar
• Luo X, Carmella SG, Chen M, et al. Urinary Cyanoethyl mercapturic acid, a biomarker of the smoke toxicant acrylonitrile, clearly distinguishes smokers from nonsmokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2020;22(10):1744–1747
   Google Scholar
• Chang CM, Edwards SH, Arab A, et al. Biomarkers of tobacco exposure: summary of an FDA-sponsored public workshop. Cancer Epidemiol Prev Biomarkers. 2017;26(3):291–302
   Google Scholar
• Kramer CY. Extension of multiple range tests to group means with unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics. 1956;12(3):307–310.
   Google Scholar
• De Boor C, De Boor C, Mathématicien E-U, et al. A practical guide to splines. Springer-Verlag New York; New York, 1978
   Google Scholar
• Sakamoto Y, Ishiguro M, Kitagawa G. Akaike information criterion statistics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel. 1986;81(10.5555)
   Google Scholar
• Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148(3):839–843.
   Google Scholar
• DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–845.
   Google Scholar
• Simon TW, Budinsky RA, Rowlands JC. A model for aryl hydrocarbon receptor-activated gene expression shows potency and efficacy changes and predicts squelching due to competition for transcription co-activators. Plos One. 2015;10(6):e0127952.
   Google Scholar
• Hukkanen J, Jacob P, Benowitz NL. Metabolism and disposition kinetics of nicotine. Pharmacol Rev. 2005;57(1):79–115.
   Google Scholar
• Schane RE, Glantz SA, Ling PM. Nondaily and social smoking: an increasingly prevalent pattern. Arch Internal Med. 2009;169(19):1742–1744.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerleau CS, Pomerleau OF, Majchrzak MJ, et al. Relationship between nicotine tolerance questionnaire scores and plasma cotinine. Addict Behav. 1990;15(1):73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Van Overmeire IP, De Smedt T, Dendale P, et al. Nicotine dependence and urinary nicotine, cotinine and hydroxycotinine levels in daily smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18(9):1813–1819
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Schöttker B, Florath I, et al. Smoking-associated DNA methylation biomarkers and their predictive value for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Env Health Perspect. 2015;124(1):67–74
   Google Scholar
• Bojesen SE, Timpson N, Relton C, et al. AHRR (cg05575921) hypomethylation marks smoking behaviour, morbidity and mortality. Thorax. 2017;72(7):646–653.
   Google Scholar
• Ding YS, Trommel JS, Yan XJ, et al. Determination of 14 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in mainstream smoke from domestic cigarettes. Environ Sci Technol. 2005;39(2):471–478.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng T. Chemical evaluation of electronic cigarettes. Tob Control. 2014;23(suppl 2):ii11–ii17.
   Google Scholar
• Schober W, Szendrei K, Matzen W, et al. Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) impairs indoor air quality and increases FeNO levels of e-cigarette consumers. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2014;217(6):628–637
   Google Scholar
• Caliri AW, Caceres A, Tommasi S, et al. Hypomethylation of LINE-1 repeat elements and global loss of DNA hydroxymethylation in vapers and smokers. Epigenetics. 2020;15(8):816–829.
   Google Scholar
• Landmesser A, Scherer M, Pluym N, et al. Biomarkers of exposure specific to E-vapor products based on stable-isotope labeled ingredients. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;21(3):314–322
   Google Scholar
• Cameron JM, Howell DN, White JR, et al. Variable and potentially fatal amounts of nicotine in e-cigarette nicotine solutions. Tob Control. 2014;23(1):77–78
   Google Scholar
• Primack BA, Soneji S, Stoolmiller M, et al. Progression to traditional cigarette smoking after electronic cigarette use among US adolescents and young adults. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(11):1018–1023.
   Google Scholar
• Etter J-F. Gateway effects and electronic cigarettes. Addiction. 2018;113(10):1776–1783.
   Google Scholar
• Conner M, Grogan S, Simms-Ellis R, et al. Do electronic cigarettes increase cigarette smoking in UK adolescents? Evidence from a 12-month prospective study. Tob Control. 2018;27(4):365–372
   Google Scholar