Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
LetterLetters to the Editor

Molecular Imaging of Pulmonary Inflammation: Claiming That Vaping Is More Harmful Than Smoking Is Unsupported

Riccardo Polosa, Lucia Spicuzza and Stefano Palmucci
Journal of Nuclear Medicine June 2023, 64 (6) 994-995; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.123.265533
Riccardo Polosa
*University of Catania Catania, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lucia Spicuzza
*University of Catania Catania, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stefano Palmucci
*University of Catania Catania, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

TO THE EDITOR: We read with interest the recent pilot study by Wetherill et al. (1). The authors used 18F-6-(1/2)(2-fluoropropyl)-4-methylpyridin-2-amine (18F-NOS) PET imaging to quantify inducible nitric oxide synthase expression to characterize oxidative stress and inflammation in the lungs of 5 electronic cigarette (EC) users, 5 tobacco cigarette (TC) smokers, and 5 controls who had never smoked or vaped. PET imaging showed much greater 18F-NOS nondisplaceable binding potential in the lungs of EC users than in TC smokers, but contrary to expectations, no difference between TC smokers and controls was found.

The reported absence of difference in 18F-NOS nondisplaceable binding potential between TC smokers and controls is inconsistent with the suggestion given by enhanced nondisplaceable binding potential on 18F-NOS imaging that there is oxidative stress and inflammation in the lungs, given that smoking causes both inflammatory responses and oxidative stress. This issue renders interpretation of the study’s findings invalid. In consideration of the very small sample size and low reproducibility of 18F-NOS PET imaging, the likelihood of chance findings is very high. There would have been more confidence in the interpretation if former smokers had been included in the study design; however, this was not done. Important confounders, such as allergies of the upper respiratory tract with inducible nitric oxide synthase upregulation and high levels of exhaled nitric oxide (2) and prior and present exposure to tobacco smoking among EC users (3)—who are typically either former smokers or dual users—were not taken into consideration. As it is impossible to decouple the lung health impact of EC aerosol emissions from prior tobacco smoke exposure, only long-term follow-up of exclusive EC users who have never smoked TCs in their life would have been a better-suited study design to verify potential harm caused by EC use. In a 3.5-y prospective clinical trial, daily exclusive EC users who had never smoked TCs did not exhibit any increase in exhaled nitric oxide (4).

Additionally, given the cross-sectional design of the study, the observed correlation between EC use and improved 18F-NOS PET imaging does not infer causation.

The results of the study are inconsistent with the evidence that cigarette smoking reduces, not increases, inducible nitric oxide synthase expression and NO production from lung epithelial cells (5), as well as with the evidence that smoking is consistently linked to low levels of exhaled nitric oxide that return to normal after smoking is stopped (6–8).

Therefore, this pilot study does not support the argument that vaping is more harmful than smoking, and it contradicts clinical evidence showing that ECs may have some benefits in minimizing the harm caused by cigarette smoke and are unlikely to cause serious respiratory issues (3,4,9).

DISCLOSURE

Riccardo Polosa has received grants from U-BIOPRED, AIR-PROM, the Integral Rheumatology and Immunology Specialists Network (IRIS), the Foundation for a Smoke Free World, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, CV Therapeutics, NeuroSearch A/S, Sandoz, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Arbi Group Srl., Duska Therapeutics, Forest Laboratories, and Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca (MUR) Bando PNRR 3277/2021 (CUP E63C22000900006) and 341/2022 (CUP E63C22002080006), funded by NextGenerationEU, the European Union (EU) economic recovery package. He is founder of the Center for Tobacco Prevention and Treatment (CPCT) at the University of Catania and of the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction at the same university. He receives consultancy fees from Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Duska Therapeutics, Forest Laboratories, CV Therapeutics, and Sermo Inc. He is being paid textbook royalties from Elsevier. He is also involved in a patent application for ECLAT Srl. He is a pro bono scientific advisor for Lega Italiana Anti Fumo (LIAF) and the International Network of Nicotine Consumers Organizations (INNCO), and he is the chair of the European Technical Committee for Standardization on “Requirements and Test Methods for Emissions of Electronic Cigarettes” (CEN/TC 437; WG4). Stefano Palmucci has received personal consulting fees or speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and F. Hoffmann La Roche Ltd. outside the submitted work; is working in the scientific committee of the research project RF 2019-12371462 “Model for Optimized Implementation of Early Lung Cancer Detection: Prospective Evaluation of Preventive Lung Health,” promoted by “Ministero della Salute” (Italy); has received consultancy fees from Elma Research srl (Milano, Italy); and has received support from Bracco Imaging SpA and Bayer Schering for congress registrations and congress accommodations/travels. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Footnotes

  • Published online May 11, 2023.

  • © 2023 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Wetherill RR,
    2. Doot RK,
    3. Young AJ,
    4. et al
    . Molecular imaging of pulmonary inflammation in electronic and combustible cigarette users: a pilot study. J Nucl Med. 2023;64:797–802.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Abdullah Alwi AH,
    2. Zahedi FD,
    3. Husain S,
    4. Wan Hamizan AK,
    5. Abdullah B
    . Diagnostic value and clinical application of nasal fractional exhaled nitric oxide in subjects with allergic rhinitis. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2023;37:307–312.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Polosa R,
    2. O’Leary R,
    3. Tashkin D,
    4. Emma R,
    5. Caruso M
    . The effect of e-cigarette aerosol emissions on respiratory health: a narrative review. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2019;13:899–915.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Polosa R,
    2. Cibella F,
    3. Caponnetto P,
    4. et al
    . Health impact of E-cigarettes: a prospective 3.5-year study of regular daily users who have never smoked. Sci Rep. 2017;7:13825.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Hoyt JC,
    2. Robbins RA,
    3. Habib M,
    4. et al
    . Cigarette smoke decreases inducible nitric oxide synthase in lung epithelial cells. Exp Lung Res. 2003;29:17–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Travers J,
    2. Marsh S,
    3. Aldington S,
    4. et al
    . Reference ranges for exhaled nitric oxide derived from a random community survey of adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;176:238–242.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.
    1. Robbins RA,
    2. Millatmal T,
    3. Lassi K,
    4. Rennard S,
    5. Daughton D
    . Smoking cessation is associated with an increase in exhaled nitric oxide. Chest. 1997;112:313–318.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Campagna D,
    2. Cibella F,
    3. Caponnetto P,
    4. et al
    . Changes in breathomics from a 1-year randomized smoking cessation trial of electronic cigarettes. Eur J Clin Invest. 2016;46:698–706.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Morjaria JB,
    2. Campagna D,
    3. Caci G,
    4. O’Leary R,
    5. Polosa R
    . Health impact of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: current and emerging evidence. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2022;16:1213–1226.
    OpenUrl
  • Received for publication February 2, 2023.
  • Revision received February 2, 2023.
  • Accepted for publication February 7, 2023.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 64 (6)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 64, Issue 6
June 1, 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Molecular Imaging of Pulmonary Inflammation: Claiming That Vaping Is More Harmful Than Smoking Is Unsupported
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Molecular Imaging of Pulmonary Inflammation: Claiming That Vaping Is More Harmful Than Smoking Is Unsupported
Riccardo Polosa, Lucia Spicuzza, Stefano Palmucci
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jun 2023, 64 (6) 994-995; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.265533

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Molecular Imaging of Pulmonary Inflammation: Claiming That Vaping Is More Harmful Than Smoking Is Unsupported
Riccardo Polosa, Lucia Spicuzza, Stefano Palmucci
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jun 2023, 64 (6) 994-995; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.265533
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Redefining Nuclear Medicine: “Biodistribution” Should Be the Core Concept
  • 176Lu Radiation in Long–Axial-Field-of-View PET Scanners: A Nonissue for Patient Safety
  • Business Model Beats Science and Logic: Dosimetry and Paucity of Its Use
Show more Letters to the Editor

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire