Federal barriers to Cannabis research

Enhancing Methodological Approaches for Studying Health Effects of High-Concentration THC Products

For public health protection, informed decision-making relies on having a robust foundation of evidence concerning risks and their prevention. Application of an evidence-based framework depends on the availability of pertinent, scientifically sound data generated by well-directed and valid research endeavors. In this essay, we address the current state of research in humans and the evidential base concerning high-concentration delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) products, which are readily available in the United States. Furthermore, we explore the intricate challenges faced in carrying out research on these products, which reflect the full range of study design issues: measurement of exposure and outcomes, confounding, selection bias, and the generalizability of findings. We offer recommendations to guide future research toward providing more informative evidence. By following these recommendations, researchers and funders on this emerging topic could move toward generating the valid and comprehensive evidence needed to effectively inform public health initiatives and guide policy decisions regarding high-concentration delta-9-THC products and their use. The urgency of generating such evidence cannot be overstated, given the widespread legalization and increasing availability and use of these products. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S8):S639-S644. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307724).

Association Between Medical Marijuana Cardholder Status and Antiemetic Overuse

Introduction: The conscientious prescribing of antiemetics by chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) risk was highlighted in the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) "Choosing Wisely" recommendations. The pharmacologic properties of medical marijuana (MMJ) may allow for decreased incidence of CINV; however, little is known about the effects of MMJ on the use of antiemetics. This study aimed to determine if MMJ cardholder status, which enables access to MMJ, is associated with antiemetic overuse among patients with cancer. Materials and Methods: This population-based secondary data analysis examined a retrospective cohort derived from the linked Arkansas All Payers Claims Database (2013-2020) and MMJ cardholder registry (2013-2019). The cohort consisted of 20,558 patients with cancer aged 18 and older with a chemotherapy claim in an outpatient setting within 12 months of a cancer diagnosis. Exposure was a registration to receive an MMJ card that permitted access to MMJ. The primary outcome of interest was antiemetic overuse, as characterized by the ASCO recommendation. Antiemetic use associated with chemotherapy was identified through filled prescriptions and medical claims. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for baseline demographic and prescription characteristics, was used to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of antiemetic overuse among MMJ cardholders compared with non-MMJ cardholders. Results: Among 20,558 eligible patients, 436 (2.1%) had an MMJ card at some point in the study period. Antiemetic overuse was identified in 7.5% of chemotherapy cycles. Compared with non-MMJ cardholders, MMJ cardholders were less likely to experience antiemetics overuse (aOR: 0.76, p < 0.001). Patients with fewer chemotherapy cycles and younger in age had higher odds of antiemetic overuse compared with those with more chemotherapy cycles. The risk of antiemetic overuse did not differ based on gender and rurality of residency. Route of chemotherapy administration, CINV risk category, and type of cancer also impacted the odds of antiemetic overuse. Discussion: The findings indicate that MMJ cardholders are significantly less likely to experience antiemetic overuse than non-MMJ cardholders. Further investigation into the use, effectiveness, and safety of cannabis for CINV mitigation is needed to inform patient and provider decision-making.

Thoughtfully Integrating Cannabis Products Into Chronic Pain Treatment

Cannabis products (CPs) and cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) are becoming increasingly available and are commonly used for pain management. The growing societal acceptance of cannabis and liberalization of cannabis laws allows patients to access CPs with minimal clinical oversight. While there is mechanistic plausibility that CPs and CBMs may be useful for pain management, the clinical trial literature is limited and does not refute or support the use of CBMs for pain management. Complicating matters, a large and growing body of observational literature shows that many people use CPs for pain management and in place of other medications. However, products and dosing regimens in existing trials are not generalizable to the current cannabis market, making it difficult to compare and reconcile these 2 bodies of literature. Given this complexity, clinicians need clear, pragmatic guidance on how to appropriately educate and work with patients who are using CBMs for pain management. In this review, we narratively synthesize the evidence to enable a clear view of current landscape and provide pragmatic advice for clinicians to use when working with patients. This advice revolves around 3 principles: (1) maintaining the therapeutic alliance; (2) harm reduction and benefit maximization; and (3) pragmatism, principles of patient-centered care, and use of best clinical judgment in the face of uncertainty. Despite the lack of certainty CPs and chronic pain management use, we believe that following these principles can make most of the clinical opportunity presented by discussions around CPs and also enhance the likelihood of clinical benefit from CPs.

Health Effects of High-Concentration Cannabis Products: Scoping Review and Evidence Map

Background. The concentration of pharmacologically active tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in cannabis products has been increasing over the past decade. Concerns about potential harmful health effects of using these increasingly higher-concentration products have led some states to consider regulation of cannabis product THC concentration. We conducted a scoping review of health effects of high-concentration cannabis products to inform policy on whether the THC concentrations of cannabis product should be regulated or limited. Objectives. We conducted a scoping review to (1) identify and describe human studies that explore the relationship of high-concentration cannabis products with any health outcomes in the literature and (2) create an interactive evidence map of the included studies to facilitate further analyses. Search Methods. An experienced medical information specialist designed a comprehensive search strategy of 7 electronic databases. Selection Criteria. We included human studies of any epidemiological design with no restrictions by age, sex, health status, country, or outcome measured that reported THC concentration or included a known high-concentration cannabis product. Data Collection and Analysis. We imported search results into Distiller SR, and trained coders conducted artificial intelligence‒assisted screening. We developed, piloted, and revised data abstraction forms. One person performed data abstraction, and a senior reviewer verified a subset. We provide a tabular description of study characteristics, including exposures and outcomes measured, for each included study. We interrogated the evidence map published in Tableau to answer specific questions and provide the results as text and visual displays. Main Results. We included 452 studies in the scoping review and evidence map. There was incomplete reporting of exposure characteristics including THC concentration, duration and frequency of use, and products used. The evidence map shows considerable heterogeneity among studies in exposures, outcomes, and populations studied. A limited number of reports provided data that would facilitate further quantitative synthesis of the results across studies. Conclusions. This scoping review and evidence map support strong conclusions concerning the utility of the literature for characterizing risks and benefits of the current cannabis marketplace and the research approaches followed in the studies identified. Relevance of the studies to today's products is limited. Public Health Implications. High-quality evidence to address the policy question of whether the THC concentration of cannabis products should be regulated is scarce. The publicly available interactive evidence map is a timely resource for other entities concerned with burgeoning access to high-concentration cannabis. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(12):1332-1342. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307414).

A Pragmatic, Person-Centered View of Cannabis in the United States: Pursuing Care That Transcends Beliefs

BACKGROUND

Rates of cannabis use are increasing in the United States, likely as a result of changes in societal attitudes and expanding legalization. Although many patients report wanting to discuss the risks and benefits of cannabis use with their clinical providers, many providers hold conflicting beliefs regarding cannabis use and often do not engage patients in discussion about cannabis. This dilemma is underscored by the limitations imposed on cannabis related research, and lack of empirically based best-practice guidelines for clinicians when addressing cannabis use with patients.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to briefly summarize clinician and patient attitudes toward cannabis use and review current clinical guidelines and provide suggestions to assist health care providers and clinicians in increasing their comfort and skill in discussing cannabis use with patients.

METHODS

A narrative review on attitudes toward cannabis use and clinical guidelines was performed to summarize the literature and provide evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Attitudes toward cannabis use have been shaped by personal and political factors and contribute to clinician hesitance in speaking with patients about the topic. Administrative barriers have hindered the development of clearer public health guidelines that might enable the dissemination of evidence-based information on the health effects of cannabis use and might ultimately lead to better health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Not discussing cannabis use with patients may be a crucial missed opportunity for harm reduction. In the absence of empirically supported best-practice guidelines, a person-centered approach can facilitate conversations on the harms and benefits of cannabis use.

Systematic combinations of major cannabinoid and terpene contents in Cannabis flower and patient outcomes: a proof-of-concept assessment of the Vigil Index of Cannabis Chemovars

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the frequency with which different combinations of phytochemicals (chemovars) arise in Cannabis flower or whether common chemovars are associated with distinct pharmacodynamics and patient health outcomes. This study created a clinically relevant, user-friendly, scalable chemovar indexing system summarizing primary cannabinoid and terpene contents and tested whether the most frequently consumed chemovars differ in their treatment effectiveness and experienced side effects.

METHODS

Between 09/10/2016 and 03/11/2021, 204 people used the freely available, educational mobile software application, Releaf App, to record 6309 real-time consumption sessions using 633 distinct Cannabis flower products, unique at the user level, with terpene and cannabinoid potency information. The indexing system is based on retrospective data analysis of the products' primary and secondary terpene contents and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) potencies and yielded a total of 478 distinct chemovars. Analyses of covariances (ANCOVAs) were used to compare symptom levels and side effects experienced across the five most common chemovars before and after cannabis consumption for app users overall and for those treating chronic pain and depression or anxiety.

RESULTS

Examination of the five most frequently consumed chemovars showed significant differences in symptom treatment effectiveness for chronic pain and for depression and anxiety (ps < .001). While the effects varied in magnitude, the five chemovars were effective across conditions except for MC61 (mercene .01-0.49%/beta-caryophyllene .01 to 0.49%/THC 20-25%/CBD 0.01-1.0%), which exacerbated feelings of anxiety or depression. The chemovars also differed in their association with experiencing positive, negative, and context-specific side effects, with two chemovars, MC61 and MC62 (mercene .01-0.49%/beta-caryophyllene .01-0.49%/THC 20-25%/CBD 1-5%), generating two to three fewer positive side effects and as much as one more negative and two more context-specific side effects than the other three chemovars.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide "proof-of-concept" that a simple, yet comprehensive chemovar indexing system can be used to identify systematic differences in clinically relevant patient health outcomes and other common experiences across Cannabis flower products, irrespective of the product's commercial or strain name. This study was limited by self-selection into cannabis and app use and a lack of user-specific information. Further research using this chemovar indexing system should assess how distinct combinations of phytochemicals interact with user-level characteristics to produce general and individualized Cannabis consumption experiences and health outcomes, ideally using randomized methods to assess differences in effects across chemovars.

The Effects of Consuming <b><i>Cannabis</i></b> Flower for Treatment of Fatigue

<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We measure for the first time how commercially available <i>Cannabis</i> flower products affect feelings of fatigue. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A total of 1,224 people recorded 3,922 <i>Cannabis</i> flower self-administration sessions between June 6, 2016, and August 7, 2019, using the Releaf App. Usage sessions included real-time subjective changes in fatigue intensity levels prior to and following <i>Cannabis</i> consumption, <i>Cannabis</i> flower characteristics (labeled phenotype, cannabinoid potency levels), combustion method, and any potential experienced side effects. <b><i>Results:</i></b> On average, 91.94% of people experienced decreased fatigue following consumption with an average symptom intensity reduction of 3.48 points on a 0–10 visual analog scale (SD = 2.70, <i>d</i> = 1.60, <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001). While labeled plant phenotypes (“<i>C. indica</i>,” “<i>C. sativa</i>,” or “hybrid”) did not differ in symptom relief, people that used joints to combust the flower reported greater symptom relief than pipe or vaporizer users. Across cannabinoid levels, tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabidiol levels were generally not associated with changes in symptom intensity levels. <i>Cannabis</i> use was associated with several negative side effects that correspond to increased feelings of fatigue (e.g., feeling unmotivated, couch-locked) among a minority of users (&#x3c;24% of users), with slightly more users (up to 37%) experiencing a positive side effect that corresponds to increased energy (e.g., feeling active, energetic, frisky, or productive). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The findings suggest that the majority of patients experience decreased fatigue from consumption of <i>Cannabis</i> flower consumed in vivo, although the magnitude of the effect and extent of side effects experienced likely vary with individuals’ metabolic states and the synergistic chemotypic properties of the plant.

The Effectiveness of Common Cannabis Products for Treatment of Nausea

GOALS

We measure for the first time how a wide range of cannabis products affect nausea intensity in actual time.

BACKGROUND

Even though the Cannabis plant has been used to treat nausea for millennia, few studies have measured real-time effects of common and commercially available cannabis-based products.

STUDY

Using the Releaf App, 886 people completed 2220 cannabis self-administration sessions intended to treat nausea between June 6, 2016 and July 8, 2019. They recorded the characteristics of self-administered cannabis products and baseline symptom intensity levels before tracking real-time changes in the intensity of their nausea.

RESULTS

By 1 hour postconsumption, 96.4% of people had experienced symptom relief with an average symptom intensity reduction of -3.85 points on a 0 to 10 visual analog scale (SD=2.45, d=1.85, P<0.001). Symptom relief was statistically significant at 5 minutes and increased with time. Among product characteristics, flower and concentrates yielded the strongest, yet similar results; products labeled as Cannabis indica underperformed those labeled as Cannabis sativa or hybrid; and joints were associated with greater symptom relief than pipes or vaporizers. In sessions using flower, higher tetrahydrocannbinol and lower cannabidiol were generally associated with greater symptom relief (eg, within 5 min).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that the vast majority of patients self-selecting into cannabis use for treatment of nausea likely experience relief within a relative short duration of time, but the level of antiemetic effect varies with the characteristics of the cannabis products consumed in vivo. Future research should focus on longer term symptom relief, including nausea-free intervals and dosing frequency; the risks of consumption of medical cannabis, especially among high-risk populations, such as pregnant women and children; and potential interactions between cannabis, conventional antiemetics, other medications, food, tobacco, alcohol, and street drugs among specific patient populations.

Medical cannabis use in Thailand after its legalization: a respondent-driven sample survey

BACKGROUND

Many countries now allow the consumption of cannabis or cannabinoids for medical purposes with varying approaches concerning products allowed and the regulatory frameworks prevailing their endowment. On 18 February 2019 Thailand passed legislation allowing the use of cannabis for medical purposes. This study aimed to examine patterns and purposes for consumption of medical cannabis, and consumers' perceptions and opinions towards benefits and harms of cannabis and related policies in 2019-2020.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study using a respondent-driven sampling (RDS) method was conducted in four sites across Thailand. Participants were 485 adults aged 18 years and over, living in the study region, who had used cannabis for medical purposes within the past 12 months. Face-to-face interviews using a structured questionnaire were used to collect data on (1) demographic characteristics, (2) pattern of consumption, (3) source of information and perception of benefits and harms of medical cannabis, and (4) opinion towards cannabis policies. Data were analyzed using RDS Analyst and presented as percentage and mean with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Most participants (84.7%, 95% CI [78.9-90.5]) used an oral form of crude oil extract while 9.2% (95% CI [4.1-14.2]) used the raw form. The most common uses were for treatment of cancers (23.3%, 95% CI [16.1-30.4]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (22.8%, 95% CI [17.5-28.0]), and musculoskeletal pains (21.6%, 95% CI [16.7-26.6]). Illegal sources such as underground traders (54.5%, 95% CI [40.8-68.3]), friends and relatives (12.2%, 95% CI [6.2-18.3]), not-for-profit provider groups (5.2%, 95% CI [0.5-10.9]), and clandestine growers or producers (2.9%, 95% CI [0.6-5.3]) were the main suppliers. Most (>80%) perceived cannabis could treat cancers, chronic pains, insomnia, Parkinson's disease and generalized anxiety disorder. Less than half perceived that cannabis could cause adverse conditions e.g., palpitation, panic, memory impairment and schizophrenic-like psychosis. Most respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the policies regarding permission to use cannabis for medical purposes (95.1%, 95% CI [92.0-98.2]), for the legal sale of medical cannabis products (95.9%, 95% CI [93.7-98.2]), and for people to grow cannabis for medical use (94.2%, 95% CI [91.8-96.5]). However, only two-thirds agreed with policies concerning the sales of cannabis (65.3%, 95% CI [56.9-73.7]) and home-grown cannabis for recreational purposes (61.3%, 95% CI [52.7-69.9]).

CONCLUSION

Our study reports the experiences of consumers of medical cannabis in the first year after its legalization in Thailand. Consumers reported various patterns and indications of consumption that were not supported by scientific evidence, but had positive perception of the results of consumption. These findings highlight ongoing policy challenges for Thailand and can be a lesson to be learned for other countries in the region.

Cannabis, Cannabinoids and Cannabis-Based Medicines in Cancer Care

As medical cannabis becomes legal in more states, cancer patients are increasingly interested in the potential utility of the ancient botanical in their treatment regimen. Although eager to discuss cannabis use with their oncologist, patients often find that their provider reports that they do not have adequate information to be helpful. Oncologists, so dependent on evidence-based data to guide their treatment plans, are dismayed by the lack of published literature on the benefits of medical cannabis. This results largely from the significant barriers that have existed to effectively thwart the ability to conduct trials investigating the potential therapeutic efficacy of the plant. This is a narrative review aimed at clinicians, summarizing cannabis phytochemistry, trials in the areas of nausea and vomiting, appetite, pain and anticancer activity, including assessment of case reports of antitumor use, with reflective assessments of the quality and quantity of evidence. Despite preclinical evidence and social media claims, the utility of cannabis, cannabinoids or cannabis-based medicines in the treatment of cancer remains to be convincingly demonstrated. With an acceptable safety profile, cannabis and its congeners may be useful in managing symptoms related to cancer or its treatment. Further clinical trials should be conducted to evaluate whether the preclinical antitumor effects translate into benefit for cancer patients. Oncologists should familiarize themselves with the available database to be able to better advise their patients on the potential uses of this complementary botanical therapy.

The Use of Cannabinoids for Insomnia in Daily Life: Naturalistic Study

Background

Insomnia is a prevalent condition that presents itself at both the symptom and diagnostic levels. Although insomnia is one of the main reasons individuals seek medicinal cannabis, little is known about the profile of cannabinoid use or the perceived benefit of the use of cannabinoids in daily life.

Objective

We conducted a retrospective study of medicinal cannabis users to investigate the use profile and perceived efficacy of cannabinoids for the management of insomnia.

Methods

Data were collected using the Strainprint app, which allows medicinal cannabis users to log conditions and symptoms, track cannabis use, and monitor symptom severity pre- and postcannabis use. Our analyses examined 991 medicinal cannabis users with insomnia across 24,189 tracked cannabis use sessions. Sessions were analyzed, and both descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects modeling were completed to examine use patterns and perceived efficacy.

Results

Overall, cannabinoids were perceived to be efficacious across all genders and ages, and no significant differences were found among product forms, ingestion methods, or gender groups. Although all strain categories were perceived as efficacious, predominant indica strains were found to reduce insomnia symptomology more than cannabidiol (CBD) strains (estimated mean difference 0.59, SE 0.11; 95% CI 0.36-0.81; adjusted P<.001) and predominant sativa strains (estimated mean difference 0.74, SE 0.16; 95% CI 0.43-1.06; adjusted P<.001). Indica hybrid strains also presented a greater reduction in insomnia symptomology than CBD strains (mean difference 0.52, SE 0.12; 95% CI 0.29-0.74; adjusted P<.001) and predominant sativa strains (mean difference 0.67, SE 0.16; 95% CI 0.34-1.00; adjusted P=.002).

Conclusions

Medicinal cannabis users perceive a significant improvement in insomnia with cannabinoid use, and this study suggests a possible advantage with the use of predominant indica strains compared with predominant sativa strains and exclusively CBD in this population. This study emphasizes the need for randomized placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety profile of cannabinoids for the treatment of insomnia.

The effect of medical cannabis laws on pharmaceutical marketing to physicians

Although cannabis is federally prohibited, a majority of U.S. states have implemented medical cannabis laws (MCLs). As more individuals consider the drug for medical treatment, they potentially substitute away from prescription drugs. Therefore, an MCL signals competitor entry. This paper exploits geographic and temporal variation in MCLs to examine the strategic response in direct-to-physician marketing by pharmaceutical firms as cannabis enters the market. Using office detailing records from 2014-2018 aggregated to the county level, we find weak evidence of a relatively small and delayed response in substitute prescription drug- and opioid-related detailing. While these effects on detailing dollars are more pronounced among smaller pharmaceutical firms, the magnitudes are economically small and likely muted at aggregate levels by the small percent of doctors that actively recommend cannabis for medical treatment.

State of the science: cannabis and cannabinoids in palliative medicine-the potential

Cannabinoids are chemicals derived naturally from the cannabis plant or are synthetically manufactured. They interact directly with cannabinoid receptors or share chemical similarity with endocannabinoids (or both). Within palliative medicine, cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2) may modulate some cancer symptoms: appetite, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and mood, pain and sleep disorders. Opioid and cannabinoid receptors have overlapping neuroanatomical receptor distribution, particularly at the dorsal horn, dorsal striatum and locus coeruleus. They have a favourable safety profile compared with opioids, and cannabis-based medicines help chronic pain. While cannabidiol (CBD) has anti-inflammatory properties, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the psychoactive substance for issues such as mood and sleep. Nabiximols (Sativex), a CBD:THC combination, is Food and Drug Administration approved for some multiple sclerosis symptoms and epilepsy. There has been a swift societal evolution in attitudes about use of cannabis and cannabinoid medicines for chronic pain. In the USA, 33 states have now legalised prescription-based medical cannabis for several medical conditions; Canada has had legislation since 2001 authorising medical use. The European Union (EU) recently declared all EU citizens must have access to medical cannabis over the next 4 years. The integration into medicine and routine clinical use of cannabis is fraught with information gaps, regulatory issues and scarcity of research. Each patient should have a comprehensive assessment and risk-benefit discussion before any cannabis-based intervention to avoid possible complications such as hallucinations, psychosis and potential cardiac harm.

Attitudes and knowledge about medical cannabis among Israeli and American nursing students

BACKGROUND

Although medical cannabis regulations are emerging in many places around the world, a contentious conundrum remains within the medical establishment regarding the appropriate part that cannabis may have in the provision of health care. Nurses have an indispensable role in the care management of patients, and given the consideration of cannabis as a possible treatment, they are warranted to be aware of its medical properties, as well as to be able to adequately answer patient queries. Nevertheless, very little is currently known about nurses' perceptions related to medical cannabis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about medical cannabis among nursing students.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study in two universities: Rutgers University (RU) in New Jersey and Ben Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) in Israel. In addition to demographic data, the survey instrument included questions about attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, and training.

RESULTS

Overall, 387 students participated, mainly females (87.8%). The vast majority from both sub-groups stated they would recommend cannabis to their patients if allowed to do so (91.2%), and were in agreement that medical cannabis is associated with significant benefits for physical (93.5%) and mental (87.8%) health. Compared to the BGU sub-group, more students from RU stated that they feel prepared to answer patient questions about medical cannabis (19.5% vs. 33.5%, respectively; χ² = 9.74, p < 0.01). While the majority of respondents stated they have not received any formal education related to medical cannabis, they expressed endorsement for such training and education.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the expanding number of patients who use medical cannabis, this study highlights the importance of incorporating medical cannabis education for nurses in academic and clinical curricula.

The effectiveness of inhaled Cannabis flower for the treatment of agitation/irritability, anxiety, and common stress

BACKGROUND

An observational research design was used to evaluate which types of commonly labeled Cannabis flower product characteristics are associated with changes in momentary feelings of distress-related symptoms.

METHODS

We used data from 2306 patient-directed cannabis administration sessions among 670 people who used the real-time Cannabis effects recording software, Releaf App, between June 6, 2016, and February 23, 2019, for tracking the effects of Cannabis flower consumption. Fixed effects multivariable panel regression techniques were used to establish overall relief by symptom type and to determine which labeled product characteristics (e.g., subspecies/subtype, inhalation method, and major cannabinoid contents) showed the strongest correlation with changes in momentary feelings of agitation/irritability, anxiety, and stress, along with experienced side effects.

RESULTS

In total, a decrease in symptom intensity levels was reported in 95.51% of Cannabis usage sessions, an increase in 2.32% of sessions, and no change in 2.16% of sessions. Fixed effects models showed, on average, respondents recorded a maximum symptom intensity reduction of 4.33 points for agitation/irritability (SE = 0.20, p < 0.01), 3.47 points for anxiety (SE = 0.13, p < 0.01), and 3.98 for stress (SE = 0.12, p < 0.01) on an 11-point visual analog scale. Fixed effects regressions showed that, controlling for time-invariant user characteristics, mid and high tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) levels were the primary independent predictor of increased symptom relief, and that when broken out by symptom type, this effect was only statistically significant for our largest sample of users, those reporting anxiety rather than agitation/irritability or stress. Cannabidiol (CBD) levels were generally not associated with changes in symptom intensity levels. In a minority of cannabis use sessions (< 13%), cannabis users reported anxiogenic-related negative side effects (e.g., feeling anxious, irritable, paranoid, rapid pulse, or restless), whereas in a majority of sessions (about 66%), users reported positive anxiolytic side effects (e.g., feeling chill, comfy, happy, optimistic, peaceful, or relaxed).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest the majority of patients in our sample experienced relief from distress-related symptoms following consumption of Cannabis flower, and that among product characteristics, higher THC levels were the strongest predictors of relief.

Exploring the Use of State Medical Cannabis Legislation as a Proxy for Medical Cannabis Use Among Patients Receiving Chemotherapy

OPINION STATEMENT

The use of medical cannabis is expanding in the USA. Due to conflicting, low-quality evidence, many oncologists may not feel confident to recommend it to patients. Given the potential for legal and financial risks when conducting clinical trials with medical cannabis, the use of observational data should be explored. Observational data that directly capture medical cannabis use in relation to prescription medications and track the prevalence and patterns of cannabis use is sparse. To gain insights into the role medical cannabis plays in the pharmaceutical landscape, proxies such as cannabis legislation need to be explored. In the context of recommendation-nonadherent antiemetic prescribing among patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, medical cannabis may be a suitable alternative to an antiemetic in states that allow medical cannabis. Findings suggest that legislation may impact the use of certain antiemetics in states with cannabis legislation in place. The presence or absence of legislation regarding medical cannabis use may serve as an early, observable surrogate marker of medical cannabis use in the community. In light of the paucity of clinical trials and observational datasets that capture cannabis use, there remains a tremendous need for the development of methodologies or standardized datasets that appropriately and reliably capture the use of medical cannabis to facilitate research into its clinical application and effect on prescription medication use. Standardizing the reporting and destigmatizing use could eliminate the dependence upon proxy measures as a substitute for more extensive data and go a long way in improving data capture, thus allowing us to generate knowledge and hypotheses from observational data until research conditions improve and allow for expanded clinical trials involving medical cannabis.

Shared Decision-Making for Patients Using Cannabis for Pain Symptom Management in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Gaps in research evidence and inconsistent policies regarding use of cannabis for pain and associated symptoms result in confusion for healthcare providers and patients. The objective of this review was to synthesize information on cannabis use for pain with legal and policy implications to create a shared decision-making model that can be used to guide patient care interactions.

APPROACH

Current cannabis policies, state laws, research, and patient care practices related to medical and recreational cannabis in the United States were reviewed, along with best practices in shared decision-making. Reviewed literature was then synthesized to create a model that can be used by registered nurses and others to address cannabis use, where legal, for pain and related symptoms.

RESULT AND CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis is a legal option for many patients with pain. To minimize harms and optimize benefits, nurses can play a key role when authorized by law in assisting with decision-making surrounding cannabis use.

A within-person comparison of the subjective effects of higher vs. lower-potency cannabis

BACKGROUND

Cannabis concentrates have much higher concentrations of THC than marijuana (flower) and are quickly gaining popularity in the United States. One hypothesis is that use of higher-THC cannabis (concentrates) might result in greater intoxication and more severe acute negative effects than lower-THC cannabis (marijuana), but few studies have compared the subjective effects of concentrates and marijuana.

METHODS

Current (past-year) cannabis users were recruited online to complete a survey about their cannabis use. Cannabis users who reported using both marijuana and concentrates (n = 574) answered questions about the subjective effects of marijuana and, subsequently, the subjective effects of concentrates. Subjective effects were obtained for the following domains: affect, cognitive function, psychotic-like experiences, physiological effects, and reduced consciousness.

RESULTS

Participants reported using marijuana between 5-6 times per week and concentrates slightly more than once per month. Within-person comparisons of the subjective effects of marijuana and concentrates showed that marijuana was rated as producing greater overall positive effects (Marijuana: M = 5.6, Concentrates: M = 4.5; Cohen's d = 0.75, paired t(561) = 14.67, p < .001), including greater positive affect and enhanced cognitive function. Negative effects of both marijuana and concentrates were minimal. Marijuana was selected over concentrates as the 'preferred type' of cannabis by 77.5 % of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The main difference in the subjective effects of marijuana and concentrates is in terms of their positive effects, with marijuana producing greater positive effects than concentrates. Negative effects of marijuana and concentrates were small, suggesting that extreme negative effects are unlikely for regular cannabis users.

Cannabinoids: A Guide for Use in the World of Gastrointestinal Disease

Cannabinoids have been known as the primary component of cannabis for decades, but the characterization of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) in the 1990s opened the doors for cannabis' use in modern medicine. The 2 main receptors of this system, cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2, are found on cells of various tissues, with significant expression in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The characterization of the ECS also heralded the understanding of endocannabinoids, naturally occurring compounds synthesized in the human body. Via secondary signaling pathways acting on vagal nerves, nociceptors, and immune cells, cannabinoids have been shown to have both palliative and detrimental effects on the pathophysiology of GI disorders. Although research on the effects of both endogenous and exogenous cannabinoids has been slow due to the complicated legal history of cannabis, discoveries of cannabinoids' treatment potential have been found in various fields of medicine, including the GI world. Medical cannabis has since been offered as a treatment for a myriad of conditions and malignancies, including cancer, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, nausea, posttraumatic stress disorder, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cachexia, glaucoma, and epilepsy. This article hopes to create an overview of current research on cannabinoids and the ECS, detail the potential advantages and pitfalls of their use in GI diseases, and explore possible future developments in this field.

Marijuana Use in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Marijuana use is increasing as more states are legalizing cannabis for both medicinal and recreational purposes. National survey data estimate that >2 million Americans with established cardiovascular diseases currently use or have used marijuana in its variety of forms, including inhalation and vaping. Cannabinoid receptors are distributed in multiple tissue beds and cells, including platelets, adipose tissue, and myocytes. Observational data suggest associations between marijuana and a broad range of adverse cardiovascular risks. Marijuana is becoming increasingly potent, and smoking marijuana carries many of the same cardiovascular health hazards as smoking tobacco. Synthetic cannabinoids have been linked to more sustained and deleterious pharmacodynamic effects. Marijuana is classified as a Schedule I substance, thus limiting its rigorous study for cardiovascular health effects. This review summarizes cardiovascular considerations related to marijuana use, pharmacological interactions, and future steps to provide clearer guidance regarding its cardiovascular safety. Screening for marijuana use is encouraged, especially in young patients presenting with cardiovascular disease.

Alleviative effects of Cannabis flower on migraine and headache

OBJECTIVE

Few studies to date have measured the real-time effects of consumption of common and commercially available Cannabis products for the treatment of headache and migraine under naturalistic conditions. This study examines, for the first time, the effectiveness of using dried Cannabis flower, the most widely used type of Cannabis product in the United States, in actual time for treatment of headache- and migraine-related pain and the associations between different product characteristics and changes in symptom intensity following Cannabis use.

METHODS

Between 06/10/2016 and 02/12/2019, 699 people used the Releaf Application to record real-time details of their Cannabis use, including product characteristics and symptom intensity levels prior to and following self-administration; data included 1910 session-level attempts to treat headache- (1328 sessions) or migraine-related pain (582 sessions). Changes in headache- or migraine-related pain intensity were measured on a 0-10 scale prior to, and immediately, following Cannabis consumption.

RESULTS

Ninety-four percent of users experienced symptom relief within a two-hour observation window. The average symptom intensity reduction was 3.3 points on a 0-10 scale (standard deviation = 2.28, Cohen's d = 1.58), with males experiencing greater relief than females (P < 0.001) and a trend that younger users (< 35 years) experience greater relief than older users (P = 0.08). Mixed effects regression models showed that, among the known (i.e., labeled) product characteristics, tetrahydrocannabinol levels 10% and higher are the strongest independent predictors of symptom relief, and this effect is particularly prominent in headache rather than migraine sufferers (P < 0.05), females (P < 0.05) and younger users (P < 0.001). Females and younger users also appear to gain greater symptom relief from flower labeled as "C. indica" rather than "C. sativa" or other hybrid strains.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that whole dried Cannabis flower may be an effective medication for treatment of migraine- and headache-related pain, but the effectiveness differs according to characteristics of the Cannabis plant, the combustion methods, and the age and gender of the patient.

The Impact of Marijuana on the Cardiovascular System: A Review of the Most Common Cardiovascular Events Associated with Marijuana Use

With the expanded legalization of marijuana, its medical and recreational use have sharply increased over the past decade. A wide array of new forms of cannabis is available on the market today, and the potencies are ten times those of forms previously tested, meaning that the true impact of marijuana on the cardiovascular system remains unclear. Cannabis mainly exerts its effects via the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems, with different doses affecting different cannabinoids receptors. Studies have shown that marijuana plays a role in thrombosis, inflammation, and atherosclerosis. Case reports have linked marijuana use to myocardial infarction, cardiac arrythmias, cardiomyopathies, stroke, and arteritis. Most patients are young, healthy men with no cardiovascular risk factors; however, the patient population is expected to change to include older individuals in the future. The widespread public perception of safety accompanying marijuana use has contributed to its increased use among the elderly, who are the most at risk population for acute cardiovascular events. In this review, we aim to provide a basic understanding of the physiological effects of marijuana on the cardiovascular system and to review the current literature regarding cardiovascular diseases linked to marijuana use in adults.

Cannabis and Health Research: Rapid Progress Requires Innovative Research Designs

The United States has witnessed enormous changes concerning the acceptance of medicinal and recreational cannabis use. Sixty-three percent of the US population has access to medicinal cannabis markets, which offer increasingly diverse and potent cannabis products. Considering the rapidly changing cultural, political, and legal landscape, the scientific literature does not adequately inform public policy, medical decision making, or harm reduction approaches. The goals of this paper are to (1) investigate the state of cannabis research on medical conditions commonly treated with cannabis, (2) review the barriers that have led to large gaps between cannabis use and available empirical data, and (3) suggest a path forward with new research designs to address these gaps. Thus, we aim to advance a more nuanced understanding of the barriers to cannabis research and suggest innovative research designs necessary for rapid development of a meaningful knowledge base.

Should Oncologists Recommend Cannabis?

OPINION STATEMENT

Cannabis is a useful botanical with a wide range of therapeutic potential. Global prohibition over the past century has impeded the ability to study the plant as medicine. However, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has been developed as a stand-alone pharmaceutical initially approved for the treatment of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in 1986. The indication was expanded in 1992 to include treatment of anorexia in patients with the AIDS wasting syndrome. Hence, if the dominant cannabinoid is available as a schedule III prescription medication, it would seem logical that the parent botanical would likely have similar therapeutic benefits. The system of cannabinoid receptors and endogenous cannabinoids (endocannabinoids) has likely developed to help us modulate our response to noxious stimuli. Phytocannabinoids also complex with these receptors, and the analgesic effects of cannabis are perhaps the best supported by clinical evidence. Cannabis and its constituents have also been reported to be useful in assisting with sleep, mood, and anxiety. Despite significant in vitro and animal model evidence supporting the anti-cancer activity of individual cannabinoids-particularly THC and cannabidiol (CBD)-clinical evidence is absent. A single intervention that can assist with nausea, appetite, pain, mood, and sleep is certainly a valuable addition to the palliative care armamentarium. Although many healthcare providers advise against the inhalation of a botanical as a twenty-first century drug-delivery system, evidence for serious harmful effects of cannabis inhalation is scant and a variety of other methods of ingestion are currently available from dispensaries in locales where patients have access to medicinal cannabis. Oncologists and palliative care providers should recommend this botanical remedy to their patients to gain first-hand evidence of its therapeutic potential despite the paucity of results from randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials to appreciate that it is both safe and effective and really does not require a package insert.

Kratom policy: The challenge of balancing therapeutic potential with public safety

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a tree-like plant indigenous to Southeast Asia. Its leaves, and the teas brewed from them have long been used by people in that region to stave off fatigue and to manage pain and opioid withdrawal. Evidence suggests kratom is being increasingly used by people in the United States and Europe for the self-management of opioid withdrawal and treatment of pain. Recent studies have confirmed that kratom and its chemical constituents have potentially useful pharmacological actions. However, there have also been increasing numbers of reports of adverse effects resulting from use of kratom products. In August 2016, the US Drug Enforcement Administration announced plans to classify kratom and its mitragynine constituents as Schedule I Controlled Substances, a move that triggered a massive response from pro-kratom advocates. The debate regarding the risks, and benefits and safety of kratom continues to intensify. Kratom proponents tout kratom as a safer and less addictive alternative to opioids for the management of pain and opioid addiction. The anti-kratom faction argues that kratom, itself, is a dangerous and addictive drug that ought to be banned. Given the widespread use of kratom and the extensive media attention it is receiving, it is important for physicians, scientists and policy makers to be knowledgeable about the subject. The purpose of this commentary is to update readers about recent developments and controversies in this rapidly evolving area. All of the authors are engaged in various aspects of kratom research and it is our intention to provide a fair and balanced overview that can form the basis for informed decisions on kratom policy. Our conclusions from these analyses are: (a) User reports and results of preclinical studies in animals strongly suggest that kratom and its main constituent alkaloid, mitragynine may have useful activity in alleviating pain and managing symptoms of opioid withdrawal, even though well-controlled clinical trials have yet to be done. (b) Even though kratom lacks many of the toxicities of classic opioids, there are legitimate concerns about the safety and lack of quality control of purported "kratom" products that are being sold in the US. (c) The issues regarding the safety and efficacy of kratom and its mitragynine constituent can only be resolved by additional research. Classification of the Mitragyna alkaloids as Schedule I controlled substances would substantially impede this important research on kratom.

The Association between Cannabis Product Characteristics and Symptom Relief

Federal barriers and logistical challenges have hindered measurement of the real time effects from the types of cannabis products used medically by millions of patients in vivo. Between 06/06/2016 and 03/05/2018, 3,341 people completed 19,910 self- administrated cannabis sessions using the mobile device software, ReleafApp to record: type of cannabis product (dried whole natural Cannabis flower, concentrate, edible, tincture, topical), combustion method (joint, pipe, vaporization), Cannabis subspecies (C. indica and C. sativa), and major cannabinoid contents (tetrahydrocannabinol, THC; and cannabidiol, CBD), along with real-time ratings of health symptom severity levels, prior-to and immediately following administration, and reported side effects. A fixed effects panel regression approach was used to model the within-user effects of different product characteristics. Patients showed an average symptom improvement of 3.5 (SD = 2.6) on an 11-point scale across the 27 measured symptom categories. Dried flower was the most commonly used product and generally associated with greater symptom relief than other types of products. Across product characteristics, only higher THC levels were independently associated with greater symptom relief and prevalence of positive and negative side effects. In contrast, CBD potency levels were generally not associated with significant symptom changes or experienced side effects.

Patient-Reported Symptom Relief Following Medical Cannabis Consumption

Background: The Releaf App^TM mobile software application (app) data was used to measure self-reported effectiveness and side effects of medical cannabis used under naturalistic conditions.

Methods: Between 5/03/2016 and 12/16/2017, 2,830 Releaf App^TM users completed 13,638 individual sessions self-administering medical cannabis and indicated their primary health symptom severity rating on an 11-point (0–10) visual analog scale in real-time prior to and following cannabis consumption, along with experienced side effects.

Results: Releaf App^TM responders used cannabis to treat myriad health symptoms, the most frequent relating to pain, anxiety, and depressive conditions. Significant symptom severity reductions were reported for all the symptom categories, with mean reductions between 2.8 and 4.6 points (ds ranged from 1.29–2.39, ps < 0.001). On average, higher pre-dosing symptom levels were associated with greater reported symptom relief, and users treating anxiety or depression-related symptoms reported significantly more relief (ps < 0.001) than users with pain symptoms. Of the 42 possible side effects, users were more likely to indicate and showed a stronger correlation between symptom relief and experiences of positive (94% of sessions) or a context-specific side effects (76%), whereas negative side effects (60%) were associated with lessened, yet still significant symptom relief and were more common among patients treating a depressive symptom relative to patients treating anxiety and pain-related conditions.

Conclusion: Patient-managed cannabis use is associated with clinically significant improvements in self-reported symptom relief for treating a wide range of health conditions, along with frequent positive and negative side effects.

The Role of Cannabis within an Emerging Perspective on Schizophrenia

Background: Approximately 0.5% of the population is diagnosed with some form of schizophrenia, under the prevailing view that the pathology is best treated using pharmaceutical medications that act on monoamine receptors. Methods: We briefly review evidence on the impact of environmental forces, particularly the effect of autoimmune activity, in the expression of schizophrenic profiles and the role of Cannabis therapy for regulating immunological functioning. Results: A review of the literature shows that phytocannabinoid consumption may be a safe and effective treatment option for schizophrenia as a primary or adjunctive therapy. Conclusions: Emerging research suggests that Cannabis can be used as a treatment for schizophrenia within a broader etiological perspective that focuses on environmental, autoimmune, and neuroinflammatory causes of the disorder, offering a fresh start and newfound hope for those suffering from this debilitating and poorly understood disease.

Effectiveness of Raw, Natural Medical Cannabis Flower for Treating Insomnia under Naturalistic Conditions

Background: We use a mobile software application (app) to measure for the first time, which fundamental characteristics of raw, natural medical Cannabis flower are associated with changes in perceived insomnia under naturalistic conditions. Methods: Four hundred and nine people with a specified condition of insomnia completed 1056 medical cannabis administration sessions using the Releaf App^TM educational software during which they recorded real-time ratings of self-perceived insomnia severity levels prior to and following consumption, experienced side effects, and product characteristics, including combustion method, cannabis subtypes, and/or major cannabinoid contents of cannabis consumed. Within-user effects of different flower characteristics were modeled using a fixed effects panel regression approach with standard errors clustered at the user level. Results: Releaf App^TM users showed an average symptom severity reduction of -4.5 points on a 0⁻10 point visual analogue scale (SD = 2.7, d = 2.10, p < 0.001). Use of pipes and vaporizers was associated with greater symptom relief and more positive and context-specific side effects as compared to the use of joints, while vaporization was also associated with lower negative effects. Cannabidiol (CBD) was associated with greater statistically significant symptom relief than tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), but the cannabinoid levels generally were not associated with differential side effects. Flower from C. sativa plants was associated with more negative side effects than flower from C. indica or hybrid plant subtypes. Conclusions: Consumption of medical Cannabis flower is associated with significant improvements in perceived insomnia with differential effectiveness and side effect profiles, depending on the product characteristics.

The effect of dronabinol in a male patient with anorexia nervosa suffering from severe acute urge to be physically active

OBJECTIVE

A 27-year-old male suffering from chronic anorexia nervosa was admitted for inpatient psychotherapy suffering from severe urge to be physically active.

METHODS

An off-label treatment with dronabinol was initiated, to reduce his symptoms related to that urge. Several attempts to reduce symptoms including intensive psychotherapy and several psychopharmacological agents had failed in the past.

RESULTS

Following treatment with 7.5 mg dronabinol twice a day, the patient reported a significant reduction in his acute urge to be physically active. Also eating disorder-specific cognitions and compulsive behaviors remitted.

DISCUSSION

Previous studies have applied much lower doses and showed no effect of dronabinol upon the urge to be physically active. Up to date, the patient reported no side effects, especially no psychotropic effects. Implications of this case report are discussed.

Accuracy of Patient Opioid Use Reporting at the Time of Medical Cannabis License Renewal

The decision to authorize a patient for continued enrollment in a state-sanctioned medical cannabis program is difficult in part due to the uncertainty in the accuracy of patient symptom reporting and health functioning including any possible effects on other medication use. We conducted a pragmatic convenience study comparing patient reporting of previous and current prescription opioid usage to the opioid prescription records in the Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) among 131 chronic pain patients (mean age = 54; 54% male) seeking the first annual renewal of their New Mexico Medical Cannabis Program (NMMCP) license. Seventy-six percent of the patients reported using prescription opioids prior to enrollment in the NMMCP, however, the PMP records showed that only 49% of the patients were actually prescribed opioids in the six months prior to enrollment. Of the 64 patients with verifiable opioid prescriptions prior to NMMCP enrollment, 35 (55%) patients reported having eliminated the use of prescription opioids by the time of license renewal. PMP records showed that 26 patients (63% of patients claiming to have eliminated the use of opioid prescriptions and 41% of all patients with verifiable preenrollment opioid use) showed no prescription opioid activity at their first annual NMMCP renewal visit.

The role of cannabinoids in pain control: the good, the bad, and the ugly

Cannabinoids appear to possess many potential medical uses, which may extend to pain control. A narrative review of the literature has found a variety of studies testing botanical and synthetic cannabinoids in different pain syndromes (acute pain, cancer pain, chronic noncancer pain, fibromyalgia pain, migraine, neuropathic pain, visceral pain, and others). Results from these studies are mixed; cannabinoids appear to be most effective in controlling neuropathic pain, allodynia, medication-rebound headache, and chronic noncancer pain, but do not seem to offer any advantage over nonopioid analgesics for acute pain. Cannabinoids seem to work no better than placebo for visceral pain and conferred only modest analgesic effect in cancer pain. Cannabinoids do many good things - they appear to be effective in treating certain types of pain without the issues of tolerance associated with opioids. Negatively, marijuana currently has a very murky legal status all over the world - laws regulating its use are inconsistent and in flux. Thus, both patients and prescribers may be unsure about whether or not it is an appropriate form of pain control. Cannabinoid-based analgesia has been linked to potential memory deficits and cognitive impairment. A great deal more remains to be elucidated about cannabinoids which may emerge to play an important role in the treatment of neuropathic and possibly other painful conditions. There remains a great deal more to learn about the role of cannabinoids in pain management.

Associations between medical cannabis and prescription opioid use in chronic pain patients: A preliminary cohort study

BACKGROUND

Current levels and dangers of opioid use in the U.S. warrant the investigation of harm-reducing treatment alternatives.

PURPOSE

A preliminary, historical, cohort study was used to examine the association between enrollment in the New Mexico Medical Cannabis Program (MCP) and opioid prescription use.

METHODS

Thirty-seven habitual opioid using, chronic pain patients (mean age = 54 years; 54% male; 86% chronic back pain) enrolled in the MCP between 4/1/2010 and 10/3/2015 were compared to 29 non-enrolled patients (mean age = 60 years; 69% male; 100% chronic back pain). We used Prescription Monitoring Program opioid records over a 21 month period (first three months prior to enrollment for the MCP patients) to measure cessation (defined as the absence of opioid prescriptions activity during the last three months of observation) and reduction (calculated in average daily intravenous [IV] morphine dosages). MCP patient-reported benefits and side effects of using cannabis one year after enrollment were also collected.

RESULTS

By the end of the 21 month observation period, MCP enrollment was associated with 17.27 higher age- and gender-adjusted odds of ceasing opioid prescriptions (CI 1.89 to 157.36, p = 0.012), 5.12 higher odds of reducing daily prescription opioid dosages (CI 1.56 to 16.88, p = 0.007), and a 47 percentage point reduction in daily opioid dosages relative to a mean change of positive 10.4 percentage points in the comparison group (CI -90.68 to -3.59, p = 0.034). The monthly trend in opioid prescriptions over time was negative among MCP patients (-0.64mg IV morphine, CI -1.10 to -0.18, p = 0.008), but not statistically different from zero in the comparison group (0.18mg IV morphine, CI -0.02 to 0.39, p = 0.081). Survey responses indicated improvements in pain reduction, quality of life, social life, activity levels, and concentration, and few side effects from using cannabis one year after enrollment in the MCP (ps<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinically and statistically significant evidence of an association between MCP enrollment and opioid prescription cessation and reductions and improved quality of life warrants further investigations on cannabis as a potential alternative to prescription opioids for treating chronic pain.

Update on the Pharmacology and Legal Status of Kratom

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a plant indigenous to Southeast Asia. Its leaves and the teas brewed from them have long been used by people in that region to stave off fatigue and to manage pain and opioid withdrawal. In a comprehensive review published in 2012, Prozialeck et al presented evidence that kratom had been increasingly used for the self-management of opioid withdrawal and pain in the United States. At the time, kratom was classified as a legal herbal product by the US Drug Enforcement Administration. Recent studies have confirmed that kratom and its chemical constituents do have useful pharmacologic actions. However, there have also been increasing numbers of reports of adverse effects resulting from use of kratom products. In August 2016, the US Drug Enforcement Administration announced plans to classify kratom and its mitragynine constituents as Schedule 1 controlled substances, a move that triggered a massive response from kratom advocates. The purpose of this report is to highlight the current scientific and legal controversies regarding kratom.

The impact of cannabis and cannabinoids for medical conditions on health-related quality of life: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of cannabis or cannabinoids to treat medical conditions and/or alleviate symptoms is increasingly common. However, the impact of this use on patient reported outcomes, such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL), remains unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, employing guidelines from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We categorized studies based on design, targeted disease condition, and type of cannabis or cannabinoid used. We scored studies based on quality and risk of bias. After eliminating some studies because of poor quality or insufficient data, we conducted meta-analyses of remaining studies based on design.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met our pre-defined selection criteria. Eleven studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs; 2322 participants); the remaining studies were of cohort and cross-sectional design. Studies of cannabinoids were mostly RCTs of higher design quality than studies of cannabis, which utilized smaller self-selected samples in observational studies. Although we did not uncover a significant association between cannabis and cannabinoids for medical conditions and HRQoL, some patients who used them to treat pain, multiple sclerosis, and inflammatory bower disorders have reported small improvements in HRQoL, whereas some HIV patients have reported reduced HRQoL.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between HRQoL and the use of cannabis or cannabinoids for medical conditions is inconclusive. Some patient populations report improvements whereas others report reductions in HRQoL. In order to inform users, practitioners, and policymakers more clearly, future studies should adhere to stricter research quality guidelines and more clearly report patient outcomes.

The Devil Is in the Details! On Regulating Cannabis Use in Canada Based on Public Health Criteria Comment on "Legalizing and Regulating Marijuana in Canada: Review of Potential Economic, Social, and Health Impacts"

This commentary to the editorial of Hajizadeh argues that the economic, social and health consequences of legalizing cannabis in Canada will depend in large part on the exact stipulations (mainly from the federal government) and on the implementation, regulation and practice of the legalization act (on provincial and municipal levels). A strict regulatory framework is necessary to minimize the health burden attributable to cannabis use. This includes prominently control of production and sale of the legal cannabis including control of price and content with ban of marketing and advertisement. Regulation of medical marijuana should be part of such a framework as well.

Preparation and Distribution of Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Dosage Formulations for Investigational and Therapeutic Use in the United States

Cannabis is classified as a schedule I controlled substance by the US Drug Enforcement Agency, meaning that it has no medicinal value. Production is legally restricted to a single supplier at the University of Mississippi, and distribution to researchers is tightly controlled. However, a majority of the population is estimated to believe that cannabis has legitimate medical or recreational value, numerous states have legalized or decriminalized possession to some degree, and the federal government does not strictly enforce its law and is considering rescheduling. The explosive increase in open sale and use of herbal cannabis and its products has occurred with widely variable and in many cases grossly inadequate quality control at all levels—growing, processing, storage, distribution, and use. This paper discusses elements of the analytical and regulatory system that need to be put in place to ensure standardization for the researcher and to reduce the hazards of contamination, overdosing, and underdosing for the end-user.