Skip to main content
BioMed Research International logoLink to BioMed Research International
. 2019 Dec 19;2019:1386710. doi: 10.1155/2019/1386710

Genotoxic and Carcinogenic Potential of Compounds Associated with Electronic Cigarettes: A Systematic Review

Isaac Armendáriz-Castillo 1, Santiago Guerrero 1, Antonella Vera-Guapi 1, Tiffany Cevallos-Vilatuña 1, Jennyfer M García-Cárdenas 1, Patricia Guevara-Ramírez 1, Andrés López-Cortés 1, Andy Pérez-Villa 1, Verónica Yumiceba 1, Ana K Zambrano 1, Paola E Leone 1, César Paz-y-Miño 1,
PMCID: PMC6948324  PMID: 31950030

Abstract

Background

Many studies, comparing the health associated risks of electronic cigarettes with conventional cigarettes focus mainly on the common chemical compounds found between them.

Aim

Review chemical compounds found exclusively in electronic cigarettes and describe their toxic effects, focusing on electronic-cigarette-only and dual electronic-cigarette and conventional cigarette users.

Data Sources

Literature search was carried out using PubMed.

Study Eligibility Criteria

Articles related exclusively to conventional and electronic cigarettes' chemical composition. Articles which reported to be financed from tobacco or electronic cigarettes industries, not reporting source of funding, not related to the chemical composition of electronic and conventional cigarettes and not relevant to tobacco research were excluded.

Methods and Results

Chemical compounds reported in the selected studies were tabulated using the Chemical Abstracts Service registry number for chemical substances information. A total of 50 chemical compounds were exclusively reported to be present in electronic cigarettes. Crucial health risks identified were: eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritation, with almost 50% of incidence, an increment of 10% in cytotoxic effects, when compared to compounds in common with conventional cigarettes and around 11% of compounds with unknown effects to human health.

Limitations

Articles reporting conflicts of interest.

Conclusions and Implications of Key Findings

Despite being considered as less harmful for human health, compounds found in electronic cigarettes are still a matter of research and their effects on health are yet unknown. The use of these devices is not recommended for first time users and it is considered hazardous for dual users.

1. Introduction

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been commercially available for more than a decade [1]. They basically consist of a battery-dependent atomizer which heats fluids with or without nicotine to water vapor [1]. According to the US government, the number of high school students that use e-cigarettes increased at 80% in the last year, in consequence, the American Lung Association, which uses its own federal grading system (0–20 points), gave an “F” grade (under 12 points) in the Regulation of Tobacco Products category to the FDA [2, 3].

Many studies worldwide have analyzed health risks associated with chemical compounds found in both e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes (CC) [4]. However, 34% of these studies stated conflicts of interest, mainly related to being funded by the manufacturers of e-cigarettes or CC [5]. Despite the increase in electronic-cigarette-only users, no study has analyzed health risks associated with compounds found exclusively in e-cigarettes.

Research on genotoxic and carcinogenic effects related to e-cigarettes has been mainly focused on fluid composition and metal heating [5]. Thus, e-liquids are mainly composed of glycols, nicotine, particles, metals, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), carbonyls, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and phenols [5]. To date, only few nonconflicted studies have associated e-cigarette fluids and vapor composition with the following health risks: genotoxic and cytotoxic to human cells [6, 7], carcinogenic [8], cardiovascular [9] and pulmonary effects [10].

As reported by Pisinger & Døssing, 2014 [1], most studies used CC as reference to study the effects of e-cigarettes on human health. However, health risks, like carcinogenic effects, associated only with e-cigarettes remain unclear and more evidence is needed [2].

Therefore, we performed a comprehensive analysis using select nonconflicted articles to detect chemical compounds only found in e-cigarettes, with the aim to report toxic effects which can lead to different health risks associated with these compounds.

2. Methods

2.1. Literature Search

In order to screen for hazardous CC and e-cigarettes components, we carried out a literature search using PubMed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/) (Supplementary ). Keyword used for searching articles were: “e-cigarettes chemical composition” and “cigarettes chemical composition”. All authors participated in the literature search, papers selected were discussed and all agreed to consider articles including reviews and research papers with exception of articles where the authors reported to have worked or received funding from tobacco industry or e-cigarette manufacturers, additionally, articles which did not specify sources of funding, articles where chemical composition was not clearly detailed or not related to the aim of this review were also excluded. Risk of bias was assessed in the corresponding sections of the main article, in order to identify conflicts of interest or problems with funding. The number of articles selected and excluded can be observed in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1) [11].

Figure 1.

Figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram showing the filtering process of the articles selected to analyze chemical composition of electronic and conventional cigarettes.

To obtain a comprehensive list of CC chemical compounds with known health effects, we merged 82 compounds from [12], 98 compounds from [13], 50 compounds from [14], 30 compounds from [15], 95 compounds from [16], and 94 compounds from [17]. As a result, a list of 150 chemical compounds was generated. Similarly, a list of 84 compounds only found in e-cigarettes was generated using 29 compounds from [18], 32 compounds from [19], 13 compounds from [20], and 61 compounds from [21].

2.2. Nomenclature and Classification

To optimally compare CC and e-cigarettes' chemical compounds, we used the numerical identifier assigned by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) [22]. Compounds without CAS registries were designed as unknown. All compounds were classified according to their carcinogenic potential [23]: group 1 as carcinogenic to humans, group 2A as probably carcinogenic to humans, group 2B as possibly carcinogenic to humans, group 3 as not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans, and group 4 as probably not carcinogenic to humans and “i.e” for compounds with inadequate evidence. Additionally, compounds were classified according to their health associated risk: eyes, skin and respiratory track irritation, mild effects, cardiovascular system problems, carcinogenic, neurotoxic, harmful for animal models, cytotoxic, reproduction or developmental effects, systemic organ irritation and unknown effects for human health.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Identification of e-Cigarettes' Chemical Compounds

To identify chemical compounds exclusively present in e-cigarettes, we first performed a literature review to determine CC and e-cigarettes' chemical compounds having a known impact on human health, articles which reported conflicts of interest or funded by electronic and conventional cigarette manufacturers in the corresponding sections of the main article were excluded. As a result, 234 chemical compounds were found: 150 for CC and 84 for e-cigarettes. When comparing both lists (see Figure 2), we found 34 compounds in common with CC (Supplementary Table 1) and 50 exclusively present in e-cigarettes (Table 1).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Venn diagram showing the number of common and unique chemical compounds between electronic and conventional cigarette.

Table 1.

Chemical compounds exclusively reported in electronic cigarettes liquids.

Name Cas registry number Health effect Classification Reference
(+)-aromadendrene 489-39-4 Cytotoxic/skin irritation i.e [24]
[25]
(Z)-3-Hexen-1-ol 928-96-1 Eye irritation i.e [24]
1-Methyl phenanthrene 832-69-9 Cytotoxic/Eye irritation/Skin irritation Group 3 [24]
[26]
1,3-Butanediol 107-88-0 Low concern based on experimental and modeled data i.e [27]
1,3-Propanediol 504-63-2 Not a significant hazard via inhalation of either the gas phase or a gas/aerosol mixture i.e [27]
[28]
2-Acetylpyrrole 1072-83-9 Skin irritation i.e [24]
2,3-Dimethylpyrazine 5910-89-4 Cytotoxic i.e [24]
2,3-Pentanedione 600-14-6 Skin irritation/ eye irritation/ systemic organ irritation i.e [24]
2,3,5-Trimethylpyrazine 14667-55-1 Cytotoxic i.e [24]
3-Methyl-1-butanol 123-51-3 Cytotoxic/ skin irritation/ eye irritation/ respiratory tract irritation i.e [24]
[29]
Acetic acid 64-19-7 Respiratory tract irritation i.e [26]
Benzyl acetate 140-11-4 Cytotoxic/ eye irritation/ respiratory tract irritation Group 3 [29]
Benzyl alcohol 100-51-6 Cytotoxic i.e [24]
Butyl butyrate 109-21-7 Eye irritation/mild effects/ behavioral Effects i.e [29]
Camphor 76-22-2 Cytotoxic/ neurotoxic/ systemic organ irritation/ mild effects/ behavioral effects i.e [24]
Cinnamaldehyde 104-55-2 Eye irritation/ respiratory tract irritation/ systemic organ irritation i.e [29]
Cinnamyl alcohol 104-54-1 Unknown effects in human health i.e [24]
Coumarin 91-64-5 Behavioral effects/ systemic organ irritation Group 3 [29]
Methyl cyclopentenolone 80-71-7 Unknown effects in human health i.e [24]
Diacetyl 431-03-8 Eye irritation/ skin irritation i.e [29]
Diethylene glycol 111-46-6 Systemic organ irritation/ skin irritation i.e [29]
Ethyl butyrate 105-54-4 Mild effects/ behavioral effects i.e [29]
[27]
Ethyl maltol 4940-11-8 Cytotoxic Unknown [29]
Ethyl vanillin 121-32-4 Unknown effects in human health Unknown [29]
Ethylene glycol 107-21-1 Harmful effects in animal models Unknown [30, 31]
Glycerin 56-81-5 Eye irritation/ skin irritation/ respiratory tract irritation Unknown [1, 32]
Hydroxyacetone 116-09-6 Cytotoxic i.e [33]
i-Butyric acid 79-31-2 Respiratory tract irritation i.e [29]
Isobutyl acetate 110-19-0 Eye irritation/ skin irritation / respiratory tract irritation/ mild effects i.e [29]
Isoamyl acetate 123-92-2 Eye irritation/ skin irritation / respiratory tract irritation Unknown [26]
Isopentyl isovalerate 659-70-1 Harmful effects in animal models i.e [25]
L-Menthyl acetate 89-48-5 Respiratory tract irritation i.e [26]
Limonene 138-86-3 No evidence of carcinogenic activity in rats or human i.e [34]
Maltol 118-71-8 Cytotoxic Unknown [26]
Menthone 89-80-5 Harmful effects in animal models i.e [29]
Methyl anthranilate 134-20-3 Unknown effects in human health i.e [29]
[25]
Methyl cinnamate 103-26-4 Unknown effects in human health i.e [35]
Methyl salicylate 119-36-8 Neurotoxin / cardiovascular effects Unknown [25]
Myosmine 532-12-7 Carcinogenic Unknown [36]
n-Hexanol 111-27-3 Harmful effects in animal models i.e [29]
Nicotyrine 487-19-4 Unknown effects in human health i.e [37]
o-Tolualdehyde 529-20-4 Harmful effects in animal models/ unknown effects in human health Unknown [26]
[37]
p-Cymene 99-87-6 Skin irritation/ mild effects i.e [26]
Propylene Glycol 57-55-6 Respiratory tract irritation Unknown [38]
Safrole 94-59-7 Harmful effects in animal models Group 2B [26]
Thujone (sum of α- and β-diastereomers) 76231-76-0 Harmful effects in animal models i.e [39]
Trans-2-hexen-1-ol 928-95-0 Unknown effects in human health i.e Sigma-aldrich safety data sheet
Vanillin 121-33-5 Cytotoxic Unknown [40]
β–Damascone 23726-93-4 Skin irritation Unknown [41]
γ–Decalactone 706-14-9 Respiratory tract irritation i.e [29]

3.2. Health Associated Risks of Chemical Compounds Found in e-Cigarettes

Figure 3 shows the percentage of health associated risks of chemical compounds present only in e-cigarettes (n = 50) and common compounds with CC (n = 34). From this analysis, three health risks are the most prevailing between both groups: eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritation, with almost 50% of incidence, while cardiovascular, carcinogenic, and neurotoxic effects are also reported in e-cigarettes' exclusive compounds, which are common health effects of CC smoking according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [42]. There are around 11% of compounds effects of which in human health remain unknown, and around 7.7% have been tested in animal models and proved to be harmful. Finally, cytotoxic effects of e-cigarette compounds (13%) are higher than those present in CC (3%).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

(a) Health risks associated to chemical compounds found exclusively in electronic cigarettes. (b) Health risks associated to chemical compounds from conventional cigarettes.

From the 50 unique e-cigarette compounds, the effect of around 11% remains unknown for human health (see Figure 3(a)). Most of these are mainly found in e-liquids used to give flavour to the e-cigarettes; for instance, ethyl vanillin is found in the top three products of e-liquids [43]. Several studies have reported that presence of vanillin and cinnamaldehyde in e-liquids is highly related to toxicity [44].

The majority of chemical effects with unknown health effects are present in e-liquids, normally they are safe when digested, but little is known about inhalation of these products [45]. Most e-liquid manufacturers do not include its composition or chemical concentrations in labels, despite knowing that some of these chemicals are proved to be cytotoxic in cellular and animal models [46].

Using MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol2-yl)−2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide) assay, different authors have reported high levels of cytotoxicity of the main compound of e-liquids [47, 48]. A recent study found that vaping effects cause an inflammatory response in lung cells, similar to the response of conventional tobacco smokers and patients with obstructive pulmonary disease [49].

We found concordance between our findings and other studies. For example, P. Callahan-Lyon (2014) reported that the main components of e-liquids, such as glycol and glycerol, when vaporized, can cause throat, mucous membranes, and eye irritation [50]. In addition, Czoli et al. (2019) found similar results when analyzing health associated risks of e-cigarettes in Canadian populations [51].

Despite being reported as safer than CC, e-cigarette compounds are known to induce toxicological effects in human health that can led to genetic alterations that further initiate cancer progression in animal models [52]. Additionally, well-known carcinogens such as safrole and N´-Nitrosonornicotine have been identified in e-liquids and saliva of e-cigarette users, respectively [53, 54].

3.3. Disadvantages of the Use of e-Cigarettes

Behavioral effects related to nicotine addiction are regularly seen in first time vapers; for example, different studies found traces of nicotine in e-liquids labeled as free-nicotine [55]. This can lead first-time users of e-cigarettes, normally teenagers, to the need of increasing nicotine concentration in e-liquids and progression to CC [56].

Over the past years, the use of e-cigarettes is on the rise, literature confirms that their use is intended as a transitional stage for quitting smoking [57]. However, because e-cigarettes are a technological novelty and have a high publicity behind them, their use has been reported in many first-time users which never smoked, whom when surveyed, do not know about any associated health effect causes by its chemical compounds [57].

A matter of concern of e-cigarette effects occurs on dual users. These users are reported to generate more addiction to nicotine than e-cigarette only users, however, for the last group, the level of nicotine absorbed is higher, because they vape more often than regular smokers [58]. Accordingly, a study on biomarkers of exposure to toxics, such as carbon monoxide (CO), 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HOP), and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), showed that dual-users presented higher values of these biomarkers when compared to e-cigarette only users [59].

4. Conclusions

Despite the fact that e-cigarettes exclusive compounds showed less incidence of health related risks when compared to CCs, it is not enough to conclude that its use is safer. There are many cytotoxic and genotoxic effects still unknown related to different compounds of e-cigarettes, especially the ones included in e-liquids, which can be potentially toxic and carcinogenic to humans. Different studies showed how the use of e-liquids can lead to an increasing nicotine addiction and a possible progression to conventional tobacco in first time e-cigarette users. Furthermore, dual users are a group of high risk, not only because of higher nicotine absorption, but, because the health related effects found in common compounds between e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes will be increased. Finally, due to the lack of experimental evidence regarding health effects associated to e-cigarettes, the use of these devices is not recommended to first time users.

Data Availability

All relevant data are fully available within the manuscript and its supplementary materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors' Contributions

IAC and SG conceived the subject, designed the study and wrote the manuscript. AVG and TCV did literature review. JGC, PGR, PEL, ALC, APV, VY and AKZ tabulated data, designed graphics and made substantial contributions to the structure and design of the manuscript. CPYM directed and supervised the study. IAC and SG contributed equally to this work.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Table 1: common chemical compounds found between electronic and conventional cigarettes. Supplementary Material 1: search strategy used for PubMed articles selection. Supplementary Material 2: PRISMA checklist for systematic reviews.

References

  • 1.Pisinger C., Døssing M. A systematic review of health effects of electronic cigarettes. Preventive Medicine. 2014;69:248–260. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Editorial. Enlighten e-cigarettes. Nature Medicine. 2019;25(4):531–531. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0431-5. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-019-0431-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.American Lung Association. U.S. food and drug administration regulation of tobacco products. https://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/tobacco/reports-resources/sotc/federal-grades/methodology/tobacco-control.html.
  • 4.Glantz S. 129 public health and medical authorities from 31 countries write WHO DG Chan urging evidence-based approach to ecigs. https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/129-public-health-and-medical-authorities-31-countries-write-who-dg-chan-urging-evidence-based-approach-ecigs%0D.
  • 5.Pisinger C., Døssing M. A systematic review of health effects of electronic cigarettes. 2015. https://www.who.int/tobacco/industry/product_regulation/BackgroundPapersENDS3_4November-.pdf. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 6.Bahl V., Lin S., Xu N., Davis B., Wang Y., Talbot P. Comparison of electronic cigarette refill fluid cytotoxicity using embryonic and adult models. Reproductive Toxicology. 2012;34(4):529–537. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2012.08.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Williams M., Villarreal A., Bozhilov K., Lin S., Talbot P. Metal and silicate particles including nanoparticles are present in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):p. e57987. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kim H.-J., Shin H.-S. Determination of tobacco-specific nitrosamines in replacement liquids of electronic cigarettes by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography A. 2013;1291:48–55. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2013.03.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Tsikrika S., Vakali S., Gennimata S. A., et al. Short term use of an e-cig: influence on clinical symptoms, vital signs and eCO levels. Tubacco Induced Diseases. 2014;12(supplementry 1) doi: 10.1186/1617-9625-12-S1-A30. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vardavas C. I., Anagnostopoulos N., Kougias M., Evangelopoulou V., Connolly G. N., Behrakis P. K. Short-term pulmonary effects of using an electronic cigarette: impact on respiratory flow resistance, impedance, and exhaled nitric oxide. Chest. 2012;141(6):1400–1406. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine. 2009;6(7):p. e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Hoffmann D., Hoffmann I. Letters to the Editor - Tobacco smoke components. Beiträge zur Tabakforschung International/Contributions to Tobacco Research. 1998;18(1):49–52. doi: 10.2478/cttr-2013-0668. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Talhout R., Schulz T., Florek E., et al. Hazardous compounds in tobacco smoke. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2011;8(2):613–628. doi: 10.3390/ijerph8020613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Rustemeier K., Stabbert R., Haussmann H.-J., Roemer E., Carmines E. Evaluation of the potential effects of ingredients added to cigarettes. Part 2: chemical composition of mainstream smoke. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2002;40(1):93–104. doi: 10.1016/s0278-6915(01)00085-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Roemer E., Stabbert R., Rustemeier K., et al. Chemical composition, cytotoxicity and mutagenicity of smoke from US commercial and reference cigarettes smoked under two sets of machine smoking conditions. Toxicology. 2004;195(1):31–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2003.08.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.US Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US) 2010. How tobacco smoke causes disease: the biology and behavioral basis for smoking-attributable disease. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Fowles J., Bates M., Noiton D. The chemical constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke: priorities for harm reduction a report to the New Zealand Ministry of Health. 2000.
  • 18.Cheng T. Chemical evaluation of electronic cigarettes. Tobacco Control. 2014;23(suppl 2):ii11–ii17. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pankow J. F., Kim K., Luo W., McWhirter K. J. Gas/Particle partitioning constants of nicotine, selected toxicants, and flavor chemicals in solutions of 50/50 propylene glycol/glycerol as used in electronic cigarettes. Chemical Research in Toxicology. 2018;31(9):985–990. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hahn J., Monakhova Y. B., Hengen J., et al. Electronic cigarettes: overview of chemical composition and exposure estimation. Tobacco Induced Diseases. 2014;12(1) doi: 10.1186/s12971-014-0023-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Aszyk J., Kubica P., Namieśnik J., Kot-Wasik A., Wasik A. New approach for e-cigarette aerosol collection by an original automatic aerosol generator utilizing melt-blown non-woven fabric. Analytica Chimica Acta. 2018;1038:67–78. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2018.08.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.CAS. Chemical abstracts service. https://www.cas.org/.
  • 23.WHO. Monographs on the identification of carcinogenic hazards to humans. https://monographs.iarc.fr/agents-classified-by-the-iarc/
  • 24.ECHA. ECHA European chemical agency. https://echa.europa.eu/
  • 25.Tisserand R., Young R. Essential Oil Safety : A Guide for Health Care Professionals. 2014. pp. 187–482. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.NIH. National institutes of health (NIH) | Turning discovery into health. https://www.nih.gov/.
  • 27.US EPA. Safer choice- EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/saferchoice.
  • 28.Bertrand P., Bonnarme V., Piccirilli A., et al. Physical and chemical assessment of 1,3 Propanediol as a potential substitute of propylene glycol in refill liquid for electronic cigarettes. Scientific Reports. 2018;8(1):10702. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29066-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kim S., Chen J., Cheng T., et al. PubChem 2019 update: improved access to chemical data. Nucleic Acids Research. 2019;47(D1):D1102–D1109. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Neeper-Bradley T. L., Tyl R. W., Fisher L. C., Kubena M. F., Vrbanic M. A., Losco P. E. Determination of a no-observed-effect level for developmental toxicity of ethylene glycol administered by gavage to CD rats and CD-1 mice. Toxicological Sciences. 1995;27(1):121–130. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/27.1.121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tyl R. W., Ballantyne B., France K. A., Fisher L. C., Klonne D. R., Pritts I. M. Evaluation of the developmental toxicity of ethylene glycol monohexyl ether vapor in Fischer 344 rats and New Zealand white rabbits. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology. 1989;12(2):269–280. doi: 10.1016/0272-0590(89)90044-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Breland A. B., Spindle T., Weaver M., Eissenberg T. Science and electronic cigarettes. Journal of Addiction Medicine. 2014;8(4):223–233. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Vreeke S., Korzun T., Luo W., Jensen R. P., Peyton D. H., Strongin R. M. Dihydroxyacetone levels in electronic cigarettes: wick temperature and toxin formation. Aerosol Science and Technology. 2018;52(4):370–376. doi: 10.1080/02786826.2018.1424316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Sun J. D-Limonene: safety and clinical applications. Alternative Medicine Review. 2007;12(3):259–264. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Belsito D., Bickers D., Bruze M., et al. A toxicologic and dermatologic assessment of related esters and alcohols of cinnamic acid and cinnamyl alcohol when used as fragrance ingredients. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2007;45(1):S1–S23. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2007.09.087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kleinsasser N. H., Wallner B. C., Harréus U. A., Zwickenpflug W., Richter E. Genotoxic effects of myosmine in human lymphocytes and upper aerodigestive tract epithelial cells. Toxicology. 2003;192(2–3):171–177. doi: 10.1016/S0300-483X(03)00296-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Abramovitz A., McQueen A., Martinez R. E., Williams B. J., Sumner W. Electronic cigarettes: the nicotyrine hypothesis. Medical Hypotheses. 2015;85(3):305–310. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2015.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Kienhuis A. S., Soeteman-Hernandez L. G., Bos P. M., Cremers H. W., Klerx W. N., Talhout R. Potential harmful health effects of inhaling nicotine-free shisha-pen vapor: a chemical risk assessment of the main components propylene glycol and glycerol. Tobacco Induced Diseases. 2015;13(1) doi: 10.1186/s12971-015-0038-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Lachenmeier D. W., Uebelacker M. Risk assessment of thujone in foods and medicines containing sage and wormwood – evidence for a need of regulatory changes? Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2010;58(3):437–443. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.08.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Jansson T., Zech L. Effects of vanillin on sister-chromatid exchanges and chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes. Mutation Research Letters. 1987;190(3):221–224. doi: 10.1016/0165-7992(87)90033-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Belsito D., Bickers D., Bruze M., et al. A toxicologic and dermatologic assessment of related esters and alcohols of cinnamic acid and cinnamyl alcohol when used as fragrance ingredients. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2007;45(1):S1–S23. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2007.09.087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.CDC. Health effects of cigarette smoking. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/effects_cig_smoking/index.htm.
  • 43.Tierney P. A., Karpinski C. D., Brown J. E., Luo W., Pankow J. F. Flavour chemicals in electronic cigarette fluids. Tobacco Control. 2016;25(e1):e10–e15. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-052175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sassano M. F., Davis E. S., Keating J. E., et al. Evaluation of e-liquid toxicity using an open-source high-throughput screening assay. PLoS Biology. 2018;16(3):p. e2003904. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003904. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Aszyk J., Wozniak M. K., Kubica P., Kot-Wasik A., Namiesnik J., Wasik A. Comprehensive determination of flavouring additives and nicotine in e-cigarette refill solutions. Part II: gas-chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. Journal of Chromatography A. 2017;1517:156–164. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2017.08.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Varlet V., Farsalinos K., Augsburger M., Thomas A., Etter J.-F. Toxicity assessment of refill liquids for electronic cigarettes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2015;12(5):4796–4815. doi: 10.3390/ijerph120504796. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Hua M., Omaiye E. E., Luo W., McWhirter K. J., Pankow J. F., Talbot P. Identification of cytotoxic flavor chemicals in top-selling electronic cigarette refill fluids. Scientific Reports. 2019;9(1):2782. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-38978-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Behar R. Z., Wang Y., Talbot P. Comparing the cytotoxicity of electronic cigarette fluids, aerosols and solvents. Tobacco Control. 2018;27(3):325–333. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Scott A., Lugg S. T., Aldridge K., et al. Pro-inflammatory effects of e-cigarette vapour condensate on human alveolar macrophages. Thorax. 2018;73(12):1161–1169. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2018-211663. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Callahan-Lyon P. Electronic cigarettes: human health effects. Tobacco Control. 2014;23(suppl 2):ii36–ii40. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Czoli C. D., Goniewicz M. L., Palumbo M., Leigh N., White C. M., Hammond D. Identification of flavouring chemicals and potential toxicants in e-cigarette products in Ontario, Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2019:1–9. doi: 10.17269/s41997-019-00208-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Canistro D., Vivarelli F., Cirillo S., et al. E-cigarettes induce toxicological effects that can raise the cancer risk. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):2028. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02317-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Bustamante G., Ma B., Yakovlev G., et al. Presence of the carcinogen N′-nitrosonornicotine in saliva of e-cigarette users. Chemical Research in Toxicology. 2018;31(8):731–738. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Bode A. M., Dong Z. Toxic phytochemicals and their potential risks for human cancer. Cancer Prevention Research. 2015;8(1):1–8. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-14-0160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Raymond B. H., Collette-Merrill K., Harrison R. G., Jarvis S., Rasmussen R. J. The nicotine content of a sample of e-cigarette liquid manufactured in the United States. Journal of Addiction Medicine. 2018;12(2):127–131. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Goldenson N. I., Leventhal A. M., Stone M. D., McConnell R. S., Barrington-Trimis J. L. Associations of electronic cigarette nicotine concentration with subsequent cigarette smoking and vaping levels in adolescents. JAMA Pediatrics. 2017;171(12):1192–1199. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Daniluk A., Gawlikowska-Sroka A., Stepien-Slodkowska M., Dzieciolowska-Baran E., Michnik K. Electronic cigarettes and awareness of their health effects. Advances in Experimental Medicine Biology. 2018;1039:1–8. doi: 10.1007/5584_2017_83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Lee A. S., Hart J. L., Walker K. L., Keith R. J., Ridner S. L. Dual users and electronic cigarette only users: consumption and characteristics. International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health. 2018;4(6):111–116. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Czoli C. D., Fong G. T., Goniewicz M. L., Hammond D. Biomarkers of exposure among ‘dual users’ of tobacco cigarettes and electronic cigarettes in Canada. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2019;21(9):1259–1266. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty174. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Qasim H., Karim Z. A., Rivera J. O., Khasawneh F. T., Alshbool F. Z. Impact of electronic cigarettes on the cardiovascular system. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2017;6(9) doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.006353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.IRIS. Integrated risk information system. https://www.epa.gov/iris.
  • 62.Talhout R., Schulz T., Florek E., van Benthem J., Wester P., Opperhuizen A. Hazardous compounds in tobacco smoke. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2011;8(2):613–628. doi: 10.3390/ijerph8020613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Fowles J. Application of toxicological risk assessment principles to the chemical constituents of cigarette smoke. Tobacco Control. 2003;12(4):424–430. doi: 10.1136/tc.12.4.424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Wani A. L., Ara A., Usmani J. A. Lead toxicity: a review. Interdisciplinary Toxicology. 2015;8(2):55–64. doi: 10.1515/intox-2015-0009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Lindgren M., Molander L., Verbaan C., Lunell E., Rosén I., Verbaan C. Electroencephalographic effects of intravenous nicotine–a dose-response study. Psychopharmacology. 1999;145(3):342–350. doi: 10.1007/s002130051067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Hecht S. S. DNA adduct formation from tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis. 1999;424(1-2):127–142. doi: 10.1016/S0027-5107(99)00014-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Goney G. Electronic Cigarette (e-cigarette) using: toxicological aspects. Eurasian Journal of Pulmonology. 2017;19(1):1–7. doi: 10.5152/ejp.2016.49358. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Tang H., Chu K., Cheuk A., Tsang W., Chan H., Tong K. Renal tubular acidosis and severe hypophosphataemia due to toluene inhalation. Hong Kong Medical Journal. 2005;11(1):50–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Rosenberg N., Spitz M., Filley C., Davis K., Schaumburg H. Central nervous system effects of chronic toluene abuse–clinical, brainstem evoked response and magnetic resonance imaging studies. Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 1988;10(5):489–495. doi: 10.1016/0892-0362(88)90014-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Table 1: common chemical compounds found between electronic and conventional cigarettes. Supplementary Material 1: search strategy used for PubMed articles selection. Supplementary Material 2: PRISMA checklist for systematic reviews.

Data Availability Statement

All relevant data are fully available within the manuscript and its supplementary materials.


Articles from BioMed Research International are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES