{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02699896157840083, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005711318795430945, 'mean_word_length': 5.76140350877193, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Acute effects of a very low nicotine content cigarette on laboratory smoking lapse: Impacts of nicotine metabolism and nicotine dependence

Reducing cigarette nicotine content to nonaddictive levels facilitates smoking cessation; however, very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) may not be equally effective across heterogeneous smokers. We evaluated the impact of acute VLNC smoking versus control (sham puffs) on craving, withdrawal and smoking lapse behaviour and whether genetically influenced differences in nicotine metabolism and individual differences in nicotine dependence moderate observed effects. Thirty‐three overnight‐abstinent smokers (15 slow vs. 17 normal nicotine metabolizers; 17 low vs. 16 high nicotine dependence) smoked a 0.05‐mg nicotine VLNC during one session and took sham VLNC puffs during another session, in a counterbalanced order. Craving and withdrawal were assessed before and after smoking and sham puffing. Next, participants completed the McKee Smoking Lapse Task, which measures ability to resist smoking and quantity of ad libitum smoking. VLNC (vs. sham) reduced craving and withdrawal, increased ability to resist smoking and reduced ad libitum smoking. VLNC‐induced reduction in craving for positive reinforcement was greater in slow (vs. normal) metabolizers. Nicotine metabolism did not moderate any other VLNC responses. High‐dependence (vs. low‐dependence) participants engaged in greater ad lib smoking across VLNC and sham conditions. Nicotine dependence did not moderate VLNC responses. VLNC reduced craving, withdrawal and smoking lapse behaviour. Individual differences in nicotine metabolism and dependence had a minimal impact on VLNC responses; however, VLNCs were less effective at reducing craving for positive reinforcement among normal (vs. slow) metabolizers. These findings suggest that desirable VLNC effects may extend across heterogeneous groups of smokers.