Search

Introduction: Cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to maintain bone integrity in pre-clinical models, but little is known about the effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on bone turnover. In this study we explored the effects of two oral medical cannabis products on normal bone homeostasis through evaluation of markers of bone resorption (carboxyl-terminal collagen crosslinks, CTx) and bone formation (procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide, P1NP; alkaline phosphatase, ALP). Methods: This study is an analysis of secondary data from two Phase 1 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of Spectrum Yellow (0.9 mg THC, 20 mg CBD/mL of oil) and Spectrum Red (2.5 mg THC, 0.3 mg CBD/softgel). Healthy participants ( n =38 men, 45 women) were randomized to receive 5-20 mg THC (CBD levels varied as a function of administered product) or placebo daily (BID) for 7 days. Bone markers were assessed at baseline, upon completion of product administration (day 8), and after a 5-day washout (day 13). Results: All bone markers were significantly higher in men at baseline ( p ≤0.008). For CTx, there was a significant day×group interaction ( F =3.23, p =0.04); CTx levels were significantly lower in participants treated with Spectrum Red ( b =-164.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], -328 to -0.29; p =0.04) and marginally lower in participants treated with Spectrum Yellow ( b =-157.31; 95% CI, -323 to 8.68; p =0.06) versus placebo on day 8. For P1NP and ALP, there were no significant differences between treatments across study days. Bone marker values outside the reference range (RR) were observed; CTx > RR ( n =71) was predominantly (85.9%) observed in male participants, whereas P1NP > RR ( n =100) was more evenly distributed between sexes (53.0% in men). These were not considered clinically significant and did not differ between treatment groups. Conclusions: These are the first interventional human data on the effect of cannabinoids on biomarkers of bone turnover. Short-term treatment with CBD- or THC-dominant medical cannabis products resulted in attenuation of a marker of bone resorption. Although the attenuation was not clinically significant, this finding may be indicative of protective properties of cannabinoids in bone. Further research over longer dosing durations in individuals exhibiting bone-specific conditions (e.g., osteoporosis) is warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov IDs: ACTRN12619001723178 and ACTRN12619001450101.

Objective: To investigate the safety and effectiveness of medical cannabis (MC) in the real-world clinical practice setting. Design: A 4-year prospective noncomparative registry of adult patients who initiated MC for a variety of indications. This paper reports on patients followed for up to 12 months, with interim visits at 3, 6, and 9 months after enrollment. Setting: Public or private outpatient clinics certified to authorize MC in the province of Quebec, Canada. Participants: Overall, 2991 adult (age ≥18 years) patients (mean age 51 years; 50.2% women) were enrolled between May 2015 and October 2018, with the last follow-up ending in May 2019. Interventions/Exposures: Cannabis products (dried, oil, or other) purchased from a Canadian licensed cannabis producer as authorized by physicians. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity, interference and relief (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]), symptoms using the Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and health-related quality of life dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) at baseline and each follow-up visit. The secondary outcomes were self-reported adverse events (AEs) and characteristics of cannabis treatment. Results: All patient-reported outcomes (BPI, ESAS-r, and EQ-5D-5L) showed a statistically significant improvement at 3 months (all p <0.01), which was maintained or further improved (for pain interference, tiredness, and well-being) over the remainder of the 12-month follow-up. Results also revealed clinically significant improvements in pain interference and tiredness, anxiety, and well-being from baseline. There were 79 AE reports (77 patients), 16 met the regulatory definition of seriousness, in which only 8 AEs were certainly or probably related to MC. Conclusions: MC directed by physicians appears to be safe and effective within 3 months of initiation for a variety of medical indications.

Objective: Many patients with fibromyalgia (FM) report using cannabis as a strategy to improve pain. Given that pain often co-occurs with symptoms of anxiety and depression (i.e., negative affect) and sleep problems among patients with FM, improvements in these symptoms might indirectly contribute to reductions in pain intensity following cannabis use. The main objective of the study was to examine whether changes in pain intensity following initiation of medical cannabis among patients with FM could be attributed to concurrent changes (i.e., reductions) in negative affect and sleep problems., Methods: This was a 12-month prospective cohort study among patients with FM (n = 323) initiating medical cannabis under the care of physicians. Patients were assessed at baseline, and follow-up assessment visits occurred every 3 months after initiation of medical cannabis. Patients' levels of pain intensity, negative affect, and sleep problems were assessed across all visits., Results: Multilevel mediation analyses indicated that reductions in patients' levels of pain intensity were partly explained by concurrent reductions in sleep problems and negative affect (both P < 0.001). This remained significant even when accounting for patients' baseline characteristics or changes in medical cannabis directives over time (all P > 0.05)., Conclusion: Our findings provide preliminary insight into the potential mechanisms of action underlying pain reductions among patients with FM who are using medical cannabis. Given the high attrition rate (i.e., 75%) observed in the present study at 12 months, our findings cannot be generalized to all patients with FM who are using medical cannabis., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: Clinical trials remain the gold standard for evaluating efficacy, but there is increasing interest in using real-world evidence (RWE) to inform health care decision making. The aims of this observational study were to describe patterns of medical cannabis use, associated changes in symptom severity over time, and to evaluate change in cannabis dose over time for pain-related symptoms. Methods: Data were collected by Strainprint ™ , an application that is HIPAA, PIPEDA, and PHIPA compliant. A total of 629 participants recorded data between May 2017 and August 2019. A total of 65 symptoms were grouped as Pain, Mental Health, Physical Symptoms, Seizures, Headaches/Migraines, and Other. Descriptive statistics and mixed-effects modeling were applied. Results: THC-dominant products were more frequently consumed for symptoms of pain and sleep, while CBD-dominant products were more frequently consumed for anxiety and depression. Male and female participants demonstrated significant differences in the type of cannabis they consumed. Females more frequently consumed CBD-dominant products, and males more frequently consumed balanced (THC:CBD) products. Oil use was more prominent among females, while vaping was more common among males. Product use also varied by age tertiles (<31; 31-39; >40 years). CBD-dominant products were more common among younger participants, <31 years, THC-dominant products were more common among the 31-39 years category and balanced (THC:CBD) products were common among older participants >41 years. Dosages of CBD-dominant and balanced (THC:CBD) products increased over time irrespective of symptom response. THC-dominant products demonstrated a significant relationship between dose and symptom reduction over time. Conclusions: Recognizing that RWE has important methodological limitations, we observed cannabis product preferences based on demographic characteristics, such as gender and age and the primary symptom treated such as pain and anxiety. Our study offers real-world insights into how participants use and respond to cannabis products and suggests important avenues and methodologies for future research.

Background: Recent studies recommend medicinal cannabis (MC) as a potential treatment for chronic pain (CP) when conventional therapies are not successful; however, data from Australia is limited. This real-world evidence study explored how the introduction of MC related to concomitant medication use over time. Long-term safety also was examined., Methods: Data were collected by the Emerald Clinics (a network of seven clinics located across Australia) as part of routine practice from Jan 2020 toJan 2021. Medications were classified by group: antidepressants, benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and total number of medications. Adverse events (AEs) were collected at each visit and subsequently coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities version 23 into the system organ class (SOC) and preferred term (PT). A total of 535 patients were analyzed., Results: The most common daily oral dose was 10 mg for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 15 mg for cannabidiol (CBD). With the introduction of MC, patients' total number of medications consumed decreased over the course of one year; significant reductions in NSAIDs, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants were observed ( p  < .001). However, the number of prescribed opioid medications did not differ from baseline to the end of one year ( p  = .49). Only 6% of patients discontinued MC treatment during the study. A total of 600 AEs were reported in 310 patients during the reporting period and 97% of them were classified as nonserious. Discussion . Though observational in nature, these findings suggest MC is generally well-tolerated, consistent with the previous literature, and may reduce concomitant use of some medications. Due to study limitations, concomitant medication reductions cannot be causally attributed to MC. Nevertheless, these data underscore early signals that warrant further exploration in randomized trials., Competing Interests: MK, GMLE, MTF, and MAW (prior to June 2022) are all employees of Canopy Growth Corporation. AWV, TE, and PDW are all employees and shareholders of Emyria Ltd., (Copyright © 2022 Maja Kalaba et al.)

Purpose: Cannabichromene (CBC) is a phytocannabinoid commonly found in cannabis, yet its acute post-dose pharmacokinetics (PK) have not been examined in humans. This is a secondary data analysis from a trial investigating Spectrum Yellow oil, an oral cannabis product used for medical purposes that contained 20 mg cannabidiol (CBD), 0.9 mg Δ 9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and 1.1 mg CBC, per 1 mL of oil., Methods: Participants (N = 43) were randomized to one of 5 groups: 120 mg CBD, 5.4 mg THC, and 6.6 mg CBC daily; 240 mg CBD, 10.8 mg THC, and 13.2 mg CBC daily; 360 mg CBD, 16.2 mg THC, and 19.8 mg CBC daily; 480 mg CBD, 21.6 mg THC, and 26.4 mg CBC daily; or placebo. Study medication was administered every 12 h for 7 days. Plasma CBC concentrations were analyzed by a validated two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay., Results: After a single dose and after the final dose, the C max of CBC increased by 1.3-1.8-fold for each twofold increase in dose; the t max range was 1.6-4.3 h. Based on the ratio of administered CBD, THC, and CBC to the plasma concentration, the dose of CBD was 18 times higher than the dose of CBC, yet the AUC 0-t of CBD was only 6.6-9.8-fold higher than the AUC 0-t of CBC; the dose of THC was similar to the dose of CBC, yet THC was quantifiable in fewer plasma samples than was CBC., Conclusions: CBC may have preferential absorption over CBD and THC when administered together., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry #ACTRN12619001450101, registered 18 October 2019., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Despite increasing demand for data, little is known about the authorization patterns, safety, and effectiveness of medical cannabis products. Materials and Methods: We conducted a 2 year observational study of adult patients who were legally authorized a medical cannabis product from a single licensed producer; we captured and analyzed authorized cannabis use patterns by cannabinoid profile (tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]-dominant; cannabidiol [CBD]-dominant; and balanced (THC:CBD) and clinical outcomes using standardized outcome measures every 3 months for 12 months at a network of medical cannabis clinics in Quebec, Canada. Results: We recruited 585 patients (average age 56.5 years), of whom 61% identified as female and 85% reported pain as their primary complaint. Over 12 months, there was a significant increase in the number of products authorized ( Z =2.59, p =0.01). The proportion of authorizations for a THC-dominant or CBD-dominant product increased relative to the proportion of authorizations for a balanced (THC:CBD) product (all p <0.01). Symptom improvement over time was observed for pain, tiredness, drowsiness, anxiety, and well-being. Patients authorized THC-dominant products exhibited less symptom improvement for anxiety and well-being relative to those authorized CBD-dominant or balanced (THC:CBD) products. Medical cannabis was well tolerated across all product profiles. Conclusion: These real-world data reveal changes in medical cannabis authorization patterns and suggest that symptom improvement may vary by cannabinoid profile over 12 months of follow-up.

Objective: To determine the benefits and harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain., Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos, and trial registries up to January 2021., Study Selection: Randomised clinical trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids versus any non-cannabis control for chronic pain at ≥1 month follow-up., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects models meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence., Results: A total of 32 trials with 5174 adult patients were included, 29 of which compared medical cannabis or cannabinoids with placebo. Medical cannabis was administered orally (n=30) or topically (n=2). Clinical populations included chronic non-cancer pain (n=28) and cancer related pain (n=4). Length of follow-up ranged from 1 to 5.5 months. Compared with placebo, non-inhaled medical cannabis probably results in a small increase in the proportion of patients experiencing at least the minimally important difference (MID) of 1 cm (on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS)) in pain relief (modelled risk difference (RD) of 10% (95% confidence interval 5% to 15%), based on a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.50 cm (95% CI -0.75 to -0.25 cm, moderate certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally results in a very small improvement in physical functioning (4% modelled RD (0.1% to 8%) for achieving at least the MID of 10 points on the 100-point SF-36 physical functioning scale, WMD of 1.67 points (0.03 to 3.31, high certainty)), and a small improvement in sleep quality (6% modelled RD (2% to 9%) for achieving at least the MID of 1 cm on a 10 cm VAS, WMD of -0.35 cm (-0.55 to -0.14 cm, high certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally does not improve emotional, role, or social functioning (high certainty). Moderate certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis taken orally probably results in a small increased risk of transient cognitive impairment (RD 2% (0.1% to 6%)), vomiting (RD 3% (0.4% to 6%)), drowsiness (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), impaired attention (RD 3% (1% to 8%)), and nausea (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), but not diarrhoea; while high certainty evidence shows greater increased risk of dizziness (RD 9% (5% to 14%)) for trials with <3 months follow-up versus RD 28% (18% to 43%) for trials with ≥3 months follow-up; interaction test P=0.003; moderate credibility of subgroup effect)., Conclusions: Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids results in a small to very small improvement in pain relief, physical functioning, and sleep quality among patients with chronic pain, along with several transient adverse side effects, compared with placebo. The accompanying BMJ Rapid Recommendation provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/3pwn2., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no financial support from any industry for the submitted work; IP and SU have received research funds from Northern Green Canada; IP has been a paid consultant for Northern Green Science, Northern Green Canada, Monk-E psychedelics, and Evergreen Pacific Insurance Corporation; SU and IP received honoraria from Spectrum Therapeutics and Tilray Inc. for educational presentations; MAW is the chief medical officer for Canopy Growth Corporation., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Ecological research suggests that increased access to cannabis may facilitate reductions in opioid use and harms, and medical cannabis patients describe the substitution of opioids with cannabis for pain management. However, there is a lack of research using individual-level data to explore this question. We aimed to investigate the longitudinal association between frequency of cannabis use and illicit opioid use among people who use drugs (PWUD) experiencing chronic pain., Methods and Findings: This study included data from people in 2 prospective cohorts of PWUD in Vancouver, Canada, who reported major or persistent pain from June 1, 2014, to December 1, 2017 (n = 1,152). We used descriptive statistics to examine reasons for cannabis use and a multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects model to estimate the relationship between daily (once or more per day) cannabis use and daily illicit opioid use. There were 424 (36.8%) women in the study, and the median age at baseline was 49.3 years (IQR 42.3-54.9). In total, 455 (40%) reported daily illicit opioid use, and 410 (36%) reported daily cannabis use during at least one 6-month follow-up period. The most commonly reported therapeutic reasons for cannabis use were pain (36%), sleep (35%), stress (31%), and nausea (30%). After adjusting for demographic characteristics, substance use, and health-related factors, daily cannabis use was associated with significantly lower odds of daily illicit opioid use (adjusted odds ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.74, p < 0.001). Limitations of the study included self-reported measures of substance use and chronic pain, and a lack of data for cannabis preparations, dosages, and modes of administration., Conclusions: We observed an independent negative association between frequent cannabis use and frequent illicit opioid use among PWUD with chronic pain. These findings provide longitudinal observational evidence that cannabis may serve as an adjunct to or substitute for illicit opioid use among PWUD with chronic pain., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: M-JM is the Canopy Growth professor of cannabis science at UBC, a position created using unstructured arms’ length gifts to the university from Canopy Growth Corporation and the Government of British Columbia’s Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions. The University of British Columbia has received unstructured funding from NG Biomed, Ltd., an applicant to the Canadian federal government for a license to produce cannabis, to support M-JM. ZW is Coordinating Principal Investigator on a clinical trial sponsored by Tilray, a licensed producer of medical cannabis. ZDC has received research funds and partial salary support from Insys Therapeutics. She has served as a consultant to GB Sciences and Beckley Canopy Therapeutics and is a scientific advisor to FSD Pharma. MAW has consulted for CHI, CannaRoyalty and Zynerba and has received a grant to his institution for clinical research from CanniMed. He was appointed to Chief Medical Officer at Canopy Growth Corp in July 2018 (after the study period ended). He supported the first author in conceptualization of the research, but did not contribute to the study’s methodological design or data analysis. All other authors report no competing interests in relation to the work described.

Cannabinoids may hold potential for the management of rheumatic pain. Arthritis, often self-reported, is commonly cited as the reason for the use of medicinal herbal cannabis (marijuana). We have examined the prevalence of marijuana use among 1000 consecutive rheumatology patients with a rheumatologist-confirmed diagnosis and compared in an exploratory manner the clinical characteristics of medicinal users and nonusers. Current marijuana use, medicinal or recreational, was reported by 38 patients (3.8%; 95% CI: 2.8-5.2). Ever use of marijuana for medical purposes was reported by 4.3% (95% CI: 3.2-5.7), with 28 (2.8%; 95% CI: 1.9-4.0) reporting current medicinal use. Current medicinal users had a spectrum of rheumatic conditions, with over half diagnosed with osteoarthritis. Medicinal users were younger, more likely unemployed or disabled, and reported poorer global health. Pain report and opioid use was greater for users, but they had similar physician global assessment of disease status compared with nonusers. Medicinal users were more likely previous recreational users, with approximately 40% reporting concurrent recreational use. Therefore, less than 3% of rheumatology patients reported current use of medicinal marijuana. This low rate of use in patients with a rheumatologist-confirmed diagnosis is in stark contrast to the high rates of severe arthritis frequently reported by medicinal marijuana users, especially in Canada. Familiarity with marijuana as a recreational product may explain use for some as disease status was similar for both groups.

Unlabelled: Cannabis is widely used as a self-management strategy by patients with a wide range of symptoms and diseases including chronic non-cancer pain. The safety of cannabis use for medical purposes has not been systematically evaluated. We conducted a prospective cohort study to describe safety issues among individuals with chronic non-cancer pain. A standardized herbal cannabis product (12.5% tetrahydrocannabinol) was dispensed to eligible individuals for a 1-year period; controls were individuals with chronic pain from the same clinics who were not cannabis users. The primary outcome consisted of serious adverse events and non-serious adverse events. Secondary safety outcomes included pulmonary and neurocognitive function and standard hematology, biochemistry, renal, liver, and endocrine function. Secondary efficacy parameters included pain and other symptoms, mood, and quality of life. Two hundred and fifteen individuals with chronic pain were recruited to the cannabis group (141 current users and 58 ex-users) and 216 controls (chronic pain but no current cannabis use) from 7 clinics across Canada. The median daily cannabis dose was 2.5 g/d. There was no difference in risk of serious adverse events (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = .57-2.04) between groups. Medical cannabis users were at increased risk of non-serious adverse events (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 1.73, 95% confidence interval = 1.41-2.13); most were mild to moderate. There were no differences in secondary safety assessments. Quality-controlled herbal cannabis, when used by patients with experience of cannabis use as part of a monitored treatment program over 1 year, appears to have a reasonable safety profile. Longer-term monitoring for functional outcomes is needed., Study Registration: The study was registered with www.controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN19449752)., Perspective: This study evaluated the safety of cannabis use by patients with chronic pain over 1 year. The study found that there was a higher rate of adverse events among cannabis users compared with controls but not for serious adverse events at an average dose of 2.5 g herbal cannabis per day., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: Chronic neuropathic pain, the most frequent condition affecting the peripheral nervous system, remains underdiagnosed and difficult to treat. Inhaled cannabis may alleviate chronic neuropathic pain. Our objective was to synthesize the evidence on the use of inhaled cannabis for chronic neuropathic pain. We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of individual patient data. We registered our protocol with PROSPERO CRD42011001182. We searched in Cochrane Central, PubMed, EMBASE, and AMED. We considered all randomized controlled trials investigating chronic painful neuropathy and comparing inhaled cannabis with placebo. We pooled treatment effects following a hierarchical random-effects Bayesian responder model for the population-averaged subject-specific effect. Our evidence synthesis of individual patient data from 178 participants with 405 observed responses in 5 randomized controlled trials following patients for days to weeks provides evidence that inhaled cannabis results in short-term reductions in chronic neuropathic pain for 1 in every 5 to 6 patients treated (number needed to treat = 5.6 with a Bayesian 95% credible interval ranging between 3.4 and 14). Our inferences were insensitive to model assumptions, priors, and parameter choices. We caution that the small number of studies and participants, the short follow-up, shortcomings in allocation concealment, and considerable attrition limit the conclusions that can be drawn from the review. The Bayes factor is 332, corresponding to a posterior probability of effect of 99.7%., Perspective: This novel Bayesian meta-analysis of individual patient data from 5 randomized trials suggests that inhaled cannabis may provide short-term relief for 1 in 5 to 6 patients with neuropathic pain. Pragmatic trials are needed to evaluate the long-term benefits and risks of this treatment., (Copyright © 2015 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is increasing global awareness and interest in the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes (CTP). It is clear that health care professionals need to be involved in these decisions, but often lack the education needed to engage in informed discussions with patients. This study was conducted to determine the educational needs of Canadian physicians regarding CTP., Methods: A national needs assessment survey was developed based on previous survey tools. The survey was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the McGill University Health Centre Research Institute and was provided online using LimeSurvey®. Several national physician organizations and medical education organizations informed their members of the survey. The target audience was Canadian physicians. We sought to identify and rank using 5-point Likert scales the most common factors involved in decision making about using CTP in the following categories: knowledge, experience, attitudes, and barriers. Preferred educational approaches and physician demographics were collected. Gap analysis was conducted to determine the magnitude and importance of differences between perceived and desired knowledge on all decision factors., Results: Four hundred and twenty six responses were received, and physician responses were distributed across Canada consistent with national physician distribution. The most desired knowledge concerned "potential risks of using CTP" and "safety, warning signs and precautions for patients using CTP". The largest gap between perceived current and desired knowledge levels was "dosing" and "the development of treatment plans"., Conclusions: We have identified several key educational needs among Canadian physicians regarding CTP. These data can be used to develop resources and educational programs to support clinicians in this area, as well as to guide further research to inform these gaps.

Introduction: Published data on the safety of natural medical cannabis (MC) when used in the real-world clinical practice setting are lacking. This study aimed to describe adverse events (AEs) reported across three years following MC initiation. Methods: The Quebec Cannabis Registry (QCR) was a prospective registry of adults enrolled through participating physicians when they initiated MC between May 2015 and October 2018. Follow-up ended at MC discontinuation, loss to follow-up, three years, or end of data collection (May 2019). Data were collected at baseline and at follow-up visits every three months for the first two years, then once in the third year. Physicians filled adverse event (AE) reports, which were coded using MedDRA® preferred terms (PTs), and descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 2991 patients were enrolled (mean age 50.9 years, 50.2% females). During follow-up, 108 patients (3.6%) experienced moderate or severe AEs, yielding 111 AE reports (three patients had two reports) and 214 AEs (average 1.9 AEs per report). Mild AEs were recorded as a reason for MC discontinuation for nine patients, but no AE reports were available. The most common PTs for ingested MC (62 reports) were dizziness (12.9%), nausea (11.3%), somnolence (9.7%), and vomiting (8.1%), and for inhaled MC (23 reports), headache (13.0%) was the most common. The most frequent PTs associated with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-dominant MC (25 reports) were dizziness and somnolence (12.0% each); for cannabidiol (CBD)-dominant MC (20 reports), vomiting (20.0%) was most common; and dizziness (17.2%), nausea (13.8%), somnolence (10.3%), and headache (8.6%) were the most frequent for balanced MC (58 reports). Conclusion: No new safety concerns were identified relative to the published literature, although notable differences in AE profile between modes of administration and cannabinoid content ratios should be considered by health professionals. Further work identifying and managing risk factors for AEs is warranted to maintain a favorable benefit-risk balance for MC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to a lack of published pharmacokinetic (PK) and/or pharmacodynamic (PD) data, informed physician and patient decision-making surrounding appropriate dosing of cannabis for medical purposes is limited. This Phase 1, multiple-dose study evaluated the safety, tolerability, PK and PD of Spectrum Red softgels (2.5 mg Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and <0.25 mg cannabidiol (CBD)). Participants (n  = 41) were randomized to one of five groups: 5 mg THC and 0.06 mg CBD daily (Treatment A), 10 mg THC and 0.12 mg CBD daily (Treatment B), 15 mg THC and 0.18 mg CBD daily (Treatment C), 20 mg THC and 0.24 mg CBD daily (Treatment D) or placebo. Study medication was administered in divided doses, every 12 h, ∼60 min after a standardized meal, for 7 consecutive days. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (65/65) were of mild-to-moderate severity; none was serious. The highest number of TEAEs (30/65) occurred on the first day of treatment. The most common TEAEs included somnolence, lethargy and headache (reported by eight, seven and five participants, respectively). On Day 7, maximum observed plasma concentration of 11-carboxy-THC increased by 2.0- and 2.5-fold as the dose doubled between Treatments A and B and between Treatments B and D, respectively. Mean peak post-treatment ratings of self-reported subjective effects of 'feel any effect' and 'dazed' differed between Treatment D and placebo on Days 1, 3 and 7. Over a week of twice-daily dosing of Spectrum Red softgels, daily doses of THC up to 20 mg and of CBD up to 0.24 mg were generally safe and became better tolerated after the first day of treatment. A prudent approach to improve tolerability with Spectrum Red softgels might involve initial daily doses no higher than 10 mg THC and 0.12 mg CBD in divided doses, with titration upward over time as needed based on tolerability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Despite evidence of the analgesic benefits of cannabis, there remains a relative scarcity of research on the short- and long-term effects of cannabis use in individuals with chronic pain. Design The current study is a secondary analysis of clinical data from the Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry (CHOIR). Setting Data were drawn from a cohort of patients of a multidisciplinary tertiary care pain clinic. Subjects The study sample consisted of data from 7,026 new patient visits from CHOIR; of these, 1,668 patients with a follow-up time point within 180 days were included in a longitudinal analysis. Methods Clinical data were analyzed to characterize cross-sectional differences in pain and indicators of psychological and physical function according to self-reported, concurrent cannabis use. Additionally, a propensity score–weighted longitudinal analysis was conducted, examining cannabis use as a predictor of changes in clinical variables across time. Results Cross-sectional analyses suggested significantly poorer sleep and significantly higher intensities of pain, emotional distress, and physical and social dysfunction in patients reporting ongoing cannabis use; however, these differences were relatively small in magnitude. However, no differences between cannabis users and nonusers in terms of longitudinal changes in clinical variables were noted. Discussion Our results are among the first to examine concurrent cannabis use as a prognostic variable regarding trajectories of pain-related variables in tertiary care. Future studies may benefit from examining the effect of cannabis initiation, concurrent medication use, and specific aspects of cannabis use (dose, duration of use, or cannabis type) on clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issues: Canada recently introduced a public health-based regulatory framework for non-medical cannabis. This review sought to identify a comprehensive set of indicators to evaluate the public health and safety impact of cannabis regulation in Canada, and to explore the ways in which these indicators may be expected to change in the era of legal non-medical cannabis.Approach: Five scientific databases were searched to compile a list of cannabis-related issues of interest to public health and safety. A set of indicators was developed based on topics and themes that emerged. Preliminary evidence from other jurisdictions in the USA and Canada that have legalised medical and/or non-medical cannabis (e.g. Colorado, Washington) was summarised for each indicator, wherever possible.Key Findings: In total, 28 indicators were identified under five broad themes: public safety; cannabis use trends; other substance use trends; cardiovascular and respiratory health; and mental health and cognition. Preliminary trends from other legalised jurisdictions reveal little consensus regarding the effect of cannabis legalisation on public health and safety harms and an emerging body of evidence to support potential benefits (e.g. reductions in opioid use and overdose).Implications: In addition to indicators of commonly discussed challenges (e.g. cannabis-related hospitalisations, cannabis-impaired driving), this review led to the recommendation of several indicators to monitor for possible public health and safety improvements.Conclusion: In preparing a comprehensive public health and safety monitoring and evaluation system for cannabis regulation, this review underscores the importance of not only measuring the possible risks but also the potential benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabis-based medicines raises safety concerns for patients, clinicians, policy-makers, insurers, researchers and regulators. Although the efficacy of cannabinoids is being increasingly demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, most safety information comes from studies of recreational use. Methods: We performed a systematic review of safety studies of medical cannabinoids published over the past 40 years to create an evidence base for cannabis-related adverse events and to facilitate future cannabis research initiatives. We critically evaluated the quality of published studies with a view to identifying ways to improve future studies. Results: A total of 321 articles were eligible for evaluation. After excluding those that focused on recreational cannabis use, we included 31 studies (23 randomized controlled trials and 8 observational studies) of medical cannabis use in our analysis. In the 23 randomized controlled trials, the median duration of cannabinoid exposure was 2 weeks (range 8 hours to 12 months). A total of 4779 adverse events were reported among participants assigned to the intervention. Most (4615 [96.6%]) were not serious. Of the 164 serious adverse events, the most common was relapse of multiple sclerosis (21 events [12.8%]), vomiting (16 events [9.8%]) and urinary tract infection (15 events [9.1%]). The rate of nonserious adverse events was higher among participants assigned to medical cannabinoids than among controls (rate ratio [RR] 1.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.57-2.21); the rates of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between these 2 groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78-1.39). Dizziness was the most commonly reported nonserious adverse event (714 events [15.5%]) among people exposed to cannabinoids. Interpretation: Short-term use of existing medical cannabinoids appeared to increase the risk of nonserious adverse events. The risks associated with long-term use were poorly characterized in published clinical trials and observational studies. High-quality trials of long-term exposure are required to further characterize safety issues related to the use of medical cannabinoids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents insights on the role of marijuana in medical practice. Drs. Kahan and Srivastava states that the use of cannabis as part of medical care causes complex central actions such as analgesia. Furthermore, Dr. Ware mentions that cannabis has been used for thousands of years, but many time-honoured medical therapies have abandoned its use due to evidences of its harmful effects or due to its replacement by more effective treatments.

The authors argue that Canada should lead in facilitating research on cannabis. Topics include laws on access to herbal cannabis in Canada, the need for clinical data on the therapeutic use of cannabis, and the need for funding of a peer-reviewed cannabis research programme that allows for the procurement of research licenses. The use of funds from the herbal cannabis industry for research is addressed.