Efficacy of two cannabis based medicinal extracts for relief of central neuropathic pain from brachial plexus avulsion: results of a randomised controlled trial

Does Cannabis-based Medicine Improve Pain and Sleep Quality in Patients With Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injuries? A Triple-blind, Crossover, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

After traumatic brachial plexus injuries, despite treatment with appropriate medications, some patients experience uncontrollable pain, which can be devastating. Cannabis-based medicine is considered to have pain-relieving benefits in this situation, but the evidence is limited.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Is cannabis-based medicine effective compared with the placebo in (1) reducing pain (measured by the VAS for pain) and neuropathic pain (measured by the DN4 questionnaire), and (2) improving sleep quality (measured by the VAS for sleep quality) in patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury?

METHODS

This prospective, triple-blinded (the researcher administering the substance, the patients, and the evaluator were all blinded to the substance used), two-period crossover, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a single center. Between January 2020 and January 2022, we treated 147 patients for neuropathic pain related to a traumatic brachial plexus injury. Our inclusion criteria were age between 20 and 60 years and moderate-to-severe pain (VAS for pain equal to or greater than 4 of 10 for more than 6 months), even with the use of appropriate medications. Based on these criteria, 20% (30) of patients were eligible. They were randomly allocated to receive either cannabis-based medicine followed by the placebo or vice versa. Fifteen patients received cannabis-based medicine first, and 15 patients received the placebo first. The groups did not differ at baseline in terms of demographic parameters. Participants received both the cannabis-based medicine and the placebo; they started with 10 days of the initial intervention, followed by a 14-day washout period, and then a 10-day period with the second intervention. The dosage regimen adhered strictly to the protocol. The outcomes were the (1) VAS for pain, which ranges from 0 to 10 and where 0 represents no pain and 10 signifies the worst pain; (2) the DN4 questionnaire which ranges from 1 to 10 and where a score of 4 or higher indicates a positive result for neuropathic pain; and (3) VAS for sleep quality, from 0 (worst) to 10 (best). The minimum clinically important difference of VAS for pain was defined as a 2-point improvement. After enrollment, 7% (2 of 30) of patients (one patient received the cannabis-based medicine first and another received the placebo first) were lost before the minimum study follow-up, leaving 93% (28 of 30) for analysis. With 28 patients in each group, the study was powered a priori at 90% to detect a clinically important difference of 2 points in the VAS for pain. No carryover or period effects were observed in the study. Four patients experienced mild dizziness during the cannabis-based medicine period but were able to continue the intervention.

RESULTS

When comparing the use of cannabis-based medicine alongside pain control medications with the combination of placebo and pain control medications, the reduction in pain VAS from the preintervention resulted in a mean difference of 1 (99% CI -0.03 to 2.1; p = 0.01). Neuropathic pain was reported by 75% (21 of 28) of patients in both interventions (OR 1 [99% CI 0.07 to 14.1]; p > 0.99). The VAS for sleep quality favored cannabis-based medicine with a mean difference of 1.5 (99% CI 0.7 to 2.4; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study findings indicate that cannabis-based medicine did not improve pain by a clinically important margin. Consequently, our study advises against the addition of cannabis-based medicine to the standard medication treatment for pain in patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1, therapeutic study.

Phytocanabinoids and synthetic cannabinoids: from recreational consumption to potential therapeutic use - a review

Cannabinoids are part of the most popular group of illicit substances in the Western world. The word "cannabinoid" refers to any chemical substance, regardless of structure or origin, that binds to the body's cannabinoid receptors and that has effects similar to those produced by the Cannabis plant. Regarding their origin, cannabinoids can be classified into endocannabinoids, phytocannabinoids and synthetic cannabinoids. The behavioral and physiological effects of cannabinoids have received particular attention over the last few decades, including sensations of euphoria, relaxation and loss of concentration, with their repeated use being associated with short and long-term side effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular disorders, cognitive changes, psychoses, schizophrenia and mood disorders. On the other hand, recent investigations have proposed a promising therapeutic potential of cannabinoid-based drugs for a wide range of medical situations, including neurological and psychiatric disorders, among other indications. The growing popularity in the use of cannabinoid-based compounds, both for recreational and therapeutic purposes, has been accompanied by an equally continuous and growing evolution of knowledge regarding their potential harmful and beneficial effects. However, there are several open questions and challenges to be answered, which require more and better investigations. This article's main objectives are: i) to understand the importance of the action of cannabinoids in humans; ii) identify the different types of cannabinoids that exist and understand the differences in their action; iii) distinguish the legislative framework for cannabinoid consumption; iv) identify the possible adverse effects of cannabinoid consumption, as well as their potential benefits; v) know the existing medical-scientific evidence in terms of therapeutic potential, particularly in relation to aspects of safety and efficacy; vi) encourage critical thinking about the recreational consumption and therapeutic use of cannabinoids, based both on currently available evidence and gaps in knowledge.

Role of Cannabis in the Management of Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: A Narrative Review

Chronic non-cancer pain, defined by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as lasting beyond three months, significantly affects individuals' quality of life and is often linked to various medical conditions or injuries. Its management is complex. Cannabis, containing the key compounds Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), has garnered interest for its potential in pain management, though it remains controversial due to its psychoactive effects and illegal status in many countries. THC provides pain relief by blocking nociceptive stimuli but has psychoactive effects and may potentially induce dependency. CBD has calming and antipsychotic properties. The inhalation of cannabis offers quick relief but poses respiratory risks, while its oral administrations are safer but act more slowly. Short-term cannabis use can impair cognition and motor skills, while long-term use may lead to dependency and cognitive decline, especially if used from an early age. Adverse effects vary by gender and prior use, with addiction mainly linked to THC and influenced by genetics. Despite these risks, patients often report more benefits, such as improved quality of life and reduced opioid use, although the evidence remains inconclusive. The legal landscape for medical cannabis varies globally, with some positive public health outcomes like reduced opioid-related issues in areas where it is legalized. Cannabis shows promise in managing chronic pain, but its psychoactive effects and dependency risks necessitate cautious use. Future research should prioritize long-term clinical trials to establish optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety, aiding in the development of informed guidelines for safe cannabis use in chronic pain management. This review examines the use of cannabis in managing chronic non-cancer pain, focusing on its benefits, drawbacks, mechanisms, delivery methods, and impact on quality of life.

The Use of Cannabinoids in the Treatment of Peripheral Neuropathy and Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Peripheral neuropathies are commonly occurring conditions that are chronic and debilitating for patients. Established nonsurgical treatments have yielded mixed and patient-dependent results. Although cannabinoids have demonstrated efficacy as a treatment for central neuropathic pain, the therapeutic potential of cannabis-based medications for the management of peripheral neuropathic pain caused by nerve injury, trauma, and other noncompressive etiologies has yet to be definitively established. This study aims to determine whether cannabinoids are a potentially effective treatment for pain and symptoms associated with peripheral neuropathy.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted by two independent reviewers across PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and CINAHL to identify studies in accordance with the predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Information regarding study design, medication, dosage, effect on neuropathic pain, and other related outcomes was extracted. Meta-analysis of pain scores was performed for seven studies, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize other study findings as appropriate.

RESULTS

Of the 927 studies identified, 14 randomized controlled trials were included. Thirteen of 14 studies (79%) observed a statistically significant decrease in neuropathic pain score following treatment with a cannabinoid. Meta-analysis yielded a mean difference of -0.67 [-0.89, -0.45]) on a 0-10 scale compared with placebo. Improvements in secondary outcomes such as sleep, sensory symptoms, and quality of life were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of the literature shows that cannabis-based medicines may be effective in treating the pain and symptoms of peripheral neuropathy. These findings suggest the applicability of cannabis-based medicines for peripheral neuropathy.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Cannabis constituents for chronic neuropathic pain; reconciling the clinical and animal evidence

Chronic neuropathic pain is a debilitating pain syndrome caused by damage to the nervous system that is poorly served by current medications. Given these problems, clinical studies have pursued extracts of the plant Cannabis sativa as alternative treatments for this condition. The vast majority of these studies have examined cannabinoids which contain the psychoactive constituent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). While there have been some positive findings, meta-analyses of this clinical work indicates that this effectiveness is limited and hampered by side-effects. This review focuses on how recent preclinical studies have predicted the clinical limitations of THC-containing cannabis extracts, and importantly, point to how they might be improved. This work highlights the importance of targeting channels and receptors other than cannabinoid CB1 receptors which mediate many of the side-effects of cannabis.

The Development of Cannabinoids as Therapeutic Agents in the United States

Cannabis is one of the oldest and widely used substances in the world. Cannabinoids within the cannabis plant, known as phytocannabinoids, mediate cannabis' effects through interactions with the body's endogenous cannabinoid system. This endogenous system, the endocannabinoid system, has important roles in physical and mental health. These roles point to the potential to develop cannabinoids as therapeutic agents while underscoring the risks related to interfering with the endogenous system during nonmedical use. This scoping narrative review synthesizes the current evidence for both the therapeutic and adverse effects of the major (i.e., Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol) and lesser studied minor phytocannabinoids, from nonclinical to clinical research. We pay particular attention to the areas where evidence is well established, including analgesic effects after acute exposures and neurocognitive risks after acute and chronic use. In addition, drug development considerations for cannabinoids as therapeutic agents within the United States are reviewed. The proposed clinical study design considerations encourage methodological standards for greater scientific rigor and reproducibility to ultimately extend our knowledge of the risks and benefits of cannabinoids for patients and providers. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This work provides a review of prior research related to phytocannabinoids, including therapeutic potential and known risks in the context of drug development within the United States. We also provide study design considerations for future cannabinoid drug development.

Cannabidiol and pain

Chronic pain presents significant personal, psychological, and socioeconomic hurdles, impacting over 30% of adults worldwide and substantially contributing to disability. Unfortunately, current pharmacotherapy often proves inadequate, leaving fewer than 70% of patients with relief. This shortfall has sparked a drive to seek alternative treatments offering superior safety and efficacy profiles. Cannabinoid-based pharmaceuticals, notably cannabidiol (CBD), hold promise in pain management, driven by their natural origins, versatility, and reduced risk of addiction. As we navigate the opioid crisis, ongoing research plunges into CBD's therapeutic potential, buoyed by animal studies revealing its pain-relieving prowess through various system tweaks. However, the efficacy of cannabis in chronic pain management remains a contentious and stigmatized issue. The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) presently refrains from endorsing cannabinoid use for pain relief. Nevertheless, evidence indicates their potential in alleviating cancer-related, neuropathic, arthritis, and musculoskeletal pain, necessitating further investigation. Crucially, our comprehension of CBD's role in pain management is a journey still unfolding, with animal studies illustrating its analgesic effects through interactions with the endocannabinoid, inflammatory, and nociceptive systems. As the plot thickens, it's clear: the saga of chronic pain and CBD's potential offers a compelling narrative ripe for further exploration and understanding.

Review of the Use of Medicinal Cannabis Products in Palliative Care

In this review, we discuss the potential role of cannabis and cannabinoids in the management of cancer-related symptoms. There is limited evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of cannabis-based products in treating cancer-related pain and gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite. Regarding the role of cannabis-based products in the treatment of insomnia and mood disorders, most studies looked at these symptoms as secondary outcomes with mixed results. Cannabis-based products have adverse effects, ranging from neuropsychiatric to systemic effects to potential drug interactions.

Pierre M, Belle-Isle L, Gagnon M, Bevan S, Sanchez T, Arlt S, Monahan-Ellison M, O'Hara J, Boivin M, Costiniuk C. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Cannabis and Cannabinoid-Based Medicines in the Management of Chronic Pain and Co-Occurring Conditions

Background: One in five individuals live with chronic pain globally, which often co-occurs with sleep problems, anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. Although these conditions are commonly managed with cannabinoid-based medicines (CBM), health care providers report lack of information on the risks, benefits, and appropriate use of CBM for therapeutic purposes. Aims: We present these clinical practice guidelines to help clinicians and patients navigate appropriate CBM use in the management of chronic pain and co-occurring conditions. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies investigating the use of CBM for the treatment of chronic pain. Articles were dually reviewed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Clinical recommendations were developed based on available evidence from the review. Values and preferences and practical tips have also been provided to support clinical application. The GRADE system was used to rate the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence. Results: From our literature search, 70 articles met inclusion criteria and were utilized in guideline development, including 19 systematic reviews and 51 original research studies. Research typically demonstrates moderate benefit of CBM in chronic pain management. There is also evidence for efficacy of CBM in the management of comorbidities, including sleep problems, anxiety, appetite suppression, and for managing symptoms in some chronic conditions associated with pain including HIV, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, and arthritis. Conclusions: All patients considering CBM should be educated on risks and adverse events. Patients and clinicians should work collaboratively to identify appropriate dosing, titration, and administration routes for each individual. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO no. 135886.

Pain in the Context of Sensory Deafferentation

Pain that accompanies deafferentation is one of the most mysterious and misunderstood medical conditions. Prevalence rates for the assorted conditions vary considerably but the most reliable estimates are greater than 50% for strokes involving the somatosensory system, brachial plexus avulsions, spinal cord injury, and limb amputation, with controversy surrounding the mechanistic contributions of deafferentation to ensuing neuropathic pain syndromes. Deafferentation pain has also been described for loss of other body parts (e.g., eyes and breasts) and may contribute to between 10% and upwards of 30% of neuropathic symptoms in peripheral neuropathies. There is no pathognomonic test or sign to identify deafferentation pain, and part of the controversy surrounding it stems from the prodigious challenges in differentiating cause and effect. For example, it is unknown whether cortical reorganization causes pain or is a byproduct of pathoanatomical changes accompanying injury, including pain. Similarly, ascertaining whether deafferentation contributes to neuropathic pain, or whether concomitant injury to nerve fibers transmitting pain and touch sensation leads to a deafferentation-like phenotype can be clinically difficult, although a detailed neurologic examination, functional imaging, and psychophysical tests may provide clues. Due in part to the concurrent morbidities, the physical, psychologic, and by extension socioeconomic costs of disorders associated with deafferentation are higher than for other chronic pain conditions. Treatment is symptom-based, with evidence supporting first-line antineuropathic medications such as gabapentinoids and antidepressants. Studies examining noninvasive neuromodulation and virtual reality have yielded mixed results.

Cannabinoids and Sleep: Exploring Biological Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potentials

The endogenous cannabinoid system (ECS) plays a critical role in the regulation of various physiological functions, including sleep, mood, and neuroinflammation. Phytocannabinoids such as Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabinomimimetics, and some N-acylethanolamides, particularly palmitoyethanolamide, have emerged as potential therapeutic agents for the management of sleep disorders. THC, the psychoactive component of cannabis, may initially promote sleep, but, in the long term, alters sleep architecture, while CBD shows promise in improving sleep quality without psychoactive effects. Clinical studies suggest that CBD modulates endocannabinoid signaling through several receptor sites, offering a multifaceted approach to sleep regulation. Similarly, palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), in addition to interacting with the endocannabinoid system, acts as an agonist on peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs). The favorable safety profile of CBD and PEA and the potential for long-term use make them an attractive alternative to conventional pharmacotherapy. The integration of the latter two compounds into comprehensive treatment strategies, together with cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), represents a holistic approach to address the multifactorial nature of sleep disorders. Further research is needed to establish the optimal dosage, safety, and efficacy in different patient populations, but the therapeutic potential of CBD and PEA offers hope for improved sleep quality and general well-being.

Medicinal Plants for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Neuropathic pain is a disabling condition caused by various diseases and can profoundly impact the quality of life. Unfortunately, current treatments often do not produce complete amelioration and can be associated with potential side effects. Recently, herbal drugs have garnered more attention as an alternative or a complementary treatment. In this article, we summarized the results of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the effects of various phytomedicines on neuropathic pain. In addition, we discussed their main bioactive components and potential mechanisms of action to provide a better view of the application of herbal drugs for treating neuropathic pain.

The Therapeutic Potential and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Neuroprotective Effects of Sativex® - A Cannabis-derived Spray

Sativex is a cannabis-based medicine that comes in the form of an oromucosal spray. It contains equal amounts of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, two compounds derived from cannabis plants. Sativex has been shown to have positive effects on symptoms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), and sleep disorders. It also has analgesic, antiinflammatory, antitumoral, and neuroprotective properties, which make it a potential treatment option for other neurological disorders. The article reviews the results of recent preclinical and clinical studies that support the therapeutic potential of Sativex and the molecular mechanisms behind its neuroprotective benefits in various neurological disorders. The article also discusses the possible advantages and disadvantages of using Sativex as a neurotherapeutic agent, such as its safety, efficacy, availability, and legal status.

Cannabinoids, Endocannabinoids, and Synthetic Cannabimimetic Molecules in Neuromuscular Disorders

Neuromuscular disorders (NMDs) encompass a large heterogeneous group of hereditary and acquired diseases primarily affecting motor neurons, peripheral nerves, and the skeletal muscle system. The symptoms of NMDs may vary depending on the specific condition, but some of the most common ones include muscle weakness, pain, paresthesias, and hyporeflexia, as well as difficulties with swallowing and breathing. NMDs are currently untreatable. Therapeutic options include symptomatic and experimental medications aimed at delaying and alleviating symptoms, in some cases supplemented by surgical and physical interventions. To address this unmet medical need, ongoing research is being conducted on new treatments, including studies on medical cannabis, endocannabinoids, and related molecules with cannabimimetic properties. In this context, a significant amount of knowledge about the safety and effectiveness of cannabinoids in NMDs has been obtained from studies involving patients with multiple sclerosis experiencing pain and spasticity. In recent decades, numerous other preclinical and clinical studies have been conducted to determine the potential benefits of cannabinoids in NMDs. This review article aims to summarize and provide an unbiased point of view on the current knowledge about the use of cannabinoids, endocannabinoids, and synthetic analogs in NMDs, drawing from an array of compelling studies.

Medical Cannabis and Its Efficacy/Effectiveness for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This systematic review aims to inform the current state of evidence about the efficacy and effectiveness of medical cannabis use for the treatment of LBP, specifically on pain levels and overall opioid use for LBP. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and CINAHL. The search was limited to the past 10 years (2011-2021). Study inclusion was determined by the critical appraisal process using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework. Only English language articles were included. Participant demographics included all adult individuals with LBP who were prescribed medical cannabis for LBP and may be concurrently using opioids for their LBP. Study quality and the risk of bias were both evaluated. A narrative synthesis approach was used.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of twelve studies were included in the synthesis: one randomized controlled trial (RCT), six observational studies (one prospective, four retrospective, and one cross-over), and five case studies. All study results, except for the RCT, indicated a decrease in LBP levels or opioid use over time after medical cannabis use. The RCT reported no statistically significant difference in LBP between cannabis and placebo groups. Low back pain (LBP) affects 568 million people worldwide. In the United States, LBP treatment represents more than half of regular opioid users. With the opioid epidemic, alternative methods, particularly medical cannabis, is now increasingly sought by practicing physicians and patients. Due to its infancy, there is minimal high-quality evidence to support medical cannabis use as a first line treatment for LBP.

Unlocking the Healing Potential: Cannabinoids in Spine Surgery for Pain Relief and Recovery

» Cannabinoids, such as D9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, interact with endocannabinoid receptors in the central nervous system and immune system, potentially offering pain relief. The entourage effect, resulting from the interaction of multiple cannabis components, may enhance therapeutic impact and efficacy, making them promising candidates for exploring pain relief in spine operations, known to be among the most painful operative procedures.» The use of cannabinoids in pain management requires careful consideration of safety, including their cognitive and psychomotor effects, potential cardiovascular risks, risk of dependence, mental health implications, and drug interactions.» Few studies have analyzed cannabinoid use in relation to spine surgery, with variable results reported, indicating possible effects on reoperation rates, mortality, complications, postoperative opioid use, and length of hospital stay.» Current knowledge gaps exist in the understanding of cannabinoid effects on spine surgery, including the exploration of different administration routes, timing, dosage, and specific outcomes. In addition, mechanistic explanations for the observed results are lacking.» Ethical considerations related to informed consent, medical expertise, societal impact, and legal compliance must also be thoroughly addressed when considering the utilization of cannabinoids in spinal pathologies and back pain treatment.

Medical cannabinoids for painful symptoms in patients with severe dementia: a randomized, double-blind cross-over placebo-controlled trial protocol

Background

In an observational study in Geneva (Switzerland), we found that administering a standardized THC/CBD oil was feasible, safe, and beneficial in an elderly polymedicated population with severe dementia, behavioral troubles, and pain. Those findings need to be confirmed in a randomized clinical trial.

Objectives

The MedCanDem trial is a randomized, double-blind cross-over placebo-controlled trial to study the efficacy of cannabinoids in improving painful symptoms during severe dementia disorders in patients living in long-term care facilities in Geneva. This manuscript describes the MedCanDem trial protocol.

Materials and methods

Participants will be patients suffering from severe dementia associated with pain and behavioral troubles and living in long-term care facilities. We selected five facilities specialized in caring for severely demented patients in Geneva (Switzerland). A total of 24 subjects will be randomized 1:1 to the sequence study intervention/placebo or the sequence placebo/study intervention. Patients will receive study intervention treatment or placebo for eight weeks, and then after a one-week wash-out, treatments will be inversed for another eight weeks. The intervention will be a standardized THC/CBD 1:2 oil extract, and the placebo will be a hemp seed oil. The primary outcome is the reduction from the baseline of the Cohen-Mansfield score; secondary outcomes include the reduction in the Doloplus scale, the reduction of rigidity, the monitoring of concomitant drugs prescription and de-prescription, the safety assessment, and a pharmacokinetic evaluation. The primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed at the baseline, after 28 days, and at the end of both study periods. In addition, safety laboratory analysis, pharmacokinetic evaluation, and therapeutic drug monitoring for the cannabinoids will be evaluated through a blood sample analysis conducted at the beginning and the end of both study periods.

Discussion and conclusion

This study will allow us to confirm the clinical results observed during the observational study. It represents one of the few studies aiming to prove natural medical cannabis efficacy in a population of non-communicating patients with severe dementia, experimenting with behavioral troubles, pain, and rigidity.

Trial registration

The trial has Swissethics authorization (BASEC 2022-00999), and it is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05432206) and the SNCTP (000005168).

Evaluating the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health and pain in patients with chronic neuropathic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Chronic neuropathic pain is often debilitating and can have a significant impact on sleep health and quality of life. There is limited information on the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health when treating neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to determine the effect of cannabinoids on sleep quality, pain intensity, and patient impression of treatment efficacy in patients with neuropathic pain.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Nine available medical literature databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing synthetic and natural cannabinoids to placebo in patients with neuropathic pain syndromes. Data on validated tools for sleep quality, pain intensity, patients' global impression of change (PGIC), and incidence of adverse effects of cannabinoids were extracted and synthesized.

FINDINGS

Of the 3491 studies screened, eight randomized controlled trials satisfied the inclusion criteria for this review. Analyses were performed using R -4.1.2. using the metafor package and are interpreted using alpha=0.05 as the threshold for statistical significance. Validated measures for sleep health were not used in most studies. Meta-analysis of data from six studies showed that cannabinoids were associated with a significant improvement in sleep quality (standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19 to -0.61, 95% prediction interval (PI): -0.12 to 0.88, p-value=0.002, I2=55.26, τ2=0.05, Q-statistic=16.72, GRADE: moderate certainty). Meta-analysis of data from eight studies showed a significant reduction in daily pain scores in the cannabinoid (CB) group (SMD: -0.55, 95% CI:-0.69 to -0.19, 95% PI: -1.51 to 0.39, p=0.003, I2=82.49, τ2=0.20, Q-statistic=47.69, GRADE: moderate certainty). However, sleep health and analgesic benefits were associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing daytime somnolence, nausea, and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids have a role in treating chronic neuropathic pain as evidenced by significant improvements in sleep quality, pain intensity, and PGIC. More research is needed to comprehensively evaluate the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health and analgesic efficacy.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017074255.

Medicinal cannabis for Australian patients with chronic refractory pain including arthritis

Objectives

To examine the tolerability and effectiveness of medicinal cannabis prescribed to patients for chronic, refractory pain, with a subset analysis on arthritis.

Methods

This was an interim analysis of the CA Clinics Observational Study investigating self-reported adverse events (AEs) and changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes over time after commencing medicinal cannabis. Patients were prescribed medicinal cannabis by a medical practitioner, containing various ratios of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and/or cannabidiol (CBD).

Results

The overall chronic pain cohort, and specifically the balanced CBD:THC products, were associated with significantly reduced pain intensity scores (p = 0.003, p = 0.025), with 22% of patients reporting a clinically meaningful reduction in pain intensity. Patients in the arthritis subset (n = 199) reported significantly reduced pain intensity scores (p = 0.005) overall, and specifically for those taking CBD-only (p = 0.018) and balanced products (p = 0.005). Other HRQoL outcomes, including pain interference and pain impact scores were significantly improved depending on the CBD:THC ratio. Products that contained a balanced ratio of CBD:THC were associated with improvements in the most number of PROMIS-29 domains. Approximately half (n = 364; 51%) of the chronic pain cohort experienced at least one AE, the most common being dry mouth (24%), somnolence (19%) or fatigue (12%). These findings were similar in the arthritis subset.

Discussion

Medicinal cannabis was observed to improve pain intensity scores and HRQoL outcomes in patients with chronic, refractory pain, providing real-world insights into medicinal cannabis' therapeutic potential.

Cannabinoids versus placebo for pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of cannabinoids in participants with pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and BIOSIS.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing cannabinoids versus placebo in participants with any type of pain.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All-cause mortality, pain, adverse events, quality of life, cannabinoid dependence, psychosis, and quality of sleep.

RESULTS

We included 65 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling 7017 participants. Fifty-nine of the trials and all outcome results were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed no evidence of a difference between cannabinoids versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.20; 98% CI 0.85 to 1.67; P = 0.22). Meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that cannabinoids neither reduced acute pain (mean difference numerical rating scale (NRS) 0.52; 98% CI -0.40 to 1.43; P = 0.19) or cancer pain (mean difference NRS -0.13; 98% CI -0.33 to 0.06; P = 0.1) nor improved quality of life (mean difference -1.38; 98% CI -11.81 to 9.04; P = 0.33). Meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that cannabinoids reduced chronic pain (mean difference NRS -0.43; 98% CI -0.72 to -0.15; P = 0.0004) and improved quality of sleep (mean difference -0.42; 95% CI -0.65 to -0.20; P = 0.0003). However, both effect sizes were below our predefined minimal important differences. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis indicated that cannabinoids increased the risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.25; P < 0.001) but not serious adverse events (RR 1.18; 98% CI 0.95 to 1.45; P = 0.07). None of the included trials reported on cannabinoid dependence or psychosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids reduced chronic pain and improved quality of sleep, but the effect sizes are of questionable importance. Cannabinoids had no effects on acute pain or cancer pain and increased the risks of non-serious adverse events. The harmful effects of cannabinoids for pain seem to outweigh the potential benefits.

Dysmenorrhoea: Can Medicinal Cannabis Bring New Hope for a Collective Group of Women Suffering in Pain, Globally?

Dysmenorrhoea effects up to 90% of women of reproductive age, with medical management options including over-the-counter analgesia or hormonal contraception. There has been a recent surge in medicinal cannabis research and its analgesic properties. This paper aims to critically investigate the current research of medicinal cannabis for pain relief and to discuss its potential application to treat dysmenorrhoea. Relevant keywords, including medicinal cannabis, pain, cannabinoids, tetrahydrocannabinol, dysmenorrhoea, and clinical trial, have been searched in the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library (Wiley) databases and a clinical trial website (clinicaltrials.gov). To identify the relevant studies for this paper, 84 papers were reviewed and 20 were discarded as irrelevant. This review critically evaluated cannabis-based medicines and their mechanism and properties in relation to pain relief. It also tabulated all clinical trials carried out investigating medicinal cannabis for pain relief and highlighted the side effects. In addition, the safety and toxicology of medicinal cannabis and barriers to use are highlighted. Two-thirds of the clinical trials summarised confirmed positive analgesic outcomes, with major side effects reported as nausea, drowsiness, and dry mouth. In conclusion, medicinal cannabis has promising applications in the management of dysmenorrhoea. The global medical cannabis market size was valued at USD 11.0 billion in 2021 and is expected to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.06% from 2022 to 2030. This will encourage academic as well as the pharmaceutical and medical device industries to study the application of medical cannabis in unmet clinical disorders.

Safety and Tolerability of Oral Cannabinoids in People Living with HIV on Long-Term ART: A Randomized, Open-Label, Interventional Pilot Clinical Trial (CTNPT 028)

BACKGROUND

With anti-inflammatory properties, cannabinoids may be a potential strategy to reduce immune activation in people living with HIV (PLWH) but more information on their safety and tolerability is needed.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label interventional pilot study at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Canada. PLWH were randomized to oral Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC): cannabidiol (CBD) combination (THC 2.5 mg/CBD 2.5 mg) or CBD-only capsules (CBD 200 mg). Individuals titrated doses as tolerated to a maximum daily dose THC 15 mg/CBD 15 mg or 800 mg CBD, respectively, for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants without any significant toxicity based on the WHO toxicity scale (Grades 0-2 scores).

RESULTS

Out of ten individuals, eight completed the study. Two from the CBD-only arm were withdrawn for safety concerns: phlebotomy aggravating pre-existing anemia and severe hepatitis on 800 mg CBD with newly discovered pancreatic adenocarcinoma, respectively. Seven did not have any significant toxicity. Cannabinoids did not alter hematology/biochemistry profiles. CD4 count, CD4/CD8 ratio, and HIV suppression remained stable. Most adverse effects were mild-moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

In PLWH, cannabinoids seem generally safe and well-tolerated, though larger studies are needed. Screening for occult liver pathology should be performed and hepatic enzymes monitored, especially with high CBD doses.

Cys-loop receptors on cannabinoids: All high?

Endocannabinoids (eCBS) are endogenously derived lipid signaling molecules that serve as tissue hormones and interact with multiple targets, mostly within the endocannabinoid system (ECS). The ECS is a highly conserved regulatory system involved in homeostatic regulation, organ formation, and immunomodulation of chordates. The term “cannabinoid” evolved from the distinctive class of plant compounds found in Cannabis sativa, an ancient herb, due to their action on CB1 and CB2 receptors. CB1/2 receptors are the primary targets for eCBs, but their effects are not limited to the ECS. Due to the high interest and extensive research on the ECS, knowledge on its constituents and physiological role is substantial and still growing. Crosstalk and multiple targeting of molecules are common features of endogenous and plant compounds. Cannabimimetic molecules can be divided according to their origin, natural or synthetic, including phytocannabinoids (pCB’s) or synthetic cannabinoids (sCB’s). The endocannabinoid system (ECS) consists of receptors, transporters, enzymes, and signaling molecules. In this review, we focus on the effects of cannabinoids on Cys-loop receptors. Cys-loop receptors belong to the class of membrane-bound pentameric ligand gated ion channels, each family comprising multiple subunits. Mammalians possess GABA type A receptors (GABAAR), glycine receptors (GlyR), serotonin receptors type 3 (5-HT3R), and nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR). Several studies have shown different modulatory effects of CBs on multiple members of the Cys-loop receptor family. We highlight the existing knowledge, especially on subunits and protein domains with conserved binding sites for CBs and their possible pharmacological and physiological role in epilepsy and in chronic pain. We further discuss the potential for cannabinoids as first line treatments in epilepsy, chronic pain and other neuropsychiatric conditions, indicated by their polypharmacology and therapeutic profile.

Placebo Response and Media Attention in Randomized Clinical Trials Assessing Cannabis-Based Therapies for Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Persistent pain is a common and disabling health problem that is often difficult to treat. There is an increasing interest in medicinal cannabis for treatment of persistent pain; however, the limited superiority of cannabinoids over placebo in clinical trials suggests that positive expectations may contribute to the improvements.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the size of placebo responses in randomized clinical trials in which cannabinoids were compared with placebo in the treatment of pain and to correlate these responses to objective estimates of media attention.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search was conducted within the MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies published until September 2021 were considered.

STUDY SELECTION

Cannabinoid studies with a double-blind, placebo-controlled design with participants 18 years or older with clinical pain of any duration were included. Studies were excluded if they treated individuals with HIV/AIDS or severe skin disorders.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Data were extracted by independent reviewers. Quality assessment was performed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Attention and dissemination metrics for each trial were extracted from Altmetric and Crossref. Data were pooled and analyzed using a random-effects statistical model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Change in pain intensity from before to after treatment, measured as bias-corrected standardized mean difference (Hedges g).

RESULTS

Twenty studies, including 1459 individuals (mean [SD] age, 51 [7] years; age range, 33-62 years; 815 female [56%]), were included. Pain intensity was associated with a significant reduction in response to placebo, with a moderate to large effect size (mean [SE] Hedges g, 0.64 [0.13]; P < .001). Trials with low risk of bias had greater placebo responses (q1 = 5.47; I2 = 87.08; P = .02). The amount of media attention and dissemination linked to each trial was proportionally high, with a strong positive bias, but was not associated with the clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Placebo contributes significantly to pain reduction seen in cannabinoid clinical trials. The positive media attention and wide dissemination may uphold high expectations and shape placebo responses in future trials, which has the potential to affect the outcome of clinical trials, regulatory decisions, clinical practice, and ultimately patient access to cannabinoids for pain relief.

Use of Cannabidiol in the Management of Insomnia: A Systematic Review

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD), one of the major cannabinoids derived from the cannabis plant, is available over the counter. CBD is often used by patients for the management of insomnia, yet research supporting CBDs effectiveness as a treatment for insomnia is inadequate. Objective: The objective of this review was to critically evaluate the literature regarding the therapeutic benefits of CBD in the management of insomnia. Methods: A comprehensive search of the following databases from inception to December 29, 2021, was conducted: Ovid MEDLINE^® and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. The search included randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized experimental studies, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case series, and case reports. Risk of bias was assessed with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality design-specific recommended criteria. Results: Thirty-four studies were eligible for inclusion. All studies reported improvement in the insomnia symptoms of at least a portion of their participants. Of the 34 studies, 19 studies used CBD predominant therapy and 21 studies used nearly equal ratios of CBD to Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Of the studies that performed hypothesis testing, 4 of 7 studies with a CBD predominant arm and 12 of 16 studies with a nearly equal ratio of CBD to THC arm reported significant improvement in insomnia outcomes. However, only 2 of the 34 studies focused on patients with insomnia, of which 1 study was a case report. Additionally, several studies used nonvalidated subjective measures, and most studies failed to include objective measures for symptom assessment. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review suggest that CBD alone or with equal quantities of THC may be beneficial in alleviating the symptoms of insomnia. Nevertheless, future research assessing CBDs effectiveness in population of patients specifically with insomnia utilizing validated subjective and objective measures is necessary before definitive inferences can be made.

Effects of rich cannabidiol oil on behavioral disturbances in patients with dementia: A placebo controlled randomized clinical trial

Background

Almost 90% of patients with dementia suffer from some type of neurobehavioral symptom, and there are no approved medications to address these symptoms.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the medical cannabis oil “Avidekel” for the reduction of behavioral disturbances among patients with dementia.

Materials and methods

In this randomized, double-blind, single-cite, placebo-controlled trial conducted in Israel (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03328676), patients aged at least 60, with a diagnosis of major neurocognitive disorder and associated behavioral disturbances were randomized 2:1 to receive either “Avidekel,” a broad-spectrum cannabis oil (30% cannabidiol and 1% tetrahydrocannabinol: 295 mg and 12.5 mg per ml, respectively; n = 40) or a placebo oil (n = 20) three times a day for 16 weeks. The primary outcome was a decrease, as compared to baseline, of four or more points on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score by week 16.

Results

From 60 randomized patients [mean age, 79.4 years; 36 women (60.0%)], 52 (86.7%) completed the trial (all eight patients who discontinued treatment were from the investigational group). There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of subjects who had a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score reduction of ≥ 4 points at week 16: 24/40 (60.0%) and 6/20 (30.0%) for investigational and control groups, respectively (χ2 = 4.80, P = 0.03). There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of subjects who had a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score reduction of ≥ 8 points at week 16: 20/40 (50%) and 3/20 (15%), respectively (χ2 = 6.42, P = 0.011). The ANOVA repeated measures analysis demonstrated significantly more improvement in the investigational group compared to the control group at weeks 14 and 16 (F = 3.18, P = 0.02). Treatment was mostly safe, with no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events between the two groups.

Conclusion

In this randomized controlled trial, ‘Avidekel’ oil significantly reduced agitation over placebo in patients suffering from behavioral disturbances related to dementia, with non-serious side-effects. Further research is required with a larger sample size.

Medical cannabinoids: a pharmacology-based systematic review and meta-analysis for all relevant medical indications

BACKGROUND

Medical cannabinoids differ in their pharmacology and may have different treatment effects. We aimed to conduct a pharmacology-based systematic review (SR) and meta-analyses of medical cannabinoids for efficacy, retention and adverse events.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed (registered at PROSPERO: CRD42021229932) eight databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dronabinol, nabilone, cannabidiol and nabiximols for chronic pain, spasticity, nausea /vomiting, appetite, ALS, irritable bowel syndrome, MS, Chorea Huntington, epilepsy, dystonia, Parkinsonism, glaucoma, ADHD, anorexia nervosa, anxiety, dementia, depression, schizophrenia, PTSD, sleeping disorders, SUD and Tourette. Main outcomes and measures included patient-relevant/disease-specific outcomes, retention and adverse events. Data were calculated as standardized mean difference (SMD) and ORs with confidence intervals (CI) via random effects. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools.

RESULTS

In total, 152 RCTs (12,123 participants) were analysed according to the type of the cannabinoid, outcome and comparator used, resulting in 84 comparisons. Significant therapeutic effects of medical cannabinoids show a large variability in the grade of evidence that depends on the type of cannabinoid. CBD has a significant therapeutic effect for epilepsy (SMD - 0.5[CI - 0.62, - 0.38] high grade) and Parkinsonism (- 0.41[CI - 0.75, - 0.08] moderate grade). There is moderate evidence for dronabinol for chronic pain (- 0.31[CI - 0.46, - 0.15]), appetite (- 0.51[CI - 0.87, - 0.15]) and Tourette (- 1.01[CI - 1.58, - 0.44]) and moderate evidence for nabiximols on chronic pain (- 0.25[- 0.37, - 0.14]), spasticity (- 0.36[CI - 0.54, - 0.19]), sleep (- 0.24[CI - 0.35, - 0.14]) and SUDs (- 0.48[CI - 0.92, - 0.04]). All other significant therapeutic effects have either low, very low, or even no grade of evidence. Cannabinoids produce different adverse events, and there is low to moderate grade of evidence for this conclusion depending on the type of cannabinoid.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids are effective therapeutics for several medical indications if their specific pharmacological properties are considered. We suggest that future systematic studies in the cannabinoid field should be based upon their specific pharmacology.

Cannabinoid Use for Pain Reduction in Spinal Cord Injuries: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Spinal cord injury (SCI) often involves multimodal pain control. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cannabinoid use for the reduction of pain in SCI patients. Methods and Findings: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy (e.g., pain relief) or safety (e.g., adverse events) of cannabinoids in patients with SCI, from inception to 25 December 2021. The study quality and the quality of evidence were evaluated by Cochrane ROB 2.0 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system (GRADE), respectively. We used the random-effects model to perform the meta-analysis. From a total of 9,500 records, we included five RCTs with 417 SCI patients in the systematic review and meta-analysis. We judged all five of the included RCTs as being at high risk of bias. This meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in pain relief between the cannabinoids and placebo in SCI patients (mean difference of mean differences of pain scores: -5.68; 95% CI: -13.09, 1.73; p = 0.13; quality of evidence: very low), but higher odds of adverse events were found in SCI patients receiving cannabinoids (odds ratio: 3.76; 95% CI: 1.98, 7.13; p < 0.0001; quality of evidence: moderate). Conclusion: The current best evidence suggests that cannabinoids may not be beneficial for pain relief in SCI patients, but they do increase the risks of adverse events, including dizziness, somnolence, and dysgeusia, compared to the placebo. Cannabinoids should not be regularly suggested for pain reduction in SCI patients. Updating the systematic reviews and meta-analyses by integrating future RCTs is necessary to confirm these findings.

Dorsal Column Stimulation and Cannabinoids in the Treatment of Chronic Nociceptive and Neuropathic Pain: a Review of the Clinical and Pre-clinical Data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The main objective of this review is to appraise the literature on the role of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), cannabinoid therapy, as well as SCS and cannabinoid combination therapy for the management of chronic neuropathic and nociceptive pain. Current research suggests that SCS reduces pain and increases functional status in carefully selected patients with minimal side effects.

RECENT FINDINGS

As cannabinoid-based medications become a topic of increasing interest in pain management, data remains limited regarding the clinical efficacy of cannabinoids for pain relief. Furthermore, from a mechanistic perspective, although various pain treatment modalities utilize overlapping pain-signaling pathways, clarifying whether cannabinoids work synergistically with SCS via shared mechanisms remains to be determined. In considering secondary outcomes, the current literature suggests cannabinoids improve quality of life, specifically sleep quality, and that SCS decreases opioid consumption, increases functional capacity, and decreases long-term healthcare costs. These findings, along with the high safety profiles of SCS and cannabinoids overall, incentivize further exploration of cannabinoids as an adjunctive therapy to SCS in the treatment of neuropathic and nociceptive pain.

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Nabiximols (THC:CBD) Oromucosal Spray versus Oral Dronabinol (THC) as Add-on Treatment for Severe Neuropathic Pain in Real-World Clinical Practice: Retrospective Analysis of the German Pain e-Registry

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of add-on treatment with nabiximols (NBX: delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: cannabidiol) oromucosal spray or oral dronabinol (DRO: synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol) in patients with severe neuropathic pain poorly responsive to established treatments.

Methods

An analysis was conducted of anonymized, propensity score-matched real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry, using a sequential non-inferiority superiority approach, for adult outpatients with neuropathic pain who had initiated treatment with NBX or DRO between 10 March 2017 and 31 December 2019. The primary effectiveness variable was percent change from baseline in a 9-factor aggregated symptom relief (ASR-9) score, a composite index of nine distinct pain- and health-related parameters assessed using validated patient-reported instruments. Safety was assessed by the incidence of physician-confirmed treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and TRAEs leading to discontinuation.

Results

Propensity score-matched data were analyzed for 337 patients treated with NBX and 337 patients treated with DRO. Mean (standard deviation) THC dose over the 24-week evaluation period was 16.6 (6.5) mg for NBX and 17.2 (7.6) mg for DRO (p<0.001). Median (standard error) improvement relative to baseline in the ASR-9 composite score was 55.4% (0.5) for NBX and 40.5% (0.5) for DRO (least squares mean difference, 14.0 (0.7), 95% confidence interval 12.6–15.4; p<0.001), and incidences of TRAEs (21.1 vs 35%) and TRAE-related discontinuations (5.9 vs 14.8%) were significantly lower with NBX than DRO (p<0.001 for both), collectively indicating pre-specified non-inferiority and superiority of NBX. More NBX- than DRO-treated patients discontinued non-cannabinoid background pain medications and rescue analgesics, especially opioid analgesics (p<0.001 for both).

Conclusion

Add-on treatment with cannabinoids is effective for treatment of severe neuropathic pain with inadequate response to established treatments. In daily practice, NBX had superior effectiveness and tolerability compared to DRO. The results emphasize the importance of combining CBD with THC in this patient population.

Benefits, toxicity and current market of cannabidiol in edibles

The commercialization of products with cannabidiol (CBD) has undergone a significant increase. These products can be presented in different forms such as baked goods, gummies or beverages (such as kombucha, beer or teas, among others) using wide concentrations ranges. The use of CBD in edibles favors its consumption, for medicinal users, during the work week, avoid its possible social stigma and facilitates its transport. These products can be purchased on store shelves and online. There is a large number of specialized studies, in which the possible advantages of CBD consumption are described in the preclinical and clinical trials. It is also necessary to recognize the existence of other works revealing that the excessive consumption of CBD could have some repercussions on health. In this review, it is analyzed the composition and properties of Cannabis sativa L., the health benefits of cannabinoids (focusing on CBD), its consumption, its possible toxicological effects, a brief exposition of the extraction process, and a collection of different products that contain CBD in its composition.

Efficacy of cannabis-based medications compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Chronic neuropathic pain (NP) presents therapeutic challenges. Interest in the use of cannabis-based medications has outpaced the knowledge of its efficacy and safety in treating NP. The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of cannabis-based medications in individuals with chronic NP.

Methods

Randomized placebo-controlled trials using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabidivarin (CBDV), or synthetic cannabinoids for NP treatment were included. The MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were examined. The primary outcome was the NP intensity. The risk of bias analysis was based on the Cochrane handbook.

Results

The search of databases up to 2/1/2021 yielded 379 records with 17 RCTs included (861 patients with NP). Meta-analysis showed that there was a significant reduction in pain intensity for THC/CBD by -6.624 units (P < .001), THC by -8.681 units (P < .001), and dronabinol by -6.0 units (P = .008) compared to placebo on a 0-100 scale. CBD, CBDV, and CT-3 showed no significant differences. Patients taking THC/CBD were 1.756 times more likely to achieve a 30% reduction in pain (P = .008) and 1.422 times more likely to achieve a 50% reduction (P = .37) than placebo. Patients receiving THC had a 21% higher improvement in pain intensity (P = .005) and were 1.855 times more likely to achieve a 30% reduction in pain than placebo (P < .001).

Conclusion

Although THC and THC/CBD interventions provided a significant improvement in pain intensity and were more likely to provide a 30% reduction in pain, the evidence was of moderate-to-low quality. Further research is needed for CBD, dronabinol, CT-3, and CBDV.

Dose-Related Inhibition of Capsaicin Responses by Cannabinoids CBG, CBD, THC and their Combination in Cultured Sensory Neurons

BACKGROUND

The analgesic effects of Cannabis sativa are mediated by ∆9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), but the contributions of other bioactive complex components, including cannabigerol (CBG) and cannabidiol (CBD), are unclear. We describe the individual and combined effects of CBG, CBD and THC, on blocking capsaicin responses in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons, in an in vitro model of nociceptor hypersensitivity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult rat DRG were dissected and enzyme digested to obtain a neuronal suspension in BSF2 medium containing 2% fetal calf serum, and the neurotrophic factors NGF and GDNF. After 48 h, cultured neurons were loaded with Fura-2 AM, to determine the effects of cannabinoids on capsaicin responses using calcium imaging. In control experiments, neurons were treated with vehicle, followed by 1 µM capsaicin. In cannabinoid treated cultures, CBG, CBD or THC were applied individually, or combined (1:1:1 ratio), followed by 1 µM capsaicin. Data from n = 6 experiments were analysed with Student's t-test and Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

CBG, CBD and THC, applied individually, elicited dose-related calcium influx in a subset of DRG neurons, and a corresponding dose-related reduction of subsequent responses to capsaicin. Maximum inhibition of capsaicin responses was observed at 30 µM CBG, 100 µM CBD, and 100 µM THC individually, and with combined CBD+CBG+THC (1:1:1) at 90 µM. THC+CBD+CBG combined in a 1:1:1 proportion has the potential to enhance the potency of these compounds applied individually. There was a high correlation between cannabinoid-mediated calcium influx and reduction of capsaicin responses: CBG = -0.88, THC = -0.97, CBD = -0.99 and combined CBG + THC + CBD = -1.00.

CONCLUSION

CBG, CBD and THC demonstrated potent dose-related inhibition of capsaicin responses in DRG neurons when applied individually in vitro, and enhanced when applied in combination, being most effective at 90 μM. Thus, efficacy and tolerability of THC could be improved in combination with CBG and CBD at optimal concentrations, which deserve further studies in vivo.

Cannabinoids: an Effective Treatment for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neurotoxicity?

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN) is one of the most frequent side effects of antineoplastic treatment, particularly of lung, breast, prostate, gastrointestinal, and germinal cancers, as well as of different forms of leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. Currently, no effective therapies are available for CIPN prevention, and symptomatic treatment is frequently ineffective; thus, several clinical trials are addressing this unmet clinical need. Among possible pharmacological treatments of CIPN, modulation of the endocannabinoid system might be particularly promising, especially in those CIPN types where analgesia and neuroinflammation modulation might be beneficial. In fact, several clinical trials are ongoing with the specific aim to better investigate the changes in endocannabinoid levels induced by systemic chemotherapy and the possible role of endocannabinoid system modulation to provide relief from CIPN symptoms, a hypothesis supported by preclinical evidence but never consistently demonstrated in patients. Interestingly, endocannabinoid system modulation might be one of the mechanisms at the basis of the reported efficacy of exercise and physical therapy in CIPN patients. This possible virtuous interplay will be discussed in this review.

Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids for Impaired Sleep: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review to explore the effectiveness of medical cannabis for impaired sleep.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PsychINFO to January 2021 for randomized trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for impaired sleep vs. any non-cannabis control. When possible, we pooled effect estimates for all patient-important sleep-related outcomes and used the GRADE approach to appraise the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine trials (5,100 patients) were eligible for review, of which 38 evaluated oral cannabinoids and 1 administered inhaled cannabis. The median follow-up was 35 days, and most trials (33 of 39) enrolled patients living with chronic cancer or noncancer chronic pain. Among patients with chronic pain, moderate certainty evidence found that medical cannabis probably results in a small improvement in sleep quality versus placebo (modeled risk difference [RD] for achieving the minimally important difference [MID], 8% [95% CI, 3 to 12]). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis vs. placebo results in a small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic non-cancer pain (modeled RD for achieving the MID, 19% [95% CI, 11 to 28]) and a very small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic cancer pain (WMD of -0.19cm [95%CI, -0.36 to -0.03cm]; interaction p=0.03). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows medical cannabis, versus placebo, results in a substantial increase in the risk of dizziness (RD 29% [95%CI, 16 to 50], for trials with ≥3 months follow-up), and a small increase in the risk of somnolence, dry mouth, fatigue, and nausea (RDs ranged from 6% to 10%).

CONCLUSION

Medical cannabis and cannabinoids may improve impaired sleep among people living with chronic pain, but the magnitude of benefit is likely small.

Effectiveness, safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray versus typical oral long-acting opioid analgesics in patients with severe neuropathic back pain: analysis of 6-month real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry

Objective

To compare the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of add-on nabiximols (NBX) oromucosal spray vs typical oral long-acting opioid (LAO) analgesics in patients with severe (± chronic) peripheral neuropathic back pain poorly responsive to other treatments.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score–matched data from the German Pain e-Registry of adult outpatients who initiated NBX or LAO between March 2017 and March 2020.

Results

Data were analyzed from propensity score–matched patients treated with NBX (n = 655) or LAO (n = 655): mean age ≈51 years; 57% female; mean pain duration ≈2.6 years; chronic pain 61%; severe dysfunctional pain 93%. At 6 months, NBX was noninferior to LAO for overall symptom relief, based on the least-squares mean difference between cohorts in change from baseline in patient-reported, pain-related aggregated nine-item scale scores (−27.84%; 95% confidence interval [CI] −29.71 to −25.96; P < 0.001) and individual pain-related scale scores. Subsequent prespecified superiority analysis of the primary endpoint showed that NBX was superior to LAO: all secondary endpoints measuring symptoms of pain and physical function improved significantly with NBX and LAO, with between-group differences favoring NBX (all P < 0.001). Fewer patients treated with NBX than LAO experienced treatment-related adverse events (25.5% vs 76.0%; P < 0.001) or discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events (7.9% vs 29.3%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Within study limitations (e.g., observational design, all potential biases), add-on NBX was superior to and better tolerated than add-on treatment with typical oral LAO analgesics in patients with neuropathic back pain inadequately controlled by recommended/established systemic therapies.

Safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray: a review of more than 15 years" accumulated evidence from clinical trials

Introduction: Nabiximols, a cannabinoid-based oromucosal spray, is indicated as add-on therapy for symptomatic relief of spasticity in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). This review compiles tolerability and safety data from clinical trials that investigated nabiximols for spasticity and/or chronic pain.Areas covered: Systematic searches identified 38 placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or post-RCT open-label studies reporting safety data: 15 in spasticity; 16 in neuropathic pain; six in chronic cancer pain; and one in rheumatoid arthritis pain. In RCTs, discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) for nabiximols and placebo were lower in spasticity studies (5.4% and 2.8%) than in neuropathic pain (12.9% and 5.3%) or cancer pain (19.5% and 16.6%) studies. The most consistently identified AEs were dizziness, nausea and fatigue in spasticity or neuropathic pain studies; and dizziness, nausea, vomiting and somnolence in cancer pain studies. Serious AE (SAE) rates for nabiximols and placebo were higher in cancer pain (21.8% and 16.9%) than in MS spasticity (4.7% vs. 0.8%) and neuropathic pain (4.1% vs. 3.1%) studies despite similar dose ranges. Treatment-related SAEs showed no particular pattern.Expert opinion: More than 15 years of investigation of nabiximols oromucosal spray in spasticity and chronic pain conditions indicates an acceptable overall safety profile.

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine for pain management: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

ABSTRACT

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) are increasingly used to manage pain, with limited understanding of their efficacy and safety. We summarised efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of these types of drugs for treating pain using randomised controlled trials: in people of any age, with any type of pain, and for any treatment duration. Primary outcomes were 30% and 50% reduction in pain intensity, and AEs. We assessed risk of bias of included studies, and the overall quality of evidence using GRADE. Studies of <7 and >7 days treatment duration were analysed separately. We included 36 studies (7217 participants) delivering cannabinoids (8 studies), cannabis (6 studies), and CBM (22 studies); all had high and/or uncertain risk of bias. Evidence of benefit was found for cannabis <7 days (risk difference 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.20-0.46; 2 trials, 231 patients, very low-quality evidence) and nabiximols >7 days (risk difference 0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.12; 6 trials, 1484 patients, very low-quality evidence). No other beneficial effects were found for other types of cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in our primary analyses; 81% of subgroup analyses were negative. Cannabis, nabiximols, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol had more AEs than control. Studies in this field have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had GRADE rating of low- or very low-quality evidence. We have little confidence in the estimates of effect. The evidence neither supports nor refutes claims of efficacy and safety for cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in the management of pain.

[Cannabis and cannabinoids for the treatment of acute and chronic pain]

Since the Act on the medical use of cannabis, at which cannabis-based medicines and cannabinoids became law, there has been an exponential increase in prescriptions for the acquisition of cannabis for medical purposes. The aim of this leading article is to compile and assess the currently available relevant clinical evidence for the use of cannabis and cannabinoids for treatment of acute and chronic pain. Based on the systematic literature review "Cannabis-Potential and risks (CAPRIS)" commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Health and the recently published recommendations of the European Pain Federation EFIC, this article aims to give an orientation aid for the decision-making process in the clinical routine.

Dorsal Root Entry Zone Lesioning for Brachial Plexus Avulsion: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Dorsal root entry zone (DREZ) lesioning is a neurosurgical procedure that aims to relieve severe neuropathic pain in patients with brachial plexus avulsion by selectively destroying nociceptive neural structures in the posterior cervical spinal cord. Since the introduction of the procedure over 4 decades ago, the DREZ lesioning technique has undergone numerous modifications, with a variety of center- and surgeon-dependent technical differences and patient outcomes. We have reviewed the literature to discuss reported methods of DREZ lesioning and outcomes.

Evaluation of Patient Reported Safety and Efficacy of Cannabis From a Survey of Medical Cannabis Patients in Canada

With the medical use of cannabis permitted in Canada since 2001, patients seek to use this botanical drug to treat a range of medical conditions. However, many healthcare practitioners express the need for further scientific evidence around the use of medical cannabis. This real-world evidence study aimed to address the paucity of scientific data by surveying newly registered medical cannabis patients, before beginning medical cannabis treatment, and at one follow up 6 weeks after beginning medical cannabis treatment. The goal was to collect data on efficacy, safety and cannabis product type information to capture the potential impact medical cannabis had on patient-reported quality of life (QOL) and several medical conditions over a 6-week period using validated questionnaires. The 214 participants were mainly male (58%) and 57% of the population was older than 50. The most frequently reported medical conditions were recurrent pain, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, sleep disorders [including restless leg syndrome (RLS)], and arthritis and other rheumatic disorders. Here we report that over 60% of our medical cannabis cohort self-reported improvements in their medical conditions. With the use of validated surveys, we found significant improvements in recurrent pain, PTSD, and sleep disorders after 6 weeks of medical cannabis treatment. Our findings from patients who reported arthritis and other rheumatic disorders are complex, showing improvements in pain and global activity sub-scores, but not overall changes in validated survey scores. We also report that patients who stated anxiety as their main medical condition did not experience significant changes in their anxiety after 6 weeks of cannabis treatment, though there were QOL improvements. While these results show that patients find cannabis treatment effective for a broad range of medical conditions, cannabis was not a remedy for all the conditions investigated. Thus, there is a need for future clinical research to support the findings we have reported. Additionally, while real-world evidence has not historically been utilized by regulatory bodies, we suggest changes in public policy surrounding cannabis should occur to reflect patient reported efficacy of cannabis from real-world studies due to the uniqueness of medical cannabis's path to legalization.

Nabiximols in Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Pooled analysis of nabiximols and placebo in randomized controlled studies (RCTs) of chronic neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs of nabiximols for chronic neuropathic pain. The clinical endpoint of interest was change from baseline in mean pain score on 11-point numerical rating scales. Mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD, Hedges' g) were calculated using fixed effect (FE) and random effects (RE) models. Strength of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2).

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with 1289 participants were included. Quality of evidence (GRADE) was moderate. One study had a high risk of bias (RoB 2) and five had some concerns. For the pooled endpoint of change from baseline in mean pain score, nabiximols was superior to placebo, with a MD of -0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -.59 to -.21; FE, P < .0001) or -0.44 (95% CI: -.70 to -.19; RE, P = .0006). A SMD of -0.21 (95% CI: -.32 to -.10; FE) or -0.26 (95% CI: -.42 to -.10; RE) indicated an incremental benefit over background analgesia. Results in favor of nabiximols were maintained in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Nabiximols was superior to placebo for reduction of chronic neuropathic pain, with a small effect size. Larger RCTs designed to assess the effect of nabiximols in neuropathic pain are required to reach more definitive conclusions.

The CANBACK trial: a randomised, controlled clinical trial of oral cannabidiol for people presenting to the emergency department with acute low back pain

OBJECTIVE

To assess the analgesic efficacy and safety of single-dose oral cannabidiol (CBD) as an adjunct to standard care for patients presenting to an emergency department with acute low back pain.

DESIGN

Randomised, double blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

The tertiary emergency department of Austin Hospital, Melbourne.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who presented with acute, non-traumatic low back pain between 21 May 2018 and 13 June 2019.

INTERVENTION

One hundred eligible patients were randomised to receiving 400 mg CBD or placebo in addition to standard emergency department analgesic medication.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain score two hours after administration of study agent, on a verbal numerical pain scale (range, 0-10). Secondary outcomes were length of stay, need for rescue analgesia, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The median age of the 100 participants was 47 years (IQR, 34-60 years); 44 were women. Mean pain scores at two hours were similar for the CBD (6.2 points; 95% CI, 5.5-6.9 points) and placebo groups (5.8 points; 95% CI, 5.1-6.6 points; absolute difference, -0.3 points; 95% CI, -1.3 to 0.6 points). The median length of stay was 9.0 hours (IQR, 7.4-12 hours) for the CBD group and 8.5 hours (IQR, 6.5-21 hours) for the placebo group. Oxycodone use during the four hours preceding and the four hours after receiving CBD or placebo was similar for the two groups, as were reported side effects.

CONCLUSION

CBD was not superior to placebo as an adjunct medication for relieving acute non-traumatic low back pain in the emergency department.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618000487213 (prospective).

Cannabis-based medicines and pain: a review of potential synergistic and entourage effects

The recent legalization of medicinal cannabis in several jurisdictions has spurred the development of therapeutic formulations for chronic pain. Unlike pure delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), full-spectrum products contain naturally occurring cannabinoids and have been reported to show improved efficacy or tolerability, attributed to synergy between cannabinoids and other components in the cannabis plant. Although 'synergy' indicates that two or more active compounds may produce an additive or combined effect greater than their individual analgesic effect, potentiation of the biological effect of a compound by related but inactive compounds, in combination, was termed the 'entourage effect'. Here, we review current evidence for potential synergistic and entourage effects of cannabinoids in pain relief. However, definitive clinical trials and in vitro functional studies are still required.

Cannabinoids and Pain: The Highs and Lows

The medicolegal landscape of cannabis continues to change, and with ever increasing access there has been a concurrent proliferation of research seeking to understand the utility of cannabinoids in treating innumerable conditions with pain at the forefront. This article seeks to summarize clinically relevant findings in cannabinoid research to better prepare clinicians in the utility of cannabis in the treatment of pain.

Reasons for cannabidiol use: a cross-sectional study of CBD users, focusing on self-perceived stress, anxiety, and sleep problems

BACKGROUND

Public and medical interest in cannabidiol (CBD) has been rising, and CBD is now available from various sources. Research into the effects of low-dose CBD on outcomes like stress, anxiety, and sleep problems have been scarce, so we conducted an online survey of CBD users to better understand patterns of use, dose, and self-perceived effects of CBD.

METHODS

The sample consisted of 387 current or past-CBD users who answered a 20-question online survey. The survey was sent out to CBD users through email databases and social media. Participants reported basic demographics, CBD use patterns, reasons for use, and effects on anxiety, sleep, and stress.

RESULTS

The sample (N = 387) consisted of 61.2% females, mostly between 25 and 54 years old (72.2%) and primarily based in the UK (77.4%). The top 4 reasons for using CBD were self-perceived anxiety (42.6%), sleep problems (42.5%), stress (37%), and general health and wellbeing (37%). Fifty-four per cent reported using less than 50 mg CBD daily, and 72.6% used CBD sublingually. Adjusted logistic models show females had lower odds than males of using CBD for general health and wellbeing [OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.30-0.72] and post-workout muscle-soreness [OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.24-0.91] but had higher odds of using CBD for self-perceived anxiety [OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.02-2.49] and insomnia [OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.13-3.11]. Older individuals had lower odds of using CBD for general health and wellbeing, stress, post-workout sore muscles, anxiety, skin conditions, focusing, and sleep but had higher odds of using CBD for pain. Respondents reported that CBD use was effective for stress, sleep problems, and anxiety in those who used the drug for those conditions.

CONCLUSION

This survey indicated that CBD users take the drug to manage self-perceived anxiety, stress, sleep, and other symptoms, often in low doses, and these patterns vary by demographic characteristics. Further research is required to understand how low doses, representative of the general user, might impact mental health symptoms like stress, anxiety, and sleep problems.

Disagreement and Uncertainty Among Experts About how to Respond to Marijuana Use in Patients on Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain: Results of a Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Marijuana use is common among patients on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain, but there is a lack of evidence to guide clinicians' response.

OBJECTIVE

To generate expert consensus about responding to marijuana use among patients on LTOT.

DESIGN

Analysis from an online Delphi study.

SETTING/SUBJECTS

Clinician experts in pain and opioid management across the United States.

METHODS

Participants generated management strategies in response to marijuana use without distinction between medical and nonmedical use, then rated the importance of each management strategy from 1 (not at all important) to 9 (extremely important). A priori rules for consensus were established, and disagreement was explored using cases. Thematic analysis of free-text responses examined factors that influenced participants' decision-making.

RESULTS

Of 42 participants, 64% were internal medicine physicians. There was consensus that it is not important to taper opioids as an initial response to marijuana use. There was disagreement about the importance of tapering opioids if there is a pattern of repeated marijuana use without clinical suspicion for a cannabis use disorder (CUD) and consensus that tapering is of uncertain importance if there is suspicion for CUD. Three themes influenced experts' perceptions of the importance of tapering: 1) benefits and harms of marijuana for the individual patient, 2) a spectrum of belief about the overall riskiness of marijuana use, and 3) variable state laws or practice policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts disagree and are uncertain about the importance of opioid tapering for patients with marijuana use. Experts were influenced by patient factors, provider beliefs, and marijuana policy, highlighting the need for further research.

Cannabis attitudes and patterns of use among followers of the Allergy & Asthma Network

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use in patients with allergy/asthma, a high-risk group for adverse effects to cannabis, is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the patterns of use and attitudes toward cannabis in patients with allergy/asthma.

METHODS

An anonymous online survey on cannabis attitudes and use was conducted through the Adult Allergy & Asthma Network. The Asthma Control Test assessed asthma burden. Cluster analyses determined group phenotypes and factor analyses condensed cannabis subjective effects into similar response patterns.

RESULTS

A total of 88 of 489 respondents (18.0%) currently use cannabis with most at the age of less than 50 years old, of female sex, and of White race. Of the noncannabis users (N = 401), 2.5% reported cannabis allergy. Cluster analysis revealed that a liberal attitude toward cannabis was associated with current cannabis use (P < .001). Among current cannabis users, 40.9% of their physicians inquired on cannabis use; only 37.5% of users wanted to discuss cannabis. In addition, 65.9% used cannabis for medical or medical/recreational purposes. Cannabinoids used were tetrahydrocannabinol (33.0%), cannabidiol (19.3%), or both (47.7%). Smoked and vaped cannabis were reported by 53.4% and 35.2%, respectively. Furthermore, 51 cannabis users (58.0%) reported current asthma with 39.2% uncontrolled; of these, 50% smoked cannabis. Compared with current participants with asthma not using cannabis, those currently using cannabis experienced similar levels of asthma control, quality of life, and frequency of asthma exacerbations. Positive effects were endorsed more than negative effects to cannabis (P < .001). Moreover, 19.3% of cannabis users reported coughing that was associated with smoking cannabis (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Cannabis was used by less than 20% of the respondents with positive effects more frequent than negative effects. Half of cannabis users with uncontrolled asthma smoke cannabis, but only a minority of the physicians inquire about its use.