Terminé
SKY Pilot

Acute Effects of Cigarette Packaging and Charcoal Filtration on Perceptions, Use Behaviors, and Harm Exposure

0 critères remplis à partir de votre profilVoyez en un coup d'œil comment votre profil répond à chaque critère d'éligibilité.
Ce qui est testé

Charcoal-filtered cigarette

+ Non-charcoal filtered cigarette
Autre
Qui peut participer

De 21 à 60 ans
Voir tous les critères d'éligibilité
Comment se déroule l'étude

Étude de prévention

Interventionnel
Date de début : mars 2022
Voir le détail du protocole

Résumé

Sponsor principalAbramson Cancer Center at Penn Medicine
Dernière mise à jour : 13 décembre 2025
Issu d'une base de données validée par les autorités. Revendiquer cette étude
Date de début de l'étude : 10 mars 2022Date à laquelle le premier participant a commencé l'étude.

We will recruit 40 adult daily, non-menthol smokers to a single 2-hr laboratory study where they will smoke two study-provided \[commercially available\] cigarettes, each for a 10-min ad lib period, and then complete product perception and use measures. Smoking sessions will be video recorded and scored to capture puffing behavior, and carbon monoxide (CO) assessments will be collected before and after smoking to assess changes in acute smoke exposure. We will use a 2 x 2 mixed factorial design to manipulate the study-provided cigarette's packaging (between subject factor: light colored 'Sky' package vs. black NAS package; both industry-made) and filter type (within-subject factor: charcoal filter vs. non-charcoal filter; cigarettes will appear identical despite differences in filter composition). Primary outcomes will be product perceptions (risk perceptions, subjective ratings), use behaviors (puffing behavior and purchase task), and acute toxicant exposure (changes in CO).

Titre officielAcute Effects of Cigarette Packaging and Charcoal Filtration on Perceptions, Use Behaviors, and Harm Exposure 
NCT05157048
Sponsor principalAbramson Cancer Center at Penn Medicine
Dernière mise à jour : 13 décembre 2025
Issu d'une base de données validée par les autorités. Revendiquer cette étude

Protocole

Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan de l'étude, y compris la manière dont l'étude est conçue et ce qu'elle évalue.
Détails du design
42 participants à inclureNombre total de participants que l'essai clinique vise à recruter.
Prévention
Cette étude cherche à prévenir l'apparition d'une maladie ou d'un trouble chez des personnes qui ne l'ont pas encore développé. Elles concernent souvent des personnes à risque et testent des vaccins, des changements de mode de vie ou des traitements préventifs.

Comment les participants sont répartis entre les groupes de l'étude
Dans cette étude clinique, les participants sont répartis de manière aléatoire, comme lors d'un tirage au sort. Cela garantit l'équité et réduit les biais, rendant les résultats plus fiables. En attribuant les participants au hasard, les chercheurs peuvent comparer les traitements sans influence extérieure.

Autres méthodes de répartition
Répartition non aléatoire
: basée sur des critères spécifiques comme l'état de santé ou la décision du médecin.

Aucune (un seul groupe de participants)
: tous les participants reçoivent le même traitement, aucune répartition n'est nécessaire.

Comment les traitements sont administrés aux participants
Les participants reçoivent différentes combinaisons de traitements afin d'évaluer leur interaction. Ce modèle permet de déterminer si une combinaison est plus efficace qu'un traitement pris seul.

Autres façons d'administrer les traitements
Groupe unique
: tous les participants reçoivent le même traitement.

Affectation parallèle
: les participants sont répartis en groupes recevant chacun un traitement différent.

Affectation croisée
: les participants passent d'un traitement à un autre au cours de l'étude.

Plan séquentiel
: les traitements sont administrés successivement selon un ordre prédéterminé, pouvant varier selon la réaction du participant.

Autre type d'attribution
: L'attribution des traitements ne suit pas de schéma standard ni de protocole prédéfini.

Comment l'efficacité du traitement est contrôlée
Dans ce type d’étude, aucun participant ne reçoit de placebo. Tous reçoivent soit le traitement expérimental, soit un autre traitement actif, souvent le traitement de référence. Ce modèle permet de comparer les effets de deux interventions réelles, sans inclure de substance inactive.

Autres options possibles
Contrôlée par placebo
: un placebo est utilisé pour comparer les effets du traitement expérimental à ceux d'une substance inactive, ce qui permet d'évaluer son efficacité réelle.

Comment la nature du traitement est tenue confidentielle
Dans une étude en simple aveugle, les participants ne savent pas quel traitement ils reçoivent, mais les chercheurs, eux, le savent. Cela limite l'influence des attentes des participants, tout en permettant un suivi rigoureux par les investigateurs.

Autres méthodes de masquage
En ouvert
: tout le monde connaît le traitement administré.

Double aveugle
: ni les participants ni les chercheurs ne savent quel traitement est administré.

Triple aveugle
: Les participants, les chercheurs et les personnes qui analysent les résultats ne savent pas quel traitement est administré.

Quadruple aveugle
: Les participants, les chercheurs, les personnes qui analysent les résultats et les professionnels de santé en charge du suivi ne savent pas non plus quel traitement est administré.

Éligibilité

Les chercheurs recherchent des patients correspondant à une certaine description appelée critères d'éligibilité : état de santé général ou traitements antérieurs du patient.
Critères
Tout sexeLe sexe biologique des participants éligibles à s'inscrire.
De 21 à 60 ansTranche d'âge des participants éligibles à participer.
Volontaires sains autorisésIndique si les individus en bonne santé et ne présentant pas la condition étudiée peuvent participer.
Critères

Inclusion Criteria: * Male and female smokers who are between 21 and 60 years of age and self-report smoking at least 5 cigarettes per day for at least the past 12 months. * Smokers of primarily non-menthol cigarettes. * Not currently undergoing smoking cessation treatment or trying to quit. * Able to communicate fluently in English (speaking, writing, and reading). * Capable of giving written informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: Subjects who self-report and/or present with the following criteria will not be eligible to participate in the study: Smoking Behavior 1. Use of menthol cigarettes as preferred/regular brand (defined as using \>20% of the time). 2. Use of research cigarettes in the past 6 months (i.e., past 6-month participation in applicable previous CIRNA studies). 3. Enrollment or plans to enroll in a smoking cessation program in the next month. 4. Provide an initial Carbon Monoxide (CO) reading \< 5 parts per million (ppm). Alcohol/Drugs 1. History of substance abuse (other than nicotine) in the past 12 months and/or currently receiving medical treatment for substance abuse. 2. Current alcohol consumption that exceeds 25 standard drinks/week. Medical 1. Women who are pregnant, planning a pregnancy, and/or lactating. 2. Any impairment including, but not limited to, visual, physical, and/or neurological impairments preventing the completion of procedures included within this protocol. Notable impairments will be evaluated by the PI and eligibility will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 3. Color blindness. 4. Serious or unstable disease within the past 12 months (e.g. heart disease, cancer). Applicable conditions will be evaluated by the Principal Investigator and eligibility will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Psychiatric As determined by self-report: 1. Lifetime history or current diagnosis of psychosis, bipolar disorder, and/or schizophrenia. 2. Current diagnosis of major depression. Subjects with a history of major depression, in remission for 6 months or longer, are considered eligible. Other Additionally, participants may be deemed ineligible for any of the following general reasons at any point throughout the study, as well as during the initial telephone screen, at the discretion of the PI: * Significant non-compliance with protocol and/or study design. * Past, current, anticipated, or pending enrollment in another research program over the study period that could potentially impact study data. * Any medical condition, illness, disorder, adverse event (AE), or concomitant medication that could compromise participant safety or significantly impact study performance.


Plan de l'étude

Découvrez tous les traitements administrés dans cette étude, leur description détaillée et ce qu'ils impliquent.
Groupes de traitement
Objectifs de l'étude
2 groupes d'intervention 

sont désignés dans cette étude

Cette étude ne comporte pas de groupe placebo. 

Groupes de traitement
Groupe I
Expérimental
Participants will be randomized to one of two pack color conditions: light or dark. Those in the dark pack color condition will be given Natural American Spirit Black packs.

Participants will smoke two visually identical cigarettes, one with a charcoal filter and one with a non-charcoal filter, in counterbalanced order. The charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Sky cigarette; the non-charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Orange cigarette.

Participants will smoke two visually identical cigarettes, one with a charcoal filter and one with a non-charcoal filter, in counterbalanced order. The charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Sky cigarette; the non-charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Orange cigarette.
Groupe II
Expérimental
Participants will be randomized to one of two pack color conditions: light or dark. Those in the light pack color condition will be given Natural American Spirit Sky packs.

Participants will smoke two visually identical cigarettes, one with a charcoal filter and one with a non-charcoal filter, in counterbalanced order. The charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Sky cigarette; the non-charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Orange cigarette.

Participants will smoke two visually identical cigarettes, one with a charcoal filter and one with a non-charcoal filter, in counterbalanced order. The charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Sky cigarette; the non-charcoal filter cigarette will be a Natural American Spirit Orange cigarette.
Objectifs de l'étude
Objectifs principaux

Smoking behaviors were assessed using video-scored measures of smoking topography (i.e., puffing behavior), including number of puffs taken, total puffing duration, and total interpuff interval (time between puffs). Briefly, research staff used a digital timestamp feature in an open-source video editing software to estimate start and end times for individual puffs based on various physical cues (e.g., inhaling, glowing cigarette tip), prioritizing overall puffing behaviors (e.g., multiple occurrences of tip glowing without removing the cigarette from the mouth \["stutter puffs"\] were treated as a single puff).

Smoking behaviors were assessed using video-scored measures of smoking topography (i.e., puffing behavior), including number of puffs taken, total puffing duration, and total interpuff interval (time between puffs). Briefly, research staff used a digital timestamp feature in an open-source video editing software to estimate start and end times for individual puffs based on various physical cues (e.g., inhaling, glowing cigarette tip), prioritizing overall puffing behaviors (e.g., multiple occurrences of tip glowing without removing the cigarette from the mouth \["stutter puffs"\] were treated as a single puff).

Smoking behaviors were assessed using video-scored measures of smoking topography (i.e., puffing behavior), including number of puffs taken, total puffing duration, and total interpuff interval (time between puffs). Briefly, research staff used a digital timestamp feature in an open-source video editing software to estimate start and end times for individual puffs based on various physical cues (e.g., inhaling, glowing cigarette tip), prioritizing overall puffing behaviors (e.g., multiple occurrences of tip glowing without removing the cigarette from the mouth \["stutter puffs"\] were treated as a single puff).

Risk beliefs were captured using an 8-item scale that asked participants to compare each study cigarette to 'regular' cigarettes on eight statements (i.e., "lower in nicotine", "lower in tar", "less addictive", "less likely to cause cancer", "has fewer chemicals", "is healthier", "makes smoking safer", "helps people quit smoking") using a 5-point response scale (1='definitely untrue', 5='definitely true'). Responses were scored dichotomously ("untrue" responses scored as correct; "unsure"/"true" responses scored as incorrect) and summed to create an overall beliefs measure. Thus, responses are possible on a scale of 0-8, with a score of 0 indicating no correct beliefs and 8 indicating the participant was correct on all belief items.

Perceived health risks were assessed using the mean of six items that asked participants to indicate on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = "very low risk", 7 = "very high risk") their risk of developing smoking-related health conditions (i.e., lung cancer, heart disease, stroke, emphysema, respiratory infections, and other cancers) from regular use of each study cigarette.

Subjective ratings were assessed with THE Cigarette Rating Scale, a 100 mm visual analog scale used by the tobacco industry and our laboratory to assess 14 characteristics; higher scores generally indicate more favorable ratings (e.g., taste: 0 = "bad," 100 = "good"). We examined mean scores from three subscales generated from these items to assess domains of product harshness, smoking satisfaction, and positive sensory experience. We also explored a fourth 'cleanliness' subscale created by averaging two exploratory items assessing "chemical vs. tobacco taste" and "dirty vs. clean body feeling" based on qualitative data from a related pilot study. All subscale scores have a range of 0-100, with higher scores generally indicative of more favorable ratings.

Subjective ratings were assessed with the Cigarette Rating Scale, a 100 mm visual analog scale used by the tobacco industry and our laboratory to assess 14 characteristics; higher scores generally indicate more favorable ratings (e.g., taste: 0 = "bad," 100 = "good"). We examined mean scores from three subscales generated from these items to assess domains of product harshness, smoking satisfaction, and positive sensory experience. We also explored a fourth 'cleanliness' subscale created by averaging two exploratory items assessing "chemical vs. tobacco taste" and "dirty vs. clean body feeling" based on qualitative data from a related pilot study. All subscale scores have a range of 0-100, with higher scores generally indicative of more favorable ratings.

Subjective ratings were assessed with the Cigarette Rating Scale, a 100 mm visual analog scale used by the tobacco industry and our laboratory to assess 14 characteristics; higher scores generally indicate more favorable ratings (e.g., taste: 0 = "bad," 100 = "good"). We examined mean scores from three subscales generated from these items to assess domains of product harshness, smoking satisfaction, and positive sensory experience. We also explored a fourth 'cleanliness' subscale created by averaging two exploratory items assessing "chemical vs. tobacco taste" and "dirty vs. clean body feeling" based on qualitative data from a related pilot study. All subscale scores have a range of 0-100, with higher scores generally indicative of more favorable ratings.

Subjective ratings were assessed with the Cigarette Rating Scale, a 100 mm visual analog scale used by the tobacco industry and our laboratory to assess 14 characteristics; higher scores generally indicate more favorable ratings (e.g., taste: 0 = "bad," 100 = "good"). We examined mean scores from three subscales generated from these items to assess domains of product harshness, smoking satisfaction, and positive sensory experience. We also explored a fourth 'cleanliness' subscale created by averaging two exploratory items assessing "chemical vs. tobacco taste" and "dirty vs. clean body feeling" based on qualitative data from a related pilot study. All subscale scores have a range of 0-100, with higher scores generally indicative of more favorable ratings.

CO will be measured in parts per million (ppm) using the Vitalograph BreathCO carbon monoxide monitor (Lenexa, KS) at the onset of the laboratory visit, as well as before and after each cigarette smoked. CO boost - the change in CO values resulting from smoking a cigarette - crudely estimates smoke exposure due to smoking an individual cigarette.
Objectifs secondaires

A hypothetical cigarette purchase task, asked how many study cigarettes participants would purchase in a typical day across a range of escalating prices from free up to $1.45 per cigarette, chosen to reflect double the current median price of Natural American Spirit brands in the U.S. However, because 35-40% of participants failed to reach breakpoint (i.e., the price point at which consumption drops to 0), we report observed values for demand index of intensity (number of cigarettes consumed for free) only.

Centres d'étude

Ce sont les hôpitaux, cliniques ou centres de recherche où l'essai est conduit. Vous pouvez trouver le site le plus proche de vous ainsi que son statut.
Cette étude comporte 1 site
Suspendu
Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Nicotine Addiction, University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia, United StatesVoir le site

Terminé1 Centres d'Étude
;