Does the cannabinoid dronabinol reduce central pain in multiple sclerosis? Randomised double blind placebo controlled crossover trial

An overview on disease modifying and symptomatic drug treatments for multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory and degenerative autoimmune condition, resulting frequently in a disabling condition. Significant improvements of long-term prognosis have been recently achieved with an early and more aggressive use of disease modifying therapies (DMTs). Addressing the complexity of managing its progressive forms remains a significant challenge.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an update on DMTs for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and progressive MS and their efficacy, safety, and mechanism of action, emphasizing the critical role of biomarkers in optimizing treatment decisions. Moreover, some key information on drugs used to manage symptoms such as pain, fatigue, spasticity and urinary problems will be provided. The literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases covering the period from January 2000 to January 2024.

EXPERT OPINION

Major advances have been achieved in the treatment of RRMS. Treatment should start immediately as soon as the neurologist is confident with the diagnosis and its choice should be based on the prognostic profile and on the patient's propensity to accept drug-related risks. The therapeutic landscape for progressive MS is quite disappointing and necessitates further innovation. Personalized medicine, leveraging biomarker insights, holds promise for refining treatment efficacy and patient outcomes.

The State of Synthetic Cannabinoid Medications for the Treatment of Pain

Synthetic cannabinoids are compounds made in the laboratory to structurally and functionally mimic phytocannabinoids from the Cannabis sativa L. plant, including delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) can signal via the classical endogenous cannabinoid system (ECS) and the greater endocannabidiome network, highlighting their signalling complexity and far-reaching effects. Dronabinol and nabilone, which mimic THC signalling, have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treating nausea associated with cancer chemotherapy and/or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). However, there is ongoing interest in these two drugs as potential analgesics for a variety of other clinical conditions, including neuropathic pain, spasticity-related pain, and nociplastic pain syndromes including fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, and postoperative pain, among others. In this review, we highlight the signalling mechanisms of FDA-approved synthetic cannabinoids, discuss key clinical trials that investigate their analgesic potential, and illustrate challenges faced when bringing synthetic cannabinoids to the clinic.

Efficacy of cannabinoids compared to the current standard treatments on symptom relief in persons with multiple sclerosis (CANSEP trial): study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Background

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory and degenerative disease of the central nervous system. More than 90,000 Canadians are affected; a cure is yet to be found. Available treatments to manage the disease course are only partially effective. For many years, persons with MS (PwMS) have used cannabis to relax, to reduce pain and spasticity, or to improve sleep and daily functioning, despite the lack of scientific evidence on the efficacy of specific cannabinoids [i.e., tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD)] on these MS symptoms. The purpose of this clinical trial is to assess the effectiveness of different doses of these cannabinoids, alone or combined, on spasticity relief, compared to placebo. Moreover, we aim to determine which treatment is best effective to address other key MS conditions.

Methods

A double-blinded, randomized, factorial, placebo-controlled trial will be performed. We intend to include up to 250 PwMS aged over 21 recruited from the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal MS Clinic. PwMS will be randomly assigned on a 1:1:1:1 ratio to one of the trial arms: THC alone, CBD alone, THC/CBD combination, or placebo, using stratified blocked randomization, with random blocks within each stratum. The primary outcome is a self-assessment of spasticity using the mean Numeric Rating Scale score over 7 days. The main outcome will be the difference in this score at 4 weeks compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes include assessments of spasticity as measured by a clinician, pain, fatigue, sleep, bowel, bladder, and sexual dysfunction, restless legs syndrome, mental health, quality of life, mobility, cognitive functioning, and adverse events. Treatment responders are eligible for a 12-week extension phase, using the same treatment allocation and assessments.

Discussion

Previous clinical studies examined the efficacy of cannabis-based medicines in PwMS, mostly using products with 1:1 THC/CBD ratio. The major barrier to effectively use cannabis in real-world clinical settings is the lack of evidence on benefits of specific cannabinoids and information on possible related risks. The CANSEP study will contribute to overcome these limitations and identify the risks and benefits of cannabis-based treatments in PwMS.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT05092191.

Pharmacological and Non-pharmacological Approaches for the Management of Neuropathic Pain in Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects the central nervous system and can cause various types of pain including ongoing extremity pain, Lhermitte's phenomenon, trigeminal neuralgia, and mixed pain. Neuropathic pain is a major concern for individuals with multiple sclerosis as it is directly linked to myelin damage in the central nervous system and the management of neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis is challenging as the options available have limited efficacy and can cause unpleasant side effects. The literature search was conducted across two databases, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Eligible studies included clinical trials, observational studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and narrative reviews. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of literature on pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies employed in the management of neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis. Pharmacological options include cannabinoids, muscle relaxants (tizanidine, baclofen, dantrolene), anticonvulsants (benzodiazepines, gabapentin, phenytoin, carbamazepine, lamotrigine), antidepressants (duloxetine, venlafaxine, tricyclic antidepressants), opioids (naltrexone), and botulinum toxin variants, which have evidence from various clinical trials. Non-pharmacological approaches for trigeminal neuralgia may include neurosurgical methods. Non-invasive methods, physical therapy, and psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy and mindfulness-based stress reduction) may be recommended for patients with neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis. The choice of treatment depends on the severity and type of pain as well as other factors, such as patient preferences and comorbidities. There is a pressing need for healthcare professionals and researchers to prioritize the development of better strategies for managing multiple sclerosis-induced neuropathic pain.

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

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

Cannabinoids and the Endocannabinoid System in Early SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Long COVID-19-A Scoping Review

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious illness caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The clinical presentation of COVID-19 is variable, often including symptoms such as fever, cough, headache, fatigue, and an altered sense of smell and taste. Recently, post-acute "long" COVID-19 has emerged as a concern, with symptoms persisting beyond the acute infection. Vaccinations remain one of the most effective preventative methods against severe COVID-19 outcomes and the development of long-term COVID-19. However, individuals with underlying health conditions may not mount an adequate protective response to COVID-19 vaccines, increasing the likelihood of severe symptoms, hospitalization, and the development of long-term COVID-19 in high-risk populations. This review explores the potential therapeutic role of cannabinoids in limiting the susceptibility and severity of infection, both pre- and post-SARS-CoV-19 infection. Early in the SARS-CoV-19 infection, cannabinoids have been shown to prevent viral entry, mitigate oxidative stress, and alleviate the associated cytokine storm. Post-SARS-CoV-2 infection, cannabinoids have shown promise in treating symptoms associated with post-acute long COVID-19, including depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress injury, insomnia, pain, and decreased appetite. While current research primarily focuses on potential treatments for the acute phase of COVID-19, there is a gap in research addressing therapeutics for the early and post-infectious phases. This review highlights the potential for future research to bridge this gap by investigating cannabinoids and the endocannabinoid system as a potential treatment strategy for both early and post-SARS-CoV-19 infection.

Adult Medical Cannabinoid Use and Changes in Prescription Controlled Substance Use

Introduction: Nonopioid-based strategies for managing chronic noncancer pain are needed to help reduce overdose deaths. Although lab studies and population-level data suggest that cannabinoids could provide opioid-sparing effects, among medical cannabis participants they may also impact overdose risk by modifying other controlled substance use such as sedative hypnotics. However, no study has combined observational data at the individual level to empirically address interactions between the use of cannabinoids and prescribed controlled substances. Methods: Electronic health records, including prescription drug monitoring program data, from a large multisite medical cannabis program in New York State were abstracted for all participants with noncancer pain and recently prescribed noncannabinoid controlled substances who completed a new intake visit from April 15, 2018-April 14, 2019 and who remained actively in treatment for >180 days. Participants were partitioned into two samples: those with recent opioid use and those with active opioid use and co-use of sedative hypnotics. A patient-month level analysis assessed total average equivalent milligrams by class of drug (i.e., cannabinoid distinguishing tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] vs. cannabidiol [CBD], opioids, and sedative-hypnotics) received as a time-varying outcome measure across each 30-day "month" period postintake for at least 6 months for all participants. Results: Sample 1 of 285 opioid users were 61.1 years of age (±13.5), 57.5% female, and using an average of 49.7 (±98.5) morphine equivalents daily at intake. Unadjusted analyses found a modest decline in morphine equivalents to 43.9 mg (±94.1 mg) from 49.7 (±98.5) in month 1 (p=0.047) while receiving relatively low doses of THC (2.93 mg/day) and CBD (2.15 mg/day). Sample 2 of 95 opioid and sedative-hypnotic users were 60.9 years of age (±13.1), 63.2% female, and using an average of 86.6 (±136.2) morphine equivalents daily, and an average of 4.3 (±5.6) lorazepam equivalents. Unadjusted analyses did not find significant changes in either morphine equivalents (p=0.81) or lorazepam equivalents (p=0.980), and patients similarly received relatively low doses of THC (2.32 mg/day) and CBD (2.24 mg/day). Conclusions: Findings demonstrated minimal to no change in either opioids or sedative hypnotics over the 6 months of medical cannabis use but may be limited by low retention rates, external generalizability, and an inability to account for nonprescribed substance use.

Therapeutic Potential of Cannabis: A Comprehensive Review of Current and Future Applications

Historically, cannabis has been valued for its pain-relieving, anti-inflammatory, and calming properties. Ancient civilizations like the Egyptians, Greeks, and Chinese medicines recognized their therapeutic potential. The discovery of the endocannabinoid system, which interacts with cannabis phytoconstituents, has scientifically explained how cannabis affects the human immune system, including the central nervous system (CNS). This review explores the evolving world of cannabis-based treatments, spotlighting its diverse applications. By researching current research and clinical studies, we probe into how cannabinoids like Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) help to manage conditions ranging from chronic pain, persistent inflammation, cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, and neurological disorders to even viral diseases such as Human Immunodeficiency virus (HIV), SARS-CoV-2. and the emerging monkeypox. The long-term recreational use of cannabis can develop into cannabis use disorder (CUD), and therefore, understanding the factors contributing to the development and maintenance of cannabis addiction, including genetic predisposition, neurobiological mechanisms, and environmental influences, will be timely. Shedding light on the adverse impacts of CUD underscores the importance of early intervention, effective treatment approaches, and public health initiatives to address this complex issue in an evolving landscape of cannabis policies and perceptions.

An answered call for aid? Cannabinoid clinical framework for the opioid epidemic

BACKGROUND

The opioid crisis continues in full force, as physicians and caregivers are desperate for resources to help patients with opioid use and chronic pain disorders find safer and more accessible non-opioid tools.

MAIN BODY

The purpose of this article is to review the current state of the opioid epidemic; the shifting picture of cannabinoids; and the research, policy, and current events that make opioid risk reduction an urgent public health challenge. The provided table contains an evidence-based clinical framework for the utilization of cannabinoids to treat patients with chronic pain who are dependent on opioids, seeking alternatives to opioids, and tapering opioids.

CONCLUSION

Based on a comprehensive review of the literature and epidemiological evidence to date, cannabinoids stand to be one of the most interesting, safe, and accessible tools available to attenuate the devastation resulting from the misuse and abuse of opioid narcotics. Considering the urgency of the opioid epidemic and broadening of cannabinoid accessibility amidst absent prescribing guidelines, the authors recommend use of this clinical framework in the contexts of both clinical research continuity and patient care.

Cannabis-Based Medicine for Neuropathic Pain and Spasticity-A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and spinal cord injury (SCI) commonly sustain central neuropathic pain (NP) and spasticity. Despite a lack of consistent evidence, cannabis-based medicine (CBM) has been suggested as a supplement treatment. We aimed to investigate the effect of CBM on NP and spasticity in patients with MS or SCI. We performed a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in Denmark. Patients aged ≥18 years with NP (intensity >3, ≤9 on a numerical rating scale (NRS0-10) and/or spasticity (>3 on NRS0-10) were randomized to treatment consisting of either delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), a combination of THC&CBD in maximum doses of 22.5 mg, 45 mg and 22.5/45 mg per day, respectively, or placebo. A baseline registration was performed before randomization. Treatment duration was six weeks followed by a one-week phaseout. Primary endpoints were the intensity of patient-reported NP and/or spasticity. Between February 2019 and December 2021, 134 patients were randomized (MS n = 119, SCI n = 15), where 32 were assigned to THC, 31 to CBD, 31 to THC&CBD, and 40 to placebo. No significant difference was found for: mean pain intensity (THC 0.42 (-0.54-1.38), CBD 0.45 (-0.47-1.38) and THC&CBD 0.16 (-0.75-1.08)), mean spasticity intensity (THC 0.24 (-0.67-1.45), CBD 0.46 (-0.74-1.65), and THC&CBD 0.10 (-1.18-1.39), secondary outcomes (patient global impression of change and quality of life), or any tertiary outcomes. We aimed to include 448 patients in the trial; however, due to COVID-19 and recruitment challenges, fewer were included. Nevertheless, in this four-arm parallel trial, no effect was found between placebo and active treatment with THC or CBD alone or in combination on NP or spasticity in patients with either MS or SCI. The trial was registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT (2018-002315-98).

Cannabinoids to Improve Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Neurological or Oncological Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Cannabinoids have been suggested to alleviate frequently experienced symptoms of reduced mental well-being such as anxiety and depression. Mental well-being is an important subdomain of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Reducing symptoms and maintaining HRQoL are particularly important in malignant primary brain tumor patients, as treatment options are often noncurative and prognosis remains poor. These patients frequently report unprescribed cannabinoid use, presumably for symptom relieve. As studies on brain tumor patients specifically are lacking, we performed a meta-analysis of the current evidence on cannabinoid efficacy on HRQoL and mental well-being in oncological and neurological patients. Methods: We performed a systematic PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, and Web of Science search according to PRISMA guidelines on August 2 and 3, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effects of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) on general HRQoL and mental well-being. Pooled effect sizes were calculated using Hedges g. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Results: We included 17 studies: 4 in oncology and 13 in central nervous system (CNS) disease. Meta-analysis showed no effect of cannabinoids on general HRQoL (g=-0.02 confidence interval [95% CI -0.11 to 0.06]; p=0.57) or mental well-being (g=-0.02 [95% CI -0.16 to 0.13]; p=0.81). Conclusions: RCTs in patients with cancer or CNS disease showed no effect of cannabinoids on HRQoL or mental well-being. However, studies were clinically heterogeneous and since many glioma patients currently frequently use cannabinoids, future studies are necessary to evaluate its value in this specific population.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DESIGN

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

DATA SOURCES

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

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

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

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Cannabinoids in neuroinflammatory disorders: Focusing on multiple sclerosis, Parkinsons, and Alzheimers diseases

The medicinal properties of cannabis and cannabinoid-derivative are entirely investigated and known. In addition, the identification of psychotropic plant cannabinoids has led to more studies regarding the cannabinoid system and its therapeutic features in the treatment and management of clinical symptoms of neuroinflammatory disorders, such as multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinsons disease (PD), and Alzheimers disease (AD). In fact, cannabinoid agonists are able to control and regulate inflammatory responses. In contrast to the cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1) and its unwanted adverse effects, the cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2) and its ligands hold promise for new and effective therapeutic approaches. So far, some successes have been achieved in this field. This review will discuss an outline of the endocannabinoid system's involvement in neuroinflammatory disorders. Moreover, the pharmacological efficacy of different natural and synthetic preparations of phytocannabinoids acting on cannabinoid receptors, particularly in MS, PD, and AD, will be updated. Also, the reasons for targeting CB2 for neurodegeneration will be explained.

Task-independent acute effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on human brain function and its relationship with cannabinoid receptor gene expression: A neuroimaging meta-regression analysis

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying the effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) remain unclear. Here, we examined the spatial acute effect of THC on human regional brain activation or blood flow (hereafter called 'activation signal') in a 'core' network of brain regions from 372 participants, tested using a within-subject repeated measures design under experimental conditions. We also investigated whether the neuromodulatory effects of THC are related to the local expression of the cannabinoid-type-1 (CB1R) and type-2 (CB2R) receptors. Finally, we investigated the dose-response relationship between THC and key brain substrates. These meta-analytic findings shed new light on the localisation of the effects of THC in the human brain, suggesting that THC has neuromodulatory effects in regions central to many cognitive tasks and processes, related to dose, with greater effects in regions with higher levels of CB1R expression.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Role of Cannabis, Cannabidiol and Other Cannabinoids in Chronic Pain. The Perspective of Physicians

Currently, there is a renewed interest in treatments with medical cannabis and cannabinoids. Based on an increasing number of publications over the last decades that permitted new insights into mechanisms, efficacy and safety of cannabinoids, the use of cannabinergic medications is authorised in an increasing number of European and non-European countries. The alleviation of chronic, painful conditions is, since thousands of years, one of the primary reasons for the use of cannabis. Depending on the country, a wide range of medicinal cannabis preparations are available:ranging from defined cultivars of medical cannabis, mainly varying in their THC:CBD ratio, that are inhaled or taken as whole plant extracts,to highly purified single cannabinoids, such as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD),or mixtures of two enriched extracts, standardised to a 1:1 ratio of THC:CBD (nabiximols). Although conflicting opinions continue to exist, the majority of reviews in the past concluded that medical cannabis and cannabinoids play a significant role in the management of pain. Surprisingly, systematic studies to date do not support an "entourage effect" of the other plant constituents of cannabis (mainly terpenoids) in treatment of chronic pain. An emerging cannabinoid is CBD which is the only cannabinergic medication available at present that does not cause the typical "cannabis high"; it is not a "controlled substance". However, despite years of research, there is either no study or no well-conducted, head-to-head, comparison available between different cannabis cultivars, between pure cannabinoids, and between pure cannabinoids and extracts. It remains unanswered which is the optimal treatment approach.

Cannabis and cannabinoids for symptomatic treatment for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Spasticity and chronic neuropathic pain are common and serious symptoms in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). These symptoms increase with disease progression and lead to worsening disability, impaired activities of daily living and quality of life. Anti-spasticity medications and analgesics are of limited benefit or poorly tolerated. Cannabinoids may reduce spasticity and pain in people with MS. Demand for symptomatic treatment with cannabinoids is high. A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding benefits and harms of these drugs is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess benefit and harms of cannabinoids, including synthetic, or herbal and plant-derived cannabinoids, for reducing symptoms for adults with MS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to December 2021: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library), CINAHL (EBSCO host), LILACS, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the US National Institutes of Health clinical trial register, the European Union Clinical Trials Register, the International Association for Cannabinoid Medicines databank. We hand searched citation lists of included studies and relevant reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised parallel or cross-over trials (RCTs) evaluating any cannabinoid (including herbal Cannabis, Cannabis flowers, plant-based cannabinoids, or synthetic cannabinoids) irrespective of dose, route, frequency, or duration of use for adults with MS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane Risk of bias 2 tool for parallel RCTs and crossover trials. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: reduction of 30% in the spasticity Numeric Rating Scale, pain relief of 50% or greater in the Numeric Rating Scale-Pain Intensity, much or very much improvement in the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), withdrawals due to adverse events (AEs) (tolerability), serious adverse events (SAEs), nervous system disorders, psychiatric disorders, physical dependence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs with 3763 participants of whom 2290 received cannabinoids. Age ranged from 18 to 60 years, and between 50% and 88% participants across the studies were female.  The included studies were 3 to 48 weeks long and compared nabiximols, an oromucosal spray with a plant derived equal (1:1) combination of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) (13 studies), synthetic cannabinoids mimicking THC (7 studies), an oral THC extract of Cannabis sativa (2 studies), inhaled herbal Cannabis (1 study) against placebo. One study compared dronabinol, THC extract of Cannabis sativa and placebo, one compared inhaled herbal Cannabis, dronabinol and placebo. We identified eight ongoing studies. Critical outcomes • Spasticity: nabiximols probably increases the number of people who report an important reduction of perceived severity of spasticity compared with placebo (odds ratio (OR) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.56 to 4.04; 5 RCTs, 1143 participants; I2 = 67%; moderate-certainty evidence). The absolute effect was 216 more people (95% CI 99 more to 332 more) per 1000 reporting benefit with cannabinoids than with placebo. • Chronic neuropathic pain: we found only one small trial that measured the number of participants reporting substantial pain relief with a synthetic cannabinoid compared with placebo (OR 4.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 16.17; 1 study, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether cannabinoids reduce chronic neuropathic pain intensity. • Treatment discontinuation due to AEs: cannabinoids may increase slightly the number of participants who discontinue treatment compared with placebo (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.84; 21 studies, 3110 participants; I² = 17%; low-certainty evidence); the absolute effect is 39 more people (95% CI 15 more to 76 more) per 1000 people. Important outcomes • PGIC: cannabinoids probably increase the number of people who report 'very much' or 'much' improvement in health status compared with placebo (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.36; 8 studies, 1215 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). The absolute effect is 113 more people (95% CI 57 more to 175 more) per 1000 people reporting improvement. • HRQoL: cannabinoids may have little to no effect on HRQoL (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.02; 8 studies, 1942 participants; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence); • SAEs: cannabinoids may result in little to no difference in the number of participants who have SAEs compared with placebo (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.99; 20 studies, 3124 participants; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence); • AEs of the nervous system: cannabinoids may increase nervous system disorders compared with placebo (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.44; 7 studies, 1154 participants; I² = 63%; low-certainty evidence); • Psychiatric disorders: cannabinoids may increase psychiatric disorders compared with placebo (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.88; 6 studies, 1122 participants; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence); • Drug tolerance: the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cannabinoids on drug tolerance (OR 3.07, 95% CI 0.12 to 75.95; 2 studies, 458 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, nabiximols probably reduces the severity of spasticity in the short-term in people with MS. We are uncertain about the effect on chronic neurological pain and health-related quality of life. Cannabinoids may increase slightly treatment discontinuation due to AEs, nervous system and psychiatric disorders compared with placebo. We are uncertain about the effect on drug tolerance. The overall certainty of evidence is limited by short-term duration of the included studies.

The Efficacy of Cannabis on Multiple Sclerosis-Related Symptoms

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is known as an autoimmune disease that damages the neurons in the central nervous system. MS is characterized by its most common symptoms of spasticity, muscle spasms, neuropathic pain, tremors, bladder dysfunction, dysarthria, and some intellectual problems, including memory disturbances. Several clinical studies have been conducted to investigate the effects of cannabis on the relief of these symptoms in MS patients. The efficacy of Cannabis sativa (C. Sativa) in the management of MS outcomes such as spasticity, pain, tremors, ataxia, bladder functions, sleep, quality of life, and adverse effects were assessed in this review. Most clinical studies showed the positive effects of cannabinoids with their different routes of administration, such as oromucosal spray and oral form, in reducing most MS symptoms. The oromucosal spray Nabiximols demonstrated an improvement in reducing MS spasticity, pain, and quality of life with a tolerated adverse effect. Oral cannabinoids are significantly effective for treating MS pain and spasticity, while the other symptoms indicate slight improvement and the evidence is quite inconsistent. Oromucosal spray and oral cannabis are mainly used for treating patients with MS and have positive effects on treating the most common symptoms of MS, such as pain and spasticity, whereas the other MS symptoms indicated slight improvement, for which further studies are needed.

Central Neuropathic Pain Syndromes: Current and Emerging Pharmacological Strategies

Central neuropathic pain is caused by a disease or lesion of the brain or spinal cord. It is difficult to predict which patients will develop central pain syndromes after a central nervous system injury, but depending on the etiology, lifetime prevalence may be greater than 50%. The resulting pain is often highly distressing and difficult to treat, with no specific treatment guidelines currently available. This narrative review discusses mechanisms contributing to central neuropathic pain, and focuses on pharmacological approaches for managing common central neuropathic pain conditions such as central post-stroke pain, spinal cord injury-related pain, and multiple sclerosis-related neuropathic pain. Tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and gabapentinoids have some evidence for efficacy in central neuropathic pain. Medications from other pharmacologic classes may also provide pain relief, but current evidence is limited. Certain non-pharmacologic approaches, neuromodulation in particular, may be helpful in refractory cases. Emerging data suggest that modulating the primary afferent input may open new horizons for the treatment of central neuropathic pain. For most patients, effective treatment will likely require a multimodal therapy approach.

Medicinal Cannabis and Central Nervous System Disorders

Cannabinoids, including those found in cannabis, have shown promise as potential therapeutics for numerous health issues, including pathological pain and diseases that produce an impact on neurological processing and function. Thus, cannabis use for medicinal purposes has become accepted by a growing majority. However, clinical trials yielding satisfactory endpoints and unequivocal proof that medicinal cannabis should be considered a frontline therapeutic for most examined central nervous system indications remains largely elusive. Although cannabis contains over 100 + compounds, most preclinical and clinical research with well-controlled dosing and delivery methods utilize the various formulations of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), the two most abundant compounds in cannabis. These controlled dosing and delivery methods are in stark contrast to most clinical studies using whole plant cannabis products, as few clinical studies using whole plant cannabis profile the exact composition, including percentages of all compounds present within the studied product. This review will examine both preclinical and clinical evidence that supports or refutes the therapeutic utility of medicinal cannabis for the treatment of pathological pain, neurodegeneration, substance use disorders, as well as anxiety-related disorders. We will predominately focus on purified THC and CBD, as well as other compounds isolated from cannabis for the aforementioned reasons but will also include discussion over those studies where whole plant cannabis has been used. In this review we also consider the current challenges associated with the advancement of medicinal cannabis and its derived potential therapeutics into clinical applications.

Medicinal Cannabis and Central Nervous System Disorders

Cannabinoids, including those found in cannabis, have shown promise as potential therapeutics for numerous health issues, including pathological pain and diseases that produce an impact on neurological processing and function. Thus, cannabis use for medicinal purposes has become accepted by a growing majority. However, clinical trials yielding satisfactory endpoints and unequivocal proof that medicinal cannabis should be considered a frontline therapeutic for most examined central nervous system indications remains largely elusive. Although cannabis contains over 100 + compounds, most preclinical and clinical research with well-controlled dosing and delivery methods utilize the various formulations of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), the two most abundant compounds in cannabis. These controlled dosing and delivery methods are in stark contrast to most clinical studies using whole plant cannabis products, as few clinical studies using whole plant cannabis profile the exact composition, including percentages of all compounds present within the studied product. This review will examine both preclinical and clinical evidence that supports or refutes the therapeutic utility of medicinal cannabis for the treatment of pathological pain, neurodegeneration, substance use disorders, as well as anxiety-related disorders. We will predominately focus on purified THC and CBD, as well as other compounds isolated from cannabis for the aforementioned reasons but will also include discussion over those studies where whole plant cannabis has been used. In this review we also consider the current challenges associated with the advancement of medicinal cannabis and its derived potential therapeutics into clinical applications.

Neurological Benefits, Clinical Challenges, and Neuropathologic Promise of Medical Marijuana: A Systematic Review of Cannabinoid Effects in Multiple Sclerosis and Experimental Models of Demyelination

Despite current therapeutic strategies for immunomodulation and relief of symptoms in multiple sclerosis (MS), remyelination falls short due to dynamic neuropathologic deterioration and relapses, leading to accrual of disability and associated patient dissatisfaction. The potential of cannabinoids includes add-on immunosuppressive, analgesic, neuroprotective, and remyelinative effects. This study evaluates the efficacy of medical marijuana in MS and its experimental animal models. A systematic review was conducted by a literature search through PubMed, ProQuest, and EBSCO electronic databases for studies reported since 2007 on the use of cannabidiol (CBD) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in MS and in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), Theiler's murine encephalomyelitis virus-induced demyelinating disease (TMEV-IDD), and toxin-induced demyelination models. Study selection and data extraction were performed by 3 reviewers, and 28 studies were selected for inclusion. The certainty of evidence was appraised using the Cochrane GRADE approach. In clinical studies, there was low- and moderate-quality evidence that treatment with ~1:1 CBD/THC mixtures as a nabiximols (Sativex®) oromucosal spray reduced numerical rating scale (NRS) scores for spasticity, pain, and sleep disturbance, diminished bladder overactivity, and decreased proinflammatory cytokine and transcription factor expression levels. Preclinical studies demonstrated decreases in disease severity, hindlimb stiffness, motor function, neuroinflammation, and demyelination. Other experimental systems showed the capacity of cannabinoids to promote remyelination in vitro and by electron microscopy. Modest short-term benefits were realized in MS responders to adjunctive therapy with CBD/THC mixtures. Future studies are recommended to investigate the cellular and molecular mechanisms of cannabinoid effects on MS lesions and to evaluate whether medical marijuana can accelerate remyelination and retard the accrual of disability over the long term.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

The Safety of Dronabinol and Nabilone: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

Dronabinol, a natural cannabinoid, and its semi-synthetic derivative, nabilone, are marketed as medicines in several countries. The aim of our work was to systematically evaluate the frequency of adverse events related to dronabinol or nabilone treatment compared to placebo. Scientific databases were searched for placebo-controlled clinical studies of patients receiving either dronabinol or nabilone therapy with placebo control groups. This meta-analysis was reported following the PRISMA guidelines using the PICO format, and it was registered with the PROSPERO register. There were 16 trials included in the meta-analysis. In the nabilone studies, drowsiness was more than 7 times as frequent in patients treated with nabilone than in the placebo group (OR: 7.25; 95% CI: 1.64–31.95), and the risk of dizziness (OR: 21.14; 95% CI: 2.92–152.75) and dry mouth was also higher (OR: 17.23; 95% CI: 4.33–68.55). The frequency of headache was not different in the two groups. In case of dronabinol, the frequency of dry mouth (OR: 5.58; 95% CI: 3.19–9.78), dizziness (OR: 4.60 95% CI: 2.39–8.83) and headache (OR: 2.90; 95% CI: 1.07–7.85) was significantly higher in the dronabinol groups, whereas in case of nausea, drowsiness and fatigue there was no difference. The severity of adverse events was typically mild-to-moderate and transient. In a risk-benefit assessment, these adverse effects are acceptable compared to the achievable benefit. However, considering the diversity of the adverse effects, more studies are needed to provide a more accurate assessment on the side effect profiles of these two compounds.

A mixed methods analysis of cannabis use routines for chronic pain management

BACKGROUND

The wide heterogeneity of available cannabis products makes it difficult for physicians to appropriately guide patients. In the current study, our objective was to characterize naturalistic cannabis use routines and explore associations between routines and reported benefits from consuming cannabis.

METHODS

We performed a mixed methods analysis of n=1087 cross-sectional survey responses from adults with self-reported chronic pain using cannabis for symptom management in the USA and Canada. First, we qualitatively analyzed responses to an open-ended question that assessed typical cannabis use routines, including administration routes, cannabinoid content, and timing. We then sub-grouped responses into categories based on inhalation (smoking, vaporizing) vs. non-inhalation (e.g., edibles). Finally, we investigated subgroups perceptions of how cannabis affected pain, overall health, and use of medications (e.g., substituting for opioids, benzodiazepines). Substitutions were treated as a count of medication classes, while responses for both pain and health were analyzed continuously, with - 2 indicating health declining a lot or pain increasing a lot and 2 indicating that health improved a lot or pain decreased a lot.

RESULTS

Routines varied widely in terms of administration routes, cannabinoid content, and use timing. Overall, 18.8%, 36.2%, and 45% used non-inhalation, inhalation, and non-inhalation + inhalation routes, respectively. Those who used inhalation routes were younger (mean age 46.5 [inhalation] and 49.2 [non-inhalation + inhalation] vs. 56.3 [inhalation], F=36.1, p<0.001), while a higher proportion of those who used non-inhalation routes were female (72.5% non-inhalation vs. 48.3% inhalation and 65.3% non-inhalation + inhalation, X2=59.6, p<0.001). THC-rich products were typically used at night, while CBD-rich products were more often used during the day. While all participants reported similarly decreased pain, participants using non-inhalation + inhalation administration routes reported larger improvements in health than the non-inhalation (mean difference = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.07-0.37, p<0.001) and inhalation subgroups (mean difference = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.07-0.37, p=0.001). Similarly, the non-inhalation + inhalation group had significantly more medication substitutions than those using non-inhalation (mean difference = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.33-0.90, p<0.001) and inhalation administration routes (mean difference = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22-0.69, p<0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Subgrouping medical cannabis patients based on administration route profile may provide useful categories for future studies examining the risks and benefits of medical cannabis.

UK Medical Cannabis registry: an analysis of clinical outcomes of medicinal cannabis therapy for chronic pain conditions

OBJECTIVES

To explore pain-specific, general health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and safety outcomes of chronic pain patients prescribed cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs).

METHODS

A case series was performed using patients with chronic pain from the UK Medical Cannabis Registry. Primary outcomes were changes in Brief Pain Inventory short-form (BPI), Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2 (SF-MPQ-2), Visual Analogue Scale-Pain (VAS), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Sleep Quality Scale (SQS), and EQ-5D-5L, at 1, 3, and 6 months from baseline. Statistical significance was defined at p-value<0.050.

RESULTS

190 patients were included. Median initial Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol daily doses were 2.0mg (range:0.0-442.0mg) and 20.0mg (range:0.0-188.0mg) respectively. Significant improvements were observed within BPI, SF-MPQ-2, GAD-7, SQS, EQ-5D-5 L index, and VAS measures at all timepoints (p<0.050). Seventy-five adverse events (39.47%) were reported, of which 37 (19.47%) were rated as mild, 23 (12.11%) as moderate, and 14 (7.37%) as severe. Nausea (n=11; 5.8%) was the most frequent adverse event.

CONCLUSION

An association was identified between patients with chronic pain prescribed CBMPs and improvements in pain-specific and general HRQoL outcomes. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity, indicating CBMPs were well tolerated. Inherent limitations of study design limit its overall applicability.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Brain Tumour Temporal Monitoring of Interval Change Using Digital Image Subtraction Technique

A process that involves the registration of two brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) acquisitions is proposed for the subtraction between previous and current images at two different follow-up (FU) time points. Brain tumours can be non-cancerous (benign) or cancerous (malignant). Treatment choices for these conditions rely on the type of brain tumour as well as its size and location. Brain cancer is a fast-spreading tumour that must be treated in time. MRI is commonly used in the detection of early signs of abnormality in the brain area because it provides clear details. Abnormalities include the presence of cysts, haematomas or tumour cells. A sequence of images can be used to detect the progression of such abnormalities. A previous study on conventional (CONV) visual reading reported low accuracy and speed in the early detection of abnormalities, specifically in brain images. It can affect the proper diagnosis and treatment of the patient. A digital subtraction technique that involves two images acquired at two interval time points and their subtraction for the detection of the progression of abnormalities in the brain image was proposed in this study. MRI datasets of five patients, including a series of brain images, were retrieved retrospectively in this study. All methods were carried out using the MATLAB programming platform. ROI volume and diameter for both regions were recorded to analyse progression details, location, shape variations and size alteration of tumours. This study promotes the use of digital subtraction techniques on brain MRIs to track any abnormality and achieve early diagnosis and accuracy whilst reducing reading time. Thus, improving the diagnostic information for physicians can enhance the treatment plan for patients.

The Effect of Cannabis-Based Medicine on Neuropathic Pain and Spasticity in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis and Spinal Cord Injury: Study Protocol of a National Multicenter Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Disease or acquired damage to the central nervous system frequently causes disabling spasticity and central neuropathic pain (NP), both of which are frequent in multiple sclerosis (MS) and spinal cord injury (SCI). Patients with MS and SCI often request treatment with cannabis-based medicine (CBM). However, knowledge about effects, side effects, choice of active cannabinoids (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) alone or in combination), and doses of CBM remains limited. Using a double-blind, parallel design in a national multicenter cohort, this study examines the effect of CBM on spasticity and NP. Patients are randomized to treatment with capsules containing either THC, CBD, THC and CBD, or placebo. Primary endpoints are patient-reported pain and spasticity on a numerical rating scale. Other endpoints include quality of life and sleep, depression and anxiety, and relief of pain and spasticity. Side-effects of CBM are described. In a sub-study, the pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of oral capsule CBM are examined. We expect that the study will contribute to the literature by providing information on the effects and side-effects of CBD, THC, and the combination of the two for central neuropathic pain and spasticity. Furthermore, we will describe the PD/PK of THC and CBD in a patient population.

Medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer and cancer related pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the benefits and harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos, and trial registries up to January 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised clinical trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids versus any non-cannabis control for chronic pain at ≥1 month follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects models meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 32 trials with 5174 adult patients were included, 29 of which compared medical cannabis or cannabinoids with placebo. Medical cannabis was administered orally (n=30) or topically (n=2). Clinical populations included chronic non-cancer pain (n=28) and cancer related pain (n=4). Length of follow-up ranged from 1 to 5.5 months. Compared with placebo, non-inhaled medical cannabis probably results in a small increase in the proportion of patients experiencing at least the minimally important difference (MID) of 1 cm (on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS)) in pain relief (modelled risk difference (RD) of 10% (95% confidence interval 5% to 15%), based on a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.50 cm (95% CI -0.75 to -0.25 cm, moderate certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally results in a very small improvement in physical functioning (4% modelled RD (0.1% to 8%) for achieving at least the MID of 10 points on the 100-point SF-36 physical functioning scale, WMD of 1.67 points (0.03 to 3.31, high certainty)), and a small improvement in sleep quality (6% modelled RD (2% to 9%) for achieving at least the MID of 1 cm on a 10 cm VAS, WMD of -0.35 cm (-0.55 to -0.14 cm, high certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally does not improve emotional, role, or social functioning (high certainty). Moderate certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis taken orally probably results in a small increased risk of transient cognitive impairment (RD 2% (0.1% to 6%)), vomiting (RD 3% (0.4% to 6%)), drowsiness (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), impaired attention (RD 3% (1% to 8%)), and nausea (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), but not diarrhoea; while high certainty evidence shows greater increased risk of dizziness (RD 9% (5% to 14%)) for trials with <3 months follow-up versus RD 28% (18% to 43%) for trials with ≥3 months follow-up; interaction test P=0.003; moderate credibility of subgroup effect).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids results in a small to very small improvement in pain relief, physical functioning, and sleep quality among patients with chronic pain, along with several transient adverse side effects, compared with placebo. The accompanying BMJ Rapid Recommendation provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/3pwn2.

Approved cannabinoids for medical purposes - Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis for sleep and appetite

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids are used for numerous disease indications. However, cannabinoids can also produce adverse effects; for example, they can disturb physiological functions such as sleep and appetite. The medical use of cannabinoids refers to a wide variety of preparations and products. Approved cannabinoid products include dronabinol ((-)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), nabilone (a THC analogue), and cannabidiol (CBD) that differ in their pharmacology and may thus have different adverse effects on sleep and appetite.

OBJECTIVES

Here we ask if (i) cannabinoids decrease sleep and appetite in somatic patients or patients that suffer from mental illness and if (ii) there is a difference between THC products (nabilone, dronabinol), vs. CBD in disturbing these physiological functions.

METHODS

In order to answer these two questions, we performed a comparative systematic review (SR) for nabilone, dronabinol, and CBD. For the comparative SR we searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and extracted information for adverse side effects or outcomes reporting a negative impact on sleep and appetite. RCT evidence was calculated as odds ratios (ORs) via fixed effects meta-analyses. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021229932).

FINDINGS

A total of 17 RCTs (n = 1479) and 15 RCTs (n = 1974) were included for sleep and appetite, respectively. Pharmaceutical THC (nabilone, dronabinol) does not affect sleep or appetite. In contrast, there is moderate evidence that CBD decreases appetite (OR = 2.46 [1.74:4.01] but has also no effect on sleep.

INTERPRETATIONS

Our comparative systematic study shows that approved cannabinoids can decrease appetite as a negative side effect - an effect that seems to be driven by CBD. Approved cannabinoid products do not negatively affect sleep in somatic and psychiatric patients. This article is part of the special Issue on "Cannabinoids".

A Recent Update on Drug Delivery Systems for Pain Management

Pain remains a global health challenge affecting approximately 1.5 billion people worldwide. Pain has been an implicit variable in the equation of human life for many centuries considering different types and the magnitude of pain. Therefore, developing an efficacious drug delivery system for pain management remains an open challenge for researchers in the field of medicine. Lack of therapeutic efficacy still persists, despite high throughput studies in the field of pain management. Research scientists have been exploiting different alternatives to curb the adverse side effects of pain medications or attempting a more substantial approach to minimize the prevalence of pain. Various drug delivery systems have been developed such as nanoparticles, microparticles to curb adverse side effects of pain medications or minimize the prevalence of pain. This literature review firstly provides a brief introduction of pain as a sensation and its pharmacological interventions. Second, it highlights the most recent studies in the pharmaceutical field for pain management and serves as a strong base for future developments. Herein, we have classified drug delivery systems based on their sizes such as nano, micro, and macro systems, and for each of the reviewed systems, design, formulation strategies, and drug release performance has been discussed.

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.

Untapped endocannabinoid pharmacological targets: Pipe dream or pipeline?

It has been established that the endogenous cannabinoid (endocannabinoid) system plays key modulatory roles in a wide variety of pathological conditions. The endocannabinoid system comprises both cannabinoid receptors, their endogenous ligands including 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), N-arachidonylethanolamine (anandamide, AEA), and enzymes that regulate the synthesis and degradation of endogenous ligands which include diacylglycerol lipase alpha (DAGL-α), diacylglycerol lipase beta (DAGL-β), fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH), monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL), α/β hydrolase domain 6 (ABHD6). As the endocannabinoid system exerts considerable involvement in the regulation of homeostasis and disease, much effort has been made towards understanding endocannabinoid-related mechanisms of action at cellular, physiological, and pathological levels as well as harnessing the various components of the endocannabinoid system to produce novel therapeutics. However, drug discovery efforts within the cannabinoid field have been slower than anticipated to reach satisfactory clinical endpoints and raises an important question into the validity of developing novel ligands that therapeutically target the endocannabinoid system. To answer this, we will first examine evidence that supports the existence of an endocannabinoid system role within inflammatory diseases, neurodegeneration, pain, substance use disorders, mood disorders, as well as metabolic diseases. Next, this review will discuss recent clinical studies, within the last 5 years, of cannabinoid compounds in context to these diseases. We will also address some of the challenges and considerations within the cannabinoid field that may be important in the advancement of therapeutics into the clinic.

Repurposing Cannabidiol as a Potential Drug Candidate for Anti-Tumor Therapies

In recent years, evidence has accumulated that cannabinoids-especially the non-psychoactive compound, cannabidiol (CBD)-possess promising medical and pharmacological activities that might qualify them as potential anti-tumor drugs. This review is based on multiple studies summarizing different mechanisms for how CBD can target tumor cells including cannabinoid receptors or other constituents of the endocannabinoid system, and their complex activation of biological systems that results in the inhibition of tumor growth. CBD also participates in anti-inflammatory activities which are related to tumor progression, as demonstrated in preclinical models. Although the numbers of clinical trials and tested tumor entities are limited, there is clear evidence that CBD has anti-tumor efficacy and is well tolerated in human cancer patients. In summary, it appears that CBD has potential as a neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant drug in therapy for cancer.

Safety and tolerability of natural and synthetic cannabinoids in adults aged over 50 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoid-based medicines (CBMs) are being used widely in the elderly. However, their safety and tolerability in older adults remains unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and tolerability of CBMs in adults of age ≥50 years.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL PsychInfo, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 1990 to 3 October 2020). Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of CBMs in those with mean age of ≥50 years for all indications, evaluating the safety/tolerability of CBMs where adverse events have been quantified, were included. Study quality was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Two reviewers conducted all review stages independently. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as incident rate ratio (IRR) for outcome data such as adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and death and risk ratio (RR) for withdrawal from study and reported separately for studies using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), THC:cannabidiol (CBD) combination, and CBD. A total of 46 RCTs were identified as suitable for inclusion of which 31 (67%) were conducted in the United Kingdom and Europe. There were 6,216 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.5 years; 51% male) included in the analysis, with 3,469 receiving CBMs. Compared with controls, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing CBMs significantly increased the incidence of all-cause and treatment-related AEs: THC alone (IRR: 1.42 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78]) and (IRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.26 to 2.04]); THC:CBD combination (IRR: 1.58 [95% CI,1.26 to 1.98]) and (IRR: 1.70 [95% CI,1.24 to 2.33]), respectively. IRRs of SAEs and deaths were not significantly greater under CBMs containing THC with or without CBD. THC:CBD combination (RR: 1.40 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.80]) but not THC alone (RR: 1.18 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.57]) significantly increased risk of AE-related withdrawals. CBD alone did not increase the incidence of all-cause AEs (IRR: 1.02 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.16]) or other outcomes as per qualitative synthesis. AE-related withdrawals were significantly associated with THC dose in THC only [QM (df = 1) = 4.696, p = 0.03] and THC:CBD combination treatment ([QM (df = 1) = 4.554, p = 0.033]. THC-containing CBMs significantly increased incidence of dry mouth, dizziness/light-headedness, and somnolence/drowsiness. Study limitations include inability to fully exclude data from those <50 years of age in our primary analyses as well as limitations related to weaknesses in the included trials particularly incomplete reporting of outcomes and heterogeneity in included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis, using data from RCTs with mean participant age ≥50 years, suggests that although THC-containing CBMs are associated with side effects, CBMs in general are safe and acceptable in older adults. However, THC:CBD combinations may be less acceptable in the dose ranges used and their tolerability may be different in adults over 65 or 75 years of age.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Cannabinoid-Based Medicines and Multiple Sclerosis

The emerging role of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) in the control of symptoms and disease progression in multiple sclerosis (MS) has been highlighted by recent studies. MS is a chronic, immune-mediated, and demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system with no cure so far. It is widely reported that cannabinoids might be used to control MS symptoms and that they also might exert neuroprotective effects and slow down disease progression. The aim of this chapter is to give an overview of the main endogenous and synthetic cannabinoids used for the symptomatic amelioration of MS and their beneficial outcomes, providing new possible perspectives for the treatment of this disease.

Pharmacological treatment of central neuropathic pain: consensus of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology

ABSTRACT Background: Central neuropathic pain (CNP) is often refractory to available therapeutic strategies and there are few evidence-based treatment options. Many patients with neuropathic pain are not diagnosed or treated properly. Thus, consensus-based recommendations, adapted to the available drugs in the country, are necessary to guide clinical decisions. Objective: To develop recommendations for the treatment of CNP in Brazil. Methods: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and specialists opinions considering efficacy, adverse events profile, cost, and drug availability in public health. Results: Forty-four studies on CNP treatment were found, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis, and 15 in the quantitative analysis. Medications were classified as first-, second-, and third-line treatment based on systematic review, meta-analysis, and expert opinion. As first-line treatment, gabapentin, duloxetine, and tricyclic antidepressants were included. As second-line, venlafaxine, pregabalin for CND secondary to spinal cord injury, lamotrigine for CNP after stroke, and, in association with first-line drugs, weak opioids, in particular tramadol. For refractory patients, strong opioids (methadone and oxycodone), cannabidiol/delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, were classified as third-line of treatment, in combination with first or second-line drugs and, for central nervous system (CNS) in multiple sclerosis, dronabinol. Conclusions: Studies that address the treatment of CNS are scarce and heterogeneous, and a significant part of the recommendations is based on experts opinions. The CNP approach must be individualized, taking into account the availability of medication, the profile of adverse effects, including addiction risk, and patients' comorbidities.

Noxious pressure stimulation demonstrates robust, reliable estimates of brain activity and self-reported pain

Functional neuroimaging techniques have provided great insight in the field of pain. Utilising these techniques, we have characterised pain-induced responses in the brain and improved our understanding of key pain-related phenomena. Despite the utility of these methods, there remains a need to assess the test retest reliability of pain modulated blood-oxygen-level-dependant (BOLD) MR signal across repeated sessions. This is especially the case for more novel yet increasingly implemented stimulation modalities, such as noxious pressure, and it is acutely important for multi-session studies considering treatment efficacy. In the present investigation, BOLD signal responses were estimated for noxious-pressure stimulation in a group of healthy participants, across two separate sessions. Test retest reliability of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data and self-reported visual analogue scale measures were determined by the intra-class correlation coefficient. High levels of reliability were observed in several key brain regions known to underpin the pain experience, including in the thalamus, insula, somatosensory cortices, and inferior frontal regions, alongside "excellent" reliability of self-reported pain measures. These data demonstrate that BOLD-fMRI derived signals are a valuable tool for quantifying noxious responses pertaining to pressure stimulation. We further recommend the implementation of pressure as a stimulation modality in experimental applications.

Perioperative Pain and Addiction Interdisciplinary Network (PAIN): consensus recommendations for perioperative management of cannabis and cannabinoid-based medicine users by a modified Delphi process

In many countries, liberalisation of the legislation regulating the use of cannabis has outpaced rigorous scientific studies, and a growing number of patients presenting for surgery consume cannabis regularly. Research to date suggests that cannabis can impact perioperative outcomes. We present recommendations obtained using a modified Delphi method for the perioperative care of cannabis-using patients. A steering committee was formed and a review of medical literature with respect to perioperative cannabis use was conducted. This was followed by the recruitment of a panel of 17 experts on the care of cannabis-consuming patients. Panellists were blinded to each other's participation and were provided with rater forms exploring the appropriateness of specific perioperative care elements. The completed rater forms were analysed for consensus. The expert panel was then unblinded and met to discuss the rater form analyses. Draft recommendations were then created and returned to the expert panel for further comment. The draft recommendations were also sent to four independent reviewers (a surgeon, a nurse practitioner, and two patients). The collected feedback was used to finalise the recommendations. The major recommendations obtained included emphasising the importance of eliciting a history of cannabis use, quantifying it, and ensuring contact with a cannabis authoriser (if one exists). Recommendations also included the consideration of perioperative cannabis weaning, additional postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and additional attention to monitoring and maintaining anaesthetic depth. Postoperative recommendations included anticipating increased postoperative analgesic requirements and maintaining vigilance for cannabis withdrawal syndrome.

Central pain syndromes

The management of pain in persons with neurological injuries is challenging and complex. A holistic view and clinical approach are necessary when addressing pain in patients with neurological impairment because interpreting signs and symptoms and deciphering sources of pain is never a straightforward process. This problem is further magnified with the management of central pain syndromes. The best approach is to have a good understanding of the clinical characteristics commonly found in this patient population, in particular for patients with stroke, multiple sclerosis (MS), or spinal cord injury (SCI), as central pain manifests differently between these groups. This paper will focus on the history, clinical presentation, pathophysiology, assessment, and treatment of central pain in patients with these types of neurological conditions. In addition to being at risk for a decline in quality of life, patients with pain syndromes are also prone to adverse responses to treatments (e.g., opioid addiction). It is therefore important to methodically analyze the similarities and differences between patients with different pain syndromes.

Lipid metabolism in astrocytic structure and function

Astrocytes are the most abundant glial cell in the central nervous system and are involved in multiple processes including metabolic homeostasis, blood brain barrier regulation and neuronal crosstalk. Astrocytes are the main storage point of glycogen in the brain and it is well established that astrocyte uptake of glutamate and release of lactate prevents neuronal excitability and supports neuronal metabolic function. However, the role of lipid metabolism in astrocytes in relation to neuronal support has been until recently, unclear. Lipids play a fundamental role in astrocyte function, including energy generation, membrane fluidity and cell to cell signaling. There is now emerging evidence that astrocyte storage of lipids in droplets has a crucial physiological and protective role in the central nervous system. This pathway links β-oxidation in astrocytes to inflammation, signalling, oxidative stress and mitochondrial energy generation in neurons. Disruption in lipid metabolism, structure and signalling in astrocytes can lead to pathogenic mechanisms associated with a range of neurological disorders.

Emerging Promise of Cannabinoids for the Management of Pain and Associated Neuropathological Alterations in Alzheimer's Disease

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is an irreversible chronic neurodegenerative disorder that occurs when neurons in the brain degenerate and die. Pain frequently arises in older patients with neurodegenerative diseases including AD. However, the presence of pain in older people is usually overlooked with cognitive dysfunctions. Most of the times dementia patients experience moderate to severe pain but the development of severe cognitive dysfunctions tremendously affects their capability to express the presence of pain. Currently, there are no effective treatments against AD that emphasize the necessity for increasing research to develop novel drugs for treating or preventing the disease process. Furthermore, the prospective therapeutic use of cannabinoids in AD has been studied for the past few years. In this regard, targeting the endocannabinoid system has considered as a probable therapeutic strategy to control several associated pathological pathways, such as mitochondrial dysfunction, excitotoxicity, oxidative stress, and neuroinflammation for the management of AD. In this review, we focus on recent studies about the role of cannabinoids for the treatment of pain and related neuropathological changes in AD.

Medical cannabis for orthopaedic patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: does evidence support its use?

The treatment of chronic, non-cancer musculoskeletal pain has become a topic growing interest as it is believed to be one of the reasons for the current opioid epidemic. The medicinal use of cannabis has a long history as a number of active compounds in cannabis have been shown to interact with the body's endocannabinoid system to reduce pain. This position paper provides a history on the evolution of cannabis, the science behind its therapeutic effects, and review of the evidence and current guideline recommendations on its use as a treatment for patients with chronic, non-cancer musculoskeletal pain. Results from systematic reviews have demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in chronic pain conditions with cannabinoids, compared with placebo, although the effects might be considered small and did not reach the minimally important difference. More adverse events were reported in the cannabinoid group than in the placebo group with longer than 2 weeks of treatment. There is a lack of evidence on dependence. With changes to policies, patients' perception has changed to be more positive toward the use of medical cannabis. Current recommendations from North America, Latin America, Europe, Australia and Iran support the use of medical cannabis for chronic, non-cancer pain. Based on the current evidence, it is our position that cannabinoids may be considered as an adjunctive therapy after recommended first- and second-line therapies have failed to provide sufficient efficacy or tolerability. Patients should consider the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects of taking cannabis for chronic pain, and comprehensively consider their own values and preferences, as well as cost-effectiveness factors, based on the information provided by their physician.

Pharmacotherapeutic Options for Managing Pain in Multiple Sclerosis

Pain is a major matter for patients with multiple sclerosis; treatment response is frequently inadequate, with a significant impact on quality of life. The estimated prevalence of pain in multiple sclerosis ranges widely (26-86%), and different subtypes of pain, mediated by specific pathophysiological mechanisms, are described. The aim of this narrative review, performed using a systematic search methodology, was to provide current, evidence-based, knowledge about the pharmacological treatment of the different kinds of pain in multiple sclerosis. We searched for relevant papers within PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Clinical Trials database (ClinicalTrials.gov), considering publications up to November 2019. Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion, data extraction, and bias assessment. A total of 27 randomized controlled trials were identified, but in only a few cases, patients with different pain qualities were stratified. Following a mechanism-based approach, treatment of paroxysmal pain and painful tonic spasms should be based on sodium-channel blockers, whereas treatment of ongoing extremity pain should be based on gabapentinoids and antidepressants.

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.