Project 2: The Impact of Cigarette Nicotine Content, E-cigarette Nicotine Content, and E-cigarette Flavoring on Smoking Behavior
Phase: NA
Conditions: Smoking
Sponsor: Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Identifiers: NCT03185546   Date:   12/31/2019 
Project 2: The Impact of Cigarette Nicotine Content, E-cigarette Nicotine Content, and E-    cigarette Flavoring 
on Smoking Behavior 
 
 
 
 
CENIC II PROJECT 2 
 
The Impact of Cigarette Nicotine Content,  
E-Cigarette Nicotine Content and E-Cigarette 
Flavoring on Smoking Behavior 
 
 
Principal Investigator: 
Eric Donny, Ph.D. 
Department of Physiology and Pharmacology 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date: 4/14/2021 
 
 
 
 
Co-Investigator: 
Caroline Cobb, PhD – VCU  
 
Site Leaders: 
Eric Donny, PhD – WFSOM  
Andrew Strasser, PhD – Penn 
 
Medical Monitors: 
Claudia Campos, MD – WFSOM 
John Spangler, MD - WFSOM 
 
Biostatistician: 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 2 of 66 
confidential 
Joe Koopmeiners, PhD – UMN  
Principal Investigator Contact Information: 
Name:  Eric Donny, PhD 
Mailing Address:  Dept of Physiology & Pharmacology,
 
 
  
 
 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 3 of 66 
confidential 
Table of Contents 
Table of Contents...............................................................................................................................3 
Abbreviations .....................................................................................................................................4 
Study Synopsis ..................................................................................................................................6 
1. 
Background.................................................................................................................................7 
2. 
Study Plan and Procedures ....................................................................................................... 10 
3. 
Screening/Baseline Visit ............................................................................................................ 14 
4. 
Baseline Visit ............................................................................................................................ 19 
5. 
Randomization Visit .................................................................................................................. 21 
6. 
Experimental Phase .................................................................................................................. 24 
7. 
30 Day Follow-Up Visit .............................................................................................................. 29 
8. 
Procedures for Early Termination Visits and Withdrawal............................................................. 30 
9. 
Assessment Descriptions .......................................................................................................... 32 
10. Interactive Voice Response System........................................................................................... 34 
11. Study Debriefing ....................................................................................................................... 35 
12. Biosample Storage .................................................................................................................... 35 
13. Data Storage............................................................................................................................. 35 
14. Individually Identifiable Health Information ................................................................................. 35 
15. Participant Compensation/Incentives ......................................................................................... 35 
16. Quit Attempts During the Study Protocol: ................................................................................... 37 
17. Potential risks of participation .................................................................................................... 38 
18. Avoiding Risks to Fetus ............................................................................................................. 41 
19. Expected benefits of participation .............................................................................................. 41 
20. Suicidality/Mental Health Monitoring .......................................................................................... 41 
21. Adverse Events (AE) ................................................................................................................. 42 
22. Management of SAEs and Other Study Risks ............................................................................ 44 
23. Reporting of SAEs to the IRB, FDA, and NIDA ........................................................................... 44 
24. Reporting of IRB Actions to NIDA .............................................................................................. 45 
25. Reporting Changes or Amendments to the Protocol ................................................................... 45 
26. Withdrawal or Monitoring of Participants .................................................................................... 45 
27. Investigational Tobacco Product ................................................................................................ 47 
28. Study Endpoints / Outcomes ..................................................................................................... 47 
29. Statistical Approach .................................................................................................................. 48 
30. Power Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 50 
31. Subject Identifier ....................................................................................................................... 51 
32. Summary of Measures .............................................................................................................. 53 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 4 of 66 
confidential 
Procedures Table ........................................................................................................................... 53 
33. References ............................................................................................................................... 57 
 
Abbreviations 
AE: 
Adverse Events: any untoward medical occurrence in a subject administered a study 
product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. 
BrAC:  
Breath Alcohol Concentration: measured by an expired breath sample, commonly used as 
a metric of alcohol exposure.  
BDI:  
Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd Edition: a 21-question multiple-choice self-report 
inventory, used for measuring the severity of depression. 
BP:  
Blood Pressure: is one of the principal vital signs. 
BPM: 
Beats Per Minute: is one of the principal vital signs.  
CDC: 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
CEMA: 
N-acetyl-S-(2-cyanoethyl)cysteine; mercapturic acid metabolite of acrylonitrile 
CENIC:   Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes:  the short title selected for this 
program grant that would be easily recognized. 
CES:  
Cigarette Evaluation Scale: a 12-item questionnaire that assesses the degree to which 
smokers experience the reinforcing effects of smoking. 
CES-D:  
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale: is a self-report measure of 
depression severity. 
CO:  
Carbon Monoxide: exhaled breath carbon monoxide level reflects the level of 
carboxyhemoglobin (HbCO) in blood. 
COPD:  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: is a type of obstructive lung disease 
characterized by chronically poor airflow. 
CPD:  
Cigarettes Per Day: the amount of cigarettes smoked per day. 
CTSI: 
Clinical and Translational Science Institute 
DSMB:  
Data Safety Monitoring Board 
ENDS:   
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems:  products such as e-cigarette and vaping devices. 
FDA:  
Food and Drug Administration 
HR:  
Heart Rate: a measure of the number of heart beats per minute (bpm) 
IVR:  
Interactive Voice Response: is a technology that allows a computer to interact with humans 
through the use of voice and input via keypad. 
MNWS:  
Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale: is a 15-item self-reported scale to evaluate the 
effects of smoking cessation. 
NIDA:  
National Institute on Drug Abuse: part of the National Institutes of Health whose mission 
is to "lead the Nation in bringing the power of science to bear on drug abuse and addiction.” 
NMR:  
Nicotine Metabolite Ratio: is a salivary measure of the ratio of nicotine metabolites, which 
indicates speed of nicotine metabolism. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 5 of 66 
confidential 
NNC: 
Normal Nicotine Content 
PATH:  
Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health: a longitudinal study national study 
looking at tobacco use and health. 
PI:  
Principal Investigator: is the lead scientist for a particular, well-defined research project, 
such as a laboratory study or clinical trial. 
PPM: 
Parts Per Million 
REDCap:  Research Electronic Data Capture (web based software): is a secure, web-based 
application for building and managing online surveys and databases. 
SAE:  
Serious Adverse Events: generally, any event which causes death, permanent damage, 
birth defects, is life-threatening or requires hospitalization is considered an SAE. 
SAETRS: Serious Adverse Event Tracking and Reporting System 
TLFB:  
Timeline Followback: is a method that can be used as a clinical and research tool to obtain 
a variety of quantitative estimates of marijuana, cigarette, and other drug use by asking 
clients to retrospectively estimate their usage prior to the interview date. 
TNE:  
Total nicotine equivalents: a urinary measure of nicotine and its metabolite concentrations. 
VLNC:  
Very low nicotine content: cigarettes with much lower levels of nicotine than normal 
cigarettes (possibly below addictive levels). 
WISDM:  Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (Brief): a measure of tobacco 
dependence. 
 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 6 of 66 
confidential 
Study Synopsis 
Study Design: 
Randomized, double-blind (cigarette nicotine content), multi-center study that 
will examine the impact of cigarette nicotine content, e-liquid (vaping device) 
nicotine content and e-liquid flavor choices on smoking behavior. 
Primary Aim: 
To evaluate the impact of very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes, e-liquid 
nicotine content, and e-liquid flavoring on the total number of cigarettes 
(combined study plus non-study).  The hypothesis is that relative to normal 
nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes, VLNC cigarettes will reduce cigarettes 
smoked as well as reduce cigarette dependence, reduce exposure to 
toxicants, increase use of the vaping device and increase abstinence from 
cigarettes. These differences between VLNC and NNC cigarettes will be 
greater when participants are provided e-liquids with higher nicotine 
concentration and a choice of both tobacco and non-tobacco flavors. 
Secondary 
Aim: 
To test the impact of nicotine content in cigarettes, nicotine concentration of e-
liquids, and access to non-tobacco flavors of e-liquids on subjective effects. 
The hypothesis is that relative to NNC, VLNC cigarettes will decrease the 
positive effects of smoking and increase withdrawal. Conversely, vaping will 
produce more positive effects and withdrawal relief in participants assigned to 
VLNC vs. NNC cigarettes. These differences in the effects of vaping (between 
participants assigned VLNC vs. NNC cigarettes) will be greater when e-liquids 
a) are available in both tobacco and non-tobacco flavors (positive effects); and 
b) when e-liquids have 1.8% vs. 0.3% nicotine (positive effects and withdrawal 
relief).  
Population: 
Cigarette smokers not intending to quit, who have also tried vaping. 
Study 
Procedures: 
Subjects will undergo one week of monitoring of usual brand cigarette 
smoking. They will then be randomly assigned to one of eight experimental 
groups (2x2x2 design) receiving: study cigarettes with low versus normal levels 
of nicotine; e-liquids with 0.3% versus 1.8% nicotine content; and choice of e-
liquid flavors described as tobacco versus tobacco and non-tobacco flavors. 
All subjects will be able to use these products for a period of 12 weeks. Both 
subjects and study staff will be blind to the nicotine content of the cigarette; e-
liquid nicotine content and flavor will be open label.  After the 12-week 
experimental phase, there will be a final, 30-day follow-up visit. 
Accrual Goal: 
480; 60 people in each of the 8 experimental conditions 
Enrollment 
Goals Per Site: 
 
August, 2018 – August, 2021: 7 randomized per month 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 7 of 66 
confidential 
1. Background 
1.1. Tobacco Regulation 
Over 44 million people in the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2002) and 
1.2 billion worldwide smoke cigarettes (2014; Shafey & American Cancer Society, 2009).  With 
480,000 deaths per year in the US and 6 million per year world-wide with speculations of 7 million 
deaths per year if current trends in smoking continue through 2020 (Shafey & American Cancer 
Society, 2009), it is critical to have strong tobacco control policies in place to minimize the casualties 
from tobacco use. 
According to Orleans and Slade (1993) and Giovino (2002), there are four main targets for tobacco 
control:  the Agent, the Vector, the Host and the Environment.  Most recent tobacco control efforts 
have been aimed at the Host (tobacco prevention and cessation programs), the Environment 
(policies such as smoking bans, increased taxes, anti-smoking media campaigns, advertisement 
bans, pictorial warning labels) and the Vector (tobacco law suits).  Relatively little attention has been 
focused on the Agent (the tobacco product). Altering tobacco products in ways to reduce mortality 
and morbidity that complement current tobacco control measures may be an important next step in 
tobacco control. 
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) passed in 2009 provides the 
FDA with the authority to regulate tobacco products.  One provision in this legislative act empowers 
the FDA to set limits on constituents in tobacco products, including nicotine if the nicotine levels are 
not reduced to zero.  Such a measure has the potential to reduce the chance of individuals 
experimenting with smoking from becoming dependent and enable current smokers to quit when 
they are motivated to do so.  Although the proposal to reduce nicotine in cigarettes has been met 
with skepticism by some because of concerns over compensatory smoking behavior and the 
potential emergence of a black market (Jarvis & Bates, 1999; Kozlowski, 2015, 2016, 2017; 
Shatenstein, 1999), this policy measure was considered to be technically feasible by the American 
Medical Association and the British Medical Association (Henningfield et al., 1998), by tobacco 
control researchers, policymakers and governmental officials who were convened in a meeting on 
nicotine regulation (Hatsukami, Perkins, et al., 2010), and by the WHO Study Group on Tobacco 
Product Regulation (TobReg, 2015). Most importantly, in July 2017, FDA Commissioner Gottlieb 
announced he was “directing our Center for Tobacco Products to develop a comprehensive nicotine 
regulatory plan premised on the need to confront and alter cigarette addiction.” This announcement 
was followed on March 16, 2018 by the release of the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
entitled “Tobacco Product Standard for Nicotine Level of Combusted Cigarettes” (ID: FDA-2017-N-
6189-0001) “to obtain information for consideration in developing a tobacco product standard to set 
the maximum nicotine level for cigarettes.”  
1.2. Effects of Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes 
Studies of very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNC; e.g., <2.4 mg/g) suggest that, acutely, they 
produce many effects in smokers that are qualitatively similar to normal nicotine content (NNC; e.g., 
15.8 mg/g) cigarettes, but with somewhat reduced efficacy.  VLNC cigarettes reinforce behavior 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 8 of 66 
confidential 
(Shahan et al., 1999; Shahan et al., 2001), maintaining similar rates of self-administration as NNC 
cigarettes in brief sessions even though participants prefer NNC cigarettes when given a choice 
(Shahan et al., 1999).  Compared to not smoking, VLNC cigarettes increase ratings of satisfaction 
and liking (Donny et al., 2007; Donny & Jones, 2009; Rose et al., 2000), although the magnitude of 
these effects is typically reduced compared to those produced by NNC cigarettes (Butschky et al., 
1995; Gross et al., 1997; Robinson et al., 2000).  VLNC cigarettes also reduce withdrawal and 
craving (Pickworth et al., 1999), although some symptoms (e.g., restlessness, impatience) may be 
more effectively alleviated by NNC cigarettes (Buchhalter et al., 2005).   
Studies in which VLNC cigarettes were utilized over a longer period suggest potential benefits in 
terms of reduced smoking. When only VLNC cigarettes were available in an inpatient setting, the 
number of cigarettes smoked and the motivation to smoke during periods of abstinence decreased 
over time (Donny et al., 2007).  Longer, outpatient studies have either found no change in smoking 
rates (Benowitz et al., 2007; Benowitz et al., 2009; Benowitz et al., 2012; Donny & Jones, 2009), or 
a significant decline in smoking rates (Donny et al., 2015; Hatsukami et al., 2010).  Some studies 
have also shown that VLNC cigarettes reduce nicotine dependence (Hatsukami et al., 2010) and 
increase quit attempts (Donny et al., 2015). In one study conducted among individuals interested in 
quitting smoking, there was a significant increase in smoking cessation (Hatsukami et al., 2010).   
There is very little evidence of adverse outcomes associated with VLNC use, including 
compensatory smoking. As noted above, data available to date indicate that the number of cigarettes 
smoked per day tends to decrease, not increase, over time (Donny et al., 2015; Donny & Jones, 
2009; Hatsukami, Kotlyar, et al., 2010).  Furthermore, participants tend to reduce the volume of 
smoke inhaled and some studies have reported significant decreases in expired carbon monoxide 
(CO) (Donny & Jones, 2009; Hatsukami et al., 2010).  If compensatory smoking occurs, it appears 
to be short-lived (Macqueen et al., 2012; Strasser, Lerman, Sanborn, Pickworth, & Feldman, 2007) 
and may be more likely in heavily dependent smokers (Bandiera et al., 2015).  Likewise, few other 
unintended consequences have been identified. In our recent clinical trial, there was also no 
evidence of an increase in depressive symptoms among those with higher depression scores at 
baseline (Tidey et al., 2017) and no evidence of an increase in alcohol or marijuana use (Dermody 
et al., 2016; Pacek et al., 2016). However, individuals who were compliant with the VLNC cigarettes 
did gain weight over a six-week intervention period at a rate similar to what might be expected during 
smoking cessation (Rupprecht et al., 2016). 
Most studies to date provide smokers with only two options: smoke free study cigarettes or abstain 
from using tobacco, with clear instructions to not use non-study products. In this context, most 
smokers not only continue to smoke, but, despite instructions to the contrary, continue to use non-
study cigarettes. Based on self-report, more than 75% of participants assigned to VLNC cigarettes 
use at least one non-study (normal nicotine) cigarette during trials that last 6 weeks or longer, 
typically smoking 2-4 non-study cigarettes on at least a third of the days (Benowitz et al., 2015; 
Donny et al., 2015). Consequently, nicotine exposure (as measured by urine total nicotine 
equivalents) only decreases by about 60% compared to the 97% reduction of nicotine content in the 
product (Donny et al., 2015). This pervasive noncompliance may attenuate the effects of VLNC 
cigarettes on abstinence (Dermody, Donny, Hertsgaard, & Hatsukami, 2015), but it also likely 
foreshadows how patterns of product use would evolve if nicotine product standards were enacted 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 9 of 66 
confidential 
for combusted tobacco. Some may seek out black market cigarettes or tamper with cigarettes to 
increase nicotine delivery, but many others may turn to easily accessible alternative products.   
1.3. Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes and Vaping Devices 
Vaping devices (e.g., e-cigarettes, vape pens, mods) use liquid that often contains nicotine, as well 
as varying compositions of flavorings, propylene glycol, glycerin, and other ingredients. The liquid is 
heated into an aerosol that the user inhales. Vaping devices have rapidly emerged as a commonly 
used non-combusted product in the U.S. (Agaku et al., 2014; Arrazola et al., 2015) with a rule by 
FDA that they be deemed a “tobacco product” ("Deeming tobacco products to subject to the federal 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control 
Act," 2016) with premarket review of products required as of August, 2022. Our preliminary study 
suggests that approximately half of all smokers switched to VLNC cigarettes will try vaping devices 
when provided the opportunity (far more than any other non-combusted tobacco product; Hatsukami 
et al., 2017). Interestingly, there was a negative association between smoking VLNC cigarettes and 
use of alternative products which is consistent with evidence that vaping devices can function as a 
substitute for conventional cigarettes (Polosa, 2015). However, we know little about how the 
characteristics of vaping devices impact VLNC use and, conversely, how nicotine reduction in 
cigarettes impacts the use of vaping devices with different characteristics. Both nicotine and non-
nicotine factors may be important.  This gap is important given FDA’s intention “to address the issue 
of flavored tobacco products” while “not altering the nicotine content of noncombustible products 
such as e-cigarettes” (Gottleib, July 28, 2017) 
1.3.1. Nicotine 
Nicotine delivered via vaping devices may serve a variety of functions that support its actions as 
a reinforcer and an appealing alternative to smoking VLNC cigarettes. Some vaping devices can 
deliver as much or more (among experienced users) nicotine as a traditional cigarette with a 
relatively rapid rate of absorption (Tmax ≤ 5 min) (Spindle, Breland, Karaoghlanian, Shihadeh, & 
Eissenberg, 2015). In devices similar to the one proposed here, e-liquids with 18-36 mg/ml 
produce cigarette-like increases in plasma nicotine concentrations after 10 puffs while lower 
nicotine content e-liquids produce smaller and short-lived increases in plasma nicotine (Lopez et 
al., 2016; Hiler et al., 2017). This pharmacokinetic profile suggests that vaping devices may have 
greater positive reinforcing effects than VLNC cigarettes (Ramoa et al., 2016). Vaping devices 
can also be used throughout the day to maintain nicotine levels that would otherwise fall by 95% 
or more if smokers use only VLNC cigarettes (Denlinger et al., 2016). Indeed, vaping devices 
reduce withdrawal symptoms in cigarette smokers (Dawkins, Turner, & Crowe, 2013; Dawkins, 
Turner, Hasna, & Soar, 2012), and this suppression is dependent on the nicotine concentration 
of the e-liquid (Dawkins et al., 2012). Relatedly, greater nicotine delivery may also result in 
increased risk of dependence on vaping devices (Etter & Eissenberg, 2015). Finally, nicotine 
also acts peripherally on receptors in the oropharyngeal cavity which may contribute to sensory 
effects (discussed below) that might generalize across products. Together, these data suggest 
that vaping devices that effectively deliver nicotine may be more likely to function as both positive 
and negative reinforcers and more able to compete with the reduced reinforcing effects of VLNC 
cigarettes.   

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 10 of 66 
confidential 
1.3.2. Non-nicotine factors 
Vaping devices have a somewhat unique feature relative to other alternative nicotine delivery 
systems such as the patch or gum – they can provide sensorimotor stimuli similar to combusted 
cigarettes, including a smoke-like vapor and a tobacco-like flavor. Decades of research highlight 
the importance of sensorimotor stimuli in maintaining behavior even when nicotine is absent 
(Caggiula et al., 2001; Rose, 2006). Stimuli associated with nicotine can elicit craving (Baker, 
2015), increase the probability of use (Thornley et al., 2009), increase positive subjective 
experiences (Furlow, 2015; Glover & McRobbie, 2015; McNeill et al., 2015; McRobbie et al., 
2015), reduce withdrawal (Hajek et al., 2015; Kalousova, 2015; McRobbie et al., 2015), and 
support behavior even in the absence of the drug (McRobbie, Bullen, Hartmann-Boyce, & Hajek, 
2014; McRobbie et al., 2010). These data suggest that the sensorimotor experience is an 
important determinant of whether a product will substitute for traditional cigarettes. Vaping 
devices may serve this function better than other alternative products which might explain both 
why they were chosen most often in our pilot study (Hatsukami et al., 2017) and why they 
attenuate withdrawal in cigarette users even if they do not deliver nicotine (Vansickel, Cobb, 
Weaver, & Eissenberg, 2010). 
Vaping device e-liquids are also available in a variety of non-tobacco flavors that may impact the 
appeal and reinforcing effects of the product. The full impact of flavors on vaping devices use is 
still unknown, but it seems likely that the availability of non-tobacco flavors influences the 
likelihood of use. Recent estimates are that 53% of adults use vaping devices with flavors other 
than tobacco (Yingst et al., 2015). Other studies also supported this assumption, demonstrating 
that liquid flavor choices influence appeal and choice of vaping device (Shiffman, Sembower, 
Pillitteri, Gerlach, & Gitchell, 2015; Yingst et al., 2015). If flavors impact the appeal of vaping 
devices, they may also impact the likelihood that smokers will switch from VLNC cigarettes to 
these products.  
2. Study Plan and Procedures 
2.1. Study Design 
480 smokers will receive Spectrum cigarettes, a vaping device (Halo Triton 650 mAh and 2.4 ml 
tank with a 2.2-2.4 ohm coil), and an adequate supply of e-liquid for twelve weeks. After a screening 
visit, when eligibility is confirmed, participants will complete a baseline session where they will be 
provided with their usual brand of cigarettes to smoke for one week. Participants will then complete 
a randomization visit in which they are randomized into one of eight groups. Participants will either 
receive VLNC or NNC Spectrum cigarettes (double blind), e-liquid that is either low nicotine (0.3 % 
or 3 mg/ml) or contains a moderate level of nicotine (1.8% or 18 mg/ml), and will choose up to three 
flavors – either from a selection of flavors characterized as similar to tobacco, or from a selection of 
flavors characterized as similar to tobacco as well as other non-tobacco flavors (e.g., blueberry). 
Over 12 weeks of the experimental phase, they will use these products ad libitum attending weekly 
laboratory visits for the first four weeks and biweekly visits from Week 6 to 12.   At Week 12, 
participants will be required to return their study products. Participants can quit smoking or vaping 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 11 of 66 
confidential 
at any time during the study; if participants are interested in quitting they will be provided appropriate 
resources. Approximately 30 days after the week 12 visit, they will return to the lab for a follow up 
visit to assess smoking behavior and biomarkers of exposure.   
 
Estimated Timeline 
(may vary) 
In person sessions 
Cigarette 
provided 
END provided 
0 days 
Screening 
 
 
7 days 
Baseline 
Usual brand 
 
14 days 
Randomization 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
21 days 
Week 1 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
28 days 
Week 2 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
35 days 
Week 3 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
42 days 
Week 4 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
56 days 
Week 6 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
70 days 
Week 8 
Study cigarette 
Study END 
84 days 
Week 10  
Study cigarette 
Study END 
98 days 
Week 12 
 
 
128 days 
30-day follow-up 
 
 
 
2.2. Pilot 
Up to four subjects (only at the Wake Forest site) will complete an abbreviated pilot procedure before 
implementing the full protocol for the purpose of staff training and evaluating the planned 
procedures. Interested participants will be recruited (as described in Section 3.1) and consented 
with a pilot-study specific consent form (as described in Section 3.2).  Up to 12 participants will be 
screened (as described in Sections 3.3-3.6) and enrolled to achieve four completers. Stratification 
variables outlined in Section 3.7 will not be implemented.  Investigational cigarettes (i.e., Spectrum) 
will not be used; usual brand cigarettes will be used in their place. The vaping device (Halo Triton 
650 mAh and 2.4 ml tank with a 2.2-2.4 ohm coil) and e-liquids will be as proposed in the main 
protocol. One week after the screening visit, eligible participants will complete the “Randomization 
Visit” (described in Section 5) in which they will be assigned one of the four e-liquid conditions 
(described in Section 2.3.2) in the following order (note: assignment of pilot subjects is not random): 
1) e-liquid that is low nicotine (0.3 % or 3 mg/ml) and available only in tobacco flavors; 2) e-liquid 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 12 of 66 
confidential 
that is moderate nicotine (1.8 % or 18 mg/ml) and available only in tobacco flavors; 3) e-liquid that 
is low nicotine (0.3 % or 3 mg/ml) and available in tobacco and non-tobacco flavors; 4) e-liquid that 
is moderate nicotine (1.8 % or 18 mg/ml) and available in tobacco and non-tobacco flavors. The pilot 
procedure experimental phase will last 2 weeks. After 1 week, participants will complete what is 
described in this protocol as the “Week 3 visit” and after 2 weeks participants will complete what is 
described in this protocol as the “Week 12 visit.” At the last experimental lab visit, participants will 
be required to return their study products. The 30-day follow-up visit will not be conducted. 
Participants can quit smoking or vaping at any time during the pilot; if participants are interested in 
quitting they will be provided appropriate resources. Compensation will be provided as outlined in 
Section 13 with session earning up to $150 and incentives up to $70 plus $10 per visit for 
transportation costs ($45 for IVR calls; $25 retention bonus for completing all sessions; no incentives 
for compliance will be available). The potential risks are as outlines in Section 15 except for the 
following omissions related to the fact that usual brand cigarettes will be used: #4 and 8.   
Pilot Timeline 
Estimated Timeline 
(may vary) 
In person sessions 
Cigarette 
provided 
END provided 
0 days 
Screening 
 
 
7 days 
Randomization 
Usual brand 
Study END 
14 days 
Week 1 
Usual brand 
Study END 
21 days 
Week 2 
Usual Brand 
Study END 
 
2.3 Study Products  
2.3.1 Investigational Cigarettes 
The National Institute on Drug Abuse has made available investigational cigarettes that vary in 
nicotine content for research purposes (NOT-DA-14-004).  We have used these cigarettes in 
previous studies (e.g., Donny et al., 2015). The specific products and nicotine/tar yields are 
reported below.  All products are manufactured by 22nd Century and distributed by the Research 
Triangle Institute (RTI) for NIDA. The NNC cigarettes contain approximately 15.8 mg nicotine per 
g of tobacco.  The VLNC cigarettes contain approximately 0.4 mg nicotine per g of tobacco.  
Additional information including machine generated nicotine and tar yields is provided below and 
detailed product information including storage requirements can be found in the Investigator 
Brochure.   
 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 13 of 66 
confidential 
Spectrum Cigarettes to be used in this project 
Condition 
TPMF Code 
Type* 
Specifications 
Nicotine Yield 
Specifications    
Tar Yield 
Specification 
Range for Nicotine 
Yield 
NNC 
NRC600 
CN 
0.8 ± 0.15 
10.5 ± 1.5 
0.65 ‐ 0.95 
NNC 
NRC601 
CN‐Men 
0.8 ± 0.15 
10.5 ± 1.5 
0.65 ‐ 0.95 
VLNC 
NRC102 
RN 
0.03 ± 0.01 
9 ± 1.5 
0.02 ‐ 0.04 
VLNC 
NRC103 
RN‐Men 
0.03 ± 0.01 
9 ± 1.5 
0.02 ‐ 0.04 
 
 
 
 
 
 
*Legend: 
  
RN 
Reduced Nicotine 
RN‐Men 
Reduced Nicotine‐Menthol 
CN 
Conventional Nicotine 
CN‐Men 
Conventional Nicotine‐Menthol 
2.3.2 Vaping Devices 
All participants will receive identical vaping devices – the Halo Triton (3.7 V battery; 650 mAh) and 
compatible Triton 2.4 ml refillable tank with 2.2-2.4 ohm coil. Participants will be instructed on how 
to fill them with their assigned e-liquid by study staff, and will refill them as needed during the trial. 
All e-liquid will be purchased from Syndicate Distribution (previously known as Nicopure Labs) with 
a base of 70% propylene glycol and 30% vegetable glycerin. Nicotine concentration will be either 
(0.3 % or 3 mg/ml) or (1.8% or 18 mg/ml), depending on randomization group (open-label). E-liquids 
will be stored at room temperature and protected from sustained direct light.  Participants will either 
choose between tobacco flavors only or between tobacco flavors and additional non-tobacco flavors 
(open label). Participants will take home three 10-ml bottles of e-liquid solution each week (six 10-
ml bottles for bi-weekly visits), and will choose up to three flavors from a menu of e-liquid choices. 
Tobacco flavor choices include: a “robust” tobacco flavor, a “light” tobacco flavor, and a tobacco-
menthol combination flavor.  Non-tobacco flavors include: three fruit flavors (berry, blueberry, 
watermelon), three dessert flavors (cookies and crème, chocolate, caramel), and three mint flavors 
(peppermint, spearmint and menthol). The device, tank, coils, and liquids were commercially 
available in the U.S. prior to August 8, 2016 (i.e., deeming date) and are therefore appropriate for 
use in this project. The nicotine of the e-liquids will be characterized prior to the start of the study 
and at least annually thereafter by the University of Minnesota, CENIC Biostatistics Core. 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 14 of 66 
confidential 
3. Screening/Baseline Visit  
3.1. Recruitment  
Participants will be recruited from two sites: Wake Forest School of Medicine (Site PI: Donny) and 
the University of Pennsylvania (Site PI: Strasser). Participants will be recruited through flyers, direct 
mailings, television, radio, newspaper, bus, social media, online via our recruitment website, the 
CTSI Registry, and Craigslist advertisements that read, “If you smoke, we could use your help. If 
you’re (age 18-24 or 25 or older), smoke and have tried e-cigarettes or vaping multiple times, you 
may be eligible for a 4 month study on tobacco use—during which you will be paid for your time and 
effort. This is NOT intended as a treatment for smoking.”  Additional ads will be run as needed 
targeting smokers who would fit under-enrolled age categories. These ads will be identical but 
specify the age range (“age 18-24…” “age 25 or older…”). Individuals who are interested will leave 
their contact information on a voicemail, or enter it on a form on our website. Research staff will call 
each participant and read a script briefly explaining the study.  After verbal informed consent is 
received, the participants will be asked questions over the phone to determine initial eligibility. If 
eligible and interested, they will be scheduled for an informational session during which they will be 
provided with a copy of the consent document and shown a PowerPoint presentation that outlines 
the procedures, benefits/risks, compensation and the participants’ rights. They will also be able to 
ask questions about the study.  They will receive $10 in transportation costs for the informational 
session. If they are still interested in participation, then they will be scheduled for an in-person 
screening visit.  Potential participants will be instructed to bring a pack of their usual brand cigarettes, 
all prescription medications they are currently taking, and a valid, state-issued photo ID to the 
screening visit. Acceptable forms of identification include a Driver’s License, State Photo ID Card, 
State Voter ID Card, Passport, or Military ID. If the potential participant does not have a valid, state 
issued photo ID, the interviewer can provide him/her with information on obtaining one. Participants 
will be given the option to receive study information and visit reminders by phone, email, and text 
message. 
A participant must complete his/her in-person screening session within 30 days of completing the 
telephone recruitment questionnaire.  If the participant is not able to attend the in-person screening 
visit in that timeframe, he/she will need to complete the telephone recruitment questionnaire again 
and will be given a new REDCap ID number. 
3.2. Informed Consent Process 
Before beginning the informed consent process, participants will need to produce valid, state issued 
photo identification. The interviewer will confirm the age and identity of the participant.  If the 
participant is not age 18 or older, he/she will be dismissed without payment.  During the in-person 
screening session, study information will be presented and written, informed consent will be required 
to participate in the screening.  To ensure adequate informed consent, participants will be asked to 
read the first several lines aloud (to determine literacy) and will then be given ample time to read the 
consent document.  If the interviewer determines that the participant is not literate, he/she will 
dismiss the person from the study.  The interviewer will review the PowerPoint presentation if 
necessary.  The participant will be instructed to read several open-ended questions aloud and 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 15 of 66 
confidential 
discuss the answers with the researcher. Only after the participant and the researcher are fully 
satisfied that the participant understands the purpose of the study, the confidentiality of the data, the 
procedures, the risks/benefits and his/her rights as a research participant will the consent form be 
signed and the participant undergo screening procedures.  
3.3. Screening Procedures 
Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap by the 
interviewer at the end of the visit: 
 
1. Breath alcohol concentration (BrAC)  
2. Expired breath carbon monoxide (CO). 
3. Urinary cotinine strips, if needed  
4. A urine toxicological screen  
5. Weight and height  
6. Pregnancy Tests (HCG detection)  
7. Blood pressure and heart rate  
 
Screening questionnaires administered on paper and entered into the study databases at the 
end of the visit: 
1. Identifying Information Form  
2. Brief Medical History Questionnaire 
3. Prime MD 
 
Screening assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the 
interviewer: 
1. Concomitant Medications Form 
2. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) suicide subscale  
3. Tobacco Use History Questionnaire 
4. Smoking Cessation Therapy Use Questionnaire 
5. Drug Use Questionnaire (12 month and 1 month version)  
 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
1. Brief Medical History Follow-Up Questionnaire, if needed 
2. BDI, if needed 
3. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed 
 
 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 16 of 66 
confidential 
Screening assessments administered directly via Redcap: 
1. Demographic Questionnaire 
2. Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale 
3. Alcohol Use Questionnaire (12 month and 1 month version)  
4. Smoking Stages of Change 
 
If the Redcap website is not functioning, the assessments will be printed out and administered on 
paper.  The source documents will be kept in the participant’s binder.  The interviewer will enter the 
data into Redcap when it resumes functioning properly.  This information should be recorded in the 
‘End of Visit Evaluation Form’ and entered in to REDCap. 
The following task will be completed after initial eligibility determination by the research 
assistant (prior to review by medical staff):  
1. Puff topography entails having participants smoke through a device that more precisely 
measures puffing behavior (e.g., puff volume). At screening, participants will smoke a usual 
brand cigarette through the topography device. 
3.4. Eligibility Determination 
Research staff will determine initial eligibility after reviewing all eligibility criteria except for the 
medical/psychiatric history. If the participant is deemed eligible, he/she will complete the puff 
topography assessment, be trained on using the IVR system (see Section 9), and be scheduled to 
come in for the baseline visit.  Participants will be instructed to use tobacco products as usual 
between the screening visit and the baseline visit.  
Final eligibility of the participant will be determined by a licensed medical monitor (LMM) after 
reviewing the Brief Medical History Questionnaire, Medical History Follow-Up Questionnaire and the 
MINI suicide subscale.  If the participant's score on the Prime MD indicates a psychiatric disorder, 
then the Prime MD will be submitted to the licensed medical monitor for review as well.  Additionally, 
if the participant's score on the Prime MD indicates Major Depressive Disorder, then the Prime MD 
along with the Beck Depression Inventory will be submitted for review.  The LMM will sign off prior 
to the Baseline Visit that the participant is medically stable to receive the study product(s).  The LMM 
will not review the medical history forms of participants who are not eligible for other, non-medical 
reasons. 
Once all the screening procedures have been completed, researchers will pay ineligible participants 
$30 for their time as long as they pass the drug and breathe alcohol tests and meet the minimum 
requirements for carbon monoxide or urinary cotinine levels.  Those participants who do not pass 
these tests or meet these requirements will be dismissed from the study without payment.  If a 
participant does not pass the drug test but has a current, valid prescription that would explain the 
failed test, then he/she will not be automatically excluded and will still receive $30.   
At the end of the Screening/Baseline Visit, the researcher will complete the End of Visit Evaluation 
Form, which will be entered into REDCap. This will allow the researcher to make note of any 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 17 of 66 
confidential 
problems encountered during the visit and to assess the truthfulness of the participant regarding 
self-report of tobacco use.  
3.5. Inclusion Criteria: 
1. Age 18+ 
2. Daily smokers who smoke an average of at least five and 50 or fewer cigarettes per day for 
the last month. 
3. Must have used a vaping device on 2 or more separate occasions before participating in the 
trial 
4. Expired breath carbon monoxide (CO) level to assess recent smoking. Carbon monoxide 
level must be > 10 ppm to confirm regular daily smoking. If CO is <10 ppm, NicAlert strips 
will be used to assess urinary cotinine quantity to confirm smoking status. A result of 2,000 
ng/mL is needed to verify regular daily smoking. 
3.6. Exclusion Criteria:  
1. Unwilling to use research cigarettes or a vaping device as part of the trial 
2. Currently trying to quit or intending to quit smoking in the next 60 days 
3. Currently seeking treatment for smoking cessation 
4. A quit attempt in the past 30 days resulting in greater than 3 days of abstinence 
5. Using 
tobacco products, including 
nicotine 
replacement therapies or 
other 
pharmacotherapies (other than cigarettes, vaping devices or roll-your-own tobacco) more 
than 9 days in the past 30 days 
6. Roll your own tobacco users that are unwilling to smoke machine manufactured cigarettes 
as part of the trial 
7. Use of vaping devices > 15 days of the last 30 
8. Conditions in which participation is likely to pose a significant threat to health or for which the 
condition could interfere with the ability of the participant to fully participate 
9. Significant unstable medical conditions (any significant change in a serious medical 
condition occurring during the past 3 months including cardiovascular disease, COPD, and 
cancer, as determined by the licensed medical monitor) 
10. Significant unstable psychiatric conditions (any significant change in psychiatric symptoms 
during the past 3 months as determined by the licensed medical monitor) 
11. Schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder 
12. Positive toxicology screen for any of the following drugs: cocaine, opiates, methadone, 
benzodiazepines, barbiturates, amphetamines, methamphetamines, and PCP. Positive test 
for marijuana only allowed. Failing temperature strip for the sample or unable to provide 
enough urine sample for the drug screen. 
a. Participants with valid prescriptions for opiates, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, 
amphetamines or methadone (clinic letter) will not be excluded. 
13. Self-reported illicit use of any drug including marijuana ≥ 10 days in the past month 
14. Breath alcohol level > 0.01 (g/dL), as measured by a breath sample. 
15. Binge drinking alcohol (more than 9 days in the past 30 days, 4/5 drinks in a 2-hour period 
(female/male)) 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 18 of 66 
confidential 
16. Pregnant, trying to become pregnant or breastfeeding 
17. Failure to agree to use adequate protection to avoid becoming pregnant during the study 
18. Currently taking any one of the following medications: 
a. Phenytoin [Brand Name: Dilantin]  
b. Carbamazepine [Brand Name: Tegretol, Carbatrol, Equetro, Epitol]  
c. Oxcarbazepine [Brand Name: Trileptal] 
d. Primidone [Brand Name: Mysoline] 
e. Phenobarbital 
f. Bendamustine [Brand Name: Treanda] 
g. Clopidogrel [Brand Name: Plavix] 
h. Clozapine [Brand Name: Clozaril, FazaClo]  
i. 
Erlotinib [Brand Name: Tarceva] 
j. 
Flecainide [Brand Name: Tambocor] 
k. Fluvoxamine [Brand Name: Luvox] 
l. 
Irinotecan [Brand Name: Camptosar] 
m. Olanzapine [Brand Name: Zyprexa] 
n. Tacrine [Brand Name: Cognex] 
o. Theophylline [Brand Name: Theo Dur] 
19. CO reading >80 ppm 
20. Systolic BP greater than or equal to 160 mm/Hg 
a. Participants failing for blood pressure will be allowed to re-screen once. 
21. Diastolic BP greater than or equal to 100 mm/Hg 
a. Participants failing for blood pressure will be allowed to re-screen once. 
22. Systolic BP below 90 mm/Hg 
a. Participants failing for blood pressure will be allowed to re-screen once. 
23. Diastolic BP below 50 mm/Hg 
a. Participants failing for blood pressure will be allowed to re-screen once. 
24. Heart rate greater than or equal to 105 bpm 
a. Participants failing for heart rate will be allowed to re-screen once. 
25. Heart rate lower than 45 bpm 
a. Participants failing for heart rate will be allowed to re-screen once. 
26. Indicating any suicidal ideation in the past month or suicide attempts in the past 5 years (if 
within the past 6-10 years, LMM approval required). 
27. Inability to independently read and comprehend the consent form and other written study 
materials and measures.  
28. Having participated in a research study during the past three months in which the participant: 
a. Smoked a cigarette that was not his/her usual brand cigarette for more than one day 
b. Used any tobacco products beyond normal use for more than one day 
c. Used any nicotine replacement products or smoking cessation medications for more 
than one day 
29. Having participated in prior studies involving reduced nicotine cigarettes in the past three 
years.    
30. Household member enrolled in the study concurrently 
31. Self-reported allergies to propylene glycol and/or vegetable glycerin. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 19 of 66 
confidential 
32. Previous adverse reactions when using vaping devices. 
 
Children under age 18 are excluded because they cannot legally buy cigarettes.  Those with 
unstable medical or psychiatric conditions are excluded as these symptoms could affect a 
participant’s ability to complete the study.  Examples include but are not limited to the following: 
angina, stroke, heart attack which occurred since phone screening, blood clots in the arms or legs 
for which the individual is undergoing active medical treatment, cancer requiring active 
chemotherapy or radiation therapy, severe shortness of breath caused by conditions such as 
uncontrolled asthma, COPD, or arrhythmia, active untreated infection such as pneumonia, active 
untreated endocrine disorder such as hyperthyroidism.  The LMM can also exclude participants for 
conditions in which participation is likely to pose a significant threat to health or for which the 
condition could interfere with the ability of the participant to fully participate (e.g. severe allergic 
reaction to propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin found in e-liquids). We will exclude those currently 
seeking smoking treatment, those who have quit smoking for longer than 3 days in the past 30 days 
or are planning to quit in the next 60 days, as participation in this study may not lead to reductions 
in smoking.  We will exclude pregnant and nursing women and anyone with current or recent alcohol 
or drug abuse problems as these factors could independently affect smoking behavior during the 
study.  Individuals with baseline CO readings greater than 80 ppm, those with heart rate or blood 
pressure readings that are out of range and anyone who has attempted suicide in the past five years 
will be excluded from the study for safety concerns. Participants currently prescribed one of the 
medications listed will be excluded because this medication could interfere with the biomarkers or 
possibly cause an adverse smoking-drug interaction if there are changes in smoking behavior.  If an 
individual has recently participated in a smoking research study that changed his/her smoking 
behavior, this person would be excluded because he/she would not have a stable smoking baseline.  
Because participants are required to complete portions of the protocol independently both in the lab 
and at home, they will need to be able to independently read and comprehend the study materials.  
Multiple participants within the same household may not enroll concurrently to avoid product 
exchanging.  Very frequent use of vaping devices is exclusionary to target individuals who are 
primarily cigarette smokers and to decrease the likelihood that a participant will have a vaping device 
they find more satisfying than the study vaping device. However, individuals must have at least tried 
vaping devices at least on 2 separate occasions, without an allergic or otherwise adverse 
experience, to maximize the likelihood that participants will try the vaping device provided to them. 
3.7. Stratification  
Throughout the study, we will stratify by menthol status (no required sample size) and age range 
(no required sample size 18-24/25+). We recognize that it will likely be more challenging to recruit 
young adults. We will make use of targeted recruitment strategies (e.g., social media for the 
recruitment of young adults).  
4. Baseline Visit 
4.1. Baseline Visit Scheduling Requirements 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 20 of 66 
confidential 
Participants will return for a baseline visit one week after their screening visit. The ideal visit window 
is 6-10 days, but could be extended to as many as 21 days if necessary. If the participant is unable 
to attend the baseline visit within 21-days, they will not be eligible to continue. At this visit they will 
complete a variety of assessments and will be provided with a 14-day supply of their usual brand 
cigarette to smoke between the baseline visit and the randomization visit. 
4.2.  Baseline Visit Procedures  
Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap at the 
end of the visit: 
1. BrAC 
2. Weight 
3. CO 
4. Blood Pressure (lab visit & Product evaluation) 
5. Heart Rate (lab visit & Product evaluation) 
 
Biological specimens collected, stored, and entered into CENIC Biosample Collection 
Platform: 
1. Saliva sample:  
Participants will be asked to provide two saliva samples during the Baseline Visit for 
assessment of nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR), an indicator of CYP2A6 enzyme activity.  
Participants must wait 30 minutes after arrival to the lab before collecting the first saliva 
sample. During this time, participants cannot eat, drink, chew gum or use tobacco/nicotine 
products.  After collecting the sample, the participant is provided time to eat and/or drink and 
must wait another 30 minutes before collecting the second saliva sample.  Samples will be 
stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake Forest). Saliva 
samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the University of Minnesota.  
 
2. First void urine sample for smoking biomarker assessment:  
Participants will be asked to bring a urine sample (first void of the day) to the Randomization 
Visit for biomarker assessment.  Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -
20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed 
and stored at the University of Minnesota.  We will assess mercapturic acids (markers of 
exposure to volatile organic compounds) and total nicotine equivalents (TNEs; a measure of 
nicotine exposure). If a participant forgets to bring his/her urine sample, then the spot urine 
sample will be used. 
 
 
3. Spot urine sample for assessing baseline anatabine: 
Participants will be asked to provide a urine sample in the lab for biomarker assessment. 
Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake 
Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed for anatabine (a non-nicotine 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 21 of 66 
confidential 
tobacco alkaloid present in high levels in NNC and commercial but not VLNC cigarettes) and 
stored at the University of Minnesota.   
 
Assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the interviewer: 
1. Concomitant Medications Form 
2. Adverse Event Form, if needed  
3. Health Changes Questionnaire 
4. IVR Review of Daily Call and follow-up on missing and unusual reports and Timeline Follow-
back Questionnaire (since last visit); if needed 
5. Intention to Quit Smoking and Vaping 
 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
4. BDI, if needed 
5. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed 
 
Assessments administered directly via REDCap:  
1. Environmental and Social Influences on Tobacco Use Questionnaire 
2. Purchase Task: Usual Brand 
3. Respiratory Health Questionnaire 
4. Smoking Expectancies and Vaping Expectancies Questionnaires  
5. Vaping Utility Questionnaire 
6. Perceived Health Risks Questionnaire: Usual Brand 
Tasks completed at baseline: 
1. Product evaluation: will be assessed after participants take 4 puffs of their usual brand 
cigarette at baseline. Following the sampling period, participants will complete the Cigarette 
Evaluation Scale (CES), which assesses the extent to which the product they just sampled 
produced various subjective effects including satisfaction, good taste, dizziness, reduced 
appetite, nausea, and enjoyable sensations in the throat and chest on a 7 point Likert-type 
scale. We will also assess changes in heart rate and blood pressure related to smoking.  
4.3. Distributing Usual Brand Cigarettes 
Participants will receive a supply of their usual brand cigarette to smoke between the baseline visit 
and the randomization visit. Participants will receive a 14-day supply and be instructed to bring their 
entire supply (empty packs and unused cigarettes) to the randomization visit. Participants will be 
notified that failure to return products throughout the study will result in removal from the study.   
5. Randomization Visit 
5.1. Randomization Visit Scheduling Requirements 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 22 of 66 
confidential 
The ideal target window between the baseline and randomization visit is 6 to 10 days.  However, in 
rare cases, the window may be extended to as many as 21 days after the baseline visit. If the visit 
window is extended beyond 10 days, the participant will receive a larger supply of usual brand 
cigarettes (see Product Distribution section). If a participant cancels and reschedules their 
randomization visit outside of the 10-day window, staff will encourage the participant to return to the 
lab for an unanticipated visit to obtain additional product. If the participant is unable to attend the 
randomization visit within 21-days, they will not be eligible to continue. 
5.2. Experimental Conditions 
During the Randomization Visit, participants (N=480; 240 per site) will be randomized equally into 
one of eight experimental conditions. Participants will be assigned a cigarette that matches their 
menthol preference. Groups will be stratified by age and menthol status with no required sample 
size.  
 
 
Very Low Nicotine Cigarettes 
(VLNC) 
Normal Nicotine Cigarettes 
(NNC) 
Range 
of 
Flavors 
0.3% or 3mg/ml  
nicotine e-liquid 
1.8% or 18 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
0.3% or 3 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
1.8% or 18 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
Tobacco 
Flavors 
0.3% or 3 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
1.8% or 18 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
0.3% or 3 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
1.8% or 18 mg/ml 
nicotine e-liquid 
 
5.3. Randomization Visit Procedures 
Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap at the 
end of the visit: 
1. BrAC 
2. Weight 
3. CO 
4. Blood Pressure 
5. Heart Rate 
6. Urine Pregnancy Test, if applicable 
Biological specimens collected, stored, and entered into CENIC Biosample Collection 
Platform: 
1. First void urine sample for smoking biomarker assessment:  

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 23 of 66 
confidential 
Participants will be asked to bring a urine sample (first void of the day) to the Randomization 
Visit for biomarker assessment.  Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -
20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed 
and stored at the University of Minnesota.  We will assess mercapturic acids, and total 
nicotine equivalents (TNEs). If a participant forgets to bring his/her urine sample, then the 
spot urine sample will be used. 
 
2. Spot urine sample for assessing baseline anatabine: 
Participants will be asked to provide a urine sample in the lab for biomarker assessment. 
Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake 
Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the University of 
Minnesota.   
 
Assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the interviewer: 
1. Concomitant Medications Form 
2. Adverse Event Form, if applicable  
3. Health Changes Questionnaire  
4. IVR Review of Daily Call and follow-up on missing and unusual reports and Timeline Follow-
back Questionnaire (since last visit); if needed 
5. Intention to Quit Smoking and Vaping  
 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
1. BDI, if applicable  
2. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed 
 
Assessments administered directly via REDCap: 
1. Respiratory Health Questionnaire 
2. Cigarette Dependence Measures  
3. Vaping Device Dependence Measures 
4. Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale  
5. Context of Product Use-Baseline  
6. Urge to Use Questionnaire-Baseline 
7. Perceived Health Risks Questionnaire: Study Products  
 
If the Redcap website is not functioning, the assessments will be printed out and administered on paper.  
The source documents will be kept in the participant’s binder.  The interviewer will enter the data into 
Redcap when it resumes functioning properly.  This information should be recorded in the ‘End of Visit 
Evaluation Form’ and entered in to REDCap. 
The following tasks will be completed after participants are randomized:  
1. Product evaluation will be assessed after participants take four puffs of each assigned 
product with a 30-second inter-puff interval, and a 15-minute inter-product interval 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 24 of 66 
confidential 
(Randomization, Weeks 02, 04, 08, and 12). Following each sampling period, participants 
will complete the Cigarette Evaluation Scale (CES; modified to apply to both cigarettes and 
vaping devices), which assesses the extent to which the product they just sampled produced 
various subjective effects including satisfaction, good taste, dizziness, reduced appetite, 
nausea, and enjoyable sensations in the throat and chest on a 7 point Likert-type scale. We 
will also assess changes in heart rate and blood pressure related to each product.  
 
2. Preference Task will consist of a series of 10 choice trials, each lasting 1 minute, with a 2 
minute inter-trial interval.  During each trial, participants will be presented (via computer) 
with a choice between taking 2 puffs of the cigarette, 2 puffs of the e-cigarette, or 
abstaining. Indices derived from this task include: total number of cigarette puffs; total 
number of vaping device puffs; and total number of choices to abstain from product use.  
Researchers will complete the End of Visit Evaluation Form, which will be entered into REDCap.  This 
will allow the researcher to make note of any problems encountered during the visit and to assess the 
truthfulness of the participant in regard to self-report of tobacco use. 
6. Experimental Phase 
6.1.  Study Product Distribution 
The Administrative Core for the Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes (CENIC) will be 
responsible for removing all identifying information from cigarettes received from the Research 
Triangle Institute (RTI), labeling each carton with a blind code, assigning product using this blind 
code based on the randomization schedule being provided by the CENIC Biostatistics Core, and 
shipping cigarettes to each site as needed based on recruitment.  The site will be responsible for 
tracking product received and distributed to participants, collecting unused product from participants, 
and destroying unused open packs.  The participants, investigators and study staff will not have 
knowledge of which product is given to a participant or whether different participants received the 
same or different product with regards to study cigarettes. 
Between Visits 00, 01, 02, 03, and 04, participants will receive a 14-day supply of research cigarettes 
at each visit. Between Visits 04, 06, 08, 10, and 12, participants will receive a 28-day supply. This 
will ensure adequate availability of cigarettes in the numerous locations participants may typically 
keep a supply (home, work, vehicle, etc.) as well as avoid expending the entire supply if they miss 
a scheduled visit.   
Additionally, participants will receive two vaping device batteries and one tank per flavor choice. 
Tanks are refillable, but do need to be replaced occasionally. The Administrative Core will apply a 
product tracking label/code to each e-liquid bottle. Product will be assigned using this code based 
on the randomization schedule being provided by the CENIC Biostatistics Core. Participants will 
receive three 10-ml e-liquid bottles at each weekly visit (Visit 00, 01, 02, 03) and six 10-ml bottles at 
each bi-weekly visit (Visit 04, 06, 08, 10), divided among as many as three different flavor choices. 
After choosing flavors, participants will fill an empty tank with each of their chosen e-liquid flavors in 
the lab with help of study staff. This process allows study staff to train participants on the proper 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 25 of 66 
confidential 
method for filling tanks. Participants will return their empty e-liquid bottles and any unused product 
at each weekly visit. Unopened e-liquid bottles will be considered full and all bottles with > 5 ml will 
be redistributed to the same participant if participants choose the same flavor in a future week. If a 
participant loses their vaping device or e-liquids, we will provide replacements up to two times. If a 
participant loses their device or liquids more than twice, we may withdraw them from the study. 
When participants are provided with their study vaping device for the first time, they will be told that 
losing their device or e-liquids multiple times may result in study withdrawal.  
If there is prior knowledge a participant will be missing a visit (e.g., planned vacation, laboratory 
closure, etc.), or a participant is unable to attend the randomization visit within the 10-day window, 
then the participant will be provided with an adequate supply of study product until their next visit.  
The participant will be given a 21-day supply of cigarettes if they will miss Visit 01, 02 or 03 or if the 
randomization visit is between 11 and 17 days from screening, a 28-day supply of cigarettes if they 
will miss Visit 04 or the randomization visit is 18 or more days from screening, and a 35-day supply 
of cigarettes if they will miss Visit 06, 08 or 10. For e-liquids, participant will be given 5 bottles (10 
ml each) if they will miss Visit 01, 02 or 03, 6 bottles if they will miss Visit 04, and 8 bottles if they 
will miss Visit 06, 08 or 10. In addition, participants can come to the laboratory during normal 
business hours to receive additional study product if needed.  
6.2. Study Product Accountability 
Participants will be required to keep track of the vaping device, tanks, and all the cigarettes and e-
liquid provided to them. They will be instructed to return all unused cigarettes and empty cigarette 
packs and vaping device, tanks, and e-liquid bottles each week.  Because participants are provided 
with an ample supply of research cigarettes and e-liquid (to account for unanticipated missed visits 
or greater than anticipated use), they will be expected to return unused product at each visit to 
remain enrolled in the study. 
Research staff will complete the ‘Product Accountability Log’ directly in REDCap. Any discrepancies 
in the product dispensed versus product returned will be discussed and recorded in the log.  Empty 
cigarette packs and/or empty bottles will be saved. Unused cigarettes or bottles will be redistributed 
to the participants during Visits 01-12.  At Visit 10, participants will be made aware that they will be 
required to turn in all study products (cigarettes and vaping devices) at Visit 12.  
During the Experimental Phase, if participants lose cigarettes or e-liquids and require an 
unscheduled visit to the laboratory to supplement their supply, they will be told the next time they 
lose their supply of either product they will have to wait until their next scheduled appointment to 
receive more product.   
6.3. Experimental Phase Visit Scheduling Requirements 
A computer-generated ideal visit calendar will automatically generate the ideal visit windows once 
the participant has been randomized.  If a participant misses a visit and is not able to reschedule 
during the window, that visit will not be ‘made-up’ in the future.  All measures that were not completed 
will be considered missing data and will not be collected during future visits.  If a visit mistakenly 
occurs outside of the designated window, this is a protocol deviation.  A ‘Protocol Deviation Form’ 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 26 of 66 
confidential 
will need to be completed and tracked in REDCap.  If a participant is not able to attend Visit 12, then 
it should be rescheduled even if it is outside of the scheduling window.  This will be documented as 
a protocol deviation. Participants that do not attend scheduled lab visits, miss daily IVR phone calls, 
and do not respond to phone messages will be considered lost to follow-up. A certified letter will be 
sent to notify them as defined by the site’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).  
6.4. Visit 01, 02, 03, 04, 06, 08, 10, and 12 Procedures 
Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap at the 
end of the visit: 
1. BrAC 
2. Weight 
3. CO  
4. Blood Pressure 
5. Heart Rate 
6. Urine toxicology assessment (Visit 12 only) 
7. Pregnancy test (if applicable, Visits 4, 8, 12 only) 
Biological specimens collected, stored, and entered into CENIC Biosamples Collection 
Platform: 
1. First void urine sample for smoking biomarker assessment (Visits 4, 8, 12):  
Participants will be asked to bring a urine sample (first void of the day) for biomarker 
assessment.  Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -
80°C (Wake Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the 
University of Minnesota.  We will assess mercapturic acids, and total nicotine equivalents 
(TNEs). If a participant forgets to bring his/her urine sample, then the spot urine sample will 
be used. 
 
2. Spot urine sample for assessing baseline anatabine: 
Participants will be asked to provide a urine sample in the lab for biomarker assessment. 
Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at --20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake 
Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the University of 
Minnesota.   
 
Assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the interviewer: 
1. Concomitant Medications 
2. Adverse Event Form, if applicable 
3. Health Changes Questionnaire  
4. IVR Review of Daily Call and follow-up on missing and unusual reports and Timeline Follow-
back Questionnaire; if needed 
5. Intention to Quit Smoking and Vaping  
6. Drug Use Questionnaire, 1 month version (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 27 of 66 
confidential 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
1. BDI, if applicable 
2. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed  
 
Assessments administered directly via REDCap:  
1. Respiratory Health Questionnaire 
2. MNWS 
3. Urge to Use Questionnaire-Experimental 
4. Perceived Health Risks Questionnaire: Study Products (Visits 2, 4, 8, 12) 
5. CESD (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
6. Alcohol Use Questionnaire, 1 month version (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
7. Context of Product Use-Experimental Version (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
8. Smoking Stages of Change (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
9. Cigarette and Vaping Dependence Questionnaires (Visits 4, 8, 12) 
10. Purchase task-Study Cigarette + Vape Version (Visit 12) 
11. Smoking and Vaping Expectancies Questionnaires (Visit 12) 
12. Vaping Utility Questionnaire (Visit 12) 
13. Environmental Tobacco Smoke Questionnaire (Visit 12) 
14. Predicted Behavior Questionnaire (Visit 12) 
15. End of Study Questionnaire (Visit 12) 
In the event that the Redcap website is not functioning, the assessments will be printed out and 
administered on paper.  The source documents will be kept in the participant’s binder.  The interviewer 
will enter the data into Redcap when it resumes functioning properly.  This information should be 
recorded in the ‘End of Visit Evaluation Form’ and entered in to REDCap. 
The following tasks will be completed: 
Product evaluation will be assessed after participants take 4 puffs of each assigned product with 15-
minute inter-product interval (Randomization and Visits 02, 04, 08, and 12). Following each sampling 
period, participants will complete the Cigarette Evaluation Scale (CES; modified to apply to both 
cigarettes and vaping devices), which assesses the extent to which the product they just sampled 
was produced various subjective effects including satisfaction, good taste, dizziness, reduced 
appetite, nausea, and enjoyable sensations in the throat and chest on a 7 point Likert-type scale. 
We will also assess changes in heart rate and blood pressure related to each product. The product 
evaluation will be omitted if the participant indicates they are currently abstaining from use of the 
product (Question 3 of the Intention to Quit Log). 
Puff topography entails having participants puff through a device that more precisely measures 
puffing behavior (e.g., puff volume). At Visits 01 and 10, participants will puff both their assigned 
cigarette and vaping device through the topography device. Puff topography will be omitted if the 
participant indicates they are currently abstaining from use of the product (Question 3 of the Intention 
to Quit Log). 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 28 of 66 
confidential 
Researchers will complete the End of Visit Evaluation Form, which will be entered into REDCap, after 
each visit during the experimental phase.  This will allow the researcher to make note of any problems 
encountered during the visit and to assess the truthfulness of the participant in regard to self-report of 
tobacco use. 
6.5. Product and Procedures Compliance Review Sessions 
Participants will be counseled at each visit to the lab about their use of the study products. They will 
be asked about any concerns or obstacles associated with using the study cigarettes and vaping 
device.  The importance of honest self-reporting will be stressed. If difficulties are encountered, 
participants will be asked why they think they are experiencing difficulties (e.g., taste, withdrawal 
symptoms) and to problem-solve how to deal with these difficulties to meet the protocol 
requirements.   
Additionally, participants will be counseled about IVR completion, visit attendance, task engagement 
and product accountability.   
Preparation for Visit 12 
At the end of Visit 10, participants will be reminded that the study will conclude at Visit 12 (except 
for the 30-day follow up visit). Further, at Visit 12 they will be expected to turn in all study tobacco 
products. Participants can make or schedule a quit attempt at any time throughout the study (see 
related procedure in Section 15: Quit Attempts), including at this time. The two-week period between 
Visit 10 and Visit 12 will allow participants to prepare accordingly for the end of the study or a quit 
attempt. 
After a participant has completed all study procedures, they are required to turn in all study 
cigarettes, vaping devices, tanks and e-liquids.  
The research assistant will read the following script to all participants at the Week 12 visit:  
“Nicotine in cigarettes is very addictive and robs people the choice of being able to quit smoking or 
not. In addition to being in cigarettes, nicotine is in smokeless tobacco products, snus, nicotine 
patches, nicotine lozenges, nicotine gum, and most e-liquid for vaping devices. Among these 
products, cigarettes contain the most toxins and cancer-causing chemicals because they are 
burned and this smoke is associated with the greatest risk for disease and death.  As many as half 
of the people who smoke cigarettes will die from smoking-related disease. The number of harmful 
chemicals in vaping products may be less because they are not burned. Are you interested in 
additional resources about vaping risks? (provide list of online resources)  
There is a 50% chance that the study cigarettes provided to you during the study were very low in 
nicotine content. In prior studies, smokers assigned to very low nicotine cigarettes smoked less 
and made more quit-attempts than smokers of cigarettes with normal nicotine levels. Before you 
go, we want to encourage you to abstain (continue abstaining) from smoking. We can provide you 
with some resources that may help you quit. Would you like a copy of those resources? (provide 
“Clearing the Air,” state Quitline number, smokefree.gov). Are you interested in quitting now or in 
the near future? (If yes) Do you want to take five minutes to make a personalized quit plan that we 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 29 of 66 
confidential 
can print off for you? (provide smokefree.gov/build-your-quit-plan-results). We also encourage you 
to consult with your physician and use any medications he/she deems appropriate.” 
7. 30 Day Follow-Up Visit 
Participants will return to the lab between 25 and 35 days after Visit 12 to assess their smoking 
patterns. The purpose of this visit is to discuss tobacco product use since the study ended and obtain 
physiological measures. Additionally, any Adverse Event Forms that remain open from the last 
session will be discussed.  If the participant became pregnant during the study, this would have been 
recorded as an adverse event.  During this visit, the research assistant will confirm her due date.  
This event will remain open until delivery.  At that time, the licensed medical monitor will contact the 
participant to ask a few questions about the baby’s health and will update the Adverse Event Form. 
Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap at the 
end of the visit: 
1. BrAC 
2. Weight 
3. CO 
4. Blood Pressure 
5. Heart Rate  
 
Biological specimens collected, stored, and entered into CENIC Biosample Collection 
Platform: 
1. Spot urine sample for assessing baseline anatabine: 
Participants will be asked to provide a urine sample in the lab for biomarker assessment. 
Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake 
Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the University of 
Minnesota.   
2. First void urine sample for smoking biomarker assessment. Participants will be asked to bring 
a sample (first void urine of the day) for biomarker assessment. Samples will be stored at 
temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake Forest). Urine samples will be 
send quarterly to be analyzed and stored at the University of Minnesota. Total nicotine 
equivalents and mercapturic acids will be assessed. If a participant forgets to bring his/her 
urine sample, then the spot urine sample will be used.  
3. Total nicotine equivalents at the 30-day follow-up will be compared to baseline samples. At 
the discretion of the PI, a letter will be sent to participants who demonstrate a 100% increase 
relative to baseline to alert them of their nicotine exposure, advise them to try to reduce their 
nicotine/tobacco use and provide cessation resources. 
 
Assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the interviewer: 
1. 30-Day Tobacco Use Questionnaire  
2. Concomitant Medications 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 30 of 66 
confidential 
3. Adverse Event Form, if needed 
4. Health Changes Questionnaire  
5. Drug Use Questionnaire (1-month version) 
 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
1. BDI, if needed 
2. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed 
 
Assessments administered directly via REDCap:  
1. Respiratory Health Questionnaire  
2. Alcohol Use Questionnaire (1-month version) 
3. Cigarette Dependence Questionnaire 
4. Vaping Dependence Questionnaire 
5. Smoking Stages of Change  
 
Qualitative Interview (Wake Forest Site Only) collected on paper and audio recorded:  
A qualitative interview may be conducted to discuss the following topics:  
1) Product Use Patterns 
2) E-liquid Flavor Selection  
3) Tobacco Product Non-compliance  
4) General Study Feedback 
 
In the event that the Redcap website is not functioning, the assessments will be printed out and 
administered on paper. The source documents will be kept in the participant’s binder.  The interviewer 
will enter the data into Redcap when it resumes functioning properly.  This information should be 
recorded in the ‘End of Visit Evaluation Form’ and entered into REDCap. 
Once a participant has completed all study procedures and all open events have been closed, 
the PI will review the participant’s binder and sign a form indicating study completion for that 
participant. 
Researchers will complete the End of Visit Evaluation Form, which will be entered into REDCap. This 
will allow the researcher to make note of any problems encountered during the visit and to assess the 
truthfulness of the participant in regard to self-report of tobacco use. 
8. Procedures for Early Termination Visits and Withdrawal 
8.1. Withdrawal Procedures 
If the decision to withdraw a subject occurs at a study visit, regular clinic visit procedures will be 
conducted as well as the additional termination procedures as described in section 8.2. If it is 
determined via a phone call that withdrawal is appropriate or if the subject is dropping out, we will 
ask the subject to attend an exit visit to return study product and equipment (e.g. cell phone if 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 31 of 66 
confidential 
issued), complete questionnaires, product accountability and safety assessments and to receive 
their final study payment. 
If the subject refuses an exit visit, we will request that at the minimum, study investigational 
products be returned and product accountability be completed. We will also stress the importance 
of being able to assess safety measures for the subject’s safety. 
8.2. Early Termination 
If a participant decides to withdraw from the study prior to completion or if they are withdrawn by 
the PI or LMM due to safety concerns, they will be scheduled for an early termination visit. If the 
participant is seen within the window of a regularly scheduled visit, all measures for that visit will 
be collected. Additional questionnaires and safety measures may be obtained (urine sample for 
biomarkers and pregnancy screen, CES-D, and BDI-II if appropriate) if not scheduled during the 
normal visit. If the subject is seen outside of a regularly scheduled visit window, the following 
measures will be obtained: 
 Physiological measures collected and recorded on paper, and entered into REDCap at the  
end of the visit: 
1. BrAC 
2. Weight 
3. CO 
4. Blood Pressure 
5. Heart Rate 
6. Pregnancy test (if applicable) 
 
Biological specimens collected, stored, and entered into CENIC Biosample Collection 
Platform: 
1. Spot urine sample for assessing baseline anatabine: 
Participants will be asked to provide a urine sample in the lab for biomarker assessment. 
Samples will be stored at temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake 
Forest).  Urine samples will be sent regularly to be analyzed and stored at the University of 
Minnesota.   
4. First void urine sample for smoking biomarker assessment. Participants will be asked to bring 
a sample (first void urine of the day) for biomarker assessment. Samples will be stored at 
temperatures approximately at -20°C (UPenn) or -80°C (Wake Forest). Urine samples will be 
send quarterly to be analyzed and stored at the University of Minnesota. Total nicotine 
equivalents and mercapturic acids will be assessed. If a participant forgets to bring his/her 
urine sample, then the spot urine sample will be used.  
 
 
Assessments administered via interview and entered into REDCap by the interviewer: 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 32 of 66 
confidential 
1. Concomitant Medications 
2. Adverse Event Form, if applicable 
3. Health Changes Questionnaire  
4. IVR Review of Daily Call and follow-up on missing and unusual reports and Timeline Follow-
back Questionnaire; if needed 
5. Intention to Quit Smoking and Vaping  
6. Drug Use Questionnaire, 1 month version 
 
Assessments administered on paper and kept as a source document only: 
1. BDI, if applicable 
2. GAD 2 week monitoring, if needed  
 
Assessments administered directly via REDCap:  
The following additional assessments will be completed by all early termination participants, 
if not part of the usual measures scheduled for the regularly scheduled visit: 
1. CESD  
2. Alcohol Use Questionnaire, 1 month version  
3. Environmental and Social Influences on Tobacco Use Questionnaire  
4. End of Study Questionnaire  
The data collected during the termination visit will be used as appropriate given the days outside of 
visit window, subject use of study product, measures of safety or other considerations to be 
determined in data analysis.  
9.  Assessment Descriptions 
1. Tobacco Use History and Nicotine Exposure, derived from the Population Assessment of 
Tobacco and Health (PATH) allowing comparisons with a nationally representative sample of 
smokers measures variables such as smoking rate (current and maximum), cigarette brand, age 
of initiation of smoking, number of quit attempts, duration of quit attempts and duration of 
smoking and history of use of other tobacco and nicotine products. 
2. Demographics asks about age and gender, race, ethnicity, current occupation and usual 
occupation, and income.  
3. Brief Medical History Questionnaire to assess medical history and current health diagnoses, 
symptoms and past health problems including psychiatric and substance abuse and medication 
use. 
4. Medical History Follow-up Questionnaire will be completed by study staff to further assess 
current diagnoses, symptoms or past health problems.  
5. Concomitant Medications lists medications (prescription, over-the-counter and supplements) and 
doses that are taken 30 days prior and during the study. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 33 of 66 
confidential 
6. PrimeMD - Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), a brief multi-choice questionnaire developed as 
a screening and diagnostic tool for mental health disorders of depression, anxiety, alcohol, for 
primary care physicians (somatoform and eating disorder questions are not used in this study).  
7. Centers for Epidemiological Studies-Depression 20-item scale (CES-D) which measures current 
symptoms of depression.  
8. Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) suicide subscale to evaluate suicide risk.  
9. Beck Depression Inventory 2nd Edition (BDI-II) is a severity measure assessing symptoms of 
depression.  
10. Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7): measures severity of anxiety. 
11. Interactive Voice Response-Daily Call Recording System to record amount of product use, 
cigarettes and other nicotine containing products on a daily basis (estimated vaping puffs per 
day will be recorded). 
12. IVR Review Form will assess study and non-study use of cigarette and other products missing 
from the IVR calls, correct errors in IVR entries or clarify any discrepancies or unusual IVR 
reports. Will only be used if a correction is needed. 
13. Timeline follow back for tobacco will only be used if a participant misses one day or more of IVR, 
or if an IVR correction is needed.   
14. Context of Product Use asks what tobacco product (study cigarette, non-study cigarette, study 
vape, non-study vape, other products, or no products) participants are most likely to use in a 
variety of contextual situations. 
15. Predicted Behavior Questionnaire questions participants about what they think their tobacco 
product use would look like one year from now if starting today, all cigarettes available for 
purchase in the United States had the same nicotine content as their assigned study cigarette. 
16. Smoking Cessation Therapy Use captures nicotine replacement therapy use at Screening. 
17. Urge to Use Questionnaire has participants rate their strongest urge to use a study cigarette, 
usual brand cigarette, and the study vaping device in the past 24 hours using a 7-point Likert 
scale. 
18. Cigarette/Vaping Dependence Measures includes:  Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence 
(FTND), Penn State Cigarette Dependence Scale, Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Motives 
(WISDM) primary dependence motives subscales and 3 items from PATH. 
19. Minnesota Nicotine Withdrawal Scale (MNWS) is an 8 item assessing symptoms of tobacco 
withdrawal.  
20. Adverse Events to assess the nature, severity, duration, action taken, and outcome of adverse 
events related to tobacco/nicotine product use.  
21. Health Changes Questionnaire queries for any health care visits or circumstances that would 
indicate any change since last visits. 
22. Respiratory Health Questionnaire rates overall health (1-10 scale) and respiratory symptoms 
such as cough, phlegm production, shortness of breath on a scale ranging from 0 = none up to 
10 = severe with a total respiratory score determined by adding the scores of each of these 
items. 
23. Alcohol Use Questionnaire (1 and 12 month) assesses frequency and quantity of alcohol use.  
24. Drug Use History (1 and 12 month) assesses amount, frequency in past year, and past month 
and date of last use of illicit drugs.  

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 34 of 66 
confidential 
25. Perceived Health Risks assesses perceived health risks of no tobacco use, usual brand of 
cigarettes and study products that are provided.  
26. Modified Cigarette Evaluation Scale and/or Product Evaluation Scale assesses different 
dimensions of responses to cigarettes or other tobacco/nicotine products, (e.g., psychological 
reward, satisfaction, aversiveness, and additional oral and respiratory sensation items).  
27. Cigarette/Product Purchase Task assesses demand curves of products that are chosen.  This 
questionnaire will be used to generate demand curves by asking the subject to report the number 
of units of a tobacco product that they would consume in a day if the units cost various amounts 
of money.  
28. Smoking and Vaping Expectancy Questionnaire to assess attitudes and beliefs about the 
products provided.  
29. Stages of Change assesses the intention to quit smoking including next 30 days, 6 months and 
overall readiness to quit. 
30. Intention to Quit assesses intention to quit smoking including next 30 days and 6 months and 
overall readiness to quit.  
31. Social and Environmental Influences on Tobacco Use assesses tobacco/nicotine situational use 
and subject’s opinion on potential tobacco control policies. 
32. End of Study Questionnaire, an open-ended interview administered at follow-up which queries 
the subject’s rationale for product selection, knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about these 
products, reactions to product(s) selected, reactions to a policy that reduces nicotine in 
cigarettes, ideas about how this policy should be conveyed to the public and what needs to be 
in place to reduce any negative effects.  
33. Qualitative Interview Guide an open-ended interview administered at the 30-day Follow-Up to 
gather qualitative data about product use patterns, e-liquid flavor selection, non-study product 
use, and general study feedback. (Wake Forest Site Only)   
10. 
Interactive Voice Response System  
Participants will be trained to use the Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System, which will contact 
participants each day throughout the study and ask about their smoking and vaping behavior. 
Participants will be provided a study cell phone if they have unreliable telephone access, do not 
have enough monthly cell phone minutes or prefer not to use their own phone. Each day during the 
period between the screening visit and the Week 12 Visit the IVR system will ask participants to 
report their use of cigarettes, puffs of a vaping device, first tobacco product used, and minutes after 
waking until first tobacco product use. During each call, participants report about tobacco use during 
the previous calendar day (midnight to midnight), not the previous 24-hours. 
The IVR system is operated by MicroAutomation, a media production company.  To be enrolled in 
the IVR system, research staff will enter the participant’s telephone number, subject identifier, and 
visit dates into the IVR CENIC website.  Identifying information (telephone numbers) will be removed 
from the dataset by the biostatistics core. Please refer to MicroAutomation’s privacy statement and 
HIPAA compliance form for additional information. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 35 of 66 
confidential 
11. Study Debriefing 
After data collection is complete, participants will receive a letter telling them which condition they 
were randomized into and the results of the study thus far.  
12. Biosample Storage 
The urine and saliva biosamples will be collected and stored at study sites until regular shipments 
to the University of Minnesota Masonic Cancer Center for analysis or long term storage. Samples 
that are not used for primary analysis of study biomarkers will be banked for future use related to 
tobacco and nicotine exposure.  
13. Data Storage 
Data will be stored locally at each site and at the University of Minnesota Masonic Cancer Center’s 
Bioinformatics Core for at least 7 years after study completion.  
14. Individually Identifiable Health Information  
No information will be collected from medical records. Direct identifiers will be retained at each site, 
stored separate from all other data, and will only be available to the local study and regulatory staff.  
The only exception is subject telephone numbers provided to a HIPAA compliant vendor for our 
Interactive Voice Recording System. Other identifiable information (excluding direct identifiers) such 
as visit dates will be collected and accessible to study staff (i.e., a limited dataset).  These variables 
will be removed from the final de-identified dataset by staff associated with CENIC at the University 
of Minnesota Biostatistics Core.   
Data Collection Platforms 
Data will be collected and entered into multiple platforms including the REDCap and the Interactive 
Voice Recording System (IVR). In the event that internet access is not functioning, the assessments 
will be printed out and administered on paper. The source documents will be kept in the participant’s 
case report form binder and the interviewer will enter the data into the software when it resumes 
functioning properly. Biosamples will be entered into a biomarker tracking database as they are 
collected. 
15. Participant Compensation/Incentives 
Subjects will receive $30 for the Screening Visit, $20 for the Baseline and 30-day Follow-up Visits, 
$20 for completing each shorter visit (Week 01, 02, 03, 06, 10) and $40 for completing each longer 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 36 of 66 
confidential 
visit (04, 08, 12), and $60 for completing the Randomization Visit. All subjects will also receive $10 
to cover transportation costs for each visit, including the informational session ($130).  
In addition to compensating subjects for their time and travel, there are incentives in place to 
encourage retention, and compliance. 
Completed IVR Calls 
Participants will receive $1 for each completed IVR call. An additional bonus of $5 will be awarded 
for missing no calls between scheduled visits. 
Retention 
Those who miss no more than two visits between Visit 01 and Visit 08, and who attend both Visit 10 
and 12, will receive a $100 completion bonus. 
Compliance 
Since we have previously observed high rates of non-compliance among those assigned to VLNC 
cigarettes, we think it is important to incentivize only using assigned study products. Subjects will be 
told that one of their spot urine samples collected between Visit 01 and Visit 12 will be randomly 
selected and analyzed, and if it indicates they were compliant, they will receive a $300 bonus. A 
missed visit will count as a non-compliant urine sample. In actuality the bonus will only be contingent 
on urine samples from Visit 12, but it is important for subjects to believe samples are analyzed 
throughout the study to encourage compliance. Since compliance cannot be assessed in participants 
using NNCs, all participants in those groups will receive the $300 compliance incentive unless they 
miss Visit 12. For those using VLNC cigarettes, the incentive will be contingent on a urinary 
anatabine cut-off that indicates compliance with study products. Anatabine measures will be deemed 
compliant at levels slightly higher (0.16 nmol/ml) than what would be expected for complete 
compliance (0.010 nmol/ml) to allow for variation in individual metabolism and will not penalize 
occasional non-study product use.  

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 37 of 66 
confidential 
16. Quit Attempts During the Study Protocol: 
At each session, we will ask the participant if he/she is currently abstaining from smoking and/or 
vaping with the intention of quitting.  If the answer is no, then we will also ask if he/she is planning 
to quit smoking and/or vaping prior to his/her next scheduled visit. 
16.1. If a participant is currently abstaining from smoking and/or vaping with the 
intention to quit we: 
 
Encourage participant to continue abstaining.  
 
Schedule the participant for normal weekly visits, but do not conduct puff topography, 
preference task or product evaluation tasks 
 
Provide the participant with the ‘Clearing the Air’ manual and smoking cessation resources 
Session   
Amount  
Visit Distributed 
      Screening 
$30.00 
92 
      Baseline 
$20.00 
91 
      Randomization  
$60.00 
00 
      Short Visits (01, 02, 03, 06, 10) ($20/visit) 
$100.00  
01, 02, 03, 06, 10 
      Long Visits (04, 08, 12) ($40/visit) 
$120.00 
04, 08, 12 
      30-day follow up  
$20.00 
30 
  Travel to each visit, including the info session  
($10/visit) 
$130.00 
Each visit 
Total 
$480.00 
 
Additional Incentives 
Amount 
Visit Distributed 
IVR Calls ($1/completed call [up to $140], plus $5 
bonus awarded when all calls between visits 
completed [up to $50]) 
Up to $190.00 
12 
Retention Bonus 
$100.00 
12 
Compliance Bonus 
$300.00 
30 
Total 
Up to $590.00 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 38 of 66 
confidential 
 
Give the participant the option to take home he/she’s preferred amount of study product, up 
to the full amount (baseline CPD), that they would like to take, rather than require him/her 
to take the full amount.   
o If the participant choses to take home the study product we have him/her sign a form 
acknowledging that tobacco product availability could be detrimental to the quit 
attempt. We also recommend that he/she puts the product “away” at home as to 
avoid unwanted cues to smoke. 
 
If the participant chooses not to take home the study product, we have him/her contact the 
lab if he/she lapses and would like to pick up the study product prior to his/her next visit. 
16.2. If a participant is planning to quit smoking or vaping, but has not initiated 
the quit attempt we 
 
Ask if he/she has identified a target quit date and, if so, what that target date is 
 
Provide the participant with the ‘Clearing the Air’ manual and smoking cessation resources 
 
Provide the participant with he/she’s preferred amount of study product, up to the full amount 
(baseline CPD), that they would like to take. We also recommend that on the target date 
he/she puts the product “away” at home as to avoid unwanted cues to smoke. 
 
If the participant choses to take home any amount of the study product, we have him/her 
sign a form acknowledging that tobacco product availability could be detrimental to the quit 
attempt.  
17. Potential risks of participation 
1. Survey Questionnaires: The interview will include questions about medical history, drug and 
alcohol use, and questionnaires about mood.  Answering these personal questions could 
make the participant feel uncomfortable. 
2. Breach of Confidentiality: The risk of the interview is loss of privacy if other people find out 
the results. 
3. Smoking Cigarettes: All cigarettes are detrimental to a person’s health and can lead to severe 
or fatal medical problems including: 
a. Cardiovascular Diseases: Coronary heart disease, heart attack, stroke, peripheral 
vascular disease, reduced blood circulation, abdominal aortic aneurysm 
b. Respiratory Diseases: Emphysema, bronchitis, tuberculosis and chronic airway 
obstruction  
c. Cancers: Lung, bladder, liver, colon, cervical, esophageal, kidney, larynx, mouth, 
pancreatic, throat, stomach cancers and acute myeloid leukemia  
d. Diabetes 
e. Abnormal immune function, rheumatoid arthritis 
f. Other Health Risks Associated with Smoking: Including but not limited to infertility,  
tubal pregnancy, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), birth defects, lower bone 
density in postmenopausal women, hip fracture in women, male sexual dysfunction; 
age-related macular degeneration, vision problems. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 39 of 66 
confidential 
g. Changes in blood pressure and/or heart rate 
h. Death 
4. Smoking study cigarettes: In addition to the above medical problems, participants may 
experience some minor adverse health effects such as headaches or experience withdrawal 
symptoms which are listed below.  Due to the altered nicotine levels, there could be a change 
in their cigarette use including the way they inhale the smoke or an increase in the number 
of cigarettes smoked per day. This increased rate of smoking may persist after completing 
the study. Smoking the study cigarettes does not provide any less risk than their usual brand 
cigarette and could pose increased health risks.  Participants may also experience increases 
in levels of carbon monoxide, a gas from smoke.  The study cigarettes are made from 
genetically modified tobacco plants.  A recent toxicological analysis of these cigarettes 
showed that the concentrations of many harmful tobacco constituents, including tobacco-
specific nitrosamines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, ammonia, and toxic metals, was 
similar to the concentrations of these constituents in commercial cigarettes (Richter et al., 
2016). 
5. Vaping Devices: Vaping devices can expose users to several chemicals, including nicotine, 
carbonyl compounds, and volatile organic compounds, known to have adverse health effects. 
The health effects and potentially harmful doses of heated and aerosolized constituents of 
vaping devices, including solvents, flavorants, and toxicants, are not completely understood. 
Vaping device aerosol is not harmless although it generally contains fewer toxicants than 
combustible tobacco products. Specific potential known risks include: 
a. E-liquids may contain nicotine contain nicotine which may contribute to some of the 
disease associated with smoking. 
b. The most common side effects related to vaping device use are changes in taste, 
mucus in throat/sinus, dry mouth, dry cough, throat irritation, sore throat, mouth 
ulcers, dizziness, headache, seizures, and nausea. Subjects are told to stop use of 
e-cigarette (or other nicotine products) and promptly notify study staff if they have 
loss of consciousness, memory lapse, change in mental status, confusion, tremor, 
shaking, or seizure.  
c. While uncommon, batteries from vaping devices have exploded/ignited and injured 
users. 
d. Vaping devices can overheat and present a burn risk if the device is turned on 
repeatedly. Subjects are told to be careful if storing the device in a place where the 
button might be accidentally pressed often.  
e. Defective cartridges, tanks or devices may leak e-liquid. If this should happen, wash 
the exposed area to remove the e-liquid immediately. 
f. Ingestion of e-liquids containing nicotine can cause acute toxicity and possible death 
if the contents of refill cartridges containing nicotine are consumed. Subjects are told 
to keep vaping devices and all e-liquid cartomizers away from pets and children. 
Instructions are provided to call the Poison Control Center (1-800-222-1222) 
immediately and contact study staff if e-liquids are ingested.  For skin exposure we 
recommend washing well with soap and water for 10-15 minutes. 
g. Allergic reactions to propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin have been reported. 
Chemicals used to flavor foods are also a risk for allergic reactions. We will ask 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 40 of 66 
confidential 
subjects if they have had previous adverse reactions to vaping and/or allergic 
reactions to food and provide that information to the medical monitor to review as 
part of determining eligibility.   
h. Recent reports of seizure and severe lung problems associated with vaping are 
being evaluated by the CDC and the FDA. While current evidence is not conclusive 
of causality, it is prudent to inform potential subjects of this on-going investigation 
and be alerted to the symptoms of lung disease. These symptoms include: cough, 
shortness of breath, chest pain, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and fever. One 
should promptly seek medical attention for any health concerns. Subjects will also 
be advised to use only the study product we have provided to them and to not alter 
the device or add any substances to e-liquids. We will keep participants informed as 
the additional information is provided by the CDC and FDA. 
6. Continued use of vaping devices: As part of this study, participants will try a vaping device 
on multiple occasions and can use a vaping device as much as they like, outside of the lab, 
over a 12-week period. This product may contain nicotine, an addictive chemical. It is 
possible that this experience could lead to long-term use of vaping devices after the trial is 
over. 
7. Nicotine Withdrawal: Participants may experience smoking withdrawal symptoms during this 
study.  The symptoms can be uncomfortable but are typically of minimal risk. Smoking 
withdrawal symptoms include: 
a. Anger, irritability, frustration 
b. Anxiousness, nervousness 
c. Depressed mood or sadness  
d. Desire or craving to smoke 
e. Difficulty concentrating 
f. Increased appetite, hunger or weight gain 
g. Insomnia, problems sleeping or awakening at night 
h. Restlessness 
i. 
Impatience 
j. 
Constipation 
k. Dizziness 
l. 
Coughing 
m. Dreaming or nightmares 
n. Nausea 
o. Sore Throat 
8. Returning to Regular Smoking: It is possible that if participants return to smoking their usual 
brand of cigarette at the end of the study they may experience mild and transient nausea, 
dizziness, and lightheadedness. 
9. Risk to Fetus: Smoking during pregnancy can lead to miscarriage, preterm delivery, stillbirth, 
low birth weight, problems with the placenta, birth defects such as cleft palate, sudden infant 
death syndrome (SIDS), early childhood behavioral problems, altered lung development, and 
a possible propensity for addiction. Although unknown, adverse effects could occur with the 
use of vaping devices. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 41 of 66 
confidential 
10. Changes in blood pressure and/or heart rate: Smoking and nicotine can affect the 
cardiovascular system which may result in changes in blood pressure and/or heart rate. 
11. Changes in mood, emotions and psychiatric symptoms: Smoking and nicotine can affect a 
person’s mood and emotions and are associated with psychiatric disorders including major 
depressive disorder, general anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder and eating disorders.  Any 
changes in nicotine use or cigarette consumption could adversely affect mood, emotions and 
the symptoms related to psychiatric conditions in some individuals. 
12. Smoking and oral contraceptives in women: Women who smoke and are over the age of 35 
should not take oral contraceptives that contain estrogen without consulting their physician. 
Smoking while using oral contraceptives can increase the risk of having a cardiovascular 
event such as a heart attack or stroke. Additionally, there is a potential risk of thrombosis 
associated with hormonal therapy (including contraceptives) and smoking.  
13. Smoking and medications: Quitting smoking can greatly benefit participants’ health. 
However, changes in smoking can lead to changes in how well some medications work. 
Participants should disclose all medications they are taking. We also recommend that 
participants discuss any planned or actual changes in how much they smoke with their 
doctor, especially if they are taking any medications for psychiatric, cardiovascular, or other 
serious diseases. 
14. Unforeseen risks: There may be additional unforeseen short and long-term risks of 
participation.   
18. Avoiding Risks to Fetus 
If participants choose to be sexually active, they are advised to use an appropriate “double barrier” 
method of birth control (such as female use of a diaphragm, intrauterine device (IUD), or 
contraceptive sponge, in addition to male use of a condom) or the female should be using prescribed 
“birth control” pills, injections, or implants.  Female participants with child-bearing potential will be 
tested for pregnancy at Screening, Randomization, and Visits 04, 08 and 12.  If a participant 
becomes pregnant during the study, she will be withdrawn from the study.  Approximately 30 days 
after being withdrawn or having a positive pregnancy test at Visit 12, the research staff will call the 
participant to confirm her due date.  The licensed medical monitor will follow-up with the participant 
after delivery to ask questions about the baby’s health. 
19. Expected benefits of participation 
There are no immediate benefits from participating in the study. The information obtained from this 
study may ultimately help the Food and Drug Administration decide how best to regulate tobacco 
products with the goal of improving public health.  
20. Suicidality/Mental Health Monitoring 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 42 of 66 
confidential 
Participants who make any response other than “not at all” on the suicidal ideation question of the 
Prime MD (Question 1i), indicate suicidal ideation, have attempted suicide in the past month, or have 
had a suicide attempted in the past 5 years on the MINI suicide subscale will not be eligible to 
participate in the study. If the participant has attempted suicide between 6-10 years ago, then the 
LMM must approve eligibility. To determine if a participant is in immediate danger, staff will ask the 
participant two questions to determine level of risk: “Are you feeling suicidal?” and “Do you have a 
plan to kill yourself today?” If the participant has a plan to kill himself/herself, staff will put the 
participant in contact with the suicide prevention hotline (Durham Center Crisis Line at 1-800-510-
9132; Philadelphia Suicide Prevention Hotline: 215-686-4420 or UPenn’s HELP line: 215-898-HELP 
4357). If the participant refuses to talk to the hotline and leaves, the study staff will call 911. They 
will also contact the Study Coordinator and Site PI to inform them of the situation as soon as 
possible. If the participant does not have a plan to kill himself/herself, the study staff will recommend 
he/she speaks with the suicide hotline. The visit will continue as normal, but the participant will not 
be eligible for the study.  The participant will be paid $30 and provided with local mental health 
resources. The on-site clinician will be available by phone for consultation within 24-hours. 
Additionally, any participant whose score on the Prime MD indicates Major Depressive Disorder will 
be administered the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the GAD 2 week monitoring on paper. 
The BDI will be submitted, along with the Prime MD, Brief Medical History Questionnaire, Brief 
Medical History Follow-up Questionnaire, and the MINI suicide subscale to the licensed medical 
monitor for eligibility review. If he/she determines a participant with Major Depressive Disorder is 
eligible for study participation, the participant will complete the BDI each visit to monitor changes in 
his/her mood. 
21. Adverse Events (AE) 
21.1. Identifying Adverse Events 
While participating in the trial, adverse events and concomitant medications will be assessed at 
every study visit and vital signs and carbon monoxide will be measured.  Adverse events will typically 
be identified during the administration of the Health Changes Questionnaire and Respiratory Health 
Questionnaire, and in some cases during the administration of the CESD.  Other events may be 
identified from physiological study measures or by spontaneous reports during non-scheduled 
assessments. The medical monitor is notified about all AEs within 10 days. 
Questionnaire items that will be reviewed: 
1. Health Changes Questionnaire  
1. Have you had any negative changes in your physical or mental health since your 
last visit? If yes, briefly describe. 
2. Since your last visit, have you received any form of medical care?  If yes, briefly 
describe. 
No new AE report will be required if one or more conditions below are met and the description 
does not otherwise meet the definition of an AE. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 43 of 66 
confidential 
a. Existing AE already open for reported symptom 
b. Pre-existing condition without increase in severity or frequency of symptoms (brief 
medical history will be updated if not previously reported). 
c. Nicotine withdrawal symptoms that don’t meet AE criteria 
A. 
The following withdrawal symptoms are considered expected 
withdrawal symptoms and are not considered AEs 
1. Desire or craving to smoke 
2. Restlessness 
3. Impatience 
4. Increased appetite, hunger, weight gain* 
*If a participant indicates any clinical behaviors such as binging or 
purging this should be recorded as an Adverse Event and the 
PrimeMD should be completed. 
B. 
The following withdrawal symptoms would be considered an AE if 
the participant indicated the symptom had a significant impact on your 
daily life, caused a major disruption of functioning, or took any medication 
for it. 
1. Anger, irritability, frustration 
2. Difficulty Concentrating 
3. Insomnia 
4. Nightmare/Night Terrors  
5. Depressed (sad) mood* 
6. Anxious (nervous) mood* 
*If a depressed (sad) mood and an anxious (nervous) mood AE is 
reported, the participant will complete the Prime MD and be assessed 
for suicidality. 
d. Received preventative or follow-up medical care. 
e. Other (explain). 
 
2. Respiratory Health Questionnaire: In the past week, have you experienced any health 
problems, such as cold, flu, or other respiratory illness that would affect these 
respiratory symptoms? 
No new AE report will be required if one or more conditions below are met and the description 
does not otherwise meet the definition of an AE. 
a. Existing AE already open for reported symptom 
b. Pre-existing condition without increase in severity or frequency of symptoms (brief 
medical history will be updated if not previously reported; e.g., seasonal allergies). 
 
3. CESD: If the participant scores 16 or higher and is not already being monitored for 
depression, a ‘Adverse Event Form’ should be completed and the LMM will provide 
information regarding follow-up.  If there is already an open event, information will be added 
to the existing ‘Adverse Event Form.’  

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 44 of 66 
confidential 
 
Physiological data that will be reviewed: 
1. CO level: The ‘Adverse Event Form’ should be completed if the average CO within a visit is: 
o CO is greater than 50 ppm if CO at Baseline is < 20 ppm. 
o CO is greater than 60 ppm if CO at Baseline is 20 – 34 ppm. 
o CO is greater than 70 ppm if CO at Baseline is 35 – 49 ppm. 
o CO is greater than 80 ppm if CO at Baseline is 50 – 64 ppm. 
o CO is greater than 90 ppm if CO at Baseline is 65 – 80 ppm.  
2. Blood Pressure:  
o The ‘Adverse Event Form’ and ‘Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Symptom Checklist’ 
should be completed if an automatic and subsequent manual blood pressure 
measurement during the same visit is at or above 160 SBP or 100 DBP. 
o The ‘Adverse Event Form’ and ‘Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Symptom Checklist’ 
should be completed if an automatic and subsequent manual blood pressure 
measurement during the same visit is below 90 SBP or 50 DBP. 
3. Heart Rate:  
o The ‘Adverse Event Form’ and ‘Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Symptom Checklist’ 
should be completed if an automatic and subsequent manual heart rate 
measurement during the same visit is at or above 105 bpm. 
o The ‘Adverse Event Form’ and ‘Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Symptom Checklist’ 
should be completed if an automatic and subsequent manual heart rate 
measurement during the same visit is below 45 bpm.  
22. 
Management of SAEs and Other Study Risks 
The site medical monitor(s) will review all AEs.  A study participant may be discontinued from 
the study if the medical monitor and/or PI determine it is the best decision in order to protect the 
safety of a participant.  In the event that a participant either withdraws from the study or the 
investigator decides to discontinue a participant due to an AE/SAE, the participant will have 
appropriate follow-up medical monitoring.  The participant experiencing an AE/SAE will be 
followed until the problem resolves, stabilizes, or is clearly unrelated to the study cigarettes.  Any 
AE that remains open will be reviewed and closed at the 30 day follow-up visit.   
23. 
Reporting of SAEs to the IRB, FDA, and NIDA 
Serious adverse events (SAEs) as defined in 21 CFR 312.32 (death, life-threatening, 
hospitalization (initial or prolonged), disability or permanent damage, congenital anomaly/birth 
defect, required intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage (devices), other 
serious (important medical outcomes)) that are related or possibly related to study participation 
will be reported to the Administrative Core, all site IRBs, the NIDA Scientific Officer (Kevin 
Walton, PhD), the NIDA Project Officer (Ann Anderson, MD), FDA, and the Data Safety and 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 45 of 66 
confidential 
Monitoring Board.  All Site IRBs require that fatalities related to the study be reported within 24 
hours, that all other SAEs be reported within 5 business days.  Reports of all SAEs will also be 
documented within NIDA’s SAE data monitoring system, or SAETRS, within 72 hours.  
24. 
Reporting of IRB Actions to NIDA 
Actions taken by the local IRBs in response to SAEs will be reported to NIDA in the annual 
noncompetitive continuation application, as will reports of changes or amendments to the 
protocol as a result of an SAE.  Recommendation for trial discontinuation, for significant changes 
or amendments to the protocol, or other significant findings as a result of an SAE will be reported 
immediately to the NIDA Scientific Officer (Kevin Walton, PhD) and Project Officer (Ann 
Anderson, MD) by the Project PI.  
25. 
Reporting Changes or Amendments to the Protocol 
Any changes or amendments to the protocol made in response to adverse events/SAEs will be 
discussed with Eric Donny, PhD and Dorothy Hatsukami, PhD, and then requested in writing to 
the IRB, which will then grant or deny permission to make the requested change in protocol.  The 
DSMB and FDA will be notified about any significant changes to the protocol.  NIDA will be 
informed of any approved changes in protocol by documentation in the noncompetitive 
continuation application.  Changes that significantly alter the scope of the research or the ability 
of the research to achieve its specific aims will be submitted to Eric Donny, PhD and Dorothy 
Hatsukami, PhD, the DSMB, FDA, and NIDA for approval prior to implementation. 
26. 
Withdrawal or Monitoring of Participants  
For the participant’s protection, participants will be withdrawn immediately from the study 
if any of the following occur: 
 
1. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) event: Typically includes MI (heart attack), PTCA 
(angioplasty/stenting), bypass surgery, stroke, peripheral vascular disease (arterial 
blockages in arms or legs leading to procedure or surgery).  Less common CVD problems 
would be new cardiac arrhythmias (e.g., new atrial fibrillation) or new valvular disease (e.g., 
mitral or aortic regurgitation). 
2. DVT/PE (deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, i.e., blood clots in the venous system). 
3. Suicide Attempt:  A participant will be withdrawn if he/she attempts suicide at any time during 
participation in the study. 
4. Psychiatric Hospitalization: A participant will be withdrawn if he/she is hospitalized for 
psychiatric reasons at any time during participation in the study. 
5. Pregnancy: If participant indicates she is pregnant or has a positive pregnancy test at the 
Randomization Visit, she will be withdrawn from the study, and this event will remain open 
until delivery.  At that time the licensed medical monitor will contact the participant to ask a 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 46 of 66 
confidential 
few questions about the baby’s health and will update the open ‘Adverse Event Form’.  A 
positive pregnancy test at follow-up will trigger an ‘Adverse Event Form’ to be completed but 
will not result in withdrawal since she is no longer receiving study product. 
6. Expired breath carbon monoxide increase: A participant will be withdrawn from the study if 
their CO reading is 100 ppm or greater.   
 
The following will be monitored and can lead to the participant being withdrawn by the PI 
or Licensed Medical Monitor: 
 
1. Blood pressure (BP) or heart rate (HR) changes: If any of the following occur post-enrollment: 
1) BP is at or above 160 SBP or 100 DBP, 2) BP is below 90 SBP or 50 DBP 3) HR is at or 
above 105 bpm, 4) or below 45 bpm.   
2. Changes in tobacco product use: if during the weekly visits, participants self-report a greater 
than 100% increase in cigarette per day (total cigarettes, including study and non-study 
cigarettes) relative to baseline, or a 50% increase in cigarettes per day relative to baseline 
that is accompanied by an average daily use of 2 ml e-liquid or more.” 
3. Expired breath Carbon Monoxide increase: An ‘Adverse Event Form’ will be documented and 
the participant will be monitored by the medical monitor if CO exceeding the following criteria 
based on Baseline CO: 
a. CO is greater than 50 ppm if CO at Baseline is < 20 ppm. 
b. CO is greater than 60 ppm if CO at Baseline is 20 – 34 ppm. 
c. CO is greater than 70 ppm if CO at Baseline is 35 – 49 ppm. 
d. CO is greater than 80 ppm if CO at Baseline is 50 – 64 ppm. 
e. CO is greater than 90 ppm if CO at Baseline is 65 – 80 ppm.  
4. Medication changes: If a participant begins taking any of the exclusionary medications or 
other medications that could potentially have a smoking-drug interaction post- enrollment, 
the licensed medical monitor will determine how best to monitor and minimize potential risks 
(including withdrawal if warranted).  We will also recommend that a letter be sent to the 
participant’s physician (with their consent), making them aware of the potential changes in 
smoking that could occur as a result of participation in the study.   
5. Any hospitalization or debilitation in which participation in the study could be detrimental to 
the recovery process.  This will be self-reported by the participant and will be reviewed by 
the site PI and medical monitor to determine whether continued participation in the study is 
appropriate.   
6. If a participant is behaving in an inappropriate or threatening manner, admits to lying about 
eligibility criteria, including omitting previous medical diagnoses and medications, is 
participating in other smoking research studies that could affect the primary outcome 
measures, does not follow study instructions, etc., then the PI can withdraw him/her from the 
study at the PI’s discretion.  
7. If a participant fails to attend his/her Randomization Visit within the 21-day allowable visit 
window, he/she will not be eligible to reschedule this visit or continue participation in the 
study. 
8. If there is reason to believe the participant is sharing the study product with other people. 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 47 of 66 
confidential 
If a participant chooses to withdraw from the study at any time, we will them to return to the lab 
to return study product and equipment and to receive their final study payment. We will also ask 
participants who have been randomized if they would like to complete the end of study 
questionnaires. 
27. 
Investigational Tobacco Product 
The Co-Directors of this Center grant, Drs. Donny and Hatsukami, have submitted an 
Investigational Tobacco Product (ITP) application to the FDA to cover the experimental cigarettes 
being used in this study.  
28. 
Study Endpoints / Outcomes   
28.1. Primary Endpoints: 
 
Total number of cigarettes smoked per day (i.e. study plus non-study cigarettes) as 
measured by daily Interactive Voice Response (IVR) phone calls.  The total number 
of cigarettes smoked per day will be averaged using the last 7 days prior to the Week 
12 visit. We note that subjects have the opportunity to correct data entry errors in IVR 
from calls made since the last visit at each visit (for example, if a subject entered 100 
cigarettes instead of 10 cigarettes). In these cases, the original IVR data will be 
replaced with the corrected data to create a final, cleaned version that will be used 
for analysis (herein called “IVR-Revised”). A secondary, repeated measures analysis 
will also be completed using the mean of the total number of cigarettes smoked per 
day at each visit, calculated using IVR calls from the previous 7 days. In the event 
that two visits were less than 7 days apart, then the average will be calculated using 
only days since the last visit.  
28.2. Secondary Outcomes: 
 
Cigarette smoke exposure: mercapturic acid CEMA 
 
Smoke-free days: the number of days not smoking any combustible products based 
on IVR-Revised 
 
28.3. Exploratory Outcomes: 
 
Cigarette characteristics: CES subscale score for Satisfaction 
 
Discomfort/dysfunction: MNWS total  
 
Vaping device use: number of days using assigned vaping device (IVR) 
 
Study cigarettes per day (CPD): the mean cigarettes smoked per day based on 7 
days’ Daily Interactive Voice Response (IVR)-Revised data before the week 12 visit. 
 
Cigarette dependence: Total scores on the FTND 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 48 of 66 
confidential 
 
Compliance/retention: Non-study cigarette use (IVR), urinary anatabine, drop-out rate 
 
Nicotine exposure: urinary total nicotine equivalents 
 
Cigarette smoke exposure: breathe CO, urinary mercapturic acids, puff topography 
 
Relative reinforcement: Preference Task, Purchase Task 
 
Cigarette dependence: WISDM Primary Subscales, Penn State Smoking 
Questionnaire, and PATH Smoking Dependence questions 
 
E-cigarette dependence: Penn State E-cigarette questionnaire, PATH Vaping 
Dependence questions 
 
Hypothetical cigarette and vaping device use: Purchase Task, Predicted Behavior 
Questionnaire 
 
Discomfort/dysfunction: urge to use questionnaire, CES-D total score 
 
Vaping device use: intensity (puff/day) of use of the assigned vaping device (IVR), e-
liquid mls used per week; e-liquid flavor preferences  
 
Smoking/vaping context: Environmental and Social Influences on Tobacco Use, 
Context of Product Use 
 
Product expectancies: Vaping Utility Questionnaire, Smoking and Vaping 
Expectancies Questionnaires 
 
Perceived risk: Perceived Health Risk Questionnaire 
 
Other health-related behaviors: Breath alcohol, urine drug screen, Alcohol Use 
Questionnaire, Drug Use Questionnaire, weight  
 
Cigarette characteristics: CES subscale scores 
 
Intention to quit: Stages of Change, Contemplation Ladder, Quit Attempts 
 
Post-intervention changes in tobacco use behavior: 30-day tobacco use 
questionnaire 
 
Qualitative Interview: Themes related to product use patterns, e-liquid flavor 
selection, non-compliance and general study feedback 
 
28.4. Safety Outcomes: 
 
Potential adverse consequences: Change in mental (CES-D) or physical health 
(Respiratory and Global Health Questionnaire, Health Changes Questionnaire, 
weight)  
 
Measures of cardiovascular function: Heart rate, blood pressure 
 
Increased nicotine exposure as indicated by 100% increase in total nicotine 
equivalents relative to baseline or a 50% increase in cigarettes per day relative to 
baseline that is accompanied by an average daily use of 2ml e-liquid or more. 
 
Adverse events 
29. 
Statistical Approach 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 49 of 66 
confidential 
This is a 2x2x2 factorial design in which participants will be randomized with equal probability to 
one of eight groups. Randomization will be stratified by age (18-24 vs. 25+) and menthol 
preference; a set number/percentage of either age and menthol vs. non-menthol preferring 
smokers will not be enforced. All analyses described below will follow the intent-to-treat principle 
(i.e. subjects will be analyzed according to their randomized treatment assignment regardless of 
their compliance) unless otherwise noted.  
Our primary objective is to test the main effects of cigarette nicotine content, e-liquid nicotine 
content and e-liquid flavors, as well as the interactions among these factors. The primary 
endpoint will be total CPD (i.e. study plus non-study CPD) based on IVR-Revised. The primary 
analysis will compare CPD by factor at the week 12 visit using linear regression. Treatment 
groups should be balanced at baseline, and as a result our primary analysis will only adjust for 
baseline CPD, week and the three stratification factors (site, age, and menthol preference). This 
will be considered the “unadjusted model” for the purposes of this document. We will start with a 
model that includes all two-way interactions between the three factors (note: the three way 
interaction will not be considered). Two-way interactions that are not significant will be removed 
from the model and the final model will include the three factors, any two-way interactions 
significant at the 0.05 levels, baseline CPD, and the three stratification factors. The estimation 
and testing of main effects in the presence of significant interactions will be completed within 
levels of the other factor, otherwise, global estimates of the main effects will be obtained. 
Whenever possible, secondary endpoints will be analyzed following the approach to testing the 
main effects and interactions described above. Biomarkers of toxicant exposure are expected to 
be skewed and will be analyzed on the log scale. Likewise, exploratory endpoints will be 
analyzed following the approach outlined above using a linear mixed model or logistic regression, 
as appropriate, depending on the type of endpoint (continuous, binary). Finally, we will complete 
subgroup analyses following the approach described above within each subgroup (age: 18 – 24 
vs. 25+; menthol preference; sex). We will not use formal multiple comparison adjustments for 
secondary endpoints because we have included only 2 outcomes that are likely correlated with 
each other and the primary endpoint. Likewise, we will not correct for multiple comparisons for 
our subgroup analyses as they are considered exploratory.      
Study staff will make every effort to minimize missing data in the proposed clinical trial. The 
success of our previous and ongoing trials suggests that missing data will be minimal. 
Nevertheless, we plan to complete a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the impact of missing data 
on trial conclusions.   
We will compare subjects with and without missing data in order to identify baseline covariates 
associated with missing data. Our primary approach to handling missing data will be multiple 
imputation where missing values are imputed using regression models developed from baseline 
covariates (Little and Rubin, 2002). Daily IVR data will be averaged within a week using complete 
observations (i.e. we will average the number of cigarettes smoked per day for complete calls). 
In our previous work (Donny et al., 2015), 90% of weeks had 0 or 1 missed call, while 4% of 
weeks were completely missing, which suggests that an alternate approach to handling 
sporadically missed calls will only impact a small number of weeks for the entire trial. Missing 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 50 of 66 
confidential 
weekly average IVR data (i.e. when all calls in a week are missing) will be analyzed using multiple 
imputation. 
In addition, we will conduct a sensitivity analysis of the primary and secondary endpoints using 
baseline-carried-forward and last-observation carried forward. The results of these analyses will 
be compared to the primary analysis to evaluate the robustness of our conclusions. 
For the qualitative data, we will use grounded theory to develop hypotheses related to the topics 
of interest. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The interviews will be 
analyzed using open and axial coding. Themes will emerge during data analysis, which will be 
ongoing throughout the project.   
30. 
Power Analysis  
We will enroll 480 subjects (n=60/group) and assume 75% retention at week 12 (i.e. 360 completers) 
based on our current and previous trials. Power calculations are presented for testing the main 
effects and the interactions between cigarette nicotine content and e-cigarette nicotine concentration 
or flavor. Effect size estimates were based on our previous studies of VLNC cigarettes and the 
assumption that the main effect of e-liquid nicotine content and the interaction between e-liquid 
nicotine content and cigarette nicotine content will be similar to the effect of cigarette nicotine 
content. This assumption is supported by the results of Donny and Jones, who found that the effect 
of transdermal nicotine on use of VLNC cigarettes was as large as the main effect for cigarette 
nicotine content (Donny & Jones, 2009). The impact of flavors is largely unknown, therefore, we 
assumed an effect size similar to e-liquid nicotine content (A in table below) as well as one half as 
large (B in table below). All power calculations were completed assuming a type-I error rate of 0.05. 
Power calculations for the main effect were completed in PASS 13. Power for testing interactions 
was calculated by simulation and is consistent with the well-known theoretical relationship between 
the power for testing main effects and the power for testing interactions.       
 
  
Outcome  
Effect 
size 
shown as  
Diff (SD)  
 
Power - Full Sample  
Power - SubgroupsC  
Main  
EffectA  
Main  
EffectB  
  
InteractionA  
  
InteractionB  
Main  
EffectA  
  
InteractionA  
 
 
 
Primary Outcome  
 
CPD1 
6.3 (7.2)  
0.99  
0.99  
0.99  
0.54  
0.99  
0.83  
 
 
 
Secondary Outcomes  
 
FTND1 
1.31 
(1.77)  
0.97  
0.94 
0.94 
0.41 
0.94  
0.69 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 51 of 66 
confidential 
Log(CEMA) 1  0.51 
(0.92)  
0.96 
0.73 
0.73 
0.25 
0.74 
0.44 
A Effect size for flavor equal to effect size for nicotine. B Effect size for flavor equal to half the effect size 
for nicotine.  
C Power calculations for our pre-planned subgroup analyses are based on the assumption of 50% of 
participants in each subgroup defined by age, sex, and menthol status. We are not forcing balance for 
any of these factors and we therefore acknowledge that the actual power will be larger for subgroups 
with more than 50% of the sample and lower for subgroups with less than 50% of the sample. 1 The 
hypothesized differences for CPD, FTND and log(CEMA) are based on the differences observed 
between the immediate reduction and control groups at 12 weeks in Hatsukami et al. (submitted)  
31. 
Subject Identifier  
The subject identifier is an alpha-numeric combination. Example: M-G001 would be Wake Forest 
University’s first subject. 
31.1.1. Project Identifier 
 
G= Project 2 
31.1.1. Site Identifier 
M = Wake Forest School of Medicine 
E = University of Pennsylvania 
31.1.2. Subject ID  
001-899  
 
31.1.3. Data Collection Time Points Identification Numbers 
92= Screening Visit 
91=Baseline Visit 1 
00=Randomization 
01= Week 1 visit 
02= Week 2 visit 
03= Week 3 visit 
04= Week 4 visit 
06= Week 6 visit 
08= Week 8 visit 
10= Week 10 visit 
12= Week 12 End of Intervention visit 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 52 of 66 
confidential 
30= 30-day follow-up visit 
Additional visit (AV1, AV2, etc)  
86 = Termination Visit 
 
 
 

Identifiers: NCT03185546   Date:   12/31/2019 
Project 2: The Impact of Cigarette Nicotine Content, E-cigarette Nicotine Content, and E-    cigarette Flavoring on Smoking Behavior 
 
32. 
Summary of Measures 
Procedures Table 
Platform/Source 
SCRN 
92 
BL 
91 
RAN 
00 
Week 
01 
Week 
02 
Week 
03 
Week 
04 
Week 
06 
Week 
08 
Week 
10 
Week 
12 
Follow-
Up 30 
Anatabine (spot urine) 
UMN Biomarker 
Core 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Mercapturic Acids (1st  void 
urine) 
UMN Biomarker 
Core 
 
X 
X 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
Total Nicotine Equivalents (1st 
void urine) 
UMN Biomarker 
Core 
 
X 
X 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
Nicotine Metabolite Ratio 
(saliva) 
UMN Biomarker 
Core 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Carbon Monoxide  
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Urinary Cotinine Test  
Paper and REDCap X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BrAC 
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Toxicology Screen 
Paper and REDCap X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
OTHER ASSESSMENTS 
Identifying Information Form 
Paper and Access 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Brief Medical History 
Questionnaire  
Paper and REDCap X 
  
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
Brief Medical History Follow-
Up Questionnaire (if needed) 
Paper and REDCap X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Prime MD 
Paper and REDCap X 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
MINI Suicide Subscale 
Paper (Source 
Only) 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tobacco Use History and 
Exposure 
Paper and REDCap X 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
Demographics Questionnaire 
REDCap 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Smoking Cessation Therapy 
Use 
Paper and REDCap X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 54 of 66 
confidential 
 
Procedure Table 
Platform/Source 
SCRN 
92 
BL 
91 
RAN 
00 
Week 
01 
Week 
02 
Week 
03 
Week 
04 
Week 
06 
Week 
08 
Week 
10 
Week 
12 
Follow-
Up 30 
Smoking Stages of Change 
Paper and REDCap X 
   
 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE 
Drug Use (12 months)  
Paper and REDCap X  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Drug Use History (1 month) 
Paper and REDCap X 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
Alcohol Use (12 months) 
REDCap 
X 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
Alcohol Use (1 month) 
REDCap 
X 
  
  
  
  
  
X 
 
X 
  
X 
X 
DEPRESSION MONITORING 
Beck Depression Inventory (if 
needed) 
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
CES-D 
REDCap 
X 
  
  
  
  
  
X 
 
X 
  
X 
  
GAD 2 week monitoring (if 
needed) 
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
HEALTH MONITORING 
Concomitant Medications 
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X   
Health Changes Questionnaire 
Paper and REDCap  
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Respiratory Health 
Questionnaire  
REDCap 
  
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 X 
Adverse Event Form (if needed) Paper and REDCap   
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
SMOKING BEHAVIOR 
Tobacco Daily Diary (IVR; in 
field, enrolled at screening) 
 
 Enroll 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Un-
enroll    
Puff Topography: Usual Brand 
CReSS 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
Puff Topography: Study Cig 
CReSS 
  
  
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
  
Puff Topography: Study Vape 
Custom 
  
 
 
X 
 
 
  
 
 
X 
 
  
IVR Review and TLFB 
Questionnaire, if needed  
 
 
Paper and REDCap   
X 
X 
 X 
X 
X 
 X 
X 
X 
 X 
X 
 

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 55 of 66 
confidential 
Procedure Table 
Platform/Source 
SCRN 
92 
BL 
91 
RAN 
00 
Week 
01 
Week 
02 
Week 
03 
Week 
04 
Week 
06 
Week 
08 
Week 
10 
Week 
12 
Follow-
Up 30 
Context of Product Use: 
Baseline 
REDCap 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Context of Product Use: 
Experimental 
REDCap 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
Predicted Behavior 
Questionnaire 
REDCap 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
Intention to Quit Smoking + 
Vaping 
Paper and REDCap  
 X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
30 Day Tobacco Use 
Questionnaire 
Paper and REDCap   
 
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
  
X  
Craving/Withdrawal  
MNWS 
REDCap 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Urge to Use: Baseline 
REDCap 
  
  
X 
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
Urge to Use: Experimental 
REDCap 
  
  
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
  
Smoking and Vaping Reinforcement/Dependence  
Preference Task 
REDCap 
  
  
X 
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
Cigarette Dependence 
REDCap 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
Vaping Dependence 
REDCap 
  
 
X 
  
 
 
X 
 
X 
  
X 
X 
Purchase Task Usual Brand 
REDCap 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Purchase Task Study Cigarette 
+ Vape 
REDCap 
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
X 
  
PRODUCT EVALUATION  
Cigarette Evaluation Scale: 
Usual Brand 
REDCap 
  
X 
  
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
  
 
Cigarette Evaluation Scale: 
Study Cig. 
REDCap 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
Vaping Evaluation Scale: Study 
Vape 
REDCap 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
  
X 
 
Perceived Health Risk: Usual 
Brand 
REDCap 
  
X 
 
  
 
 
   
 
 
  
 
  

CENIC II Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 56 of 66 
confidential 
Procedure Table 
Platform/Source 
SCRN 
92 
BL 
91 
RAN 
00 
Week 
01 
Week 
02 
Week 
03 
Week 
04 
Week 
06 
Week 
08 
Week 
10 
Week 
12 
Follow-
Up 30 
Perceived Health Risk: Study 
Products  
REDCap 
  
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
 
X 
  
Environmental and Social 
Influences on Tobacco Use 
Questionnaire 
REDCap 
  
X 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
   
X 
  
Smoking Expectancies 
Questionnaire 
REDCap 
  
X 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
  
Vaping Expectancies 
Questionnaire 
REDCap 
  
X  
  
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
X 
  
Vaping Utility  
REDCap 
  
X 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
X 
  
End of Study Questionnaire  
REDCap 
  
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
   
X 
  
Qualitative Interview Guide 
Paper/Audio 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
PHYSIOLOIGCAL ASSESSMENTS 
Height  
Paper and REDCap X 
 
  
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
Weight  
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Pregnancy Test (Female 
Participants) 
Paper and REDCap X 
 
X 
  
  
 
X 
 
X 
  
X 
  
HR/BP 
Paper and REDCap X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
 
 
 
 

Identifiers: NCT03185546   Date:   12/31/2019 
Project 2: The Impact of Cigarette Nicotine Content, E-cigarette Nicotine Content, and E-    cigarette Flavoring on 
Smoking Behavior 
 
33. 
References  
Agaku, I. T., King, B. A., Husten, C. G., Bunnell, R., Ambrose, B. K., Hu, S. S., . . . Prevention. (2014). Tobacco 
product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013. MMWR: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 
63(25), 542-547.  
Arrazola, R. A., Singh, T., Corey, C. G., Husten, C. G., Neff, L. J., Apelberg, B. J., . . . Prevention. (2015). 
Tobacco use among middle and high school students - United States, 2011-2014. MMWR: Morbidity and 
Mortality Weekly Report, 64(14), 381-385.  
Baker, H. (2015). E-cigarettes and subsequent tobacco use in adolescence. Lancet Oncology, 16(13), e481. 
doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00272-7 
Bandiera, F. C., Ross, K. C., Taghavi, S., Delucchi, K., Tyndale, R. F., & Benowitz, N. L. (2015). Nicotine 
Dependence, Nicotine Metabolism, and the Extent of Compensation in Response to Reduced Nicotine 
Content Cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res, 17(9), 1167-1172. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntu337 
Beck, A. T., Ward C., & Mendelson, M. (1961). Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561–
571. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004. PMID 13688369. 
Beiner, L. & Abrams D.B. (1991).  The Contemplation Ladder: validation of a measure of readiness to consider smoking 
cessation. Health Psychology, 10 (5), 360-3650. doi: 10.1037//0278-6133.10.5.360  
Benowitz, N .L., Pomerleau, O. F., Pomerlau, C. S., & Jacob, P. (2003). Nicotine metabolite ratio as a predictor 
of 
cigarette 
consumption. 
Nicotine 
& 
Tobacco 
Research, 
5, 
621-624. 
doi: 
10.1080/1462220031000158717. 
Benowitz, N. L. & Henningfield, J. E. (1994). Establishing a nicotine threshold for addiction. The implications for 
tobacco 
regulation. 
New 
England 
Journal 
of 
Medicine, 
331, 
123-125. 
doi: 
10.1056/NEJM199407143310212. 
Benowitz, N. L., Dains, K. M., Hall, S. M., Stewart, S., Wilson, M., Dempsey, D. A., et al. (2009). Progressive 
commercial cigarette yield reduction: Biochemical exposure and behavioral assessment. Cancer 
Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 18, 876-883. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0731. 
Benowitz, N. L., Dains, K. M., Hall, S. M., Stewart, S., Wilson, M., Dempsey, D. A & Jacob P. (2012). Smoking 
behavior and exposure to tobacco toxicants during 6 months of smoking progressively reduced nicotine 
content cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 21(5), 761-769. Doi: 10.1158/1055-
9965.EPI-11-0644. 
Benowitz, N. L., Hall, S. M., Stewart, S., Wilson, M., Dempsey, D. A., & Jacob, P. (2007). Nicotine and carcinogen 
exposure with smoking of progressively reduced nicotine content cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiology, 
Biomarkers & Prevention, 16, 2479-2485. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0393. 
Benowitz, N. L., Nardone, N., Dains, K. M., Hall, S. M., Stewart, S., Dempsey, D., & Jacob, P., 3rd. (2015). Effect 
of reducing the nicotine content of cigarettes on cigarette smoking behavior and tobacco smoke toxicant 
exposure: 2-year follow up. Addiction, 110(10), 1667-1675. doi:10.1111/add.12978 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 58 of 66 
confidential 
Blank, M. D., Disharoon, S., & Eissenberg, T. (2009). Comparison of methods for measurement of smoking 
behavior: Mouthpiece-based computerized devices versus direct observation. Nicotine & Tobacco 
Research, 11, 896-903. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntp083. 
Brauer, L. H., Hatsukami, D. K., Hanson, K., & Shiffman, S. (1996). Smoking topography in tobacco chippers 
and dependent smokers. Addictive Behaviors, 21, 233-238. doi: 10.1016/0306-4603(95)00054-2. 
Buchhalter, A. R., Acosta, M. C., Evans, S. E., Breland, A. B., & Eissenberg, T. (2005). Tobacco abstinence 
symptom suppression: The role played by the smoking-related stimuli that are delivered by denicotinized 
cigarettes. Addiction, 100, 550-559. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01030.x. 
Butschky, M. F., Bailey, D., Henningfield, J. E., & Pickworth, W. B. (1995). Smoking without nicotine delivery 
decreases withdrawal in 12-hour abstinent smokers. Pharmacology Biochemistry & Behavior, 50, 91-96. 
doi: 10.1016/0091-3057(94)00269-O. 
Caggiula, A. R., Donny, E. C., White, A. R., Chaudhri, N., Booth, S., Gharib, M. A., . . . Sved, A. F. (2001). Cue 
dependency of nicotine self-administration and smoking. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 
70(4), 515-530.  
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Cigarette smoking among adults -- United States, 2000. 
MMWR: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 51(29), 642-645.  
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cigarette smoking among adults -- United States, 2000. MMWR 
Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2002;51(29):642-45 
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health & 
Social Behavior, 24, 385-396. doi: 10.2307/2136404. 
Congress (2009). Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. (H.R. 1256). U. S. Congress. 
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 
Conklin, C. A. & Tiffany S. T. (2002). Applying extinction research and theory to cue-exposure addiction 
treatments. Addiction, 97, 155-167. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00014.x. 
Cox, L. S., Tiffany, S. T., & Christen, A. G. (2001). Evaluation of the brief questionnaire of smoking urges (QSU-
brief) in laboratory and clinical settings. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 3, 7-16. doi: 
10.1080/14622200124218. 
Dawkins, L., Turner, J., & Crowe, E. (2013). Nicotine derived from the electronic cigarette improves time-based 
prospective memory in abstinent smokers. Psychopharmacology, 227(3), 377-384. doi:10.1007/s00213-
013-2983-2 
Dawkins, L., Turner, J., Hasna, S., & Soar, K. (2012). The electronic-cigarette: effects on desire to smoke, 
withdrawal 
symptoms 
and 
cognition. 
Addictive 
Behaviors, 
37(8), 
970-973. 
doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.03.004 
Deeming tobacco products to subject to the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family 
Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. (2016). Restrictions on the sale and distribution of tobacco 
products and required warning statements for tobacco products, A rule by the Food and Drug 
Administration, Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration.  

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 59 of 66 
confidential 
Dempsey, D. A., Tutka, P., Jacob, P., Allen, F., Schoedel, K., Tyndale, R. F., et al. (2004). Nicotine metabolite 
ratio as an index of cytochrome P450 2A6 metabolic activity. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 76, 
64-72. doi: 10.1016/j.clpt.2004.02.011. 
Denlinger, R. L., Smith, T. T., Murphy, S. E., Koopmeiners, J. S., Benowitz, N. L., Hatsukami, D., & Donny, E. 
C. (2016). Nicotine and anatabine exposure from very low nicotine content cigarettes. Tobacco 
Regulatory Science, 2(2), 186-203.  
Dermody, S. S., Donny, E. C., Hertsgaard, L. A., & Hatsukami, D. K. (2015). Greater reductions in nicotine 
exposure while smoking very low nicotine content cigarettes predict smoking cessation. Tobacco Control, 
24(6), 536-539. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051797 
Dermody, S. S., Tidey, J. W., Denlinger, R. L., Pacek, L. R., al'Absi, M., Drobes, D. J., . . . Donny, E. C. (2016). 
The Impact of Smoking Very Low Nicotine Content Cigarettes on Alcohol Use. Alcoholism, Clinical and 
Experimental Research, 40(3), 606-615. doi:10.1111/acer.12980 
DiClemente, C. C., Prochaska, J. O., Fairhurst, S. K., Velicer, W. F., Velasquez, M. M., & Rossi, J. S. (1991). 
The process of smoking cessation: An analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation 
stages of change. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 59, 295-304. doi: 10.1037/0022-
006X.59.2.295. 
Donny, E. C. & Jones, M. (2009). Prolonged exposure to denicotinized cigarettes with or without transdermal 
nicotine. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 104, 23-33. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.01.021. 
Donny, E. C., & Jones, M. (2009). Prolonged exposure to denicotinized cigarettes with or without transdermal 
nicotine. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 104(1-2), 23-33. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.01.021 
Donny, E. C., Denlinger, R. L., Tidey, J. W., Koopmeiners, J. S., Benowitz, N. L., Vandrey, R. G., . . . Hatsukami, 
D. K. (2015). Randomized Trial of Reduced-Nicotine Standards for Cigarettes. New England Journal of 
Medicine, 373(14), 1340-1349. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1502403 
Donny, E. C., Houtsmuller, E. J., & Stitzer, M. L. (2007). Smoking in the absence of nicotine: Behavioral, 
subjective and physiological effects over 11 days. Addiction, 102, 324-334. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-
0443.2006.01670.x. 
Erb, P., Raiff, B. R., Meredith, S. E., & Dallery, J. (2014). The accuracy of a lower-cost breath carbon monoxide 
meter in distinguishing smokers from non-smokers. Journal of Smoking Cessation, 10(1), 59-64.  
Ernst, M., Heishman, S. J., Spurgeon, L., & London, E. D. (2001). Smoking history and nicotine effects on 
cognitive performance. Neuropsychopharmocology, 25, 313-319. doi: 10.1016/S0893-133X(01)00257-3. 
Etter, J. F., & Eissenberg, T. (2015). Dependence levels in users of electronic cigarettes, nicotine gums and 
tobacco cigarettes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 147, 68-75. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.12.007 
Federal Trade Commission (2000). Tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide of the smoke of 1294 varieties of 
domestic cigarettes for the year 1998 (FTC File No. 992 3169). 
Federal Trade Commission (2009). Federal Trade Commission cigarette report for 2006. (FTC File No. 072-
3058). 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 60 of 66 
confidential 
Food 
and 
Drug 
Adminstration 
Consumer 
Updates, 
April 
1, 
2013 
http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm345087.htm  
Furlow, B. (2015). US Government warns against long-term dual use of conventional and e-cigarettes. Lancet 
Respir Med, 3(5), 345. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(15)00138-1 
Gans, K. M., Ross E., Barner C. W., Wylie-Rosett J., McMurray J., Eaton C. (2003). REAP and WAVE: New 
tools to rapidly assess/discuss nutrition with patients. The Journal of Nutrition, 133(2), 556S-562S.  
George, T. P., Vessicchio, J. C., Termine, A., Sahady, M., Head, C. A., Pepper, W., et al. (2002). Effects of 
smoking 
abstinence 
on 
visuospatial 
working 
memory 
function 
in 
schizophrenia. 
Neuropsychopharmacology, 26, 75-85. doi: 10.1016/S0893-133X(01)00296-2. 
Giovino GA. Epidemiology of tobacco use in the United States. Oncogene 2002;21(48):7326-40 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=123
79876. 
Giovino, G. A. (2002). Epidemiology of tobacco use in the United States. Oncogene, 21(48), 7326-7340.  
Glover, M., & McRobbie, H. (2015). Electronic cigarettes appealing quit aids for young adult smokers. New 
Zealand Medical Journal, 128(1417), 59-60.  
Gross, J., Lee, J., & Stitzer, M. L. (1997). Nicotine-containing versus de-nicotinized cigarettes: Effects on craving 
and withdrawal. Pharmacology Biochemistry & Behavior, 57, 159-165. doi: 10.1016/S0091-
3057(96)00309-7. 
Hajek, P., Goniewicz, M. L., Phillips, A., Myers Smith, K., West, O., & McRobbie, H. (2015). Nicotine intake from 
electronic cigarettes on initial use and after 4 weeks of regular use. Nicotine Tob Res, 17(2), 175-179. 
doi:10.1093/ntr/ntu153 
Hatsukami DK, Perkins KA, Lesage MG, et al. Nicotine reduction revisited: science and future directions. Tob 
Control 2010;19(5):e1-10 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20876072. 
Hatsukami, D. K., Benowitz, N. L., Rennard, S. I., Oncken, C., & Hecht, S. S. (2006). Biomarkers to assess the 
utility of potential reduced exposure tobacco products. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 8, 600-622. doi: 
10.1080/14622200600576628. 
Hatsukami, D. K., Hertsgaard, L.A., Vogel, R.I., Jensen, J.A., Murphy S.E, Hecht, S.S., et al. (2013). Reduced 
nicotine content cigarettes and nicotine patch. Cancer, Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 22(6): 
1015-24. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965 
Hatsukami, D. K., Kotlyar, M., Hertsgaard, L. A., Zhang, Y., Carmella, S. G., Jensen, J. A., . . . Hecht, S. S. 
(2010). Reduced nicotine content cigarettes: effects on toxicant exposure, dependence and cessation. 
Addiction, 105(2), 343-355. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02780.x 
Hatsukami, D. K., Kotlyar, M., Hertsgaards, L. A., Zhang, Y., Carmella, S. G., Jensen, J. S., et al. (2010). 
Reduced nicotine content cigarettes: Effects on toxicant exposure, dependence and cessation. Addiction, 
105, 343-355. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02780.x. 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 61 of 66 
confidential 
Hatsukami, D. K., Perkins, K. A., Lesage, M. G., Ashley, D. L., Henningfield, J. E., Benowitz, N. L., . . . Zeller, M. 
(2010). Nicotine reduction revisited: science and future directions. Tobacco Control, 19(5), e1 -10. 
doi:19/5/e1 [pii] 
Heatherton, T. F., Kozlowski, L. T., Frecker, R. C., & Fagerström, K. O. (1991). The Fagerström test for nicotine 
dependence: A revision of the Fagerström tolerance questionnaire. British Journal of Addiction, 86, 1119-
1127.  
Heishman, S. J. (1999). Behavioral and cognitive effects of smoking: Relationship to nicotine addiction. Nicotine 
& Tobacco Research, 1(Suppl 2), S143-147. doi: 10.1080/14622299050011971. 
Henningfield J, Benowitz NL, Slade J, et al. Reducing the addictiveness of cigarettes. Council on Scientific 
Affairs, 
American 
Medical 
Association. 
Tob 
Control 
1998;7(3):281-93 
http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/7/3/281. 
Henningfield, J., Benowitz, N. L., Slade, J., Houston, T. P., Davis, R. M., & Deitchman, S. D. (1998). Reducing 
the addictiveness of cigarettes. Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Tobacco 
Control, 7(3), 281-293. doi:10.1136/tc.7.3.281  
Herning, R. I., Jones, R. T., Bachman, J., & Mines, A. H. (1981). Puff volume increases when low-nicotine 
cigarettes are smoked. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Edition), 283(6285), 187-189. doi: 
10.1136/bmj.283.6285.187. 
Hiler M, Breland A, Spindle T, Maloney S, Lipato T, Karaoghlanian N, Shihadeh A, Lopez A,  
Hughes, J. R. & Hatsukami, D. K. (1986). Signs and symptoms of tobacco withdrawal. Archives of General 
Psychiatry, 43, 289-294.  
Hukkanen, J., Jacob, P., & Benowitz, N. L. (2005). Metabolism and disposition kinetics of nicotine. 
Pharmacological Reviews, 57, 79-115. doi: 10.1124/pr.57.1.3. 
Jacobs, E. A. & Bickel, W. K. (1999). Modeling drug consumption in the clinic using simulation procedures: 
Demand for heroin and cigarettes in opioid-dependent outpatients. Experimental & Clinical 
Psychopharmacology, 7, 412-426. doi:10.1037/1064-1297.7.4.412. 
Jarvis MJ, Bates C. Eliminating nicotine in cigarettes. Tob Control 1999;8(1):106-7; author reply 07-9 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=104
65828 
Jarvis, M. J., & Bates, C. (1999). Eliminating nicotine in cigarettes. Tobacco Control, 8(1), 106-107; author reply 
107-109.  
Johnstone, E., Benowitz, N. L., Cargill, A., Jacob, R., Hinks, L., Day, I., et al. (2006). Determinants of the rate of 
nicotine metabolism and effects on smoking behavior. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 80, 319-
330. doi: 10.1016/j.clpt.2006.06.011. 
Juliano LM, Brandon TH. Reactivity to instructed smoking availability and environmental cues: evidence with urge and 
reaction time. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology. 1998;6:45–53. 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 62 of 66 
confidential 
Kalousova, L. (2015). E-cigarettes: a harm-reduction strategy for socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers? 
Lancet Respir Med, 3(8), 598-600. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(15)00239-8 
Kleykamp, B. A., Jennings, J. M., Blank, M. D., & Eissenberg, T. (2005). The effects of nicotine on attention and 
working memory in never-smokers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19, 433-438. doi: 10.1037/0893-
164X.19.4.433. 
Kozlowski, L. T. (2015). Prospects for a nicotine-reduction strategy in the cigarette endgame: Alternative tobacco 
harm 
reduction 
scenarios. 
International 
Journal 
of 
Drug 
Policy, 
26(6), 
543-547. 
doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.02.001 
Kozlowski, L. T. (2016). Cigarette prohibition and the need for more prior testing of the WHO TobReg's global 
nicotine-reduction strategy. Tobacco Control. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-052995 
Kozlowski, L. T. (2017). Let actual markets help assess the worth of optional very-low-nicotine cigarettes before 
deciding on mandatory regulations. Addiction, 112(1), 3-5. doi:10.1111/add.13515 
Levi, M., Dempsey, D. A., Benowitz, N. L., & Sheiner, L. B. (2007). Prediction methods for nicotine clearance 
using cotinine and 3-hydroxy-cotinine spot saliva samples II. Model application. Journal of 
Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics, 34, 23-34. doi: 10.1007/s10928-006-9026-0. 
Little, R. J., Long, Q., Lin, X., (2009). A Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Causal Effect of a Treatment 
in Randomized Clinical Trials Subject to Noncompliance. Biometrics, 65, 640-649. 
MacKillop, J., Murphy, J. G., Ray, L. A., Eisenberg, D. T., Lisman, S. A., Lum, J. K., et al. (2008). Further 
validation of a cigarette purchase task for assessing the relative reinforcing efficacy of nicotine in college 
smokers. Experimental & Clinical Psychopharmacology, 16, 57-65. doi: 10.1037/1064-1297.16.1.57. 
Macqueen, D. A., Heckman, B. W., Blank, M. D., Janse Van Rensburg, K., Evans, D. E., & Drobes, D. J. (2012). 
Transient compensatory smoking in response to placebo cigarettes. Psychopharmacology, 223(1), 47-
54. doi:10.1007/s00213-012-2685-1 
McNeill, A., Brose, L. S., Calder, R., Hitchman, S. C., Hajek, P., & McRobbie, H. (2015). E-cigarettes: the need 
for clear communication on relative risks. Lancet, 386(10000), 1237. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00079-
3 
McRobbie, H., Bullen, C., Hartmann-Boyce, J., & Hajek, P. (2014). Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation 
and reduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(12), CD010216. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub2 
McRobbie, H., Phillips, A., Goniewicz, M. L., Smith, K. M., Knight-West, O., Przulj, D., & Hajek, P. (2015). Effects 
of Switching to Electronic Cigarettes with and without Concurrent Smoking on Exposure to Nicotine, 
Carbon Monoxide, and Acrolein. Cancer Prevention Research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 8(9), 873 -878. 
doi:10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-15-0058 
McRobbie, H., Thornley, S., Bullen, C., Lin, R. B., Senior, H., Laugesen, M., . . . Hajek, P. (2010). A randomized 
trial of the effects of two novel nicotine replacement therapies on tobacco withdrawal symptoms and user 
satisfaction. Addiction, 105(7), 1290-1298. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02950.x 
Murthy, V. (2014) The Health Consequences of Smoking-50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon 
General. Atlanta (GA). 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 63 of 66 
confidential 
Myers, C. S., Taylor, R. C., Moolchan, E. T., & Heishman, S. J. (2008). Dose-related enhancement of mood and 
cognition in smokers administered nicotine nasal spray. Neuropsychopharmocology, 33, 588-598. doi: 
10.1038/sj.npp.1301425. 
Nondahl, D. M., Cruickshanks, K. J., & Schubert, C. R. (2005). A questionnaire for assessing environmental 
tobacco smoke exposure. Environmental Research, 97, 76-82. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2004.02.005. 
Orleans C, Slade J. Nicotine Addiction: Principles and Management. New York: Oxford University Press 1993. 
Orleans, C., & Slade, J. (1993). Nicotine Addiction: Principles and Management. New York: Oxford University 
Press. 
Pacek, L. R., Vandrey, R., Dermody, S. S., Denlinger-Apte, R. L., Lemieux, A., Tidey, J. W., . . . Donny, E. C. 
(2016). Evaluation of a reduced nicotine product standard: Moderating effects of and impact on cannabis 
use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 167, 228-232. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.620 
Pickworth, W. B., Nelson, R. A., Rohrer, M. S., Fant, V. R., & Henningfield, J. E. (1999). Pharmacodynamic 
effects of new de-nicotinized cigarettes. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 1, 357-364. doi: 
10.1080/14622299050011491. 
Piper, M. E., McCarthy, D. E., Bolt, D. M., Smith, S. S., Lerman, C., Benowitz, N. L., et al. (2008). Assessing 
dimensions of nicotine dependence: An evaluation of the Nicotine Dependence Syndrome Scale (NDSS) 
and the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM). Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 
10, 1009-1020. doi: 10.1080/14622200802097563.  
Polosa, R. (2015). E-cigarettes: Public Health England's evidence based confusion? Lancet, 386(10000), 1237-
1238. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00133-6 
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. 
Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401. doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306. 
Ramoa, C. P., Hiler, M. M., Spindle, T. R., Lopez, A. A., Karaoghlanian, N., Lipato, T., . . . Eissenberg, T. (2016). 
Electronic cigarette nicotine delivery can exceed that of combustible cigarettes: a preliminary report. 
Tobacco Control, 25(e1), e6-9. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2015-052447 
RamôaC, Eissenberg T. (2017). Electronic cigarette user plasma nicotine concentration, puff topography, heart 
rate, and subjective effects: Influence of liquid nicotine concentration and user experience. Exp. Clin. 
Psychopharmacology, 5, 380-392.  
Richter, P., Steven, P. R., Bravo, R., Lisko, J. G., Damian, M., Gonzalez-Jimenez, N., . . . Watson, C. H. (2016). 
Characterization of SPECTRUM Variable Nicotine Research Cigarettes. Tob Regul Sci, 2(2), 94-105. 
doi:10.18001/TRS.2.2.1 
Robinson, J. C. & Forbes, W. F. (1975). The role of carbon monoxide in cigarette smoking. I. Carbon monoxide 
yield from cigarettes. Archives of Environmental Health, 30, 425-434.  
Robinson, M. L., Houtsmuller, E. J., Moolchan, E. T. & Pickworth, W. B. (2000). Placebo cigarettes in smoking 
research. Experimental & Clinical Psychopharmacology, 8, 326-332. doi: 10.1037/1064-1297.8.3.326. 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 64 of 66 
confidential 
Rose, J. E. & Levin, E. D. (1991). Inter-relationships between conditioned and primary reinforcement in the 
maintenance of cigarette smoking. British Journal of Addiction, 86, 605-609. doi:10.1111/j.1360-
0443.1991.tb01816.x. 
Rose, J. E. (2006). Nicotine and nonnicotine factors in cigarette addiction. Psychopharmacology, 184(3-4), 274-
285. doi:10.1007/s00213-005-0250-x 
Rose, J. E., & Corrigall, W. A. (1997). Nicotine self-administration in animals and humans: similarities and 
differences. Psychopharmacology, 130, 28-40. doi: 10.1007/s002130050209. 
Rose, J. E., Behm, F. M., Westman, E. C., & Johnson, M. (2000). Dissociating nicotine and non-nicotine 
components of cigarette smoking. Pharmacology Biochemistry & Behavior, 67, 71-81. doi: 
10.1016/S0091-3057(00)00301-4. 
Rupprecht, L. E., Koopmeiners, J. S., Dermody, S. S., Oliver, J. A., al'Absi, M., Benowitz, N. L., . . . Donny, E. 
C. (2016). Reducing nicotine exposure results in weight gain in smokers randomised to very low nicotine 
content cigarettes. Tobacco Control. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053301 
Rycroft, N., Hutton, S. B., & Rusted, J. M. (2006). The antisaccade task as an index of sustained goal activation 
in working memory: Modulation by nicotine. Psychopharmacology, 188, 521-529. doi: 10.1007/s00213-
006-0455-7. 
Sayette, M. A., Loewenstein, G., Griffin, K. M., & Black, J. J. (2008).  Exploring the cold-to-hot empathy gap in 
smokers.  Psychological Science, 19(9), 926-932. 
Sayette, M. A.,Martin, C. S., Wertz, J. M., Shiffman, S., & Perrott, M. A. (2001). A multi-dimensional analysis of 
cue-elicited craving in heavy smokers and tobacco chippers. Addiction, 96, 1419–1432. 
Sayette, M.A., Griffin, K.M., & Sayers, W.M.  (2010). Counterbalancing in smoking cue research: a critical 
analysis.  Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 12(11), 1068-1079. 
Shafey O, American Cancer Society. The Tobacco Atlas. 3rd ed. ed. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society 
2009. 
Shafey, O., & American Cancer Society. (2009). The Tobacco Atlas (9781604430134 (pbk. alk. paper) 
1604430133 (pbk. alk. paper)). Retrieved from Atlanta, GA. 
Shahan, T. A., Bickel, W. K., Badger, G. J., & Giordano, L. A. (2001). Sensitivity of nicotine-containing and de-
nicotinized cigarette consumption to alternative non-drug reinforcement: A behavioral economic analysis. 
Behavioural Pharmacology, 12, 277-284.  
Shahan, T. A., Bickel, W. K., Madden, G. J., & Badger, G. J. (1999). Comparing the reinforcing efficacy of nicotine 
containing and de-nicotinized cigarettes: A behavioral economic analysis. Psychopharmacology, 147, 
210-216. doi: 10.1007/s002130051162. 
Shatenstein S. Eliminating nicotine in cigarettes. Tob Control 1999;8(1):106; author reply 07-9 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=104
65827 
Shatenstein, S. (1999). Eliminating nicotine in cigarettes. Tobacco Control, 8(1), 106; author reply 107 -109.  

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 65 of 66 
confidential 
Sheehan, D. V., Lecrubier, Y., Sheehan, K. H., Janavas, J., Weiller, E., Keskiner, A., et al. (1997). The validity 
of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) according to the SCID-P and its reliability. 
European Psychiatry, 12(5), 232-241. doi: 10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83297-X. 
Shiffman, S., Sembower, M. A., Pillitteri, J. L., Gerlach, K. K., & Gitchell, J. G. (2015). The Impact of Flavor 
Descriptors on Nonsmoking Teens' and Adult Smokers' Interest in Electronic Cigarettes. Nicotine Tob 
Res, 17(10), 1255-1262. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntu333 
Spindle, T. R., Breland, A. B., Karaoghlanian, N. V., Shihadeh, A. L., & Eissenberg, T. (2015). Preliminary results 
of an examination of electronic cigarette user puff topography: the effect of a mouthpiece -based 
topography measurement device on plasma nicotine and subjective effects. Nicotine Tob Res, 17(2), 
142-149. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntu186 
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., & Williams, J. B. (1999). Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME MD: 
The PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire. 
Journal of the American Medical Association, 282, 1737-1744. 
Strasser, A. A., Lerman, C., Sanborn, P. M., Pickworth, W. B., & Feldman, E. A. (2007). New lower nicotine 
cigarettes can produce compensatory smoking and increased carbon monoxide exposure. Drug & 
Alcohol Dependence, 86, 294-300. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.06.017. 
Strasser, A. A., Lerman, C., Sanborn, P. M., Pickworth, W. B., & Feldman, E. A. (2007). New lower nicotine 
cigarettes can produce compensatory smoking and increased carbon monoxide exposure. Drug and 
Alcohol Dependence, 86(2-3), 294-300. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.06.017 
Sweitzer, M. M., Denlinger, R. L., & Donny, E. C. (2013). Dependence and withdrawal-induced craving predict 
abstinence in an incentive-based model of smoking relapse. Nicotine Tob Res, 15(1), 36-43. 
doi:10.1093/ntr/nts080 
Thornley, S., McRobbie, H., Lin, R. B., Bullen, C., Hajek, P., Laugesen, M., . . . Whittaker, R. (2009). A single -
blind, randomized, crossover trial of the effects of a nicotine pouch on the relief of tobacco withdrawal 
symptoms and user satisfaction. Nicotine Tob Res, 11(6), 715-721. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntp054 
Tidey, J. W., Pacek, L. R., Koopmeiners, J. S., Vandrey, R., Nardone, N., Drobes, D. J., . . . Donny, E. C. (2017). 
Effects of 6-Week Use of Reduced-Nicotine Content Cigarettes in Smokers With and Without Elevated 
Depressive Symptoms. Nicotine Tob Res, 19(1), 59-67. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntw199 
Tiffany, S. T. & Drobes, D. J. (1991). The development and initial validation of a questionnaire on smoking urges. 
British Journal of Addiction, 86, 1467-1476. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01732.x. 
USDHHS. (1988). The health consequences of smoking: Nicotine addiction: A report of the Surgeon General. 
(DHHS Publication No. CDC 88-8406). Center for Health Promotion and Education. Office on Smoking 
and Health United States. Public Health Service. Office of the Surgeon General. 
Vansickel, A. R., Cobb, C. O., Weaver, M. F., & Eissenberg, T. E. (2010). A clinical laboratory model for 
evaluating the acute effects of electronic "cigarettes": nicotine delivery profile and cardiovascular and 
subjective effects. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 19(8), 1945-1953. doi:10.1158/1055-
9965.EPI-10-0288 

CENIC II-Project 2 
 
 
 
 
 
17OCTOBER2019 
Page 66 of 66 
confidential 
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegan, A. (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and 
negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. 
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063. 
Westman, E. C., Levin, E. D., & Rose, J. E. (1992). Smoking while wearing the nicotine patch: Is smoking 
satisfying or harmful? Clinical Research, 40, 871A.  
World Health Organization. The Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation: Second Report of a WHO Study 
Group. Geneva: World Health Organization 2008. 
Yingst, J. M., Veldheer, S., Hrabovsky, S., Nichols, T. T., Wilson, S. J., & Foulds, J. (2015). Factors Associated 
With Electronic Cigarette Users' Device Preferences and Transition From First Generation to Advanced 
Generation Devices. Nicotine Tob Res, 17(10), 1242-1246. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntv052