Background

Few studies consider simultaneously the oral health implications of nontraditional tobacco products and tobacco-use patterns. The authors aimed to evaluate self-reported gingival disease among cigarette smokers and users of other types of tobacco products.

Methods

The authors used survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression to assess associations between different tobacco products, use patterns (for example, dual or multiple tobacco product use or product switching); and lifetime history of gingival disease diagnosis and treatment. They used the nationally representative (US) Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study's Wave 1 (2013-2014) adult data (N = 32,320).

Results

Overall, 12.1% of participants self-reported gingival disease diagnosis, and 19.1% reported receiving treatment. Groups with the highest adjusted relative odds for diagnosis (reference, lifetime tobacco never users) were pipe users (2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 5.3), e-cigarette users (2.9; 95% CI, 1.9 to 4.5), multiple tobacco product users (2.8; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.4), and recent (< 12 months) quitters (2.8; 95% CI, 2.0 to 3.8). Similarly, odds of treatment report were highest among pipe users (2.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.1), e-cigarette users (2.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.1), multiple tobacco product users (1.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9), and recent quitters (1.7; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.2).

Conclusions

Numerous tobacco-use patterns were associated with worse periodontal health compared with tobacco never users. These findings are consistent with previous biological and epidemiologic evidence linking tobacco use to poor periodontal health.

Practical implications

Dental clinicians should anticipate various tobacco-use patterns among their patients, all of which may impact oral health. Oral health care professionals should remain informed of, screen for, and address the use of all tobacco products in practice.

Background. Tobacco companies have actively promoted the substitution of cigarettes with purportedly safer tobacco products (e.g., smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes) as tobacco harm reduction (THR). Given the tobacco, e-cigarette, and pharmaceutical industries' substantial financial interests, we quantified industry influence on support for THR. Objectives. To analyze a comprehensive set of articles published in peer-reviewed journals assessing funding sources and support for or opposition to substitution of tobacco or nicotine products as harm reduction. Search Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO with a comprehensive search string including all articles, comments, and editorials published between January 1, 1992, and July 26, 2016. Selection Criteria. We included English-language publications published in peer-reviewed journals addressing THR in humans and excluded studies on modified cigarettes, on South Asian smokeless tobacco variants, on pregnant women, on animals, not mentioning a tobacco or nicotine product, on US Food and Drug Administration-approved nicotine replacement therapies, and on nicotine vaccines. Data Collection and Analysis. We double-coded all articles for article type; primary product type (e.g., snus, e-cigarettes); themes for and against THR; stance on THR; THR concepts; funding or affiliation with tobacco, e-cigarette, pharmaceutical industry, or multiple industries; and each author's country. We fit exact logistic regression models with stance on THR as the outcome (pro- vs anti-THR) and source of funding or industry affiliation as the predictor taking into account sparse data. Additional models included article type as the outcome (nonempirical or empirical) and industry funding or affiliation as predictor, and stratified analyses for empirical and nonempirical studies with stance on THR as outcome and funding source as predictor. Main Results. Searches retrieved 826 articles, including nonempirical articles (21%), letters or commentaries (34%), editorials (5%), cross-sectional studies (15%), systematic reviews and meta-analyses (3%), and randomized controlled trials (2%). Overall, 23.9% disclosed support by industry; 49% of articles endorsed THR, 42% opposed it, and 9% took neutral or mixed positions. Support from the e-cigarette industry (odds ratio [OR] = 20.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.3, 180.7), tobacco industry (OR = 59.4; 95% CI = 10.1, +infinity), or pharmaceutical industry (OR = 2.18; 95% CI = 1.3, 3.7) was significantly associated with supportive stance on THR in analyses accounting for sparse data. Authors' Conclusions. Non-industry-funded articles were evenly divided in stance, while industry-funded articles favored THR. Because of their quantity, letters and comments may influence perceptions of THR when empirical studies lack consensus. Public Health Implications. Public health practitioners and researchers need to account for industry funding when interpreting the evidence in THR debates.

Background

Adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) is the second most common malignancy of the salivary glands, accounting for ~ 1% of malignant tumors of the head and neck region and 10% of salivary gland neoplasms. Predicting the long-term outcomes of patients with ACC is still challenging, as reliable prognostic biomarkers are not available. Among salivary gland tumors, Myb overexpression is highly specific for ACC. In addition, the MYB-NF1B fusion translocation is a hallmark of ACC, and although the detection of this translocation does not appear to impact prognosis, the MYB-NF1B fusion is also implicated in MYB upregulation. Myb has recently been identified as an activator of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, and aberrant cytoplasmic expression of β-catenin has been observed in many salivary gland malignancies. In this study, we aim to analyze the impact of Myb and β-catenin expression on prognosis in ACC.

Methods

A tissue microarray constructed from archival tissue from 64 patients with ACC was stained for Myb and β-catenin; both localization and intensity were evaluated. In parallel, we abstracted demographic data, tumor characteristics, survival data, and outcomes, including local recurrence, regional recurrence, and distant metastasis from the medical record. Statistical analysis was performed.

Results

Our analysis supports that ACC patients negative for Myb by immunohistochemical methods have a higher risk of developing metastasis than patients with Myb staining (HR: 4.06, 95% CI: 1.02-14.96, p-value: 0.03). Although not statistically significant, cytoplasmic localization of β-catenin is may suggest a diminished rate of relapse-free survival (HR 2.45, 95%CI: 0.9-6.7, p = 0.08). Furthermore, Myb expression correlated with β-catenin expression, increasing 1.69 in staining intensity units with each increase in β-catenin staining intensity (p-value: 0.04).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that Myb expression is protective; Myb positive patients have diminished risk of distant metastasis. In contrast, there is a trend towards increased hazard of death in ACC patients with cytoplasmic β-catenin expression. Additional analyses will be necessary to establish Myb and β-catenin as independent protective and adverse biomarkers, respectively.