Analysis of Reference Cigarette Smoke Yield Data From 21 Laboratories for 28 Selected Analytes as a Guide to Selection of New Coresta Recommended Methods

Open access

Abstract

Since 1999, the CORESTA Special Analytes Sub Group (SPA SG) has been working on the development of CORESTA Recommended Methods (CRMs) for the analysis of cigarette smoke components. All CRMs have been posted on the CORESTA website and several associated papers published. In this study, 21 laboratories shared data and in-house methodologies for 28 additional smoke components of regulatory interest to prioritise the development of further CRMs. Laboratories provided data, where available, from CORESTA monitor test pieces (CM6 and CM7) and Kentucky Reference Cigarettes (1R5F / 3R4F) covering the period 2010-2012 obtained under both the ISO 3308 and Health Canada Intense regimes. Scant data were available on the CORESTA monitor test pieces and the Kentucky 1R5F reference. The greatest amount of data was obtained on the Kentucky 3R4F and this was used in the analyses described in this paper. SPA SG discussions provided invaluable insight into identifying causes and ways of reducing inter-laboratory variability which will be investigated in joint experiments before embarking on final collaborative studies using draft CRMs to obtain mean yields, repeatability and reproducibility values. Phenolic compounds (phenol, 3 cresol isomers, hydroquinone, catechol and resorcinol) gave consistent results by liquid chromatography (LC) separation and fluorescence detection after extracting collected “tar” on a Cambridge filter pad (CFP). Yields were similar to those obtained by a derivatisation method followed by gas chromatography - mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis. Similar ratios of phenols were also obtained from each method. Of the 28 studied analytes, the between-laboratory variability was lowest for the phenols. Hydrogen cyanide was derivatised using various reagents and the colour development measured after continuous flow analysis (CFA) by ultra-violet absorbance. Although, methodologies gave reasonably consistent results, investigations on the trapping system and on differences in the application of the various colour complexes used for quantification with UV absorbance is required. Ammonia analysis was carried out by ion chromatography (IC) followed by conductivity measurement and gave very similar results between laboratories. Yields were similar to those obtained by a derivatisation method followed by LC/MS-MS methodology. Optimal conditions for the separation of ammonium from interfering ions and minimizing artefactual ammonia formation from other smoke components need to be addressed during standardisation. Aromatic amine methods involved either LC/MS-MS separation and detection or derivatisation by one of two main reagents followed by GC-MS analysis. Yields were at similar but variable levels using these different techniques. It is currently unclear which method will be taken to a CRM. In general, four compounds were measured (1-amino naphthalene; 2-amino naphthalene; 3-amino biphenyl and 4-amino biphenyl) although two others were incorporated in methodologies used by 3 laboratories (o-anisidine and o-toluidine). Semi-volatiles (pyridine, quinoline and styrene) were often integrated with the selected volatiles method by measurement of the combination of CFP extracts and the contents of the impinger trapping system. Less data, obtained mainly by inductively-coupled plasma - mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), were available on metals (cadmium, lead, arsenic, beryllium, cobalt, chromium, nickel, selenium and mercury) in smoke. Trace metals were the most variable of the studied smoke analytes. Optimisation of the digestion step to remove the organic matrix needs to be addressed. As a consequence of this study and subsequent discussions within the Sub Group, it was decided to prioritise the development of CRMs for selected phenols followed by hydrogen cyanide and ammonia.

1. World Health Organization (WHO): The Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation. Second Report of a WHO Study Group; WHO Technical Report Series 951, ISBN 978 92 4 120951 9 World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.

2. CORESTA: CORESTA Recommended Method No 58 - Determination of Benzo[a]pyrene in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke by GC-MS; CORESTA, March 2013, available at: http://www.coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

3. CORESTA: CORESTA Recommended Method No 63 - Determination of Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke - GC-TEA Method; CORESTA, June 2005, available at: http://www.coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

4. CORESTA: CORESTA Recommended Method No 75 - Determination of Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke by LC-MS/MS; CORESTA, June 2012, available at: http://www.coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

5. CORESTA: CORESTA Recommended Method No 70 - Determination of Selected Volatile Organic Compounds in the Mainstream Smoke of Cigarettes by GC-MS; CORESTA, March 2013, available at: http://www.coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

6. CORESTA: CORESTA Recommended Method No 74 - Determination of Selected Carbonyls in the Mainstream Cigarette Smoke by HPLC; CORESTA, March 2013, available at: http://www.coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

7. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO): ISO 3308:2012. Routine Analytical Cigarette-Smoking Machine - Definitions and Standard Conditions; Fifth edition, ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.

8. Health Canada: Official Method T-115 - Determination of "Tar", Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide in Mainstream Tobacco Smoke; Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1999.

9. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, and W. Wagstaff: Determination of Aromatic Amines in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke: The CORESTA 2007 Joint Experiment; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 24 (2010) 78-92.

10. Intorp, M. and S. Purkis: Determination of Selected Volatiles in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2008 Joint Experiment; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 24 (2011) 174-186.

11. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, and W. Wagstaff: Determination of Selected Volatiles in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2009 Collaborative Study and Recommended Method; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 24 (2011) 243-251.

12. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, and W. Wagstaff: Determination of Carbonyl Compounds in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2010 Collaborative Study and Recommended Method; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 25 (2012) 361-374.

13. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, and W. Wagstaff: Determination of Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke: The CORESTA 2011 Collaborative Study; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 25 (2012) 507-519.

14. Purkis, S., M. Intorp, and A. Hauleithner: Updates of CORESTA Recommended Methods After Further Collaborative Studies Carried Out Under Both ISO and Health Canada Intense Smoking Regimes; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 25 (2013) 700-707.

15. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO): ISO 22634:2008. Cigarettes - Determination of Benzo- [a]pyrene in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke - Method Using Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry; ISO,

16. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, M. Whittaker, and W. Wright: Determination of "Hoffmann Analytes" in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2006 Joint Experiment; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 23 (2009) 161-202.

17. Health Canada: Tobacco Reporting Regulations. Regulation June 2000 and the amendments 2005; available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/tobac-tabac/legislation/reg/indust/index-eng.php (accessed May 2014).

18. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Guidance for Industry. Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under Section 904(a)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act - Draft Guidance; FDA, Rockville, MD, USA, March 2012, available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/UCM297828.pdf (accessed May 2014).

19. Health Canada: Official Method T-107 - Determination of Hydrogen Cyanide in Mainstream Tobacco Smoke; Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1999.

20. Ma, L., X.-Y. Li., J. Zhou, Y.-J. Ma, R.-S. Bai, and L.- H. Yan: The Influence of Nitrogen Oxides on the Determination of Hydrogen Cyanide in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke by Continuous Flow Analyser; Paper ST19, presented at the CORESTA SSPT Meeting, Graz, Austria, 2011, available at: http://coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

21. Nanni, E.J., M.E. Lovette, R.D. Hicks, K.W. Fowler, and M.F. Borgerding: Separation and Quantitation of Monovalent Anionic and Cationic Species in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke Aerosols by High- Performance Ion Chromatography; J. Chromatogr. Sci. 28 (1990) 432-436.

22. Mottier, N. and F. Jeanneret: Evaluation of Two Derivatization Reagents for the Determination by LCMS/ MS of Ammonia in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke; J. Agric. Food Chem. 59 (2011) 92-97.

23. Risner, C.H. and S.L. Cash: A High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Major Phenolic Compounds in Tobacco Smoke; J. Chromatogr. Sci. 28 (1990) 239-244.

24.Nanni, E.J., M.E. Lovette, R.D. Hicks, K.W. Fowler, and M.F. Borgerding: Separation and Quantitation of Phenolic Compounds in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke by Capillary Gas Chromatography with Mass Spectrometry in the Selected-Ion Mode; J. Chromatogr. 505 (1990) 365-374.

25. Houlgate, P.: UK Smoke Constituents Study. Part 11: Determination of Metals Yields in Cigarette Smoke by ICP-MS & CVAAS; Commissioned by Tobacco Manufacturers Association, London, UK, 2003, available at: http://www.the-tma.org.uk/benchmark/benchmarkresources/part11.pdf (accessed May 2014).

26. Tayyarah, R.: Multiple Point in Time Evaluation of Commercial and Reference Cigarette Products for Abbreviated HPHC Yield for Mainstream Smoke and Filler; Paper ST59 presented at the CORESTA SSPT Meeting, September 2013, Seville, Spain, available at: http://coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

27. Kim, H.K., J.T. Lee, K.J. Hwang, and M.S. Rhee: The Change in Ammonium Ion Concentration in the Sample Solution for Smoke Analysis; Paper SS25 presented at the CORESTA Congress, Kyoto, Japan 2004, available at: http://coresta.org (accessed May 2014).

Journal Information


CiteScore 2017: 0.63

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.309
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.403

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 262 262 49
PDF Downloads 143 143 32