Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background This paper examines top-selling electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) brands and differences in top-selling brands by region in the USA from 2022 to 2024, and the market share of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorised products in 2023 and 2024 using e-cigarette sales data from Nielsen’s Convenience Track system.
Methods Regional analyses included sales data from eight US census divisions. We reported total unit sales and market share by brand, nationally and by region. Data on whether products had FDA marketing authorisation were obtained from FDA’s Searchable Tobacco Product Database.
Results Nationally, Vuse, JUUL and NJOY comprised the majority of e-cigarette market share in 2022 (68.3%), 2023 (65.4%) and 2024 (57.5%), and Geek Bar emerged as the third top selling brand in 2024 (17.8%). Aside from these brands, there was a large variation in the top five brands by region across years. Approximately 13.8% of e-cigarette product sales in 2024 were authorised for sale by the FDA, as compared with 3.3% in 2023.
Conclusions The differences in top brands by region reflect challenges in the surveillance of e-cigarette sales, marketing and use and reflect the rapidly changing disposable e-cigarette marketplace, in which new brands are introduced and popularised at high frequency, as manufacturers of disposable e-cigarettes adapt to exploit regulatory loopholes. In the context of other emerging markets, like nicotine pouches, we urge regulators to act quickly to regulate the market for these products.
- Electronic nicotine delivery devices
- Non-cigarette tobacco products
- Surveillance and monitoring
Data availability statement
Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. Data from Nielsen cannot be shared.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. Data from Nielsen cannot be shared.
Footnotes
X @otg2014, @crisdelnevo
Contributors Conceptualisation: CDD. Formal analysis: CDD, ML. Writing—Original Draft: OG, ML, CDD. Writing—Review and Editing: All authors. Acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data: All authors. Supervision: OG. Funding acquisition: CDD. Guarantor: OG.
Funding This work was supported in part by grant U01CA278695 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institutes of Health and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products. JF was supported in part by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health and the Center for Tobacco Products of the US FDA (under Award Numbers U54DA058271 and R01CA239030).
Disclaimer Rutgers University Institute for Nicotine and Tobacco Studies’ own analyses and calculations are based in part on data reported by the Nielsen Company through its Convenience Track Service for tobacco products from 2022 through 2024 (US Convenience Store Channel, copyright 2024, The Nielsen Company). The conclusions drawn from Nielsen data are those of Rutgers University and do not reflect the views of Nielsen. Nielsen is not responsible for and had no role in analysing and preparing the results reported here. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NCI or FDA.
Competing interests CDD reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) during the conduct of the study. CDD also reported serving as the chair of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Tobacco Product Scientific Advisory Board. JF has done paid consulting for pharmaceutical companies involved in producing smoking cessation medications, including GSK, Pfizer, Novartis, J&J and Cypress Bioscience, and received a research grant and study product from Pfizer.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.