Observational comparisons of former smokers who use non-combusted nicotine products with former smokers who quit without these products require precise measurement of two key variables: the specific product(s) used after quitting and the time since cigarette cessation. The National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) screening instrument used in a recent Korean cohort study did not record either quantity. This analysis used contemporaneous, nationally representative survey data to characterize product mix and cessation timing in the same population and calendar year.
The analysis used public-release microdata from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) spanning 2018 to 2023, restricted to adults aged 19 years and older. Former smokers were identified via survey smoking status, and cessation duration was taken from the survey item recording months since the last cigarette.
Former smokers currently reporting use of a heated tobacco product (HTP) or an e-cigarette (EC) were compared with former smokers reporting neither product. KNHANES 2018 included a generic EC question plus a separate checklist naming HTP brands, permitting separation of the two product classes. Distributions were compared using rank-based methods (Kolmogorov–Smirnov), the age–duration relationship was estimated with Theil–Sen regression, and residual imbalance was assessed after restricting the comparison group to respondents age-matched within two years.
In the 2018 analytic sample of 1,348 former smokers, 43 respondents reported current use of HTP or EC, and 1,305 reported using neither product. Among the 43 product-using former smokers, 58% reported HTP only, 21% reported both HTP and EC, and 21% reported EC only. Overall, 79% of product users reported any HTP use, indicating HTPs predominated in this group within the Korean population surveyed.
Median cessation duration among former smokers using HTP or EC was 0.7 years (interquartile range [IQR] 0.25 to 1.5). Among former smokers using neither product, median cessation duration was 12.0 years (IQR 5.0 to 20.0). The distributions differed strongly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov D = 0.76, P < 0.001), and in 92% of cross-group pairs the product user had quit more recently than the no-product former smoker.
The separation in cessation timing persisted when the analysis was restricted to the short-term cessation stratum (<5 years), where distributions remained significantly different (D = 0.34, P < 0.001) and product users had more recent cessation in 73% of cross-group pairs. After matching comparator respondents by age to within two years, a residual gap in cessation duration of approximately 9.3 years remained, demonstrating that age differences alone did not account for the contrast.
Cessation duration increased with age among former smokers reporting no post-cessation product use (Theil–Sen slope +0.30 years of cessation per year of age). By contrast, cessation duration was effectively flat across age among former smokers using HTP or EC (-0.01 years per year), indicating that product users tended to be recent quitters regardless of age.
The authors examined the screening-eligible stratum used in the cohort’s high-risk analysis (age 50–80 and applying a 20 pack-year criterion). Among those aged 50 to 80, median cessation among no-product quitters rose to 15.5 years (n = 858). Applying a ≥20 pack-year criterion left 421 no-product quitters with a median cessation of 11.0 years. In contrast, only three HTP/EC users met the same high-risk screening criteria; those three reported cessation 0.25, 1.0, and 2.0 years earlier despite similar mean cumulative cigarette exposure (mean pack-years 37.6 vs 37.7). This highlights that even within eligibility-restricted, high-risk strata, product users tended to have much shorter cessation durations.
The overall contrast between former smokers using non-combusted products and those using neither reproduced in every KNHANES wave from 2018 through 2023. Age-matched residual differences in cessation duration were consistently in the 9–11 year range across waves, supporting robustness of the observed pattern.
In a nationally representative survey of the same population and calendar year as the NHIS screening cohort analyzed by Kim et al., former smokers who currently used non-combusted nicotine products were predominantly HTP users and had stopped smoking roughly a decade more recently than other former smokers. These differences persisted after short-term stratification and age matching and were present in screening-eligible high-risk subgroups.
Because the NHIS screening instrument used in the cohort study did not record precise post-cessation product composition or time since cessation, the authors argue that cohort estimates comparing post-cessation product users with other former smokers should be interpreted cautiously when those two quantities are not measured directly. Future observational studies aiming to compare outcomes by post-cessation product use should capture both specific product types and exact time since cigarette cessation to avoid confounding by recency of quitting.
The manuscript discloses competing interests: one author’s contribution was supported by an NIH/FDA grant, and another author reports past and continuing paid expert witness work; a third author is a salaried employee of a contract research organization with past industry affiliations and equity holdings as described. The analysis was not externally commissioned. KNHANES public use files are the data source and are publicly available at the KNHANES website.