Skip to main content
Log in

Exposure of nonsmoking women to environmental tobacco smoke: a 10-country collaborative study

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The interpretation and interpretability of epidemiologic studies of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) depend largely on the validity of self-reported exposure. To investigate to what extent questionnaires can indicate exposure levels to ETS, an international study was conducted in 13 centers located in 10 countries, and 1,369 nonsmoking women were interviewed. The present paper describes the results of the analysis of self-reported recent exposure to ETS from any source in relation to urinary concentrations of cotinine. Of the total, 19.7 percent of the subjects had nondetectable cotinine levels, the median value was 6 ng/mg, and the cut-point of the highest decile was 24 ng/mg. The proportion of subjects misreporting their active smoking habit was estimated at between 1.9 and 3.4 percent, depending on whether cut-points of 50 or 100 ng/mg creatinine were used. Large and statistically significant differences were observed between centers, with the lowest values in Honolulu, Shanghai, and Chandigarh, and the highest in Trieste, Los Angeles, and Athens. Mean cotinine/creatinine levels showed a clear linear increase from the group of women not exposed either at home or at work, to the group of those exposed both at home and at work. Values were significantly higher for women exposed to ETS from the husband but not at work, than for those exposed at work but not from the husband. The results of linear regression analysis indicated that duration of exposure and number of cigarettes to which the subject reported being exposed were strongly related to urinary cotinine. ETS exposure from the husband was best measured by the number of cigarettes, while exposure at work was more strongly related to duration of exposure. After adjustment of number of cigarettes for volume of indoor places, a similar increase in cotinine (5 ng/mg) was predicted by the exposure to 7.2 cigarettes/8 h/40 m3 from the husband and 17.9 cigarettes/8 h/40 m3 at work. The results indicate that, when appropriately questioned, nonsmoking women can provide a reasonably accurate description of ETS exposure. Assessment of individual exposure to ETS should focus on daily duration and volume of indoor places where exposure occurred.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Trichopoulos D, Kalandidi A, Sparros L, MacMahon B, Lung cancer and passive smoking. Int J Cancer 1981; 27: 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hirayama T. Nonsmoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: a study from Japan. Br Med J. 1981; 282: 183–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. National Research Council. Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Measuring Exposures and Assessing Health Effects. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Smoking—Cancer. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1986; DHSS(CDC)87–8398.

    Google Scholar 

  5. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Tobacco smoking. Lyon: IARC, 1986; Monogr Eval Carcinog Risk Chem Man.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lee PN. Misclassification of Smoking Habits and Passive Smoking: A Review of the Evidence. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Haley NJ, Hoffman D, Wynder EL. Uptake of tobacco smoke components. In: Hoffman D, Harris C, eds. Mechanisms in Tobacco Carcinogenesis (Banbury Reports No. 23). New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1986: 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sepkovic DW, Haley NJ, Hoffman D. Elimination from the body of tobacco products by smokers and passive smokers (Letter). JAMA 1986; 256: 863.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Haley NJ, Axelrad CM, Tilton KA. Validation of self-reported smoking behavior: biochemical analyses of cotinine and thiocyanate. Am J Publ Hlth 1983; 73: 1204–7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Langone JJ, Gjika HB, VanVunakis H. Nicotine and its metabolites. Radioimmunoassays for nicotine and cotinine. Biochemistry 1973; 12: 5025–30.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Adlkofer F, Scherer G, Heller WD. Hydroxyproline excretion in urine of smokers and passive smokers. Prev Med 1984; 13: 670–9.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jarvis M, Tunstall-Pedre H, Feyerabend C, Vesey C, Saloojey Y. Biochemical markers of smoke absorption and self-reported exposure to passive smoking. J Epidemiol Comm Hlth 1984; 38: 335–9.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lee PN. Misclassification of Smoking Habits and Passive Smoking. A Review of the Evidence. London: Springer Verlag, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wall MA, Johnson J, Jacob P, Benowitz NL. Cotinine in the serum, saliva and urine of nonsmokers, passive smokers and active smokers. Am J Publ Hlth 1988; 78: 699–701.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sepkovic DW, Haley NJ. Biomedical applications of cotinine quantitation in smoking-related research. Am J Publ Hlth 1985; 75: 663–5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hoffmann DW, Haley NJ, Adams JW, Brunnemann KD. Tobacco sidestream smoke. Uptake by nonsmokers. Prev Med 1984; 13: 608–17.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mattsen ME, Boyd G, Boyd D et al. Passive smoking on commercial airline flights. JAMA 1989; 261: 867–72.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Muranaka H, Higashi E, Itani S, Shimizu J. Evaluation of nicotine, cotinine, thiocyanate, carboxyhemoglobin and expired carbon monoxide as biochemical tobacco smoke uptake parameters. Int Arch Occup Environ Hlth 1988; 60: 37–41.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Haley NJ, Colosimo SG, Axelrad CM, Harris R, Sepkovic DW. Biochemical validation of self-reported exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. J. Environ Res 1989; 49: 127–35.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Coultas DB, Peake GT, Samet JM. Questionnaire assessment of lifetime and recent exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 130: 338–47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

Drs Riboli and Saracci are at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France; Drs Preston-Martin and Wu-Williams are at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA; Dr Haley is at the American Health Foundation, Valhalla, New York, USA; Dr Trichopoulos was at the University of Athens Medical School, Greece at the time of this research and is presently affiliated with the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, USA; Dr Becher was at the Bremen Institute of Preventive Research and Social Medicine, Germany at the time of this research and is presently affiliated with the German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Dr Burch is at the NCIC Epidemiology Unit, Toronto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Riboli, E., Preston-Martin, S., Saracci, R. et al. Exposure of nonsmoking women to environmental tobacco smoke: a 10-country collaborative study. Cancer Causes Control 1, 243–252 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117476

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117476

Key words

Navigation