Introduction: The prevalence of waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing globally. Biomarkers of waterpipe tobacco smoke (WTS) exposure are less studied. Aims and methods: To identify the types of biomarkers of WTS exposure and estimate changes in biomarker concentrations pre- to post-WTS exposure. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies up to April 24, 2023. The types of biomarkers were identified. Random-effects models were used to estimate changes in biomarker concentrations pre- to post-WTS exposure. Results: Seventy-three studies involving 3755 participants exposed to WTS (49% male, mean age: 24.8 years) and 11 types of biomarkers of WTS exposure were identified. The biomarkers included tobacco alkaloids, expired carbon monoxide (eCO), carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), tobacco-specific nitrosamines, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), heavy metals, unmetabolized VOCs, unmetabolized PAHs, furan metabolites, and heterocyclic aromatic amines. Compared with pre-WTS exposure, eCO (breath; mean difference [MD] 27.00 ppm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.91 to 33.08), COHb (blood; MD 4.30%; 95%CI: 2.57 to 6.03), COHb (breath; MD 7.14%; 95%CI: 4.96 to 9.31), nicotine (blood; MD 8.23 ng/mL; 95%CI: 6.27 to 10.19), and cotinine (urine; MD 110.40 ng/mL; 95%CI: 46.26 to 174.54) significantly increased post-WTS exposure. Conclusions: Biomarkers of WTS exposure were systematically identified. The similarity between the biomarkers of WTS exposure and those of cigarette smoke and higher concentrations of some biomarkers post-WTS exposure underscore the need for further research on applying biomarkers in surveillance, interventions, and regulations to mitigate the harms of waterpipe tobacco smoking. Implications: This study provides the first comprehensive overview of biomarkers investigated and available for assessing WTS exposure and their concentration changes in the human body. Researchers can use biomarkers such as eCO, COHb, nicotine, and cotinine to measure the health risks associated with WTS exposure and objectively evaluate the effectiveness of public health interventions aimed at reducing waterpipe tobacco smoking. Public health policymaking can also be informed through increased biomarker concentrations following WTS exposure, to implement regulations and public health education campaigns on limiting or preventing waterpipe tobacco smoking.

Background:This study aims to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline of acupuncture in the treatment of patients with moderate and severe cancer pain. Methods:The development of this guideline was triggered by a systematic review published in JAMA Oncology in 2020. We searched databases and websites for evidence on patient preferences and values, and other resources of using acupuncture for treatment of cancer pain. Recommendations were developed through a Delphi consensus of an international multidisciplinary panel including 13 western medicine oncologists, Chinese medicine/acupuncture clinical practitioners, and two patient representatives. The certainty of evidence, patient preferences and values, resources, and other factors were fully considered in formulating the recommendations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was employed to rate the certainty of evidence and the strength of recommendations. Results:The guideline proposed three recommendations: (1) a strong recommendation for the treatment of acupuncture rather than no treatment to relieve pain in patients with moderate to severe cancer pain; (2) a weak recommendation for the combination treatments with acupuncture/acupressure to reduce pain intensity, decrease the opioid dose, and alleviate opioid-related side effects in moderate to severe cancer pain patients who are using analgesics; and (3) a strong recommendation for acupuncture in breast cancer patients to relieve their aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia. Conclusion:This proposed guideline provides recommendations for the management of patients with cancer pain. The small sample sizes of evidence limit the strength of the recommendations and highlights the need for additional research.