Opioid-sparing effects of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and observational studies

Clinical Benefits and Safety of Medical Cannabis Products: A Narrative Review on Natural Extracts

Interest in medical cannabis and cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs) has increased greatly in recent years. Two cannabinoids are of principal importance; delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC), the primary psychoactive component, and also cannabidiol (CBD), considered non-intoxicating. Each has distinct mechanisms of action and different therapeutic potentials. CBMPs differ in their ∆9-THC and CBD components; predominantly ∆9-THC, balanced formulations with equivalent ∆9-THC and CBD elements, and CBD-predominant products. In this narrative review, we evaluate the published evidence for the clinical benefits of CBMPs and overall benefits in well-being. We also review the overall safety profile and discuss the potential for dependence with CBMPs. Evidence can be drawn from a wide range of randomized and other controlled studies and from observational real-world studies. Most data from observational registry studies are supportive of ∆9-THC-based products (∆9-THC-predominant or balanced CBMPs) in the management of chronic neuropathic pain. Balanced products are also effective in reducing spasticity in multiple sclerosis. Most CBMPs show benefit in providing symptomatic benefits in reducing anxiety, nausea, and in improving sleep, but the place of specific products is more subtle, and choice guided by specific circumstances. Symptomatic improvements are accompanied by improved quality of life and well-being. Safety data indicate that CBMPs are generally well tolerated in most patients without specific contraindications. The majority of adverse effects are non-serious, and transient; most are principally associated with ∆9-THC and are dose-dependent. In contrast to recreational cannabis use, there is little evidence from clinical studies that CBMPs have any potential for dependence.

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.

[Benefits and harms of cannabis-based medicines from the viewpoint of patients with chronic pain and their physicians : A cohort study in three pain centers of the German federal state Saarland]

BACKGROUND

There are no studies available that have simultaneously assessed the benefits and harms of cannabis-based medicines from the viewpoint of patients and their physicians.

METHODS

All chronic pain patients at three pain centres in the German federal state of Saarland who had received at least one prescription of cannabis-based medicines (CbMs) in the past from the study centre were included in a cross-sectional study from January 1 to December 31, 2021. Patients and their physicians completed a self-developed questionnaire separately.

RESULTS

All 187 contacted patients participated in the study. Since the start of CbM therapy, 44.9% of patients reported to be much or very much, 43.3% to be moderately and 8.0% to be slightly improved overall. A total of 2.7% reported no change and 1.1% a moderate deterioration of overall wellbeing. From the patients' point of view, the symptoms most frequently reported to have substantially improved were sleep problems (36.4%), muscle tension (25.1%) and appetite problems (22.1%). The most frequent bothersome side effects were sweating (6.4%), concentration problems (4.2%) and nausea (4.1%). Physicians noted substantial pain relief in 60.7%, improvement of sleep in 65.7% and of mental well-being in 34.3%. A complete cessation of opioids was achieved in 64.7%, of anticonvulsants in 57.9% and of antidepressants in 60% of patients that had received these medications before the start of CbM therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

CbMs can contribute to a clinically relevant reduction in pain, sleep problems and muscle tension and can improve daily functioning in carefully selected and supervised patients with chronic pain. CbM can contribute to the reduction or complete cessation of other pain medications (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, opioids).

The Association of Medical Cannabis Use with Pain Levels and Opioid Use in Illinois' Opioid Alternative Pilot Program

OBJECTIVE

The state of Illinois' Opioid Alternative Pilot Program (OAPP) is the first and only official harm-reduction program in the US to address the opioid crisis via facilitation of safe and legal access to medical cannabis. This study evaluates the association of medical cannabis use with pain level and frequency of opioid use in the first cohort of OAPP participants in 2019.

METHODS

A survey was sent OAPP enrollees between February and July 2019. Cannabis users (n = 626) were compared to non-users (n = 234) to determine whether there was an association between cannabis use and self-reported (a) pain level and (b) frequency of opioid use. Backward stepwise regression models were used.

RESULTS

A total of 860 participants was included in the analysis. Overall, 75% of the study sample reported pain as their primary medical symptom, and 67% of cannabis users reported having a disability. The mean difference in pain level between cannabis users and non-users was 4.5 units (on a 100-point scale) higher among cannabis users than non-users (p = 0.03); and cannabis use was statistically associated with pain level. High-frequency opioid users had lower odds of reporting cannabis use within the past year than low/no opioid users.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was a statistical association between cannabis use and pain, the difference of 4.5 points in pain level between users and non-users was too small to reflect a clinically meaningful relative difference. This study may provide useful information to providers and clinicians about how the OAPP and similar programs may reduce opioid use and improve health outcomes.

Pharmacodynamic effects following co-administration of cannabinoids and opioids: a scoping review of human experimental studies

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids are increasingly used in the management of chronic pain. Although analgesic potential has been demonstrated, cannabinoids interact with a range of bodily functions that are also influenced by chronic pain medications, including opioids.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a scoping review of literature on the pharmacodynamic effects following the co-administration of cannabinoids and opioids.

METHODS

We systematically searched EMBASE, PubMed, and PsycINFO for studies that experimentally investigated the co-effects of cannabinoids and opioids in human subjects. Available evidence was summarized by clinical population and organ system. A risk of bias assessment was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. Study populations included patients with chronic non-cancer and cancer pain on long-term opioid regimens and healthy young adults without prior exposure to opioids who were subject to experimental nociceptive stimuli. Commonly administered cannabinoid agents included Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and/or cannabidiol. Co-administration of cannabinoids and opioids did not consistently improve pain outcomes; however, sleep and mood benefits were observed in chronic pain patients. Increased somnolence, memory and attention impairment, dizziness, gait disturbance, and nauseousness and vomiting were noted with co-administration of cannabinoids and opioids. Cardiorespiratory effects following co-administration appeared to vary according to duration of exposure, population type, and prior exposure to cannabinoids and opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence directly investigating the pharmacodynamic effects following co-administration of cannabinoids and opioids for non-analgesic outcomes is scarce and suffers from a lack of methodological reporting. As such, further research in this area with comprehensive methodologic reporting is warranted.

Medical marijuana in the treatment of cancer-associated symptoms

OBJECTIVE

Previous cancer studies have indicated that medical marijuana addresses a significant unmet need, namely chronic pain treatment and conferring oncology supportive care. However, the clinical research evaluating medical marijuana is preliminary and requires further consideration.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a PubMed search primarily comprising retrospective and prospective studies, systematic reviews, and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from approximately 2020-2023. The search included specific terms that incorporated medical marijuana, cancer treatment, cancer-related symptoms, pain management, and side effects.

DATA SUMMARY

A total of 40 studies were included in the review, many of which were either of acceptable or good quality. Select investigations indicated that medical marijuana was associated with decreased overall pain levels and improvements in nausea and vomiting. Alternatively, the results from RCTs have found that the benefits from a placebo were equivalent to medical marijuana in both the treatment of cancer-related pain and providing an opioid-sparing effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the potential cancer-related benefits derived from medical marijuana, the study design and results for many of the investigations on which the evidence is based, were neither uniform nor conducted via RCTs; hence, the efficacy and appropriateness of medical marijuana in treating cancer-related conditions remain indeterminate.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in regional anesthesia and pain medicine (Part II): guidelines for performing the systematic review

In Part I of this series, we provide guidance for preparing a systematic review protocol. In this article, we highlight important steps and supplement with exemplars on conducting and reporting the results of a systematic review. We suggest how authors can manage protocol violations, multiplicity of outcomes and analyses, and heterogeneity. The quality (certainty) of the evidence and strength of recommendations should follow the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. It is our goal that Part II of this series provides valid guidance to authors and peer reviewers who conduct systematic reviews to adhere to important constructs of transparency, structure, reproducibility, and accountability. This will likely result in more rigorous systematic reviews being submitted for publication to the journals like Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine and Anesthesia & Analgesia.

Indirect effects of emotion regulation in the relationship between pain and cannabis use in adults 18-64 years

INTRODUCTION

Individuals with chronic pain often receive prescription opioid medication, and they may use cannabis to treat pain as well, although the risks of cannabis-opioid co-use are significant. This study aimed to investigate whether two transdiagnostic factors, emotion regulation and distress tolerance, had significant indirect effects in the relationship between pain and cannabis use in adults with chronic pain and an opioid prescription.

METHODS

Participants (n = 450; mean age = 38.6 ± 11.09) were recruited using Qualtrics panel service and were 75 % female and 79 % White, non-Hispanic. Participants completed a 30-minute self-report survey capturing three-month cannabis use, the Difficulties in Emotional Regulation Scale (DERS), and the Distress Tolerance Scale (DTS). The Graded Pain Scale (GCPS) assessed pain severity/intensity and disability. Analyses used the SPSS PROCESS macro, with both single (i.e., one transdiagnostic factor) and parallel indirect effects (i.e., both the DERS and DTS) examined.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant indirect effects for both the DERS and DTS in the relationship between pain intensity or disability and three-month cannabis use in single factor models. In the parallel indirect effect model, only the DERS was statistically significant (intensity indirect effect coefficient = 0.0195 % confidence interval [95 %CI] = 0.0065, 0.390; disability indirect effect coefficient = 0.0147, 95 %CI = 0.0055, 0.0274).

CONCLUSIONS

When examining parallel indirect effects, only emotional regulation and not distress tolerance mediated the relationship between chronic pain and cannabis use among those with an opioid prescription. Clinically, interventions aimed at improving emotional regulation in individuals with chronic pain can help limit cannabis and opioid co-use.

Evaluating the balance of benefits and harms in chronic pain clinical trials: prioritizing individual participants over individual outcomes

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) generally assess efficacy and safety separately, with the conclusion of whether a treatment is beneficial based solely on the efficacy endpoint. However, assessing and combining efficacy and safety domains, using a single composite outcome measure, can provide a more comprehensive assessment of the overall effect of a treatment. Furthermore, composite outcomes can incorporate information regarding the relationship between the individual outcomes. In fact, such outcomes have been suggested in the clinical trials literature for at least 15 years.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) identify whether recent primary publications of chronic pain RCTs from major pain journals included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms and (2) discuss the potential benefits of such outcomes in various stages of treatment development, including as outcome measures in RCTs, and to support decisions of Data and Safety Monitoring Boards and ordering of treatments in the context of treatment guidelines.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

RCTs published in 6 major pain journals published between 2016 and 2021 that investigated interventions for chronic pain were reviewed.

FINDINGS

Of 73 RCTs identified, only 2 included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms. Both of these articles compared 2 active treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Composite outcomes of benefits and harms are underutilized in chronic pain RCTs. The advantages and challenges of using such outcomes are discussed.

Transversus Thoracic Muscle Plane Block For Postoperative Pain in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis of Randomized And Observational Studies

OBJECTIVES

Pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery usually experience significant surgical pain. Additionally, the effect of poor surgical analgesia creates a pain continuum that extends to the postoperative period. Transversus thoracic muscle plane block (TTMPB) is a novel plane block technique that can provide analgesia to the anterior chest wall. The analgesic role of TTMPB in pediatric cardiac surgery is still uncertain. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the analgesic efficacy of this procedure.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, WanFang Data, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched to November 2023, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was followed to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible studies enrolled pediatric patients from 2 months to 12 years old scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery, and randomized them to receive a TTMPB or no block/sham block.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Six studies that enrolled 601 pediatric patients were included. Low-certainty evidence from randomized trials showed that, compared with no block or sham block, TTMPB in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery may reduce postoperative modified objective pain score at 12 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD] -2.20, 95% CI -2.73 to -1.68) and 24 hours (WMD -1.76, 95% CI -2.09 to -1.42), intraoperative opioid consumption (WMD -3.83, 95% CI -5.90 to -1.76 μg/kg), postoperative opioid consumption (WMD -2.51, 95% CI -2.84 to -2.18 μg/kg), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (WMD -5.56, 95% CI -8.30 to -2.83 hours), and extubation time (WMD -2.13, 95% CI -4.21 to -0.05 hours). Retrospective studies provided very low certainty that the results were consistent with the randomized trials.

CONCLUSION

Very low- to low-certainty evidence showed that TTMPB in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery may reduce postoperative pain, opioid consumption, ICU length of stay, and extubation time.

Interactions Between Endocannabinoid and Endogenous Opioid Systems Prospectively Influence Postoperative Opioid Use in Pregnant Patients Undergoing Cesarean Delivery

Both endocannabinoid (EC) and endogenous opioid systems are involved in nociceptive processing and may work together synergistically based on preclinical models. This study evaluated the interactive effects of preoperative beta-endorphin concentrations (a key analgesic endogenous opioid) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and ECs (CSF and plasma 2-arachidonoylglycerol [2-AG] and plasma anandamide [AEA]) on postoperative opioid use and pain intensity in a prospective cohort of n = 112 pregnant patients undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery. Maternal blood and CSF samples were collected preoperatively for beta-endorphin and EC assays. Patients completed measures of outpatient opioid use (number of tablets used and days of use) and average pain intensity at 2 weeks postoperatively. Results of general linear model analyses controlling for maternal age, BMI at time of delivery, and race revealed significant multiplicative interactions between EC and beta-endorphin concentrations on number of opioid tablets used (based on pill count), days of opioid use, and total milligram morphine equivalents used in the 2 week follow-up period. Elevated preoperative plasma and CSF 2-AG predicted reduced outpatient opioid analgesic use particularly for patients low in CSF beta-endorphin. Similar analyses for pain intensity at 2-week follow-up indicated a significant interaction (p<.02) characterized by higher preoperative beta-endorphin concentrations being associated with lower subsequent pain only for individuals with low preoperative plasma AEA concentrations. Further exploration of interactions between EC and endogenous opioid inhibitory systems as they influence responses to opioid analgesics in other clinical pain populations may help guide development of precision pain management approaches. PERSPECTIVE: In the postoperative setting of patients undergoing cesarean delivery, elevated endocannabinoids were linked to reduced outpatient opioid analgesic use in individuals who had low endogenous opioid concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid. Further exploration of interactions between these two inhibitory systems as they impact on responses to pain management interventions appears warranted.

Cannabis medicine for chronic pain

In the last decade, patients with chronic pain have expressed increasing interest in cannabis-derived products for adjuvant therapy when treatment is deemed refractory to conventional analgesics. At present, clinical evidence to support this treatment approach appears to be sparse. Not because clinical studies as such are lacking, but rather as a result of methodological bias in relation to study design, patient populations, and treatment protocols. In this review, research in cannabis medicine for relief of chronic pain is reviewed, mainly with reference to published meta-analytic studies.

Recreational cannabis policy reform-What mental health nurses need to know about minimising harm and contributing to the reform debate

The recently rapidly evolving legal status of recreational cannabis in various countries has triggered international debate, particularly around measures required to minimise resulting harms. The present article argues that mental health nurses should have a key role in promoting safe and appropriate use of recreational cannabis, and minimising harm based on the extant evidence. The article summarises the factors driving legalisation, outlines the evident medicinal benefits of cannabis, and appraises the evidence on the negative mental health impacts associated with use. We go on to discuss research findings on the potentially deleterious mental health effects resulting from legalising recreational cannabis and strategies to minimise these harms, including directions for future research and evaluation. Further, we consider the importance of the implementation of harm minimisation measures that are context-specific, using Thailand as an example. Finally, we present the key health promotion messages that mental health nurses should aim to convey to people who use or consider using recreational cannabis. Ultimately, we aim to provide a summary of the existing evidence that mental health nurses can draw upon to promote mental health and engage with the policy reform debate.

Characteristics of patients with non-cancer pain and long-term prescription opioid use who have used medical versus recreational marijuana

OBJECTIVE

Marijuana use is increasingly common among patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). We determined if lifetime recreational and medical marijuana use were associated with more frequent and higher dose prescription opioid use.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional SUBJECTS: Eligible patients (n=1,037), who had a new period of prescription opioid use lasting 30-90 days, were recruited from two midwestern health care systems to a study of long-term prescription opioid use and mental health outcomes. The present cross-sectional analyses uses baseline data from this on-going cohort study.

METHODS

Primary exposures were participant reported lifetime recreational and medical marijuana use versus no lifetime marijuana use. Prescription opioid characteristics included daily versus non-daily opioid use and ≥50 morphine milligram equivalent (MME) dose per day vs. <50 MME. Multivariate, logistic regression models estimated the association between lifetime recreational and medical marijuana use vs. no use and odds of daily and higher dose prescription opioid use, before and after adjusting for confounding.

RESULTS

The sample was an average of 54.9 (SD±11.3) years of age, 57.3% identified as female gender, 75.2% identified as White, and 22.5% identified as Black race. Among all participants, 44.4% were never marijuana users, 21.3% were recreational only, 7.7% medical only and 26.6% were both recreational and medical marijuana users. After controlling for all confounders, lifetime recreational marijuana use, as compared to no use, was significantly associated with increased odds of daily prescription opioid use (OR=1.61; 95%CI:1.02-2.54). There was no association between lifetime recreational or medical marijuana use and daily opioid dose.

CONCLUSION

Lifetime medical marijuana use is not linked to current opioid dose, but lifetime recreational use is associated with more than a 60% odds of being a daily prescription opioid user. Screening for lifetime recreational marijuana use may identify patients with chronic pain who are vulnerable to daily opioid use which increases risk for adverse opioid outcomes. Prospective data is needed to determine how marijuana use influences the course of LTOT and vice versa.

Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses in Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (Part II): Guidelines for Performing the Systematic Review

In Part I of this series, we provide guidance for preparing a systematic review protocol. In this article, we highlight important steps and supplement with exemplars on conducting and reporting the results of a systematic review. We suggest how authors can manage protocol violations, multiplicity of outcomes and analyses, and heterogeneity. The quality (certainty) of the evidence and strength of recommendations should follow the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. It is our goal that Part II of this series provides valid guidance to authors and peer reviewers who conduct systematic reviews to adhere to important constructs of transparency, structure, reproducibility, and accountability. This will likely result in more rigorous systematic reviews being submitted for publication to the journals like Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine and Anesthesia & Analgesia .

Cannabis Use Following Total Joint Arthroplasty is Associated With Increased Risks? A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the increased legalization of cannabis, a new unknown emerges for orthopaedic surgeons and their patients. This systematic review aimed to (1) evaluate complications of cannabis use; (2) determine the effects of cannabis on pain and opioid consumption; and (3) evaluate healthcare utilizations associated with cannabis use among patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed. A search of the literature was performed in 5 databases. We included studies between January 2012 and July 2022 reporting cannabis use and complications, pain management, opioid consumption, length of stay, costs, or functional outcomes following TJA. A meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) and continuous variables was performed. A total of 19 articles were included in our final analysis.

RESULTS

Cannabis use was associated with higher odds for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR: 1.46, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.13 to 1.89) and revisions (OR: 1.47 [95% CI: 1.41 to 1.53]) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cannabis use was associated with similar odds for DVT in total hip arthroplasty (THA) (OR: 1.30 [95% CI: 0.79 to 2.13]), pulmonary embolus in both TKA (OR: 1.29 [95% CI: 0.95 to 1.77]), THA (OR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.09 to 3.28]), and cardiovascular complications in TKA (OR: 1.97 [95% Cl: 0.93 to 4.14]). Cannabis use did not alter pain scores, opioid consumption, or cost of care in THA (estimate: $2,550.51 [95% CI: $356.58 to $5,457.62]) but was associated with higher costs in TKA (estimate: $3,552.46 [95% CI: $1,729.71 to $5,375.22]). There was no difference in lengths of stay or functional outcomes; however, there may be a potentially increased risk for prosthetic complications, pneumonia, and cerebrovascular accidents among cannabis users.

CONCLUSION

Cannabis use may be associated with an increased risk of DVTs, revisions, pneumonia, cerebrovascular accidents, and cardiac complications after TJA. Higher-level studies are needed to ascertain the impact of cannabis use for patients undergoing TJA.

Cannabis for medical use versus opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of opioids and cannabis for medical use for chronic non-cancer pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised trials comparing any type of cannabis for medical use or opioids, against each other or placebo, with patient follow-up ≥4 weeks.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Paired reviewers independently extracted data. We used Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence and communicate our findings.

RESULTS

Ninety trials involving 22 028 patients were eligible for review, among which the length of follow-up ranged from 28 to 180 days. Moderate certainty evidence showed that opioids provide small improvements in pain, physical functioning and sleep quality versus placebo; low to moderate certainty evidence supported similar effects for cannabis versus placebo. Neither was more effective than placebo for role, social or emotional functioning (all high to moderate certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed there is probably little to no difference between cannabis for medical use and opioids for physical functioning (weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.47 on the 100-point 36-item Short Form Survey physical component summary score, 95% credible interval (CrI) -1.97 to 2.99), and cannabis resulted in fewer discontinuations due to adverse events versus opioids (OR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.83). Low certainty evidence suggested little to no difference between cannabis and opioids for pain relief (WMD 0.23 cm on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 95% CrI -0.06 to 0.53) or sleep quality (WMD 0.49 mm on a 100 mm VAS, 95% CrI -4.72 to 5.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis for medical use may be similarly effective and result in fewer discontinuations than opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020185184.

Operationalizing the GRADE-equity criterion to inform guideline recommendations: application to a medical cannabis guideline

OBJECTIVES

Incorporating health equity considerations into guideline development often requires information beyond that gathered through traditional evidence synthesis methodology. This article outlines an operationalization plan for the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE)-equity criterion to gather and assess evidence from primary studies within systematic reviews, enhancing guideline recommendations to promote equity. We demonstrate its use in a clinical guideline on medical cannabis for chronic pain.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We reviewed GRADE guidance and resources recommended by team members regarding the use of evidence for equity considerations, drafted an operationalization plan, and iteratively refined it through team discussion and feedback and piloted it on a medicinal cannabis guideline.

RESULTS

We propose a seven-step approach: 1) identify disadvantaged populations, 2) examine available data for specific populations, 3) evaluate population baseline risk for primary outcomes, 4) assess representation of these populations in primary studies, 5) appraise analyses, 6) note barriers to implementation of effective interventions for these populations, and 7) suggest supportive strategies to facilitate implementation of effective interventions.

CONCLUSION

Our approach assists guideline developers in recognizing equity considerations, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Its application across various guideline topics can verify its feasibility and necessary adjustments.

Declared Rationale for Cannabis Use Before and After Legalization for Nonmedical Use: A Longitudinal Study of Community Adults in Ontario

Objectives: To examine the proportion of individuals using cannabis for medical purposes who reported nonmedical use of cannabis after it became legal to do so. Materials and Methods: We acquired data from the Population Assessment for Tomorrow's Health, the Cannabis Legalization Surveillance Study on a subpopulation of participants residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, who reported using cannabis for medical purposes. Specifically, we acquired data 6 months before, and again 6 months after, legalization of cannabis for nonmedical purposes. We constructed a logistic regression model to explore the association between potential explanatory factors and endorsing exclusively nonmedical use after legalization and reported associations as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Our sample included 254 respondents (mean age 33±13; 61% female), of which 208 (82%) reported both medical and nonmedical use of cannabis (dual motives) before legalization for nonmedical purposes, and 46 (18%) reported cannabis use exclusively for medical purposes. Twenty-five percent (n=63) indicated they had medical authorization to use medical cannabis, of which 37 (59%) also endorsed nonmedical use. After legalization of nonmedical cannabis, ∼1 in 4 previously exclusive cannabis users for medical purposes declared dual use (medical and nonmedical), and ∼1 in 4 previously dual users declared exclusively nonmedical use of cannabis. No individual with medical authorization reported a change to exclusively nonmedical use after legalization. Our adjusted regression analysis found that younger age, male sex, and lacking authorization for cannabis use were associated with declaring exclusively nonmedical use of cannabis after legalization. Anxiety, depression, impaired sleep, pain, and headaches were among the most common complaints for which respondents used cannabis therapeutically. Most respondents reported using cannabis as a substitute for prescription medication at least some of the time, and approximately half reported using cannabis as a substitute for alcohol at least some of the time. Conclusions: In a community sample of Canadian adults reporting use of cannabis for medical purposes, legalization of nonmedical cannabis was associated with a substantial proportion changing to either dual use (using cannabis for both medical and nonmedical purposes) or exclusively nonmedical use. Younger men without medical authorization for cannabis use were more likely to declare exclusively nonmedical use after legalization.

Postmicturition dribble in men with no previous urogenital surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment modalities

INTRODUCTION

Postmicturition dribble (PMD) is common in males. Little is known about PMD etiology, but it is either secondary to urethral/prostatic surgery or primary (no previous surgery). Despite PMD's high prevalence, the effectiveness of its treatment modalities remains lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a systematic review of the available treatments for primary PMD in adult males and meta-analysis of their effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched four electronic databases from inception to 2023 for original articles that evaluated PMD treatments in male adults without previous urethral/prostatic surgery (PROSPERO protocol CRD42023444591). Study quality and risk of bias were evaluated using established tools. We extracted a range of variables including treatment modality used and its effectiveness on PMD volume and patient complaint. Meta-analysis was undertaken where feasible, and where this was not feasible, narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Out of 335 studies, four were included (four clinical trials, n = 344 patients). Two trials used physical/behavioral therapy (pelvic floor muscle exercises [PFMEs], urethral milking); the other two employed phosphodiesterase (PDE5) inhibitors (tadalafil, Udenafil). All studies were of good quality, but physical/behavioral therapy studies had some risk of bias. As the two physical/behavioral therapy studies used heterogenous outcome measures, narrative synthesis showed PMD volume improvement with PFMEs more than with urethral milking, both modalities were more effective than counseling, and in one study, PFMEs were effective in reducing PMD self-reported complaint than counseling. Meta-analyses of the two PDE5 inhibitors studies showed a large effect size with high heterogeneity for decreased PMD volume favoring PDE5 inhibitors over placebo (g = -0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.75; 0.02, p = 0.05; I2  = 88%); and a significant improvement equivalent to -1.06 points on the Hallym PMD Questionnaire score with no discernable heterogeneity (95% CI -1.65; -0.47, p = 0.0004; I2  = 0%), favoring PDE5 inhibitors compared to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical/behavioral therapy and PDE5 inhibitors are effective primary PMD treatments. PMD management studies in males with no previous urethral/prostatic surgery are very scarce and lack the use of consistent/comparable outcome measures. Further studies addressing these deficiencies would benefit this very thin evidence base.

Within-subject, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled evaluation of combining the cannabinoid dronabinol and the opioid hydromorphone in adults with chronic pain

The potential synergistic effects of combining cannabinoids and opioids for analgesia has received considerable attention. No studies to date have evaluated this combination in patients with chronic pain. The present study aimed to evaluate the combined analgesic and drug effects of oral opioid (hydromorphone) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (dronabinol), as well as their effects on physical and cognitive functioning, and human abuse potential (HAP) outcomes among individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This was a within-subject, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Participants (N = 37; 65% women; mean age = 62) diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis of ≥3/10 average pain intensity were included. Participants received (1) placebo-placebo, (2) hydromorphone (4 mg)-placebo; (3) dronabinol (10 mg)-placebo, and (4) hydromorphone (4 mg)-dronabinol (10 mg). Clinical and experimentally-induced pain, physical and cognitive function, subjective drug effects, HAP, adverse events, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated. No significant analgesic effects were observed for clinical pain severity or physical functioning across all drug conditions. Little enhancement of hydromorphone analgesia by dronabinol was observed on evoked pain indices. While subjective drug effects and some HAP ratings were increased in the combined drug condition, these were not significantly increased over the dronabinol alone condition. No serious adverse events were reported; hydromorphone produced more mild adverse events than placebo, but hydromorphone + dronabinol produced more moderate adverse events than both placebo and hydromorphone alone. Only hydromorphone impaired cognitive performance. Consistent with laboratory studies on healthy adults, the present study shows minimal benefit of combining dronabinol (10 mg) and hydromorphone (4 mg) for analgesia and improving physical functioning in adults with KOA.

Use of Medical Cannabis by Patients With Cancer: Attitudes, Knowledge, and Practice

CONTEXT

Demand for medical cannabis (MC) is growing among Israeli patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVES

The study sought to assess factors contributing to the demand for MC among patients with cancer.

METHODS

Patients applying for a permit to receive MC at a pain and palliative clinic of a university-affiliated cancer center in Israel in 2020-2021 were asked to complete self-report questionnaires assessing attitudes, knowledge, and expectations regarding MC use. Findings were compared between first-time and repeat applicants. Repeat applicants were asked to report their indications for requesting MC, patterns of use, and treatment effect.

RESULTS

The cohort included 146 patients: 63 first-time applicants and 83 repeat applicants. First-time applicants were more likely to consult sources other than their oncologist for MC-related information (P < 0.01) and expressed more concern about addiction (P < 0.001) and side effects (P < 0.05). They often erroneously assumed the treatment was subsidized (P < 0.001). Repeat applicants were younger (P < 0.05) and included more smokers (P < 0.05) and recreational cannabis users (P < 0.05); 56.6% were cancer survivors and 78% used high-potency MC. Most patients believed to some degree that MC is more effective than conventional medications for symptom control, and over half thought that MC helps to cure cancer.

CONCLUSION

Misconceptions regarding the effectiveness of MC for symptom management and treatment may explain the motivation of patients with cancer to apply for a permit. There seems to be an association of young age, cigarette smoking, and recreational cannabis use with ongoing use of MC among cancer survivors.

Balancing risks and benefits of cannabis use: umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and observational studies

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

Umbrella review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses) in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive).

CONCLUSIONS

Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine but not without adverse events.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018093045.

FUNDING

None.

Perceived Effectiveness of Medical Cannabis Among Adults with Chronic Pain: Findings from Interview Data in a Three-Month Pilot Study

Objectives

Patient-reported outcomes are critical to evaluate the effectiveness of medical cannabis as an alternative treatment for chronic pain. This study examined the perceived effectiveness of medical cannabis for chronic pain management among middle-aged and older adults newly initiating medical cannabis.

Methods

Interview data from participants in a three-month pilot study were analyzed to assess the perceived effectiveness of medical cannabis on chronic pain and related outcomes. The interview was conducted after approximately one month of usage and responses were analyzed using the RADaR (Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction) technique.

Results

51 adults initiating medical cannabis for chronic pain were interviewed (24 women, 27 men, mean age 54.4, SD = 12.0), with the majority (n=41) identifying as Non-Hispanic White followed by Non-Hispanic Black (n=7), Multi-racial (2), Hispanic White (1). Most study participants (62.7%) reported MC being overall effective. Common benefits included reduced pain intensity, anxiety, and dependency on pain and psychiatric medications. Improvements in physical functioning, sleep quality, and mood were reported. Common challenges included difficulty finding a suitable product or dose, experiencing side effects such as 'undesired high', 'stomach issues', and a limited 'threshold of pain' treatable by the product.

Discussion

Findings suggest most participants perceived medical cannabis to be overall effective for chronic pain management. Participants reported improved physical and mental functioning and reduced use of pain and psychiatric medications. Future research systematically assessing side effects, dosage and mode of consumption is needed to further evaluate the outcomes among adults initiating medical cannabis.

Cannabis Unveiled: An Exploration of Marijuana's History, Active Compounds, Effects, Benefits, and Risks on Human Health

Marijuana, also known as cannabis, is a psychoactive drug that comes from the Cannabis plant. Marijuana can be smoked, vaporized, or consumed through edibles in a variety of ways. Perception changes, changes in mood, and problems with coordination are all possible side effects. Marijuana is used for both recreational and medical purposes to treat a variety of health conditions. The literature review on the effects of marijuana on the human body has increased in recent years as more states legalize its use. It is important to investigate the benefits and harmful effects of marijuana on individuals due to the widespread use of cannabis-derived substances like marijuana for medical, recreational, and combined purposes. The paper will review different aspects of marijuana in 4 main domains. A thorough discussion of marijuana's definition, history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and effects on human cells will be given in the first domain. The second domain will concentrate on marijuana's negative effects, while the third domain will look at marijuana's possible positive impacts, such as its usage in controlling multiple sclerosis, treating obesity, lowering social anxiety, and managing pain. The fourth domain will concentrate on marijuana's effects on anxiety, educational attainment, and social consequences. Additionally, this paper also will provide a highlight of the history of marijuana use and governmental legislation, both of which play a significant role in determining how the public views marijuana. In conclusion, this paper provides a comprehensive review of marijuana's effects, which may be of interest to a large readership. This review adds to the continuing discussion about the use of marijuana by analyzing the data that is currently available about the possible advantages and disadvantages of marijuana usage.

Cannabinoid Therapy: Attitudes and Experiences of People With Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials of cannabinoids for chronic pain have mixed and often inconclusive results. In contrast, many prospective observational studies show the analgesic effects of cannabinoids. This survey study aimed to examine the experiences/attitudes of individuals with chronic pain who are currently taking, have previously taken, or never taken cannabinoids for chronic pain to inform future research.

METHODS

This study is based on a cross-sectional, web-based survey of individuals with self-reported chronic pain. Participants were invited to participate through an email that was distributed to the listservs of patient advocacy groups and foundations that engage individuals with chronic pain.

RESULTS

Of the 969 respondents, 444 (46%) respondents reported currently taking, 213 (22%) previously taken, and 312 (32%) never taken cannabinoids for pain. Participants reported using cannabinoids to treat a wide variety of chronic pain conditions. Those currently taking cannabinoids (vs previously) more frequently reported: (1) large improvements from cannabinoids in all pain types, including particularly difficult-to-treat chronic overlapping pain conditions (eg, pelvic pain), (2) improvements in comorbid symptoms (eg, sleep), and (3) lower interference from side effects. Those currently taking cannabinoids reported more frequent and satisfactory communication with clinicians regarding cannabinoid use. Those never taken cannabinoids reported a lack of suggestion/approval of a clinician (40%), illegality (25%), and lack of FDA regulation (19%) as reasons for never trying cannabinoids.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore the importance of conducting high-quality clinical trials that include diverse pain populations and clinically relevant outcomes that if successful, could support FDA approval of cannabinoid products. Clinicians could then prescribe and monitor these treatments similarly to other chronic pain medications.

[Complementary and alternative medicine-An option for chronic pain patients?]

The interest of patients with chronic pain in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is high. The aim of an accompanying complementary therapy is to strengthen the patient's self-efficacy, the ability to make decisions and the autonomy. The best evidence exists for physical activity and a balanced diet. Exercise combinations of strength and endurance as well as targeted strengthening of the muscles in the area of the pain are particularly suitable. When choosing the form of exercise, low-threshold training options are recommended. There is no reliable evidence for kinesio taping, homeopathy, neural therapy and draining procedures. The extensive data on acupuncture must be interpreted taking methodological limitations into account. Heat applications can support multimodal pain therapy. In the case of anti-inflammatory phytotherapeutic agents, there are good rationales from basic research and reliable empirical knowledge regarding the dosage. The evidence on cannabis is low.

Assessment of Medical Cannabis and Health-Related Quality of Life

Importance

The use of cannabis as a medicine is becoming increasingly prevalent. Given the diverse range of conditions being treated with medical cannabis, as well as the vast array of products and dose forms available, clinical evidence incorporating patient-reported outcomes may help determine safety and efficacy.

Objective

To assess whether patients using medical cannabis report improvements in health-related quality of life over time.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective case series study was conducted at a network of specialist medical clinics (Emerald Clinics) located across Australia. Participants were patients who received treatment for any indication at any point between December 2018 and May 2022. Patients were followed up every mean (SD) 44.6 (30.1) days. Data for up to 15 follow-ups were reported. Statistical analysis was conducted from August to September 2022.

Exposure

Medical cannabis. Product types and cannabinoid content varied over time in accordance with the treating physician's clinical judgement.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome measure was health-related quality of life as assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire.

Results

In this case series of 3148 patients, 1688 (53.6%) were female; 820 (30.2%) were employed; and the mean (SD) age was 55.9 (18.7) years at baseline before treatment. Chronic noncancer pain was the most common indication for treatment (68.6% [2160 of 3148]), followed by cancer pain (6.0% [190 of 3148]), insomnia (4.8% [152 of 3148]), and anxiety (4.2% [132 of 3148]). After commencing treatment with medical cannabis, patients reported significant improvements relative to baseline on all 8 domains of the SF-36, and these improvements were mostly sustained over time. After controlling for potential confounders in a regression model, treatment with medical cannabis was associated with an improvement of 6.60 (95% CI, 4.57-8.63) points to 18.31 (95% CI, 15.86-20.77) points in SF-36 scores, depending on the domain (all P < .001). Effect sizes (Cohen d) ranged from 0.21 to 0.72. A total of 2919 adverse events were reported, including 2 that were considered serious.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this case series study, patients using medical cannabis reported improvements in health-related quality of life, which were mostly sustained over time. Adverse events were rarely serious but common, highlighting the need for caution with prescribing medical cannabis.

The Impact of Naloxone Coprescribing Mandates on Opioid-Involved Overdose Deaths

INTRODUCTION

Since 2017, a total of 10 states have mandated naloxone coprescribing intended to prevent fatal opioid overdoses. This study aims to assess the association between naloxone coprescribing/offering mandates and opioid-involved overdose deaths on the basis of the opioid type.

METHODS

Data on overdose deaths from 1999 to 2020 came from the National Center for Health Statistics CDC WONDER Online Database. This study examined deaths stratified by illicit/synthetic opioids and prescription/treatment opioids. Difference-in-difference negative binomial regression models estimated average marginal effects and 95% CIs. Covariates included opioid dispensing rate, Good Samaritan law, pharmacy-based naloxone access law, mandatory use of prescription drug monitoring program, and recreational cannabis dispensaries. Data collection and analysis were conducted in 2022.

RESULTS

Ten states implemented naloxone coprescribing/offering mandates during the period. Coprescribing/offering mandates significantly reduced the number of prescription/treatment overdose deaths by 8.61 per state per quarter (95% CI= -15.13, -2.09), a 16% reduction from the counterfactual estimates. Coprescribing/offering mandates did not significantly impact illicit/synthetic overdose deaths (average marginal effect=0.32; 95% CI= -18.27, 18.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Coprescribing/offering mandates prevent overdose deaths for its target population, individuals using prescription/treatment opioids. These mandates do not appear to impact populations using illicit/synthetic opioids; thus, expanded efforts are needed to reach these individuals.

Potential, Limitations and Risks of Cannabis-Derived Products in Cancer Treatment

The application of cannabis products in oncology receives interest, especially from patients. Despite the plethora of research data available, the added value in curative or palliative cancer care and the possible risks involved are insufficiently proven and therefore a matter of debate. We aim to give a recommendation on the position of cannabis products in clinical oncology by assessing recent literature. Various types of cannabis products, characteristics, quality and pharmacology are discussed. Standardisation is essential for reliable and reproducible quality. The oromucosal/sublingual route of administration is preferred over inhalation and drinking tea. Cannabinoids may inhibit efflux transporters and drug-metabolising enzymes, possibly inducing pharmacokinetic interactions with anticancer drugs being substrates for these proteins. This may enhance the cytostatic effect and/or drug-related adverse effects. Reversely, it may enable dose reduction. Similar interactions are likely with drugs used for symptom management treating pain, nausea, vomiting and anorexia. Cannabis products are usually well tolerated and may improve the quality of life of patients with cancer (although not unambiguously proven). The combination with immunotherapy seems undesirable because of the immunosuppressive action of cannabinoids. Further clinical research is warranted to scientifically support (refraining from) using cannabis products in patients with cancer.

A national population-based study of cannabis use and correlates among U.S. veterans prescribed opioids in primary care

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is marketed as a treatment for pain. There is limited data on the prevalence of cannabis use and its correlates among Veterans prescribed opioids.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence and correlates of cannabis use among Veterans prescribed opioids.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

PARTICIPANTS

Veterans with a urine drug test (UDT) from Primary Care 2014-2018, in 50 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. A total of 1,182,779 patients were identified with an opioid prescription within 90 days prior to UDT.

MAIN MEASURES

Annual prevalence of cannabis positive UDT by state. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess associations of demographic factors, mental health conditions, substance use disorders, and pain diagnoses with cannabis positive UDT.

RESULTS

Annual prevalence of cannabis positive UDT ranged from 8.5% to 9.7% during the study period, and in 2018 was 18.15% in Washington, D.C. and 10 states with legalized medical and recreational cannabis, 6.1% in Puerto Rico and 25 states with legalized medical cannabis, and 4.5% in non-legal states. Younger age, male sex, being unmarried, and marginal housing were associated with use (p < 0.001). Post-traumatic stress disorder (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.22, p < 0.001), opioid use disorder (AOR 1.14; CI 1.07-1.22, p < 0.001), alcohol use disorder or positive AUDIT-C (AOR 1.34; 95% CI 1.28-1.39, p < 0.001), smoking (AOR 2.58; 95% CI 2.49-2.66, p < 0.001), and other drug use disorders (AOR 1.15; 95% CI 1.03-1.29, p = 0.02) were associated with cannabis use. Positive UDT for amphetamines AOR 1.41; 95% CI 1.26-1.58, p < 0.001), benzodiazepines (AOR 1.41; 95% CI 1.31-1.51, p < 0.001) and cocaine (AOR 2.04; 95% CI 1.75-2.36, p < 0.001) were associated with cannabis positive UDT.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis use among Veterans prescribed opioids varied by state and by legalization status. Veterans with PTSD and substance use disorders were more likely to have cannabis positive UDT. Opioid-prescribed Veterans using cannabis may benefit from screening for these conditions, referral to treatment, and attention to opioid safety.

Do We Have Structure, Process and Outcomes to Support Cannabis as Supportive Therapy in Cancer?

Cannabis is becoming more popular and more available in the United States. It has been approved for use by multiple states for various conditions and several states now allow recreational cannabis. We explore the structure of cannabis distribution, the process of acquisition, outcomes, and the safety of cannabis in the United States.

Cannabis use for pain relief in the context of health service barriers: Accounts of street-involved Nigerian women suffering chronic pain

INTRODUCTION

This study explored cannabis use for pain relief among socially marginalised Nigerian women in the context of barriers to pain management.

METHODS

The study was designed as a qualitative exploratory study of pain experience and management. Sixteen in-depth, individual interviews were conducted with street-involved women who use drugs and had chronic pain. Transcripts were coded and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Pain was experienced as a pervasive feature of everyday life that disrupted daily routines, affected economic activities, strained social relationships and had adverse effects on health and wellbeing. Participants sought treatment in health facilities, but faced social and health system barriers to service utilisation including financial cost of services, dismissal of symptoms by providers, stigma due to physical appearance, substance use and lack of social support. These barriers encouraged disengagement from services and reliance on cannabis (along with heroin and diverted prescription opioids) for pain management. Cannabis use relieved pain and improved daily functioning, enabling participants to undertake economic activities. However, using cannabis to enhance the effects of opioids and heavy and long-term use owing to pain chronicity and disability generated concerns about harms.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Findings show the therapeutic benefits of cannabis in the face of barriers to pain management. This support calls to explore the potentials of cannabis for pain management for socially marginalised populations and to develop medical guidelines to reduce the risk of adverse health consequences. Therapeutic cannabis, provided based on medical guidance, could improve pain management for socially marginalised populations.

The evolving culture of medical cannabis in Canada for the management of chronic pain

Although used therapeutically for millennia, cannabis has been a prohibited substance worldwide for most of the 20th Century. With revision of prohibitive regulations in many jurisdictions during the past 2 decades, cannabis is increasingly available to patients as a potential treatment option for various symptoms. Pain relief, sleep promotion and alleviation of distress, depression and anxiety are the most common reasons for cannabis use. Canada has been at the forefront of medical cannabis (MC) legislation revisions to enable and facilitate access for therapeutic use. Although initially viewed with caution and stigma, attitudes to cannabis in general have changed. Medical cannabis is identified as the herbal plant product sourced from a grower/producer and is not at present a regulated pharmaceutical product. Medical cannabis use is currently prevalent in Canada but has bypassed the rigorous study required for usual drug approval. Although uptake has been enthusiastic by patients, the medical community has voiced cautions and concerns. Access to medical cannabis is fairly easy once an approval document is obtained from a healthcare professional, but without obligation for medical or pharmacy oversight. The greatest concern is a dearth of sound clinical evidence for effects and harms. Emerging concerns include prevalent patient self-management with information based on personal research, an abundance of on-line information which may not always be accurate, the emergence of designated "cannabis clinics," potential risks to society due to accidents, and high cost of the legal medical product leading to access via the recreational market. With cannabis now entrenched in Canadian healthcare, physicians must be sufficiently knowledgeable to provide guidance that is evidence-based and will ensure personal and societal harm reduction. Examination of the changing culture of medical cannabis in Canada will provide insight for countries that may be anticipating similar revisions of cannabis regulations to allow cannabis access for their patient population and learn from the issues created by recreational legalization.

Clinical Research Evidence Supporting Administration and Dosing Recommendations of Medicinal Cannabis as Analgesic in Cancer Patients

The analgesic potential of Cannabis sativa L.-based medicinal cannabis products for treatment of cancer associated chronic pains has gained increased interest in recent years. To ensure a controlled distribution of these products and investigate their therapeutic potential, several countries have established so-called pilot trials. Many doctors, however, are hesitant to prescribe medicinal cannabis primarily due to lack of research evidence regarding the products' efficacy, safety and thus questionable dosing guidelines. This review aims to elucidate clinical research supporting administration of medicinal cannabis in cancer patients for analgesic purposes. The cannabinoids' effects on the endocannabinoid system (ECS) and its implication in pain regulation is included to illustrate the complexity related to this research field. Published clinical studies on medicinal cannabis primarily consist of observational studies and only one pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), where more RCTs exist on the cannabis-based product, Sativex^® (GW Pharma Ltd., Cambridge, UK). The studies indicate analgesic potential, however non-significantly, for most patients and with acceptable safety profile. Summarizing, high-quality RCTs are scarce in this research field, and the limitations of the observational studies complicates interpretation of clinical outcomes. Despite discrepancy among the studies, they do show indications for administration and dosing regimens providing analgesic effects for some cancer patients.

Comparison of Health Care Providers Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol in the Management of Pain and Other Symptoms in Cancer Patients

Background: Medical marijuana (MM) and cannabidiol (CBD) have received increasing attention to manage pain and other symptoms even with limited scientific evidence. Objectives: We examined the attitudes and beliefs of health care providers toward MM and CBD compared to standard treatments for cancer-associated pain and various symptoms. Design: Two sets of anonymous surveys (MM and CBD) containing similar items were completed by clinicians of four symptom-focused specialties. Results: A minority of respondents preferred recommending MM (9%) and CBD (13%), respectively, over opioids for cancer pain, while 11% and 22% felt that MM and CBD, respectively, would be useful to combine with opioids to treat cancer pain. Respondents did not favor MM or CBD over common treatment options for nonpain symptoms. Conclusion: MM and CBD were not preferred over current standard treatments for pain and other symptoms. Responses from the four specialties aligned with unique aspects of their clinical practice.

Making a joint decision: Cannabis as a potential substitute for opioids in obstetrics and gynecology

There is a growing body of evidence that cannabis may be effective as an analgesic with potential to reduce opioid usage in chronic pain. This review synthesizes the available literature to elucidate the possible role that cannabis might play in reducing opioid use in gynecological disorders that may potentially lead to a recommendation of substituting opioids with cannabis. With reports of a decrease in opioid use after cannabis initiation, an opioid-sparing effect has been seen in gynecologic malignancies such as ovarian, uterine, endometrial, and cervical cancers, in addition to chronic pelvic pain (CPP). Though many studies have found an association between cannabis and various adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials making it difficult to claim a directly causal relationship between cannabis and these adverse outcomes. Additionally, with increased use of cannabis during pregnancy, the evidence of possible benefits and risks to mothers and fetuses is examined.

Therapeutic use of cannabis in the US

ABSTRACT

NPs are likely to encounter patients using cannabis with therapeutic intent, with or without legal authorization. During the clinical history and assessment process, NPs need to engage in frank discussion about cannabis therapeutics, including the risks and benefits, evidence for use, dosing considerations, potential drug interactions, and harm reduction.

Association of cannabis and/or opioid with quality of life and healthcare utilization in patients with chronic pain

Background

Opioids have been commonly used to treat chronic pain, but they are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Cannabis has been advocated as an alternative; however, a growing number of patients are now using a combination of opioid and cannabis and the impact of this combination is not well-studied.

Aim

We characterized use of opioid and/or cannabis in patients with chronic pain; and compared utilization of healthcare resources.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine if measures of physical, psychological and social functioning differed among patients according to whether they used opioids and/or cannabis. We used our learning healthcare system - CHOIR - to capture NIH Patient Reported Outcomes Measure Information System surveys, and legacy pain and treatment specific questions.

Results

Patients who report use of opioid and/or cannabis experience higher levels of physical, psychological and social distress. After adjusting for inversed weight of propensity scores, they have higher odds of visiting an emergency room, staying overnight at the hospital, and visiting a physician.

Conclusion

Our results show that use of opioid and/or cannabis is associated with worse baseline characteristics and outcomes. Our study however cannot determine if worse outcomes are due to the opioids and/or cannabis or simply that these patients are worse off before using opioids and/or cannabis. Thus, it is important to characterize the trajectory of these patients in a prospective longitudinal study.

Long-term and serious harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain: a systematic review of non-randomised studies

OBJECTIVE

To establish the prevalence of long-term and serious harms of medical cannabis for chronic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL from inception to 1 April 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Non-randomised studies reporting on harms of medical cannabis or cannabinoids in adults or children living with chronic pain with ≥4 weeks of follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

A parallel guideline panel provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of adverse events for consideration. Two reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, screened the search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We used random-effects models for all meta-analyses and the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 39 eligible studies that enrolled 12 143 adult patients with chronic pain. Very low certainty evidence suggests that adverse events are common (prevalence: 26.0%; 95% CI 13.2% to 41.2%) among users of medical cannabis for chronic pain, particularly any psychiatric adverse events (prevalence: 13.5%; 95% CI 2.6% to 30.6%). Very low certainty evidence, however, indicates serious adverse events, adverse events leading to discontinuation, cognitive adverse events, accidents and injuries, and dependence and withdrawal syndrome are less common and each typically occur in fewer than 1 in 20 patients. We compared studies with <24 weeks and ≥24 weeks of cannabis use and found more adverse events reported among studies with longer follow-up (test for interaction p<0.01). Palmitoylethanolamide was usually associated with few to no adverse events. We found insufficient evidence addressing the harms of medical cannabis compared with other pain management options, such as opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

There is very low certainty evidence that adverse events are common among people living with chronic pain who use medical cannabis or cannabinoids, but that few patients experience serious adverse events.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of Medical Students’ Perceptions of Medical Cannabis Scale

Background

There are few published research articles investigating medical students’ perceptions of medical cannabis (MC), including their attitudes toward its efficacy and appropriateness in medicine, concerns for potential adverse effects, and their willingness to prescribe it to patients (in future practice). This research investigated the factor structure of a tool to assess medical students’ perceptions of MC for the purpose of curriculum enhancement.

Methods

Using a voluntary electronic survey, quantitative data were collected between January and March 2022 from 526 medical students enrolled in a large medical school in Florida, United States. A 32-item questionnaire developed by the researchers was used to investigate medical students’ perceptions of MC. The survey was anonymous and took about 10 minutes to complete. Bivariate correlation analyses were conducted prior to performing a principal component analysis with varimax rotation.

Results

Using principal component analysis with varimax rotation, three factors were identified with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and a cumulative variance of 59.694%. These factors are perceived knowledge of MC, concern for possible adverse effects of MC (e.g., the potential for misuse/dependence), and attitudes toward MC (e.g., cannabis having an acceptable role in medicine, willingness (as a future physician) to help patients access MC, obtaining training about MC in school and residency training, the physician’s role as a prescriber, and efficacy and benefits of MC for certain health conditions).

Conclusions

The development of this kind of brief measure may be valuable for defining the future educational needs of medical students and other health professionals as well as a tool for future research.

Opioid-sparing effect of cannabinoids for analgesia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical and clinical studies

Cannabinoid co-administration may enable reduced opioid doses for analgesia. This updated systematic review on the opioid-sparing effects of cannabinoids considered preclinical and clinical studies where the outcome was analgesia or opioid dose requirements. We searched Scopus, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Medline, and Embase (2016 onwards). Ninety-two studies met the search criteria including 15 ongoing trials. Meta-analysis of seven preclinical studies found the median effective dose (ED₅₀) of morphine administered with delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol was 3.5 times lower (95% CI 2.04, 6.03) than the ED₅₀ of morphine alone. Six preclinical studies found no evidence of increased opioid abuse liability with cannabinoid administration. Of five healthy-volunteer experimental pain studies, two found increased pain, two found decreased pain and one found reduced pain bothersomeness with cannabinoid administration; three demonstrated that cannabinoid co-administration may increase opioid abuse liability. Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) found no evidence of opioid-sparing effects of cannabinoids in acute pain. Meta-analysis of four RCTs in patients with cancer pain found no effect of cannabinoid administration on opioid dose (mean difference -3.8 mg, 95% CI -10.97, 3.37) or percentage change in pain scores (mean difference 1.84, 95% CI -2.05, 5.72); five studies found more adverse events with cannabinoids compared with placebo (risk ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.03, 1.24). Of five controlled chronic non-cancer pain trials; one low-quality study with no control arm, and one single-dose study reported reduced pain scores with cannabinoids. Three RCTs found no treatment effect of dronabinol. Meta-analyses of observational studies found 39% reported opioid cessation (95% CI 0.15, 0.64, I² 95.5%, eight studies), and 85% reported reduction (95% CI 0.64, 0.99, I² 92.8%, seven studies). In summary, preclinical and observational studies demonstrate the potential opioid-sparing effects of cannabinoids in the context of analgesia, in contrast to higher-quality RCTs that did not provide evidence of opioid-sparing effects.

Hand Surgery Patient Perspectives on Medical Cannabis: A Survey of Over 600 Patients

Purpose

Medical cannabis (MC) has been proposed as a potential addition to multimodal pain management regimens in orthopedics. This study evaluates hand and upper-extremity patient perspectives of MC as a treatment for common orthopedic and musculoskeletal pain conditions. This study also aims to identify the proportion of patients already using MC, perceived barriers to MC use, and opinions on insurance coverage and legality of cannabis.

Methods

An anonymous cross-sectional survey study was conducted of all patients at least 18 years old presenting from October 2020 to January 2021 to a hand and upper-extremity outpatient clinic. The survey collected information regarding opinion on MC, including use, legality, and willingness to use MC in the future. Medical cannabis was legal in the states where the study was conducted.

Results

A total of 679 patients completed the survey (response rate 72.5%). Sixty-eight patients (10.0%) reported currently using MC. Of the 623 patients (90.0%) who reported not currently using MC, 504 (80.9%) would consider using MC for chronic pain, while the remaining 119 (19.1%) would not consider the use of MC for chronic pain. Age was not associated with whether a patient would consider using MC (P = .16) or was already using MC (P = .10). The most identified barrier to MC use was cost, reported as either expensive or not affordable by 477 patients (70.5%).

Conclusions

This study found that most patients presenting for hand and upper-extremity complaints would consider using MC (80.9%), and most perceive it as a safe treatment option for common orthopedic conditions. Moreover, 10% of patients reported already using MC. One of the major barriers to MC use is the cost. Most (90.9%) patients support policies for legalization and insurance coverage of MC.

Type of study/level of evidence

Therapeutic Level III.

An overview of the use and misuse/abuse of opioid analgesics in different world regions and future perspectives

Opioids are an important therapeutic option for severe resistant chronic pain but, in the absence of proper oversight, their use has risks. The level of prescription opioid misuse/abuse differs among countries, due to differences in healthcare systems and pain management approaches. However, evaluating the true dimension of prescription opioid misuse/abuse is complicated by statistical reporting which often does not differentiate between prescription and illicit opioid use, or between prescription opioid use by patients and nonpatients, highlighting a need for greater uniformity. Parallel efforts to educate patients and the general public about opioid risks, facilitate appropriate analgesic prescribing and identify alternative formulations or options to use instead of or with opioids, may contribute to optimizing prescription opioid use for pain management.

Possible opioid-saving effect of cannabis-based medicine using individual-based data from the Norwegian Prescription Database

Some ecological studies have shown that areas with higher use of cannabis may have lower opioid use and fewer opioid-related problems. Newer studies are questioning this finding. Few individually based studies have been performed. Using data from the Norwegian Prescription Database, this study investigated the individual level effect of prescribed cannabis extract (Sativex®) in prescription opioid users on their opioid use in the following year. Looking at all those filling a prescription for Sativex®, opioid use was only marginally lowered in the follow-up period. Some Sativex® users, however, filled more prescriptions for Sativex® and were able to reduce their opioid use substantially. Further studies are needed to elucidate more details on these patients, so as to know who can benefit from such cannabis-based extracts in reducing their opioid use.