Antiemetic efficacy of smoked marijuana: subjective and behavioral effects on nausea induced by syrup of ipecac

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of cardiovascular toxicity of medical cannabinoids

BACKGROUND

Several systematic reviews (SRs) have summarized the potential effectiveness of medical cannabinoids, but it is unclear to what extent safety-related outcomes were incorporated.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cardiovascular toxicity associated with medical use of cannabinoids.

METHODS

A 2-stage systematic review (SR) approach was undertaken to assess the current evidence on cannabinoid-associated cardiovascular events reported among randomized controlled trials (RCTs). First, we searched for SRs in multiple sources until June 2019. Second, RCTs identified from the SRs were included if they assessed medical cannabis and reported cardiovascular events. The outcomes of interest were all types of cardiovascular events. Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias. A statistical test of heterogeneity was performed. The summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies involving 2800 patients were included. The median duration of cannabinoid use was 15.8 days (range 1 to 322), and 45% of the studies excluded patients with underlying cardiovascular diseases. Cannabinoid use was significantly associated with increased risks of orthostatic hypotension (RR 3.16 [95% CI 2.27-4.40], I² = 2.3%) and hypotension (3.55 [1.45-8.71], I² = 31.8%), with a trend of increased risk of tachycardia (1.94 [0.81-4.64], I² = 48.6%). No study reported serious cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoid use was associated with tachycardia, hypotension, and orthostatic hypotension. There is a paucity of data for other cardiovascular events among medical cannabis users. More data, especially regarding long-term effects among patients with existing cardiovascular diseases, are needed.

Clinical Data for the Use of Cannabis-Based Treatments: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Objective:

To compile and synthesize the available literature describing medical cannabis use across various disease states.

Data Sources:

PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar searches were conducted using MeSH and/or keywords.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Studies were included if they described the use of cannabis-based products and medications in the treatment of a predefined list of disease states in humans and were published in English. The extraction period had no historical limit and spanned through April 2019.

Data Synthesis:

Evidence was compiled and summarized for the following medical conditions: Alzheimer disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, autism, cancer and cancer-associated adverse effects, seizure disorders, human immunodeficiency virus, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis (MS), nausea, pain, posttraumatic stress disorder, and hospice care.

Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice:

Based on identified data, the most robust evidence suggests that medical cannabis may be effective in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, seizure disorders, MS-related spasticity, and pain (excluding diabetic neuropathy). Overall, the evidence is inconsistent and generally limited by poor quality. The large variation in cannabis-based products evaluated in studies limits the ability to make direct comparisons. Regardless of the product, a gradual dose titration was utilized in most studies. Cannabis-based therapies were typically well tolerated, with the most common adverse effects being dizziness, somnolence, dry mouth, nausea, and euphoria.

Conclusions:

As more states authorize medical cannabis use, there is an increasing need for high-quality clinical evidence describing its efficacy and safety. This review is intended to serve as a reference for clinicians, so that the risks and realistic benefits of medical cannabis are better understood.

Consequences of alcohol and marijuana use among college students: Prevalence rates and attributions to substance-specific versus simultaneous use

College students who use alcohol and marijuana often use them simultaneously, so that their effects overlap. The present study examined whether negative consequences experienced by simultaneous alcohol and marijuana (SAM) users vary from those experienced by individuals who use alcohol and marijuana concurrently but not simultaneously (CAM) or single-substance users. We considered 9 types of consequences: cognitive, blackout, vomiting, academic/occupational, social, self-care, physical dependence, risky behaviors, and driving under the influence (DUI). Further, we examined whether consequences experienced by SAM users are attributed to using alcohol, marijuana, or both simultaneously. The sample included past-year alcohol and marijuana users age 18-24 (N = 1,390; 62% female; 69% White; 12% Hispanic) recruited from 3 U.S. college campuses. SAM users experienced a greater overall number of consequences than CAM or alcohol-only users, even controlling for frequency and intensity of alcohol and marijuana use and potentially confounding psychosocial and sociodemographic factors. Experiencing specific consequences differed between simultaneous and concurrent users, but after adjusting for consumption and other covariates, only blackouts differed. In contrast, SAM users were more likely to experience each consequence than alcohol-only users, with strongest effects for DUI, blackouts, and cognitive consequences. Among SAM users, consequences were most likely to be attributed to alcohol and were rarely attributed to simultaneous use. Being a user of both alcohol and marijuana and using alcohol and marijuana together so that their effects overlap each contribute to risk, suggesting there is value in targeting the mechanisms underlying type of user as well as those underlying type of use. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Medicinal Properties of Cannabinoids, Terpenes, and Flavonoids in Cannabis, and Benefits in Migraine, Headache, and Pain: An Update on Current Evidence and Cannabis Science

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive literature reviews of historical perspectives and evidence supporting cannabis/cannabinoids in the treatment of pain, including migraine and headache, with associated neurobiological mechanisms of pain modulation have been well described. Most of the existing literature reports on the cannabinoids Δ⁹ -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), or cannabis in general. There are many cannabis strains that vary widely in the composition of cannabinoids, terpenes, flavonoids, and other compounds. These components work synergistically to produce wide variations in benefits, side effects, and strain characteristics. Knowledge of the individual medicinal properties of the cannabinoids, terpenes, and flavonoids is necessary to cross-breed strains to obtain optimal standardized synergistic compositions. This will enable targeting individual symptoms and/or diseases, including migraine, headache, and pain.

OBJECTIVE

Review the medical literature for the use of cannabis/cannabinoids in the treatment of migraine, headache, facial pain, and other chronic pain syndromes, and for supporting evidence of a potential role in combatting the opioid epidemic. Review the medical literature involving major and minor cannabinoids, primary and secondary terpenes, and flavonoids that underlie the synergistic entourage effects of cannabis. Summarize the individual medicinal benefits of these substances, including analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties.

CONCLUSION

There is accumulating evidence for various therapeutic benefits of cannabis/cannabinoids, especially in the treatment of pain, which may also apply to the treatment of migraine and headache. There is also supporting evidence that cannabis may assist in opioid detoxification and weaning, thus making it a potential weapon in battling the opioid epidemic. Cannabis science is a rapidly evolving medical sector and industry with increasingly regulated production standards. Further research is anticipated to optimize breeding of strain-specific synergistic ratios of cannabinoids, terpenes, and other phytochemicals for predictable user effects, characteristics, and improved symptom and disease-targeted therapies.

Cannabis and Its Secondary Metabolites: Their Use as Therapeutic Drugs, Toxicological Aspects, and Analytical Determination

Although the medicinal properties of Cannabis species have been known for centuries, the interest on its main active secondary metabolites as therapeutic alternatives for several pathologies has grown in recent years. This potential use has been a revolution worldwide concerning public health, production, use and sale of cannabis, and has led inclusively to legislation changes in some countries. The scientific advances and concerns of the scientific community have allowed a better understanding of cannabis derivatives as pharmacological options in several conditions, such as appetite stimulation, pain treatment, skin pathologies, anticonvulsant therapy, neurodegenerative diseases, and infectious diseases. However, there is some controversy regarding the legal and ethical implications of their use and routes of administration, also concerning the adverse health consequences and deaths attributed to marijuana consumption, and these represent some of the complexities associated with the use of these compounds as therapeutic drugs. This review comprehends the main secondary metabolites of Cannabis, approaching their therapeutic potential and applications, as well as their potential risks, in order to differentiate the consumption as recreational drugs. There will be also a focus on the analytical methodologies for their analysis, in order to aid health professionals and toxicologists in cases where these compounds are present.

A Review of Cannabis in Chronic Kidney Disease Symptom Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Physical and psychological symptom burden in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is significantly debilitating; yet, it is often inadequately treated. Legalization of cannabis in Canada may attract increasing interest from patients for its medical use in refractory symptom management, but its indications and long-term adverse health impacts are poorly established, creating a challenge for clinicians to support its use. In this review, we summarize key clinical studies and the level of evidence for nonsynthetic cannabinoids in the treatment of common symptoms encountered in advanced stages of CKD, including chronic pain, nausea and vomiting, anorexia, pruritus, and insomnia.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Medline and Embase.

METHODS

A search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE (inception to March 1, 2018) on cannabis and CKD symptoms of interest, complemented with a manual review of bibliographies. Studies that examined synthetic cannabinoids that are manufactured to mimic the effects of ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol such as dronabinol, levonantradol, nabilone, and ajulemic acid were excluded. We focused on studies with higher level of evidence where available, and quality of studies was graded based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence (1a to 5).

FINDINGS

Based on studies conducted in patients without renal impairment, those treated with nonsynthetic cannabinoids were 43% to 300% more likely to report a ≥30% reduction in chronic neuropathic pain compared with placebo. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to recommend nonsynthetic cannabinoids for other medical indications, although preliminary investigation into topical endocannabinoids for uremia-induced pruritus in end-stage renal disease is promising. Finally, any benefits of cannabis may be offset by potential harms in the form of cognitive impairment, increased risk of mortality post-myocardial infarction, orthostatic hypotension, respiratory irritation, and malignancies (with smoked cannabis).

LIMITATIONS

Nonsynthetic cannabinoid preparations were highly variable between studies, sample sizes were small, and study durations were short. Due to an absence of studies conducted in CKD, recommendations were primarily extrapolated from the general population.

IMPLICATIONS

Until further studies are conducted, the role of nonsynthetic cannabinoids for symptom management in patients with CKD should be limited to the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. Clinicians need to be cognizant that nonsynthetic cannabinoid preparations, particularly smoked cannabis, can pose significant health risks and these must be cautiously weighed against the limited substantiated therapeutic benefits of cannabis in patients with CKD.

Cannabinoids: the lows and the highs of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Despite remaining one of the most widely abused drugs worldwide, Cannabis sativa exhibits remarkable medicinal properties. The phytocannabinoids, cannabidiol and Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, reduce nausea and vomiting, particularly during chemotherapy. This is attributed to their ability to reduce the release of serotonin from enterochromaffin cells in the small intestine, which would otherwise orchestrate the vomiting reflex. Although there are many preclinical and clinical studies on the effects of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol during nausea and vomiting, little is known about the role that cannabidiol plays in this scenario. Since cannabidiol does not induce psychotropic effects, in contrast to other cannabinoids, its use as an anti-emetic is of great interest. This review aims to summarize the available literature on cannabinoid use, with a specific focus on the nonpsychotropic drug cannabidiol, as well as the roles that cannabinoids play in preventing several other adverse side effects of chemotherapy including organ toxicity, pain and loss of appetite.

Patterns of medicinal cannabis use, strain analysis, and substitution effect among patients with migraine, headache, arthritis, and chronic pain in a medicinal cannabis cohort

BACKGROUND

Medicinal cannabis registries typically report pain as the most common reason for use. It would be clinically useful to identify patterns of cannabis treatment in migraine and headache, as compared to arthritis and chronic pain, and to analyze preferred cannabis strains, biochemical profiles, and prescription medication substitutions with cannabis.

METHODS

Via electronic survey in medicinal cannabis patients with headache, arthritis, and chronic pain, demographics and patterns of cannabis use including methods, frequency, quantity, preferred strains, cannabinoid and terpene profiles, and prescription substitutions were recorded. Cannabis use for migraine among headache patients was assessed via the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, a validated screen used to predict the probability of migraine.

RESULTS

Of 2032 patients, 21 illnesses were treated with cannabis. Pain syndromes accounted for 42.4% (n = 861) overall; chronic pain 29.4% (n = 598;), arthritis 9.3% (n = 188), and headache 3.7% (n = 75;). Across all 21 illnesses, headache was a symptom treated with cannabis in 24.9% (n = 505). These patients were given the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, with 68% (n = 343) giving 3 "Yes" responses, 20% (n = 102) giving 2 "Yes" responses (97% and 93% probability of migraine, respectively). Therefore, 88% (n = 445) of headache patients were treating probable migraine with cannabis. Hybrid strains were most preferred across all pain subtypes, with "OG Shark" the most preferred strain in the ID Migraine™ and headache groups. Many pain patients substituted prescription medications with cannabis (41.2-59.5%), most commonly opiates/opioids (40.5-72.8%). Prescription substitution in headache patients included opiates/opioids (43.4%), anti-depressant/anti-anxiety (39%), NSAIDs (21%), triptans (8.1%), anti-convulsants (7.7%), muscle relaxers (7%), ergots (0.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic pain was the most common reason for cannabis use, consistent with most registries. The majority of headache patients treating with cannabis were positive for migraine. Hybrid strains were preferred in ID Migraine™, headache, and most pain groups, with "OG Shark", a high THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol)/THCA (tetrahydrocannabinolic acid), low CBD (cannabidiol)/CBDA (cannabidiolic acid), strain with predominant terpenes β-caryophyllene and β-myrcene, most preferred in the headache and ID Migraine™ groups. This could reflect the potent analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-emetic properties of THC, with anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties of β-caryophyllene and β-myrcene. Opiates/opioids were most commonly substituted with cannabis. Prospective studies are needed, but results may provide early insight into optimizing crossbred cannabis strains, synergistic biochemical profiles, dosing, and patterns of use in the treatment of headache, migraine, and chronic pain syndromes.

Capsaicin Cream for Treatment of Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome in Adolescents: A Case Series

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is an underrecognized diagnosis among adolescents. In the adult literature, it is characterized as nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain in patients with chronic marijuana use. CHS is often refractory to the standard treatment of nausea and vomiting. Unconventional antiemetics, such as haloperidol, have been successful in alleviating symptoms; however, even 1 dose of haloperidol can lead to grave adverse effects, such as dystonia, extrapyramidal reactions, and neuroleptic malignant syndrome. The use of topical capsaicin cream to treat CHS has been well described in the adult literature. This treatment is cost-effective and is associated with few serious side effects. Here, we describe 2 adolescent patients with nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain in the setting of chronic cannabis use whose symptoms were not relieved by standard antiemetic therapies, but who responded well to topical capsaicin administration in our pediatric emergency department. We also discuss the pathophysiology behind capsaicin's efficacy. These are the first reported cases in which capsaicin was successfully used to treat CHS in pediatric patients.

Experts' perspectives on the role of medical marijuana in oncology: A semistructured interview study

BACKGROUND

Expansion of medical marijuana (MM) laws in the United States may offer oncology new therapeutic options. However, the scientific evidence for MM remains in infancy. This study qualitatively explored professional opinion around the role of MM in cancer care.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were administered to a sample of individuals with expertise at the interface of MM and oncology nationally. Key informant criteria included an oncologic clinical or research background and any of the following: publications, research, or lectures on cannabinoids or cancer symptoms; involvement in the development of MM dispensaries or legislation; and early adoption of state MM certification procedures. A gold standard, grounded, inductive approach was used to identify underlying themes.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 15) were predominantly male, in their sixth decade, working in academic settings. Themes ranged from strong beliefs in marijuana's medical utility to reservations about this notion, with calls for expansion of the scientific evidence base and more stringent MM production standards. All participants cited nausea as an appropriate indication, and 13 of 15 pain. Over one-third believed MM to have a more attractive risk profile than opioids and benzodiazepines.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert opinion was divided between convictions in marijuana's medicinal potential and guardedness in this assertion, with no participant refuting MM's utility outright. Emergent themes included that MM ameliorates cancer-related pain and nausea and is safer than certain conventional medications. Participants called for enhanced purity and production standards, and further research on MM's utility.

Comprehensive Review of Medicinal Marijuana, Cannabinoids, and Therapeutic Implications in Medicine and Headache: What a Long Strange Trip It's Been …

BACKGROUND

The use of cannabis, or marijuana, for medicinal purposes is deeply rooted though history, dating back to ancient times. It once held a prominent position in the history of medicine, recommended by many eminent physicians for numerous diseases, particularly headache and migraine. Through the decades, this plant has taken a fascinating journey from a legal and frequently prescribed status to illegal, driven by political and social factors rather than by science. However, with an abundance of growing support for its multitude of medicinal uses, the misguided stigma of cannabis is fading, and there has been a dramatic push for legalizing medicinal cannabis and research. Almost half of the United States has now legalized medicinal cannabis, several states have legalized recreational use, and others have legalized cannabidiol-only use, which is one of many therapeutic cannabinoids extracted from cannabis. Physicians need to be educated on the history, pharmacology, clinical indications, and proper clinical use of cannabis, as patients will inevitably inquire about it for many diseases, including chronic pain and headache disorders for which there is some intriguing supportive evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To review the history of medicinal cannabis use, discuss the pharmacology and physiology of the endocannabinoid system and cannabis-derived cannabinoids, perform a comprehensive literature review of the clinical uses of medicinal cannabis and cannabinoids with a focus on migraine and other headache disorders, and outline general clinical practice guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The literature suggests that the medicinal use of cannabis may have a therapeutic role for a multitude of diseases, particularly chronic pain disorders including headache. Supporting literature suggests a role for medicinal cannabis and cannabinoids in several types of headache disorders including migraine and cluster headache, although it is primarily limited to case based, anecdotal, or laboratory-based scientific research. Cannabis contains an extensive number of pharmacological and biochemical compounds, of which only a minority are understood, so many potential therapeutic uses likely remain undiscovered. Cannabinoids appear to modulate and interact at many pathways inherent to migraine, triptan mechanisms ofaction, and opiate pathways, suggesting potential synergistic or similar benefits. Modulation of the endocannabinoid system through agonism or antagonism of its receptors, targeting its metabolic pathways, or combining cannabinoids with other analgesics for synergistic effects, may provide the foundation for many new classes of medications. Despite the limited evidence and research suggesting a role for cannabis and cannabinoids in some headache disorders, randomized clinical trials are lacking and necessary for confirmation and further evaluation.

Pharmacogenetics of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is associated with distressing adverse effects observed in patients during cytotoxic chemotherapy. One of the potential factors explaining suboptimal response to currently used antiemetics is variability in genes encoding enzymes and proteins that play a role in the action of antiemetic drugs. Pharmacogenomics studies of CINV are sparse and focus mainly on polymorphisms associated with serotonin receptor, drug metabolism and drug transport. Currently, the role of pharmacogenetics in mechanisms of CINV has not been fully unraveled, and it is premature to implement results of pharmacogenetic association studies of antiemetic drugs in clinical practice. More uniform studies, with genetic profiles and biomarkers relevant for the proposed target and transporter mechanisms, are needed.

Nausea: current knowledge of mechanisms, measurement and clinical impact

Nausea is a subjective sensation, which often acts as a signal that emesis is imminent. It is a widespread problem that occurs as a clinical sign of disease or as an adverse effect of a drug therapy or surgical procedure. The mechanisms of nausea are complex and the neural pathways are currently poorly understood. This review summarises the current knowledge of nausea mechanisms, the available animal models for nausea research and the anti-nausea properties of commercially available anti-emetic drugs. The review also presents subjective assessment and scoring of nausea. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms of nausea might reveal potential clinically useful biomarkers for objective measurement of nausea in species of veterinary interest.

Plasma and brain pharmacokinetic profile of cannabidiol (CBD), cannabidivarine (CBDV), Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) and cannabigerol (CBG) in rats and mice following oral and intraperitoneal administration and CBD action on obsessive-compulsive behaviour

RATIONALE

Phytocannabinoids are useful therapeutics for multiple applications including treatments of constipation, malaria, rheumatism, alleviation of intraocular pressure, emesis, anxiety and some neurological and neurodegenerative disorders. Consistent with these medicinal properties, extracted cannabinoids have recently gained much interest in research, and some are currently in advanced stages of clinical testing. Other constituents of Cannabis sativa, the hemp plant, however, remain relatively unexplored in vivo. These include cannabidiol (CBD), cannabidivarine (CBDV), Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabivarin (Δ(9)-THCV) and cannabigerol (CBG).

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

We here determined pharmacokinetic profiles of the above phytocannabinoids after acute single-dose intraperitoneal and oral administration in mice and rats. The pharmacodynamic-pharmacokinetic relationship of CBD (120 mg/kg, ip and oral) was further assessed using a marble burying test in mice.

RESULTS

All phytocannabinoids readily penetrated the blood-brain barrier and solutol, despite producing moderate behavioural anomalies, led to higher brain penetration than cremophor after oral, but not intraperitoneal exposure. In mice, cremophor-based intraperitoneal administration always attained higher plasma and brain concentrations, independent of substance given. In rats, oral administration offered higher brain concentrations for CBD (120 mg/kg) and CBDV (60 mg/kg), but not for Δ(9)-THCV (30 mg/kg) and CBG (120 mg/kg), for which the intraperitoneal route was more effective. CBD inhibited obsessive-compulsive behaviour in a time-dependent manner matching its pharmacokinetic profile.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide important information on the brain and plasma exposure of new phytocannabinoids and guidance for the most efficacious administration route and time points for determination of drug effects under in vivo conditions.

Phytocannabinoids, CNS cells and development: a dead issue?

ISSUES

Marijuana and hashish consist of at least 66 distinctive plant-derived (phyto-) cannabinoid compounds, with tetrahydrocannabinoids proving the most effective phytocannabinoid psychotropically. Despite the known pharmacological effects of phytocannabinoids, their role in controlling the cell survival/death decision in cells of the CNS continues to be unravelled.

APPROACH

In this review, we examine the influence of phytocannabinoids on neural cell fate, with particular emphasis on how the time of marijuana exposure (neonatal vs. pubertal vs. adult) might influence the neurotoxic activities of phytocannabinoid compounds.

KEY FINDINGS

Evidence in the literature indicates that exposure to phytocannabinoids during the prenatal period, in addition to the adolescent period, can alter the temporally ordered sequence of events that occur during neurotransmitter development, in addition to negatively impacting neural cell survival and maturation. Regarding the effect of marijuana consumption on brain composition in adults the evidence is contradictory.

IMPLICATIONS

Exposure to marijuana during pregnancy might impact negatively on brain structure in the first years of postnatal life. Furthermore, early-onset (before age 17) marijuana use might also have damaging effects on brain composition.

CONCLUSION

The neonatal and immature CNS is more susceptible to phytocannabinoid damage. In the adult CNS the data are conflicting and the continued development of methods to assess whether marijuana consumption results in brain atrophy or morphometric changes will determine if structural changes are occurring.

Endocannabinoids and the gastrointestinal tract: what are the key questions?

Cannabinoid (CB1) receptor activation acts neuronally, reducing GI motility, diarrhoea, pain, transient lower oesophageal sphincter relaxations (TLESRs) and emesis, and promoting eating. CB2 receptor activation acts mostly via immune cells to reduce inflammation. What are the key questions which now need answering to further understand endocannabinoid pathophysiology? GPR55. Does this receptor have a GI role? Satiety, Nausea, Vomiting, Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux, Gastric Emptying. Endocannabinoids acting at CB1 receptors can increase food intake and body weight, exert anti-emetic activity, reduce gastric acid secretion and TLESRs; CB2 receptors may have a small role in emesis. Question 1: CB1 receptor activation reduces emesis and gastric emptying but the latter is associated with nausea. How is the paradox explained? Q2: Do non-CB receptor actions of endocannabinoids (for example TRPV1) also modulate emesis? Q3: Is pathology necessary (gastritis, gastro-oesophageal reflux) to observe CB2 receptor function? Intestinal Transit and Secretion. Reduced by endocannabinoids at CB1 receptors, but not by CB2 receptor agonists. Q1: Do the effects of endocannabinoids rapidly diminish with repeat-dosing? Q2: Do CB2 receptors need to be pathologically upregulated before they are active? Inflammation. CB1, CB2 and TRPV1 receptors may mediate an ability of endocannabinoids to reduce GI inflammation or its consequences. Q1: Are CB2 receptors upregulated by inflammatory or other pathology? Pain. Colonic bacterial flora may upregulate CB2 receptor expression and thereby increase intestinal sensitivity to noxious stimuli. Q1: Are CB2 receptors the interface between colonic bacteria and enteric- or extrinsic nerve sensitivity? Relevance of endocannabinoids to humans. Perhaps apart from appetite, this is largely unknown.

Cannabinoids in medicine: A review of their therapeutic potential

In order to assess the current knowledge on the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids, a meta-analysis was performed through Medline and PubMed up to July 1, 2005. The key words used were cannabis, marijuana, marihuana, hashish, hashich, haschich, cannabinoids, tetrahydrocannabinol, THC, dronabinol, nabilone, levonantradol, randomised, randomized, double-blind, simple blind, placebo-controlled, and human. The research also included the reports and reviews published in English, French and Spanish. For the final selection, only properly controlled clinical trials were retained, thus open-label studies were excluded. Seventy-two controlled studies evaluating the therapeutic effects of cannabinoids were identified. For each clinical trial, the country where the project was held, the number of patients assessed, the type of study and comparisons done, the products and the dosages used, their efficacy and their adverse effects are described. Cannabinoids present an interesting therapeutic potential as antiemetics, appetite stimulants in debilitating diseases (cancer and AIDS), analgesics, and in the treatment of multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, Tourette's syndrome, epilepsy and glaucoma.

The good and the bad effects of (−) trans-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) on humans

This review analyses the therapeutic usefulness of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and its potential to induce adverse reactions on humans. During the last 30 years an enormous amount of research was carried out resulting in the disclosure of the cannabinoid system in Central Nervous System, with its CB(1) and CB(2) receptors, and the agonist anandamide. Under the clinical point of view, Delta(9)-THC produces some therapeutic benefits which are beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, the effects on nausea/emesis due to cancer chemotherapy, as appetite promoter, on some painful conditions and on symptoms of multiple sclerosis are clearly demonstrated. Delta(9)-THC is not devoid of ill effects. On the cognitive domain it impairs the human capacity to discriminate time intervals and space distances, vigilance, memory and the performance for mental work. On the psychic area Delta(9)-THC may induce unpleasant reactions such as disconnected thoughts, panic reactions, disturbing changes in perception, delusions and hallucinatory experiences. However, the long term effects on the psyche and cognition are not known as there are no reports of prolonged use of Delta(9)-THC. Actually, it has been proposed by WHO that Delta(9)-THC should be rescheduled to schedule IV of the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Drugs, as it does not constitute a substantial risk to public health and its abuse is rare if at all.

[Review of cannabinoids in the treatment of nausea and vomiting]

Cannabinoids are used to treat nausea and vomiting. The effect appears to be mediated by cannabinoid receptors in the nucleus tractus solitarius. Results are available from studies on the use of cannabinoids to manage nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy. None of these studies, however, compared cannabinoids with the newer serotonin antagonists. The antiemetic efficacy of cannabinoids for other indications has not yet been studied sufficiently. Most of the studies report significantly more or stronger side effects with cannabinoid medication in comparison to similar medication. In some of the studies on treatment after chemotherapy or radiotherapy, the patients terminated the cannabinoid therapy more frequently due to side effects. Although clinical studies have provided clear evidence for the antiemetic efficacy of cannabinoids, the frequency and severity of side effects argue against their use as the method of first choice. For patients who cannot be adequately treated with conventional antiemetic agents, cannabinoids can represent a valuable adjunct to the antiemetic regimen.

Patterns of marijuana use among patients with HIV/AIDS followed in a public health care setting

OBJECTIVES

To examine prevalence and patterns of smoked marijuana and perceived benefit and to assess demographic and clinical factors associated with marijuana use among HIV patients in a public health care setting.

METHODS

Participants (n = 252) were recruited via consecutive sampling in public health care clinics. Structured interviews assessed patterns of recent marijuana use, including its perceived benefit for symptom relief. Associations between marijuana use and demographic and clinical variables were examined using univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall prevalence of smoked marijuana in the previous month was 23%. Reported benefits included relief of anxiety and/or depression (57%), improved appetite (53%), increased pleasure (33%), and relief of pain (28%). Recent use of marijuana was positively associated with severe nausea (odds ratio [OR] = 4.0, P = 0.004) and recent use of alcohol (OR = 7.5, P < 0.001) and negatively associated with being Latino (OR = 0.07, P < 0.001). No associations between marijuana use and pain symptoms were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that providers be advised to assess routinely and better understand patients' "indications" for self-administration of cannabis. Given the estimated prevalence, more formal characterization of the patterns and impact of cannabis use to alleviate HIV-associated symptoms is warranted. Clinical trials of smoked and noncombustible marijuana are needed to determine the role of cannabinoids as a class of agents with potential to improve quality of life and health care outcomes among patients with HIV/AIDS.

Medical marijuana initiatives : are they justified? How successful are they likely to be?

The principal constituent of cannabis, Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is moderately effective in treating nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and acute and chronic pain. Oral THC (dronabinol) and the synthetic cannabinoid, nabilone, have been registered for medical use in the US and UK, but they have not been widely used because patients find it difficult to titrate doses of these drugs. Advocates for the medical use of cannabis argue that patients should be allowed to smoke cannabis to relieve these above-mentioned symptoms. Some US state governments have legislated to allow the medical prescription of cannabis, but the US federal government has tried to prevent patients from obtaining cannabis and threatened physicians who prescribe it with criminal prosecution or loss of their licence to practise. In the UK and Australia, committees of inquiry have recommended medical prescription (UK) and exemption from criminal prosecution (New South Wales, Australia), but governments have not accepted these recommendations. The Canadian government allows an exemption from criminal prosecution to patients with specified medical conditions. It has recently legislated to provide cannabis on medical prescription to registered patients, but this scheme so far has not been implemented. Some advocates argue that legalising cannabis is the only way to ensure that patients can use it for medical purposes. However, this would be contrary to international drug control treaties and is electorally unpopular. The best prospects for the medical use of cannabinoids lie in finding ways to deliver THC that do not involve smoking and in developing synthetic cannabinoids that produce therapeutic effects with a minimum of psychoactive effects. While awaiting these developments, patients with specified medical conditions could be given exemptions from criminal prosecution to grow cannabis for their own use, at their own risk.

The analgesic effect of oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), morphine, and a THC-morphine combination in healthy subjects under experimental pain conditions

From folk medicine and anecdotal reports it is known that Cannabis may reduce pain. In animal studies it has been shown that delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has antinociceptive effects or potentiates the antinociceptive effect of morphine. The aim of this study was to measure the analgesic effect of THC, morphine, and a THC-morphine combination (THC-morphine) in humans using experimental pain models. THC (20 mg), morphine (30 mg), THC-morphine (20 mg THC+30 mg morphine), or placebo were given orally and as single doses. Twelve healthy volunteers were included in the randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, crossover study. The experimental pain tests (order randomized) were heat, cold, pressure, single and repeated transcutaneous electrical stimulation. Additionally, reaction time, side-effects (visual analog scales), and vital functions were monitored. For the pharmacokinetic profiling, blood samples were collected. THC did not significantly reduce pain. In the cold and heat tests it even produced hyperalgesia, which was completely neutralized by THC-morphine. A slight additive analgesic effect could be observed for THC-morphine in the electrical stimulation test. No analgesic effect resulted in the pressure and heat test, neither with THC nor THC-morphine. Psychotropic and somatic side-effects (sleepiness, euphoria, anxiety, confusion, nausea, dizziness, etc.) were common, but usually mild.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of cannabinoids

Delta(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the main source of the pharmacological effects caused by the consumption of cannabis, both the marijuana-like action and the medicinal benefits of the plant. However, its acid metabolite THC-COOH, the non-psychotropic cannabidiol (CBD), several cannabinoid analogues and newly discovered modulators of the endogenous cannabinoid system are also promising candidates for clinical research and therapeutic uses. Cannabinoids exert many effects through activation of G-protein-coupled cannabinoid receptors in the brain and peripheral tissues. Additionally, there is evidence for non-receptor-dependent mechanisms. Natural cannabis products and single cannabinoids are usually inhaled or taken orally; the rectal route, sublingual administration, transdermal delivery, eye drops and aerosols have only been used in a few studies and are of little relevance in practice today. The pharmacokinetics of THC vary as a function of its route of administration. Pulmonary assimilation of inhaled THC causes a maximum plasma concentration within minutes, psychotropic effects start within seconds to a few minutes, reach a maximum after 15-30 minutes, and taper off within 2-3 hours. Following oral ingestion, psychotropic effects set in with a delay of 30-90 minutes, reach their maximum after 2-3 hours and last for about 4-12 hours, depending on dose and specific effect. At doses exceeding the psychotropic threshold, ingestion of cannabis usually causes enhanced well-being and relaxation with an intensification of ordinary sensory experiences. The most important acute adverse effects caused by overdosing are anxiety and panic attacks, and with regard to somatic effects increased heart rate and changes in blood pressure. Regular use of cannabis may lead to dependency and to a mild withdrawal syndrome. The existence and the intensity of possible long-term adverse effects on psyche and cognition, immune system, fertility and pregnancy remain controversial. They are reported to be low in humans and do not preclude legitimate therapeutic use of cannabis-based drugs. Properties of cannabis that might be of therapeutic use include analgesia, muscle relaxation, immunosuppression, sedation, improvement of mood, stimulation of appetite, antiemesis, lowering of intraocular pressure, bronchodilation, neuroprotection and induction of apoptosis in cancer cells.