Routes of administration, reasons for use, and approved indications of medical cannabis in oncology: a scoping review

Patient out-of-pocket costs for cannabis use during cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

We assessed patient costs associated with cannabis use during cancer treatment.

METHODS

Adults treated for cancer at a large, comprehensive center completed an anonymous survey regarding their thoughts and experiences with cannabis and cancer. Bivariate and weighted multivariable logistic regression assessed clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with patient-reported out-of-pocket costs for cannabis products.

RESULTS

Overall, 248 cannabis users provided data on cost and were analyzed. Median monthly out-of-pocket cost for cannabis was $80 (interquartile range = $25-$150). On regression analysis, male gender (odds ratio = 2.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.2 to 5.5, P = .026) and being 45 years of age or older (odds ratio = 7.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.9 to 30.0, P = .0042) were associated with spending $100 a month or more on cannabis. Of the 166 patients who stopped using cannabis early or used less than preferred, 28% attributed it to cost and 26% to lack of insurance coverage.

CONCLUSION

Cannabis use during cancer treatment may contribute to significant out-of-pocket costs, with men and younger patients more likely to pay higher costs.

Perceptions, prevalence, and patterns of cannabis use among cancer patients treated at 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers

BACKGROUND

The legal climate for cannabis use has dramatically changed with an increasing number of states passing legislation legalizing access for medical and recreational use. Among cancer patients, cannabis is often used to ameliorate adverse effects of cancer treatment. Data are limited on the extent and type of use among cancer patients during treatment and the perceived benefits and harms. This multicenter survey was conducted to assess the use of cannabis among cancer patients residing in states with varied legal access to cannabis.

METHODS

A total of 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers, across states with varied cannabis-access legal status, conducted surveys with a core questionnaire to assess cannabis use among recently diagnosed cancer patients. Data were collected between September 2021 and August 2023 and pooled across 12 cancer centers. Frequencies and 95% confidence intervals for core survey measures were calculated, and weighted estimates are presented for the 10 sites that drew probability samples.

RESULTS

Overall reported cannabis use since cancer diagnosis among survey respondents was 32.9% (weighted), which varied slightly by state legalization status. The most common perceived benefits of use were for pain, sleep, stress and anxiety, and treatment side effects. Reported perceived risks were less common and included inability to drive, difficulty concentrating, lung damage, addiction, and impact on employment. A majority reported feeling comfortable speaking to health-care providers though, overall, only 21.5% reported having done so. Among those who used cannabis since diagnosis, the most common modes were eating in food, smoking, and pills or tinctures, and the most common reasons were for sleep disturbance, followed by pain and stress and anxiety with 60%-68% reporting improved symptoms with use.

CONCLUSION

This geographically diverse survey demonstrates that patients use cannabis regardless of its legal status. Addressing knowledge gaps concerning benefits and harms of cannabis use during cancer treatment is critical to enhance patient-provider communication.

Tobacco-cannabis co-use among cancer patients and survivors: findings from 2 US cancer centers

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use is prevalent among cancer patients and survivors and may provide some therapeutic benefits for this population. However, benefits may be attenuated when cannabis is co-used with tobacco, which is associated with more severe tobacco and cannabis use and adverse outcomes in noncancer populations. We compared cannabis use, primary mode of use, and therapeutic and/or nontherapeutic use among 3 groups of patients and survivors based on cigarette smoking status.

METHODS

Survey data was collected from patients and survivors with cancer (n = 1732) at 2 US National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in states with varying cannabis regulatory policy. Prevalence of cannabis use (prior to diagnosis, after diagnosis, before treatment, after treatment), primary mode of use, and therapeutic and/or nontherapeutic use were assessed by cigarette smoking status (current, former, never) within and across centers using weighted bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression, controlling for demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Current cigarette use was associated with greater rates of cannabis use prior to diagnosis, after diagnosis, during treatment, and after treatment within each center (all P < .001) and in pooled analyses across centers (all P < .001). Primary mode of use, knowledge of cannabis products, and therapeutic and/or nontherapeutic use also statistically differed by tobacco status and study site.

CONCLUSIONS

Results illustrate the importance of conducting assessments for both tobacco and cannabis use among cancer patients during and after cancer treatment, regardless of the cannabis regulatory environment. Given previous data indicating harms from co-use and continued tobacco use during cancer treatment, this issue introduces new priorities for cancer care delivery and research.

Ethnic differences in the patterns, sources, and reasons for cannabis use among cancer patients at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe patterns, sources, and reasons for cannabis use among cancer patients by ethnic group.

METHODS

Data are from a cross-sectional study of 416 surveys collected via RedCap anonymously from adult cancer patients seen at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center within the last 5 years. A harmonized survey was created with 11 other National Cancer Institute centers to assess cannabis use patterns, sources, and reasons for use. Sociodemographics and cancer details were also collected via self-report. Descriptive statistics by ethnic group were compared using χ2 and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Among the sample (age mean = 50.4 [15.7] years; 53% male; 8.3% lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer; 46.7% Hispanic and Latinx individuals), 69.6% reported lifetime use of cannabis, 33.7% began cannabis use after cancer diagnosis, 48.1% of those consuming cannabis did not have a prescription for cannabis, and 29.4% of cannabis users consumed daily. The frequency of cannabis use (P = .04) and reasons for cannabis use (P = .02) varied by ethnic group. Sleep and pain were the most prevalent reasons for use among the Hispanics and Latinx populations; pain, mental health management, and neuropathy were the most prevalent reasons for cannabis use among non-Hispanic White individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns and reasons for cannabis use differed among cancer patients by ethnic group in this exploratory cross-sectional study aimed to provide data for more rigorous study. Understanding these distinctions are pivotal in conducting more rigorous studies that address the unique needs of diverse populations utilizing cannabis for managing cancer-related symptoms.

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.

Medical cannabis use in oncology and associated outcomes: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Natural and synthetic cannabinoids are being used worldwide to treat various symptoms in cancer patients. This study aims to map the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects associated with the use of cannabis-based drugs in these outcomes.

METHODS

Following Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines a scoping review was conducted. The study protocol was available in the Open Science Framework public repository. An extensive search strategy involving databases like Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, Medline/PubMed, Lilacs, Google Scholar, and Open Gray for gray literature analysis was executed by a skilled librarian. The inclusion criteria were primary studies (observational and randomized) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids in cancer patients. The review encompassed studies of diverse designs, publication years, and types, as long as they addressed cannabinoids' impact in oncology.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine (82.86%) out of total of 35 were randomized and 6 (14.14%) were non-randomized. About 57.1% of studies utilized registered products as interventions, with THC being the most natural cannabinoid cited in variable doses and administration routes. Moreover, 62.85% of studies specified the cancer types (breast, lung, sarcomas, hematological and reproductive system), while only one study detailed cancer staging. The evaluated outcomes encompassed nausea and vomiting (77.14%), appetite (11.43%), pain (8.57%), and tumor regression (2.86%) across different proportions of studies.

CONCLUSION

Cannabinoids show promise in managing pain, emesis, and anorexia/cachexia linked to cancer progression. New randomized clinical trials with a larger number of participants and observational studies on long-term safety are crucial to affirm their medicinal utility for cancer patients unresponsive to conventional drugs.

Cannabidiol (CBD): Confronting consumers' expectations of therapeutic benefits with pharmacological reality

In recent years, the increase in cannabidiol (CBD) sales in Europe has raised questions regarding the legal status of this product, as well as its safety of use. Consumers seem to be looking for solutions to various health issues. However, the scientific reality is much more nuanced. The European CBD market emerged in Switzerland in 2016 and subsequently expanded across the continent. This expansion has been facilitated by the establishment of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration limits for these products. However, the current market offers a diverse range of CBD products, often lacking clear information on raw materials, product concentrations and recommended dosages. Regulating these products is challenging, as the appropriate classification of CBD remains uncertain. CBD products are in high demand worldwide, with many people seeking alternative treatments for medical conditions or general health and well-being benefits. However, the use of CBD products often relies on self-medication and lacks sufficient scientific evidence. Improved communication between patients and healthcare professionals is needed to ensure informed decisions and address potential interactions with other medications. Scientific evidence on CBD is currently limited and the efficacy of CBD-containing products has only been proven in clinical trials for Epidyolex® as an add-on therapy. There is no consensus on the long-term safety, appropriate dosage, schedules or administration routes for CBD. Health claims associated with CBD are not consistent with the available scientific research, which is still in its early stages. Further clinical research is needed to establish the efficacy and safety of CBD in various medical conditions. The enthusiasm surrounding CBD-based products should be tempered by the limited scientific evidence of their efficacy, the inadequacy of patient expectations, regulatory concerns and potential drug interactions.

Cannabis Perceptions and Patterns of Use Among Older Adult Cancer Survivors

Objectives: To descriptively assess cannabis perceptions and patterns of use among older adult cancer survivors in a state without a legal cannabis marketplace. Methods: This study used weighted prevalence estimates to cross-sectionally describe cannabis perceptions and patterns of use among older (65+) adults (N = 524) in a National Cancer Institute-designated center in a state without legal cannabis access. Results: Half (46%) had ever used cannabis (18% following diagnosis and 10% currently). Only 8% had discussed cannabis with their provider. For those using post-diagnosis, the most common reason was for pain (44%), followed by insomnia (43%), with smoking being the most common (40%) mode of use. Few (<3%) reported that cannabis had worsened any of their symptoms. Discussion: Even within a state without a legal cannabis marketplace, older cancer survivors might commonly use cannabis to alleviate health concerns but unlikely to discuss this with their providers.

Role of Cannabinoids in Oral Cancer

Cannabinoids have incited scientific interest in different conditions, including malignancy, due to increased exposure to cannabis. Furthermore, cannabinoids are increasingly used to alleviate cancer-related symptoms. This review paper aims to clarify the recent findings on the relationship between cannabinoids and oral cancer, focusing on the molecular mechanisms that could link cannabinoids with oral cancer pathogenesis. In addition, we provide an overview of the current and future perspectives on the management of oral cancer patients using cannabinoid compounds. Epidemiological data on cannabis use and oral cancer development are conflicting. However, in vitro studies assessing the effects of cannabinoids on oral cancer cells have unveiled promising anti-cancer features, including apoptosis and inhibition of cell proliferation. Downregulation of various signaling pathways with anti-cancer effects has been identified in experimental models of oral cancer cells exposed to cannabinoids. Furthermore, in some countries, several synthetic or phytocannabinoids have been approved as medical adjuvants for the management of cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy. Cannabinoids may improve overall well-being by relieving anxiety, depression, pain, and nausea. In conclusion, the link between cannabinoid compounds and oral cancer is complex, and further research is necessary to elucidate the potential risks or their protective impact on oral cancer.

Analysis of Dispensing and Utilization Patterns of Medical Cannabis Products in State Licensed Cannabis Dispensaries

Background: To understand real-world dispensing and utilization patterns of medical cannabis (MC) and its financial impact on patients, we analyzed the database of a cannabis company licensed in New York state. Objectives: To evaluate the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)/cannabidiol (CBD) dose ratios, association of various medical conditions to THC/CBD dose, and the cost of products in registered patients receiving MC from four licensed state dispensaries. Design: Retrospective analysis conducted on anonymized data between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020 listing 422,201 dispensed products from 32,845 individuals aged 18 years and older. Setting/Subjects: Adult patients with medical certification for cannabis use in New York, USA. Measurements: The database included patient's age, gender, qualifying medical condition, type and dose of product, medication directions, and amount of product dispensed. Results: Findings showed a median age of 53 years with 52% of patients female. Males were found to use more products than females (1.06:1). Pain (85%) was the most common medical condition and inhalation (57%) the most common route except when used for cancer-directed treatment and neurological conditions. Individuals received a median of six prescriptions costing a median of $50/product. Average THC:CBD ratios were 28:0.5 mg/day and 12:0.25 mg/dose. Neurological conditions demonstrated the highest average cost [mean (95% confidence interval {CI}): $73 ($71-$75)] and average CBD/dose per product [mean (95% CI): 5.89 (5.38-6.40)]. Individuals with a history of substance use disorder utilizing MC as an alternative substance displayed the highest average THC/dose [mean (95% CI): 14.25 (13.36-15.14)]. Conclusion: MC was utilized for various medical conditions with variability in THC:CBD ratio seen depending on the condition. Cost variation was also observed based on the individual's medical condition.

SPME as a green sample-preparation technique for the monitoring of phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids in complex matrices

The endocannabinoid system (ECS), particularly its signaling pathways and ligands, has garnered considerable interest in recent years. Along with clinical work investigating the ECS' functions, including its role in the development of neurological and inflammatory conditions, much research has focused on developing analytical protocols enabling the precise monitoring of the levels and metabolism of the most potent ECS ligands: exogenous phytocannabinoids (PCs) and endogenous cannabinoids (endocannabinoids, ECs). Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) is an advanced, non-exhaustive sample-preparation technique that facilitates the precise and efficient isolation of trace amounts of analytes, thus making it appealing for the analysis of PCs and ECs in complex matrices of plant and animal/human origin. In this paper, we review recent forensic medicine and toxicological studies wherein SPME has been applied to monitor levels of PCs and ECs in complex matrices, determine their effects on organism physiology, and assess their role in the development of several diseases.

Should oncologists trust cannabinoids?

Cannabis enjoyed a "golden age" as a medicinal product in the late 19th, early 20th century, but the increased risk of overdose and abuse led to its criminalization. However, the 21st century have witnessed a resurgence of interest and a large body of literature regarding the benefits of cannabinoids have emerged. As legalization and decriminalization have spread around the world, cancer patients are increasingly interested in the potential utility of cannabinoids. Although eager to discuss cannabis use with their oncologist, patients often find them to be reluctant, mainly because clinicians are still not convinced by the existing evidence-based data to guide their treatment plans. Physicians should prescribe cannabis only if a careful explanation can be provided and follow up response evaluation ensured, making it mandatory for them to be up to date with the positive and also negative aspects of the cannabis in the case of cancer patients. Consequently, this article aims to bring some clarifications to clinicians regarding the sometimes-confusing various nomenclature under which this plant is mentioned, current legislation and the existing evidence (both preclinical and clinical) for the utility of cannabinoids in cancer patients, for either palliation of the associated symptoms or even the potential antitumor effects that cannabinoids may have.

Cannabis self-administration in the human laboratory: a scoping review of ad libitum studies

Cannabis self-administration studies may be helpful for identifying factors that influence cannabis consumption and subjective response to cannabis. Additionally, these paradigms could be useful for testing novel pharmacotherapies for cannabis use disorder. This scoping review aims to summarize the findings from existing ad libitum cannabis self-administration studies to determine what has been learned from these studies as well as their limitations. We examined studies that specifically examined cannabis smoking, focusing on subjective response and self-administration behavior (e.g., smoking topography). A systematic search was conducted using PubMed and Embase from inception to October 22, 2022. Our search strategy identified 26 studies (total N = 662, 79% male) that met our eligibility criteria. We found that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration significantly affected subjective response to cannabis in some but not all studies. In general, cannabis self-administration tended to be most intense at the beginning of the laboratory session and decreased in later parts of the session. There was limited data on cannabis self-administration in adults older than 55. Data on external validity and test-retest reliability were also limited. Addressing these limitations in future ad libitum cannabis self-administration studies could lead to more valid and generalizable paradigms, which in turn could be used to improve our understanding of cannabis use patterns and to help guide medication development for cannabis use disorder.

Cannabis Use in Patients Seen in an Academic Radiation Oncology Department

PURPOSE

Cannabis use rates are increasing in the United States. Patients with cancer use cannabis for many reasons, even without high-quality supporting data. This study sought to characterize cannabis use among patients seen in radiation oncology in a state that has legalized adult nonmedical use cannabis and to identify key cannabis-related educational topics.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Cannabis history was documented by providers using a structured template at patient visits in an academic radiation oncology practice October 2020 to November 2021. Cannabis use data, including recency/frequency of use, reason, and mode of administration, were summarized, and logistic regression was used to explore associations between patient and disease characteristics and recent cannabis use. A multivariable model employed stepwise variable selection using the Akaike Information Criterion.

RESULTS

Of 3143 patients total, 91 (2.9%) declined to answer cannabis use questions, and 343 (10.9%) endorsed recent use (≤1 month ago), 235 (7.5%) noted nonrecent use (>1 month ago), and 2474 (78.7%) denied history of cannabis use. In multivariable analyses, those ≥50 years old (odds ratio [OR], 0.409; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.294-0.568; P < .001) or with history of prior courses of radiation (OR, 0.748; 95% CI, 0.572-0.979; P = .034) were less likely, and those with a mental health diagnosis not related to substance use (OR, 1.533; 95% CI, 1.171-2.005; P = .002) or who smoked tobacco (OR, 3.003; 95% CI, 2.098-4.299; P < .001) were more likely to endorse recent cannabis use. Patients reported pain, insomnia, and anxiety as the most common reasons for use. Smoking was the most common mode of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients are willing to discuss cannabis use with providers and reported recent cannabis use for a variety of reasons. Younger patients new to oncologic care and those with a history of mental illness or tobacco smoking may benefit most from discussions about cannabis given higher rates of cannabis use in these groups.

Role of Cannabidiol for Improvement of the Quality of Life in Cancer Patients: Potential and Challenges

There is currently a growing interest in the use of cannabidiol (CBD) to alleviate the symptoms caused by cancer, including pain, sleep disruption, and anxiety. CBD is often self-administered as an over-the-counter supplement, and patients have reported benefits from its use. However, despite the progress made, the mechanisms underlying CBD’s anti-cancer activity remain divergent and unclear. Herein, we provide a comprehensive review of molecular mechanisms to determine convergent anti-cancer actions of CBD from pre-clinical and clinical studies. In vitro studies have begun to elucidate the molecular targets of CBD and provide evidence of CBD’s anti-tumor properties in cell and mouse models of cancer. Furthermore, several clinical trials have been completed testing CBD’s efficacy in treating cancer-related pain. However, most use a mixture of CBD and the psychoactive, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and/or use variable dosing that is not consistent between individual patients. Despite these limitations, significant reductions in pain and opioid use have been reported in cancer patients using CBD or CBD+THC. Additionally, significant improvements in quality-of-life measures and patients’ overall satisfaction with their treatment have been reported. Thus, there is growing evidence suggesting that CBD might be useful to improve the overall quality of life of cancer patients by both alleviating cancer symptoms and by synergizing with cancer therapies to improve their efficacy. However, many questions remain unanswered regarding the use of CBD in cancer treatment, including the optimal dose, effective combinations with other drugs, and which biomarkers/clinical presentation of symptoms may guide its use.