Table 1.
Prospective studies investigating the potential harm in DUs compared to ESCC.
| First Author, Year of Publication, Country, Conflict of Interest | Method | Participants | Risk of Selection Bias/Weighted Data/Adjusted Analyses/Adjusted for Former Tobacco Consumption | Major Outcomes | Overall Findings Significantly (Higher Risk/Prevalence/Level in ESCC = ## Higher Risk/Prevalence/Level in ESCC, Significance Level Not Tested or Not Significant = # Same Risk/Prevalence/Level in ESCC and DUs = ¤ Higher Risk/Prevalence/Level in DUs, Significance Level Not Tested or Not Significant = * Significantly Higher Risk/Prevalence/Level in DUs = **) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and fertility | Cardenas V.M. [42] 2020, USA None |
Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring | 1594 pregnant women | Low/yes/yes/no | Risk of small-for-gestational-age | DUs: higher odds of giving birth to a small-for-gestational-age child than ESCC, but significance level not tested * |
| Clemens M.M. [43] § 2019, USA None |
Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring | 248 pregnant women | Low/yes/yes/no | Carcinogen metabolites (TSNAs) in hair samples + Risk of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) | DUs same level of carcinogen biomarkers as ESCC ¤ DUs had higher risk of small-for-gestational-age than ESCC, but significance not tested * |
|
| Harlow A. [44] 2020, USA None |
Cohort study, online survey | 4586 young women trying to conceive | Low/no/yes/ yes |
Fecundability (menstrual cycle and achieved pregnancy) |
DUs: lower fecundability ratio than ESCC, but not significantly different * | |
| McDonnell BP. [45] 2020, Ireland None |
Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring | 620 pregnant women | Low/no/yes/no | Delivery and neonatal outcomes | DUs: same birthweight, Apgar score and mean gestation at delivery as ESCC ¤ DUs: higher rate of admission to neonatal intensive care unit and higher incidence of birthweight <10th centile than ESCC but significance level not tested * |
|
| Wang X. [46] 2020, USA None |
Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring | 31,973 pregnant women | Low/yes/yes/no | Preterm birth and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) | Similar (elevated) risk of preterm birth and of small-for-gestational-age in DU as ESCC ¤ |
|
| Other | McRobbie H. [47] 2015, UK  Yes |
Smoking cessation study with 4 weeks follow-up | 44 healthy volunteer smokers Use of EC ad libitum |
High/-/no/no | Urinary 3-HPMA, a major metabolite of acrolein and carbon-monoxide (CO) |
DUs had sign. reductions in 3-HPMA and CO after switching from ESCC (significant reduction in cotinine in DU) ## |
| Bhatta D. N. [48] 2020, USA None |
Nationally representative cohort study | 32,320 adults | Low/yes/yes/no | Self-reported respiratory disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary Disease (COPD), chronic bronchitis, emphysema, or asthma) |
DUs: higher odds of reporting of respiratory disease than ESCC but significance level not tested * | |
| Sanou A. Z. [49] 2020, USA None |
Register study using a cohort | 802,621 adult military members |
Low/no/yes/no | Incident cases of acute respiratory infections (in- and outpatient diagnoses) | DUs had higher incident rate of acute respiratory infections than ESCC but significance level not tested * | |
| Flacco M. E. [50] ^^ 2019, Italy  Yes |
Cohort study 48 months | 915 adults | High/no/yes/yes | Changes in self-reported health score and possibly smoking-related disease | DUs: no significant difference in self-reported health score and possible smoking related disease after 4 years than ESCC, but generally worse outcomes in DUs ¤ | |
| Flacco M. E. [29] ^^ 2020, Italy  Yes |
Cohort study 72 months | 912 adults | High/no/yes/yes |
Changes in self-reported health score and possibly smoking-related disease | DUs had higher odds of possibly smoking related disease after 6 years than ESCC but not significant ¤ | |
| Manzoli L. [35] ^^ 2015, Italy None, first 2 years |
Cohort study 12 months | 959 adults with 1-year data | High/no/yes/yes | Self-reported health | DUs: same self-reported health as ESCC ¤ | |
| Manzoli L. [28] ^^ 2017, Italy None, first 2 years |
Cohort study 24 months | 932 adults with 2-year data | High/no/yes/yes | Self-reported health | DUs at baseline: same self-rated health as ESCC and significantly higher probability of serious adverse events than ESCC ¤ ** DUs at 24 months follow-up: significant improvement in self-rated health compared with ESCC ## |
|
| Riehm K. E. [51] 2019, USA Yes |
Nationally representative cohort | 9588 adolescents | Low/yes/yes/no | Sleep-related complaints | DUs: higher risk of sleep-related complaints than ESCC, but not significant * |