Manual smoking machine with high tech features

The VC 1 smoking machine is used for a controlled aerosol generation of combustion cigarettes as well as of next generation devices such as Heated Tobacco Products (HTP) and electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). Special attention was given to guarantee very flexible programming of the smoking parameters. The properties of the aerosol are maintained due to small dead volumes of the system.

VITROCELL® Smoking Machine VC 1 2.0  (PDF)

Read more

Robert Leverette¹, Thomas Shutsky¹, John Wertman¹, Katarina Aleksa², Dhatri Lakshmanan², Rebecca Payne³, Kristen Jordan^1
1Scientific & Regulatory Affairs, RAI Services Company, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 
²Labstat International Inc. Kitchener, ON, Canada;
³Labcorp Early Development Laboratories Ltd., Harrogate, UK

This poster shows whole aerosol exposures of combustible and next generation tobacco products, including Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems. A Vitrocell® VC10® robot generated and delivered aerosols to the Mammalian 6/48 aerosol dilution and exposure system, with up to 7 concurrent doses plus a clean air control. Dosimetry module allowed the capture and quantification of deposited aerosol constituents (nicotine, glycerol and carbonyls). The study utilized the Neutral Red Uptake (NRU) assay in which mammalian cells were exposed to either combined TPM + GVP (submerged culture) or Whole Aerosol (ALI).

Read more

https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.155589

Kristine M. Abo,^1,2 Julio Sainz de Aja,^3,4,5 Jonathan Lindstrom-Vautrin,¹ Konstantinos-Dionysios Alysandratos,^1,2 Alexsia Richards,⁶ Carolina Garcia-de-Alba,^3,4,5 Jessie Huang,^1,2 Olivia T. Hix,^1,2 Rhiannon B. Werder,^1,2 Esther Bullitt,⁷ Anne Hinds,² Isaac Falconer,⁸ Carlos Villacorta-Martin,¹ Rudolf Jaenisch,^6,9 Carla F. Kim,^3,4,5 Darrell N. Kotton,^1,2 and Andrew A. Wilson^1,2
1Center for Regenerative Medicine of Boston University and Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 
²The Pulmonary Center and Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
³Stem Cell Program and Divisions of Hematology/Oncology and Pulmonary & Respiratory Diseases, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁴Harvard Stem Cell Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁵Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁶Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁷Department of Physiology & Biophysics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁸Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 
⁹Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

This study comprehensively characterize the effects of ALI culture on iAT2s and benchmark their transcriptional profile relative to both freshly sorted and cultured primary human fetal and adult AT2s. They find that iAT2s cultured at ALI maintain an AT2 phenotype while upregulating expression of transcripts associated with AT2 maturation. Then they leverage this platform to assay the effects of exposure to clinically significant, inhaled toxicants including cigarette smoke and electronic cigarette vapor.

Read more

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.11.006

Albert Giralt^a, Anita R Iskandar^a, FlorianMartin^a, ElisaMoschini^b, TomassoSerchi^b, AthanasiosKondylis^a, DiegoMarescotti^a, PatriceLeroy^a, LauraOrtega-Torres^a, ShoaibMajeed^a, CelineMerg^a, KeyurTrivedi^a, EmmanuelGuedj^a,StefanFrentzel^a, Nikolai V Ivanov^a, Manuel C Peitsch^a, Arno C Gutleb^b, JuliaHoeng^a

^a Philip Morris International R&D, Philip Morris Products S.A., Quai Jeanrenaud 5, 2000, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
^b Department of Environmental Research and Innovation, Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Luxembourg

Highlights
• Biological impact of exposure to an aerosol of an e-vapor device was investigated using human bronchial and alveolar models.
• The biological impact of e-vapor aerosol exposure was lower than that of cigarette smoke at similar nicotine levels.
• The exposure effects at the molecular levels were evaluated using a systems toxicology approach.

Read more

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110350

Emeline Seurat ^a, Anthony Verdin ^b, Fabrice Cazier ^c, Dominique Courcot ^b, Richard Fitoussi ^d, Katell Vi´e ^d, Val´erie Desauziers ^e, Isabelle Momas ^a, Nathalie Seta ^a, Sophie Achard ^a
a Laboratoire de Sant´e Publique et Environnement, Hera “Health Environmental Risk Assessment”, Inserm UMR1153-CRESS (Centre de Recherche en Epid´emiologie et StatistiqueS), Universit´e de Paris, Facult´e de Pharmacie de Paris, 4, Avenue de L’Observatoire, 75006, Paris, France
^b Unit´e de Chimie Environnementale et Interactions sur le Vivant UR4492, SFR Condorcet FR CNRS 3417, Maison de La Recherche en Environnement Industriel 2, Universit´e Du Littoral Cˆote D’Opale, 189A Avenue Maurice Schumann, 59140, Dunkerque, France
^c Centre Commun de Mesures (CCM), Universit´e Du Littoral-Cˆote D’Opale, 145 Avenue Maurice Schumann, 5914, Dunkerque, France
^d Laboratoires Clarins, 5 Rue Amp`ere, 95300, Pontoise, France
^e IPREM, IMT Mines Ales, Universit´e de Pau et des Pays de L’Adour, E2S UPPA, CNRS, Pau, France

In the course of this study, they tested various pollutants with different chemical compositions, applying them to the apical side of Reconstructed Human Epidermis and being particularly interested in the effect relative humidity has on the reaction to pollutants. Investigating several cytokines and chemokines, they showed that IL-1α, IL-6, IL-8, and RANTES are the cytokines/chemokines almost systematically induced by most pollutants.

Read more