Search

Background: Cannabis was legalised for medical purposes in 2016. Uptake was initially slow, but since 2019 there has been a large increase in the number of Australians who have been prescribed cannabis for medical reasons. Yet a significant number of consumers continue to treat their medical conditions via illicitly-sourced cannabis. Little is known about how these two groups of medical cannabis consumers differ. Methods: The anonymous Cannabis-As-Medicine Survey 2022–2023 (CAMS-22) was available for completion online from December 2022 to April 2023 to adult Australians who had used cannabis to treat a medical condition in the previous year. Recruitment occurred through social media, consumer forums, and medical practices. Questions included demographic characteristics, patterns of cannabis use, conditions treated, and self-rated effectiveness. Results: Of the 3323 respondents included in these analyses, 2352 (73%) mainly used prescribed medical cannabis, 871 (27%) mainly used illicit. Prescribed users were significantly more likely than illicit users to have had their health condition diagnosed (OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.3, 2.2), to consume their cannabis via oral (OR = 1.9; CI 1.5, 2.4) or vaporised (OR = 5.2; CI 4.0, 6.8) routes, and to be sure of the composition of their medical cannabis (OR = 25.0; CI 16.7, 50.0). Prescribed users were significantly less likely to have used cannabis non-medically before medical use (OR = 0.6, CI 0.5, 0.7), consume cannabis via smoked routes (OR = 0.2, CI 0.1, 0.2), and to report any side effects (OR = 0.1; CI 0.1, 0.2). The most common conditions among both prescribed and illicit users were pain (37%), mental health (36%), and sleep (15%) conditions. Prescribed users were significantly more likely to use cannabis to mainly treat a pain (OR = 1.3; CI 1.1, 1.5) or sleep condition (OR = 1.4; CI 1.1, 1.7) and less likely to treat a mental health condition (OR = 0.8; CI 0.7, 0.9). There were no between-group differences in effectiveness with 97% saying medical cannabis had improved their symptoms. Conclusions: From a harm-reduction perspective there is much to recommend prescribed medical cannabis; it has fewer side-effects than illicit, is used more safely (oral or vaporised versus smoked routes), gives consumers greater certainty regarding the composition and quality of their medicine, and does not risk exposure to the criminal justice system. Of concern, however, is the apparent willingness of prescribers to prescribe for indications for which there is limited evidence of efficacy, such as mental health and sleep conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Our research group is conducting three large randomized placebo-controlled trials of medicinal cannabis for cancer symptoms. All participants are invited to take part in a posttrial surveillance study. Methods: Participants were given the manufacturers dosing instructions and liberty to titrate to effect. Data were collected on symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale [ESAS] score), perceived benefits, adverse effects, satisfaction with the product, and dose/frequency. Results: Twenty-six percent of eligible participants consented to take part in the surveillance study. Most participants changed their self-titrated dose at least once. Pain, sleep, and mood were the most frequently cited symptoms which improved. Fatigue, nausea, and cognitive impairment were the most frequently mentioned adverse effects. Conclusion: Participants felt confident making changes to their medicinal cannabis dose within the limits suggested by the manufacturer of each product. A number of benefits and adverse effects were ascribed to the product. Benefits were similar to those described in previous studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Distressing symptoms are common in advanced cancer. Medicinal cannabinoids are commonly prescribed for a variety of symptoms. There is little evidence to support their use for most indications in palliative care. This study aims to assess a 1:20 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol (THC/CBD) cannabinoid preparation in the management of symptom distress in patients with advanced cancer undergoing palliative care. Methods and design: One hundred and fifty participants will be recruited across multiple sites in Queensland, Australia. A teletrial model will facilitate the recruitment of patients outside of major metropolitan areas. The study is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomised, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial of escalating doses of an oral 1:20 THC/CBD medicinal cannabinoid preparation (10 mg THC:200 mg CBD/mL). It will compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of a titrated dose range of 2.5 mg THC/50mgCBD to 30 mg THC/600 mg CBD per day against a placebo. There is a 2-week patient-determined titration phase, to reach a dose that achieves symptom relief or intolerable side effects, with a further 2 weeks of assessment on the final dose. The primary objective is to assess the effect of escalating doses of a 1:20 THC/CBD medicinal cannabinoid preparation against placebo on change in total symptom distress score, with secondary objectives including establishing a patient-determined effective dose, the effect on sleep quality and overall quality of life. Some patients will be enrolled in a sub-study which will more rigorously evaluate the effect on sleep. Discussion: MedCan-3 is a high-quality, adequately powered, placebo-controlled trial which will help demonstrate the utility of a THC:CBD 1:20 oral medicinal cannabis product in reducing total symptom distress in this population. Secondary outcomes may lead to new hypotheses regarding medicinal cannabis' role in particular symptoms or in particular cancers. The sleep sub-study will test the feasibility of using actigraphy and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) in this cohort. This will be the first large-scale palliative care randomised clinical trial to utilise the teletrial model in Australia. If successful, this will have significant implications for trial access for rural and remote patients in Australia and internationally. Trial registration: ANZCTR ACTRN12622000083796. Protocol number 001/20. Registered on 21 January 2022. Recruitment started on 8 August 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Prescribed medicinal cannabis (MC) is an increasingly common prescription in Australia for treating pain, anxiety, and sleep disorders. Prescribed MC products generally contain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and/or cannabidiol (CBD) in a variety of dose levels and forms. It is unclear whether THC and CBD products are used by patients with different characteristics and for different conditions. Objectives: To examine consumer experiences of using THC- and CBD-containing prescribed MC products to better understand how they are being used within the Australian context. Methods: We utilised data collected from an online anonymous cross-sectional survey of individuals (CAMS-20 survey), consisting of Australian residents using cannabis for therapeutic reasons. We focused on a subgroup of participants (N = 546) receiving prescribed MC products. We utilised linear, logistic, and multinomial regression modelling to analyse responses to survey questions based on the cannabinoid profile of the prescribed product. Results: Participants prescribed THC-dominant MC products were statistically more likely to be younger, male, and to prefer inhaled routes of administration than participants using CBD-dominant products who were older, female, and preferred oral routes of administration. Pain and mental health were the most common reasons for all types of prescribed MC, but were more likely to be treated with THC than CBD despite the significantly higher risk of mild to severe drowsiness, dry mouth and eye irritation. Consumer reported effectiveness of prescribed MC was very positive, particularly for THC-containing products. Consumers on opioids and antipsychotics were statistically more likely to be prescribed THC-containing products than products containing CBD only, despite the greater risk of impairment. Conclusions: This Australia-wide study found clear differences in consumer-reported experiences of prescribed THC- and CBD-containing products. Current prescriptions of these products do not always align with relevant clinical guidance. Educating prescribers around cannabinoid products is essential to ensure optimal prescribing practices and to prevent avoidable drug side effects and interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectives: Medical cannabis use is increasing in Australia and other jurisdictions, yet little is known about the effects of medical cannabis on cognitive function. Findings from studies of non-medical ('recreational') cannabis may not be applicable to patients using prescribed medical cannabis to manage a health condition. Methods: In this semi-naturalistic, open-label trial, patients with various health conditions attended a single laboratory session in which they self-administered a standard dose of prescribed medical cannabis as per instructions on the pharmacy label. We assessed cognitive performance using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) and Druid application (app) prior to and following (CANTAB: + 3 h; Druid: + 3 and 5.5 h) medical cannabis self-administration. We also assessed subjective drug effects prior to and following (1, 2 and 4 h) medical cannabis self-administration using a range of 0–10 cm visual analogue scales ('stoned', 'sedated', 'relaxed', 'comfortable', 'anxious' and 'confident'). Data were analyzed using linear fixed-effect models. Results: Participants (N = 40; 22 females) were prescribed a range of products including orally administered oils (n = 23) and flower for vaporization (n = 17). Participants had a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 41.38 (12.66) years and had been using medical cannabis for a mean (SD) of 10.18 (8.73) months. Chronic non-cancer pain was the most common indication for medical cannabis use (n = 20), followed by sleep disorder (n = 18) and anxiety (n = 11). The mean (SD) delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)/cannabidiol (CBD) dose administered by participants was 9.61 (8.52) mg/9.15 (10.11) mg among those using an oil, and 37.00 (24.53) mg/0.38 (1.58) mg among those who vaporized flower, respectively. Participants' performance improved over time on the CANTAB Multitasking Test and Rapid Visual Information Processing test (both p-values <0.001). All other changes in cognitive performance measures over time were non-significant (p > 0.05). Vaporization of flower was associated with significantly stronger subjective feelings of 'stoned' and 'sedated' relative to oils (both p < 0.001). Conclusions: These findings suggest that prescribed medical cannabis may have minimal acute impact on cognitive function among patients with chronic health conditions, although larger and controlled trials are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We investigated attitudes and practices of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to medicinal cannabis (MC) and complementary and integrative medicine (CIM), including individual therapies, such as acupuncture, massage, herbs, dietary supplements, nutrition and exercise. We explored whether healthcare occupation influenced attitudes to CIM and MC; referral pathways for advice on CIM; and interest in a pharmacy service to evaluate herbs and supplements. Methods: Cross-sectional survey. All clinical staff at a comprehensive cancer hospital were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire about CIM and MC. We used descriptive analysis to describe the respondent's knowledge and attitudes, and Fisher's exact test to test for differences by occupation, length of time at the hospital and age. Results: Most of the 116 HCPs respondents supported integrating CIM into cancer care (94.8%) and wanted to learn more (90%) and to understand benefits and contraindications. Most respondents believed that CIM (87.9%) could benefit patients with cancer, and MC could benefit those with advanced cancer (49–51%). Whilst just over half (52.6%) felt confident discussing CIM with patients, only 10% felt they had sufficient knowledge to discuss MC. Most felt they did not have sufficient knowledge to specifically discuss mind and body practices (63.8%) or herbs and supplements (79%). HCPs (63%) would be more inclined to allow use of herbs and supplements with cancer treatment if a pharmacy service was available to evaluate interactions. Occupation, length of time at hospital and age influenced confidence and knowledge about CIM. Conclusions: The integration of evidence-based CIM and MC into cancer care is hampered by a lack of knowledge of benefits and contraindications, and gaps in education. Effective and safe integration may require targeted development of services such as pharmacy to evaluate the safety of herbs and supplements, and inclusion of cancer specialists who have received training in individual CIM therapies and MC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Questions: Prescribed burning is a key tool for managing vegetation for conservation in fire‐prone ecosystems around the world. Plants are adapted to particular fire regimes, made up of components including fire frequency and seasonality. However, burning outside historical regime parameters may impact species recovery and subsequent community assembly. We asked (i) do shrub species respond differently to spring and autumn fires, the primary times for prescribed burns in many temperate regions and (ii) does the use of novel functional groups, based on seed and seed bank traits, allow more robust predictions of response to shifting fire season? Location: Mediterranean‐climate southern Australia. Methods: We surveyed 10 common shrub species to examine the impact of fire season on mortality, resprout vigour and seedling recruitment, using three functional groups: fire response (obligate seeder vs resprouter), seed storage (soil‐ vs canopy‐stored), and seed dormancy class [physical (PY) vs morphophysiological (MPD)]. We also analysed individual species to assess species‐specific responses. Results: Obligate seeding and canopy seed‐storing functional groups were negatively impacted by spring burns, with recruitment levels one third of that observed after autumn burns. For species with soil‐stored seed banks, impacts of burn season were mediated by seed dormancy class, with PY species performing worse than their seasonally emerging MPD counterparts. Some individual species responded in stark contrast to others within their functional group. Conclusion: Functional groups widely used to predict recovery, usually based on resprouting response and fire frequency, may not robustly predict responses to some fire factors, such as fire season. Our results highlight the importance that fire seasonality has on species response and potentially subsequent community assembly. We propose utilising multiple functional groups when assessing risk from shifting fire seasonality or when exploring impacts of multiple fire regime elements, and species‐focused studies when managing species at high risk of extinction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Patients with chronic health conditions not responding to conventional treatment can access medicinal cannabis (MC) prescriptions from clinicians in Australia. We aimed to assess overall health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, fatigue, sleep, anxiety, and depression in a large real-world sample of patients accessing prescribed medicinal cannabis. We hypothesized that all patient-reported outcomes (PROs) would improve from baseline to 3-months. Methods: The QUEST Initiative is a large prospective multicenter study of patients with any chronic health condition newly prescribed medicinal cannabis between November 2020 and December 2021. Eligible patients were identified by 120 clinicians at medical centers across six Australian states. Consenting participants completed the EuroQol Group EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire; European Organization for Research & Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (QLQ-C30); Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Forms in Fatigue and Sleep Disturbance, and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) before starting therapy, at 2-weeks titration, then monthly for 3-months. Results: Of the 2762 consenting participants, 2327 completed baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire. Ages ranged between 18–97 years (mean 51y; SD = 15.4), 62.8% were female. The most commonly treated conditions were chronic pain (n = 1598/2327; 68.7%), insomnia (n = 534/2327; 22.9%), generalized anxiety (n = 508/2327; 21.5%), and mixed anxiety and depression (n = 259/2327; 11%). Across the whole cohort both EQ-5D-5L utility scores and QLQ-C30 summary scores showed clinically meaningful improvement in HRQL from baseline to mean follow-up with d = 0.54 (95%CI:0.47 to 0.59) and d = 0.64 (95%CI:0.58 to 0.70) respectively; and clinically meaningful improvement in fatigue (d = 0.54; 95%CI:0.48 to 0.59). There was clinically meaningful reduction of pain for those with chronic pain (d = 0.65; 95%CI:0.57 to 0.72); significant improvements for those with moderate to extremely severe anxiety (X2 = 383; df = 4; p<0.001) and depression (X2 = 395; df = 4; p<0.001); and no changes in sleep disturbance. Conclusions: We observed statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvements in overall HRQL and fatigue over the first 3-months in patients with chronic health conditions accessing prescribed medical cannabis. Anxiety, depression, and pain also improved over time, particularly for those with corresponding health conditions. The study continues to follow-up patients until 12-months to determine whether improvements in PROs are maintained long-term. Trail registration: Study registration - Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12621000063819. https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12621000063819. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Almost half the sample reported driving immediately after consuming cannabis. • 26.8% of participants reported waiting a sufficient time to avoid drug driving. • 173,455 drug driving events were anticipated by the sample in the next year. • Medically prescribed users were willing to wait longer before driving. • Offending behaviours stem from a history of drug use, and a lack of perceived risk. This study aimed to explore the length of time cannabis users typically wait between drug consumption and driving a vehicle, and what factors influence such decisions. A total of 839 Australian cannabis users participated in an online survey (26.3% had a prescription for cannabis). Participants ranged in age between 18 years and 75 years (M = 43.3) and 38.2% were female. Driving immediately after consuming cannabis was reported by 41.6% of the sample and waiting 1 h was the next most common response (17%). About one-quarter of participants reported that they waited at least 4 h, thus driving at a time they may no longer be impaired (26.8%). Factors that predicted waiting less time included: a greater frequency of drug consumption (times per day and per month), earlier age of cannabis use onset, using cannabis without a prescription, reporting past-year driving within four hours of consuming cannabis with an illegal drug, and lower perceptions of risk related to driving after consuming cannabis. Participants were asked to report how many days in the next year they would drive within four hours of cannabis consumption, with the most common response being 365 days (37.9% of sample). Given cannabis use is likely to increase through impending decriminalisation and expansion of prescription access, identifying ways to educate cannabis users and extend the length of time they wait between consumption and driving is critical for road safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examines age, time period and birth cohort trends in cannabis use intention and weekly use in Australia over a period in which medicinal cannabis was legalised. Methods: Hierarchical age‐period‐cohort models were used to analyse the National Drug Strategy Household Survey between 2001 and 2019, including 158,395 participants aged 18–79 years. Results: The hierarchical age‐period‐cohort model demonstrated a decrease in likelihood of intending to try cannabis as age increases. Similar age effects were found in intending to use cannabis as often or less often. There was broad‐based shift in attitudes for people wanting to try cannabis (2007: b = −0.51 [−0.82, −0.21]; 2019: b = 0.68 [0.38, 0.98]) or use cannabis more often (2007: b = −0.15 [−0.50, 0.20]; 2019: b = 0.83 [0.49, 1.18]). The population trend of weekly cannabis use decreased in the earlier periods but increased since 2013 (b = −0.13 [−0.25, −0.02] vs 2019: b = 0.06 [−0.09, 0.20]). This suggests that legalisation would increase uptake of cannabis and consumption among current consumers. There were distinctive inter‐generation variations: people born between 1950s and 1960s had more liberal views towards cannabis use than people born before or after (p < 0.05). There were indications that young people born in the 1990 s are catching up with the baby boomers in using cannabis more often if it was legal. Discussion and Conclusions: There has been a population‐based shift in Australia in favourable attitudes towards cannabis use, more so among those born in the 1950s to 1960s than other generations. Liberal attitudes and more frequent cannabis use may put certain cohorts at higher risks of cannabis dependence and related harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Following 2016 legislation permitting limited access to cannabis for research and medicinal purposes, the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis (MC) on symptom burden relief in cancer contexts has increased in Australia. This study aimed to understand the perceptions, hopes and concerns of people with advanced cancer regarding the future availability and regulation of MC in Australia. Methods: This qualitative study draws on semistructured interviews conducted between February 2019 and October 2020 in Brisbane, Australia, as part of an MC RCT substudy. Interviews were undertaken on 48 patients with advanced cancer in palliative care eligible to participate in an MC trial (n = 26 participated in an RCT; n = 2 participated in a pilot study; n = 20 declined). Interviews included a discussion of patients' decision‐making regarding trial participation, concerns about MC and perceptions of future availability, including cost. Transcribed interviews were analysed inductively and abductively, informed by constructivist thematic analysis conventions. Results: Overall, participants supported making MC legally accessible as a prescription‐only medication. Fear of financial toxicity, however, compromised this pathway. Steep posttrial costs of accessing MC prompted several people to decline trial participation, and others to predict—if found effective—that many would either access MC through alternative pathways or reduce their prescribed dosage to enable affordable access. Conclusions: These findings suggest that—despite a relatively robust universal healthcare system—Australians are potentially vulnerable to and fearful of financial toxicity. Prevalent in the United States, financial toxicity occurs when disadvantaged cancer patients access necessary but expensive medications with lasting consequences: bankruptcy, ongoing anxiety and cancer worry. Interview transcripts indicate that financial fears—and the systems sustaining them—may pose a threat to RCT completion and to equitable access to legal MC. Such findings support calls for embedding qualitative substudies and community partnerships within RCTs, while also suggesting the importance of subsidisation to overcoming injustices. Patient or Public Contribution: A patient advisory committee informed RCT design. This qualitative substudy foregrounds patients' decision‐making, perceptions and experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient interest in the use of cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) has increased in Australia. While recent policy and legislative changes have enabled health practitioners to prescribe CBMs for their patients, many patients still struggle to access CBMs. This paper employed a thematic analysis to submissions made to a 2019 Australian government inquiry into current barriers of patient access to medical cannabis. Methods: We identified 121 submissions from patients or family members (n = 63), government bodies (n = 5), non-government organisations (i.e., professional health bodies, charities, consumer organisations or advocacy groups; n = 25), medical cannabis and pharmaceutical industry (n = 16), and individual health professionals, academics, or research centres (n = 12). Data were coded using NVivo 12 software and thematically analysed. The findings were presented narratively using a modified Levesque's patient-centred access to care framework which includes: i) appropriateness; ii) availability and geographic accessibility; iii) acceptability; and iv) affordability. Results: Submissions from government agencies and professional health bodies consistently supported maintaining the current regulatory frameworks and access pathways, whereas an overwhelming majority of patients, advocacy groups and the medical cannabis industry described the current regulatory and access models as 'not fit for purpose'. These differing views seem to arise from divergent persepctives on (i) what and how much evidence is needed for policy and practice, and (ii) how patients should be given access to medical cannabis products amidst empirical uncertainty. Notwithstanding these differences, there were commonalities among some stakeholders regarding the various supply, regulatory, legislative, financial, and dispensing challenges that hindered timely access to CBMs. Conclusions: Progress in addressing the fundamental barriers that determine if and how a patient accesses and uses CBMs needs i) a 'system-level' reform that gives due consideration to the geographic disparity in access to prescribers and medical cannabis, and ii) reframing societal and health professional's views of CBMs by decoupling recreational vs medical cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practitioners are well positioned to contribute to the pharmacovigilance of medical cannabis via the general practice electronic medical record (EMR). The aim of this research is to interrogate de-identified patient data from the Patron primary care data repository for reports of medicinal cannabis to ascertain the feasibility of using EMRs to monitor medicinal cannabis prescribing in Australia. Methods: EMR rule-based digital phenotyping of 1 164 846 active patients from 109 practices was undertaken to investigate reports of medicinal cannabis use from September 2017 to September 2020. Results: Eighty patients with 170 prescriptions of medicinal cannabis were identified in the Patron repository. Reasons for prescription included anxiety, multiple sclerosis, cancer, nausea, and Crohn's disease. Nine patients showed symptoms of a possible adverse event, including depression, motor vehicle accident, gastrointestinal symptoms, and anxiety. Conclusions: The recording of medicinal cannabis effects in the patient EMR provides potential for medicinal cannabis monitoring in the community. This is especially feasible if monitoring were to be embedded into general practitioner workflow. General practitioners are well positioned to contribute to the pharmacovigilance of medical cannabis via the general practice electronic medical record (EMR). This research interrogated de-identified patient data from the Patron primary care data repository for reports of medicinal cannabis to ascertain the feasibility of the use of EMRs to monitor medicinal cannabis prescribing in Australia. This research found patient EMRs provide potential for medicinal cannabis monitoring in the community, especially if monitoring were to be embedded into general practitioner workflow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recruitment for randomised controlled trials in palliative care can be challenging; disease progression and terminal illness underpin high rates of attrition. Research into participant decision-making in medicinal cannabis randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is very limited. Nesting qualitative sub-studies within RCTs can identify further challenges to participation, informing revisions to study designs and recruitment practices. This paper reports on findings from a qualitative sub-study supporting RCTs of medicinal cannabis for symptom burden relief in patients with advanced cancer in one Australian city.Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 48 patients with advanced cancer, eligible to participate in a medicinal cannabis RCT (n=28 who consented to participate in an RCT; n=20 who declined). An iterative and abductive approach to thematic analysis and data collection fostered exploration of barriers and enablers to participation.Results: Key enablers included participants' enthusiasm and expectations of medicinal cannabis as beneficial (to themselves and future patients) for symptom management, especially after exhausting currently approved options, and a safer alternative to opioids. Some believed medicinal cannabis to have anti-cancer effects. Barriers to participation were the logistical challenges of participating (especially due to driving restrictions and fatigue), reluctance to interfere with an existing care plan, cost, and concerns about receiving the placebo and the uncertainty of the benefit. Some declined due to concerns about side-effects or a desire to continue accessing cannabis independent of the study.Conclusions: The findings support revisions to subsequent medicinal cannabis RCT study designs, namely, omitting a requirement that participants attend weekly hospital appointments. These findings highlight the value of embedding qualitative sub-studies into RCTs. While some challenges to RCT recruitment are universal, others are context (population, intervention, location) specific. A barrier to participation found in research conducted elsewhere-stigma-was not identified in the current study. Thus, findings have important implications for those undertaking RCTs in the rapidly developing context of medical cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Australia has had a framework for legal medicinal cannabis since 2016, yet prior online surveys in 2016 and 2018 indicated that most consumers continued to use illicit medical cannabis products. Regulatory data indicate an increase in the prescription of medicinal cannabis since 2019, and this survey examines consumer experiences of prescribed and illicit medical cannabis (MC) use in Australia. Methods: A cross-sectional anonymous online survey was administered September 2020 to January 2021. Recruitment via social media, professional and consumer forums, and medical practices. Participant eligibility: ≥ 18 years; used a cannabis product for self-identified medical reason(s) in the past year, and resident in Australia. Outcome measures included consumer characteristics, conditions treated, source and patterns of MC use, and perspectives on accessing MC. Results: Of the 1600 participants (mean age 46.4 ± 14.3 years, 53% male), 62.4% (n = 999) reported using only illicit and 37.6% (n = 601) used prescribed MC in the past year. MC was used on a median of 28 (IQR: 12, 28) of the past 28 days and cost $AUD 74 ± 72 weekly (median = $40, IQR: $7, $100). Prescribed participants were more likely to treat pain conditions than those using illicit MC (52% v 40%, OR = 1.7, 1.3–2.1) and less likely to treat sleep conditions (6% v 11%, OR = 0.5, 0.3–0.8), with mental health conditions also a common indication in both groups (26%, 31%). Prescribed MC was consumed predominately by oral routes (72%), whereas illicit MC was most commonly smoked (41%). Prescribed MC was 'mainly THC' (26%), 'equal THC/CBD' (40%), 'mainly CBD' (31%) and 'uncertain' (3%), while 34% of those using illicit MC were 'uncertain' of the cannabinoid profile. Cost and difficulties finding medical practitioners to prescribe remain significant barriers to accessing prescribed MC, and few (10.8%) described the existing model for accessing prescribed MC as 'straightforward or easy'. Conclusions: There has been a notable shift from illicit to prescribed MC by many consumers compared to prior surveys. Consumers using prescribed MC reported a range of advantages compared to illicit MC, including safer routes of administration, and greater certainty regarding access and composition of products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a forum hosted by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra), focusing on ensuring regulatory systems effectively manage the challenges of medicinal cannabis while maintaining access and safety. Topics include balancing access and safety, regulatory intelligence sharing, and the rise in prescriptions of unregistered medicinal cannabis products in Australia.

The article reports that Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the world and in Australia. Topics include considered its popularity stems from the mind-altering properties it offers to users which is a brief relief from mundane life, a chance to feel differently about the real world and an escape to what some people believe is a harmless high.

As cancer patients face long-term health and psychosocial issues from their diagnosis and treatment, many patients are seeking medicinal cannabis to manage their symptoms and treatment side effects. This qualitative study aimed to explore attitudes, barriers, and concerns of cancer patients from one regional community in Australia to gain a better understanding of the experiences faced in using medicinal cannabis. Participants (n = 16) engaged in focus groups or semistructured individual interviews, and an inductive thematic analysis of data was undertaken. Four themes emerged from the data: perceived benefits, access difficulties, uncertainty, and issues of support. The findings revealed a need to provide easy access to accurate information and address the barriers faced by cancer patients in using medicinal cannabis. IMPLICATIONS Despite the growing body of clinical evidence, cancer patients may be faced with bureaucratic and social challenges in gaining access to medicinal cannabis that will require social workers' individual advocacy. Social workers should consider the roles that might be appropriate for them in advocating for policy and legislation changes around access, cost, and other barriers. Social workers working in oncology should consider the roles that might be appropriate for them in linking cancer patients to community support and resources, and in assisting cancer patients interested in medicinal cannabis, including an advocacy role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The idea that cannabis is a 'gateway drug' to more harmful substances such as opioids is highly controversial, yet has substantially impacted policy, education and how we conceptualize substance use. Given a rise in access to cannabis products and opioid‐related harm, the current study aimed to conduct the first systematic review and meta‐analysis on the likelihood of transitioning from cannabis use to subsequent first‐time opioid use, opioid use disorders (OUD), dependence or abuse. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, pubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Informit Health Collection were searched for full‐text articles assessing the likelihood of transitioning from cannabis to subsequent opioid use, and from opioid use to OUD, abuse or dependence given prior cannabis use. Analysis of subpopulations within studies were discussed narratively, and E‐values were calculated to assess the potential influence of unmeasured confounding. Findings Six studies provided relevant data from the United States, Australia and New Zealand between 1977 and 2017, a total sample of 102 461 participants. Random‐effects analysis of the adjusted pooled effect size indicates that the likelihood of transitioning from cannabis to opioid use, relative to non‐cannabis users, is odds ratio (OR) = 2.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.26–3.36, whereas the likelihood of transitioning from opioid use to OUD, abuse or dependence given prior cannabis use is OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.65–3.84. While the evidence was determined to be of low quality with moderate risk of bias, E‐values suggest that these findings are robust against unmeasured confounding. Conclusion: A systematic review and meta‐analysis found that while people who use cannabis are disproportionately more likely to initiate opioid use and engage in problematic patterns of use than people who do not use cannabis, the low quality of the evidence must be considered when interpreting these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We ran a cross-sectional population study on the changes in cannabis-related attitudes of Australian parents from 2016 to 2019. • The estimated proportion of parents who supported legalisation and approved regular cannabis use increased significantly. • Parents who would try cannabis if it was legal grew from 5.9 % (95 %CI: 5.2, 6.7) to 8.1 % (95 %CI: 7.2, 9.0). • Parents who said they would use cannabis more often increased 81% over the three years. • The strongest associations were observed between high levels of psychological distress and regular smoking and drinking. With recent policy changes around medicinal cannabis in Australia, there is concern about the influence of changing norms of cannabis use on adults who are actively parenting. This repeated cross-sectional population study used National and Drug Strategy and Household Surveys to estimate the changes and correlates of cannabis-related attitudes (support of legalisation, approve of regular use, would try or use if legal) among Australian parents from 2016 to 2019. The estimated proportion of parents who supported legalisation and approved regular cannabis use increased significantly. Parents who would try cannabis if it was legal grew from 5.9% (95 %CI: 5.2, 6.7) to 8.1% (95 %CI: 7.2, 9.0). Parents who said they would use cannabis more often increased from 1.6 (95 % CI: 1.2, 1.9) to 2.9 (95 %CI: 2.4, 3.4), an 81% jump in the three years. The strongest associations were observed between a very high level of psychological distress and regular smoking and drinking. For example, people with a very high level of psychological distress were 2.16 times (95 %CI: 1.42, 3.28) and 2.48 times (95 %CI: 1.61, 3.83) more likely to approve legalisation and regular cannabis use, respectively. Daily drinking was associated with higher odds of trying cannabis (OR = 1.66; CI: 1.25–2.20). The proportion of parents who would try or use cannabis more often represents a sizeable pool of potential new and frequent users. This highlights the need for education and intervention strategies for parents who use cannabis and care for young children. The associations between mental health and substance use suggest that more research is needed to understand the impact of legalisation on vulnerable groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regulatory changes now permit the availability and prescribing of medicinal cannabis in Australia. Public awareness and patient interest are high. Using a co‐design approach involving cancer patients, carers and oncology and palliative care clinicians, two information resources were developed to provide readily available sources of important information for cancer patients and clinicians who are considering the use of medicinal cannabis. Focus groups and evaluation interviews revealed some areas of dissonance between consumers and clinicians concerning aspects of medicinal cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, the Australian Government legislated to allow cannabis to be prescribed to patients as an unapproved medicine under the special access provisions of the Therapeutic Goods Act. This paper compares the Australian regulatory approach with other national approaches, outlines the main provisions of the Special Access Scheme for medical cannabis, describes how the program has evolved since 2017, includes an analysis of adverse events reported to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, and discusses the barriers that remain for patients who wish to access medical cannabis. It assesses how well the Australian program has addressed the challenges of providing patients with easier access to medical cannabis while ensuring that high-quality products are used safely and effectively under medical guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the misconceptions related to the use of medicinal cannabis and the conflation with illicit drug use. It argues that medicinal cannabis should be viewed separately from recreational cannabis use and that it is prescribed under the supervision of a medical practitioner. It also highlight that medicinal cannabis undergoes rigorous testing procedures to ensure safety, consistency, and accuracy of dosing.

Background: Despite improvements in medical care, patients with advanced cancer still experience substantial symptom distress. There is increasing interest in the use of medicinal cannabinoids but little high-quality evidence to guide clinicians. This study aims to define the role of a 1:1 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol (THC/CBD) cannabinoid preparation in the management of symptom burden in patients with advanced cancer undergoing standard palliative care.Methods and Design: One hundred fifty participants will be recruited from five sites within the Queensland Palliative Care Research Group (QPCRG) and randomly assigned to an active treatment or placebo group. This study is a pragmatic multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial of escalating doses of an oral 1:1 THC/CBD cannabinoid preparation. It will compare efficacy and safety outcomes of a titrated dose (10 mg/10 mg/mL oral solution formulation, dose range 2.5 mg/2.5 mg-30 mg/30 mg/day) against placebo. There is a 2-week patient-determined titration phase, using escalating doses of 1:1 THC/CBD or placebo, to reach a dose that achieves symptom relief with tolerable side effects. This is then followed by a further 2-week assessment period on the stable dose determined in collaboration with clinicians. The primary objective is to assess the effect of escalating doses of a 1:1 THC/CBD cannabinoid preparation against placebo on change in total symptom score, with secondary objectives including establishing a patient-determined effective dose, the change in total physical and emotional sores, global impression of change, anxiety and depression, opioid use, quality of life and adverse effects.Discussion: This will be the first placebo-controlled clinical trial to rigorously evaluate the efficacy, safety and acceptability of 1:1 THC/CBD for symptom relief in advanced cancer patients. This study will allow the medical community to have some evidence to present to patients wishing to access cannabis for their symptoms caused by advanced malignancy.Trial Registration: ACTRN, ACTRN12619000037101 . Registered on 14 January 2019. Trial Sponsor: Mater Misericordiae Limited (MML) and Mater Medical Research Institute Limited (MMRI)-Raymond Terrace, South Brisbane, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Access to medicinal cannabis is a timely and important issue in cancer care. Recent legislative changes in Australia have increased access to medicinal cannabis, but the views of people with cancer on this topic are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis among people with cancer. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed using an anonymous, 15-item study-specific paper-based survey. The survey was administered over a 2-week period in August 2017 in the waiting rooms of a specialist cancer hospital. Results: In all, 339 patients completed the survey (mean (± s.d.) age 59 ± 15 years; 52% male). Fourteen respondents (4%) were currently using cannabis medicinally. Only one of these respondents had a prescription for their cannabis product. Most respondents would consider using a medicinal cannabis product if recommended by their doctor (n = 271; 80%). Conclusion: This study is the first of its kind to survey the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis in a broad sample of Australian people with cancer. Few respondents were currently using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but an overwhelming majority were in favour of increasing access and would consider using a prescribed product. What is known about the topic?: Cannabis may have a wide variety of medicinal uses, particularly in the cancer setting. Currently, people with cancer in Victoria have limited access to medicinal cannabis despite recent legislative changes. What does this paper add?: In a general sample of people with cancer, few were using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but most were in favour of widening access and would consider using a product their doctor prescribed. What are the implications for practitioners?: Despite supporting access, patients indicated that the recommendations of doctors and increasing the evidence base are necessary requirements to their use of medicinal cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2016, the Australian federal government passed legislation enabling a range of cannabis-based products to be prescribed to patients by registered healthcare professionals. An online survey conducted immediately prior to these legislative changes found that the vast majority of respondents at the time were illicitly sourcing cannabis plant matter, smoking was the preferred route of administration and mental health, chronic pain, and sleep conditions were the most frequently cited reasons for medical cannabis use. This manuscript reports the results of a follow-up survey conducted in 2018–2019, the Cannabis As Medicine Survey (CAMS-18). The goal of this second questionnaire was to examine patterns of use and consumer perspectives regarding medical cannabis use in Australia, 2 years after the introduction of legal access pathways. Methods: Anonymous online cross-sectional survey with convenience sample, recruited mainly through online media between September 2018 and March 2019. Participants were adults (18 years or over) residing in Australia who reported using a cannabis product for self-identified therapeutic reasons during the preceding 12 months. The survey measured consumer characteristics, indications and patterns of medical cannabis use, routes and frequency of administration, perceived benefits and harms, experiences and preferred models of access to medical cannabis. Results: Data were available for 1388 respondents. The main categories of condition being treated with medical cannabis were pain (36.4%), mental health (32.8%), sleep (9.2%), neurological (5.2%) and cancer (3.8%). Respondents reported using medical cannabis on 15.8 (11.2) days in the past 28, by inhaled (71.4%) or oral (26.5%) routes and spending AUD$82.27 ($101.27) per week. There were high levels of self-reported effectiveness, but also high rates of side effects. There was uncertainty regarding the composition of illicit cannabinoid products and concerns regarding their possible contamination. Few respondents (2.7%) had accessed legally prescribed medical cannabis, with the main perceived barriers being cost, disinterest from the medical profession and stigma regarding cannabis use. Conclusions: Chronic pain, mental health and sleep remain the main clinical conditions for which consumers report using medical cannabis. Despite 2 years of legal availability, most consumers in Australia reported accessing illicit cannabis products, with uncertainty regarding the quality or composition of cannabis products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is considerable interest in the use of cannabinoids for symptom control in palliative care, but there is little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice. Objectives: Assess the feasibility of using global symptom burden measures to assess response to medicinal cannabis, to determine median tolerated doses of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and to document adverse events (AEs). Design: Prospective two-arm open-label pilot trial of escalating doses of CBD and THC oil. Setting/Subjects: Participants had advanced cancer and cancer-related symptoms in a palliative and supportive care service in an Australian cancer center. Measurements: The main outcome measures were the number of participants screened and randomized over the time frame, the number of participants completing days 14 and 28 and providing total symptom distress scores (TSDSs) (measured using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale), and the change from baseline of the TSDS at day 14. Results: Of the 21 participants enrolled (CBD, n = 16; THC, n = 5), 18 (86%) completed the primary outcome measure at day 14 and 8 completed at day 28. The median maximum tolerated doses were CBD, 300 mg/day (range 100–600 mg); THC, 10 mg/day (range 5–30 mg). Nine of 21 patients (43%) met the definition of response (≥6 point reduction in TSDS). Drowsiness was the most common AE. Conclusions: Trials of medicinal cannabis in advanced cancer patients undergoing palliative care are feasible. The doses of THC and CBD used in this study were generally well tolerated and the outcome measure of total symptom distress is promising as a measure of overall symptom benefit. Trial registration: ACTRN12618001205224. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following legislative changes in the availability and prescribing of medicinal cannabis in Australia, we sought to understand prospectively the nature of information seeking and requests for medicinal cannabis in consultations between palliative care clinicians and patients with cancer. The 104 discussions were overwhelmingly initiated by patients and carers (93%) and were for a variety of symptoms, reflecting high levels of patient interest in the use of medicinal cannabis in cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decision by the Commonwealth government to reschedule cannabis for medicinal purposes in August 2016 marked a watershed in the regulation of the drug. It occurred in the midst of pressure for reform by state governments, patients and the media. This article examines the reform period of 2014 to 2018 and asks what it means for the political legitimacy of the regulatory regime for therapeutic goods in Australia. It argues that three distinct voices were present in the debates on medicinal cannabis reforms, each of which expressed different views about regulatory change and the nature of cannabis itself. By applying a perspective on political legitimacy that uses dialogue as a metaphor, the article analyses how the voices of medicinal cannabis reform challenged the legitimacy of Australia's therapeutic goods regime. It concludes that this challenge provides an opportunity for reflection on Australia's therapeutic goods regulatory regime, and a chance to embrace a dialogic approach to political legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective:: To assess Australian psychiatrists' and psychiatry trainees' knowledge about and attitudes towards medicinal cannabinoids, given the recent relaxation of cannabinoid-prescribing laws in Australia.Method:: All Australian members of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists were invited to participate in an anonymous, 64-item online questionnaire, through Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists' newsletters. The questionnaire ran for a 10-week period from March to May 2017. Participants were asked about their knowledge of the evidence for and against prescribing pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol, and their concerns about prescribing medicinal cannabinoids.Results:: In total, 88 doctors responded to the survey, with 55 completing all items (23 psychiatrists, 32 trainees). Overall, 54% of respondents would prescribe medicinal cannabinoids if it was legal to do so. Participants believed there was evidence for the use of cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol in treating childhood epilepsy, chronic pain, and nausea and vomiting. They were most concerned about medicinal cannabinoids leading to psychotic symptoms, addiction and dependence, apathy and recreational use.Conclusions:: Our sample of Australian psychiatrists and trainees were aware of the main clinical indications for medicinal cannabinoids, but were poor at differentiating between the indications for cannabidiol versus tetrahydrocannabinol. Further education about medicinal cannabinoids appears necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and aims: Disentangling the putative impact of cannabis on brain morphology from other comorbid substance use is critical. After controlling for the effects of nicotine, alcohol and multi‐substance use, this study aimed to determine whether frequent cannabis use is associated with significantly smaller subcortical grey matter volumes. Design: Exploratory analyses using mixed linear models, one per region of interest (ROI), were performed whereby individual differences in volume (outcome) at seven subcortical ROIs were regressed onto cannabis and comorbid substance use (predictors). Setting: Two large population‐based twin samples from the United States and Australia. Participants: A total of 622 young Australian adults [66% female; μage = 25.9, standard deviation SD) = 3.6] and 474 middle‐aged US males (μage = 56.1SD = 2.6) of predominately Anglo‐Saxon ancestry with complete substance use and imaging data. Subjects with a history of stroke or traumatic brain injury were excluded. Measurements: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and volumetric segmentation methods were used to estimate volume in seven subcortical ROIs: thalamus, caudate nucleus, putamen, pallidum, hippocampus, amygdala and nucleus accumbens. Substance use measurements included maximum nicotine and alcohol use, total life‐time multi‐substance use, maximum cannabis use in the young adults and regular cannabis use in the middle‐aged males. Findings: After correcting for multiple testing (P = 0.007), cannabis use was unrelated to any subcortical ROI. However, maximum nicotine use was associated with significantly smaller thalamus volumes in middle‐aged males. Conclusions: In exploratory analyses based on young adult and middle‐aged samples, normal variation in cannabis use is unrelated statistically to individual differences in brain morphology as measured by subcortical volume. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. The aim of the present study was to develop a framework for assessing regulatory options for medicinal cannabis in Australia. Methods. International regulatory regimes for medicinal cannabis were reviewed with a qualitative policy analysis approach and key policy features were synthesised, leading to a conceptual framework that facilitates decision making across multiple dimensions. Results. Two central organising dimensions of medicinal cannabis regulation were identified: cannabis supply and patient authorisation (including patient access). A number of the different supply options can be matched with a number of different patient authorisation options, leading to a matrix of possible regulatory regimes. Conclusions. The regulatory options, as used internationally, involve different forms of cannabis (synthetic and plant-based pharmaceutical preparations or herbal cannabis) and the varying extent to which patient authorisation policies and procedures are stringently or more loosely defined. The optimal combination of supply and patient authorisation options in any jurisdiction that chooses to make medicinal cannabis accessible will depend on policy goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of Australians support a change in legislation to allow the use of cannabis for medical purposes. Despite strong public support, very little is known about the patterns of medicinal cannabis use among Australians. Objectives: This study aims to gain a better understanding of Australian medicinal cannabis users and their patterns of use. Methods: The nature of calls to the Cannabis Information and Helpline (N = 15701), a free national service for Australians with concerns regarding cannabis use, were investigated to determine the number of calls made by those who inquired about the medicinal use of cannabis (N = 275) and the implied reasons for use among those who identify using cannabis in this way. Results: The majority of medicinal cannabis inquirers mentioned cannabis to alleviate pain. Further, compared to other callers, medicinal cannabis inquirers were more likely to be male, unemployed, older, and have recently started using cannabis. Conclusions: These findings highlight the need for future research to better understand the issues faced by Australians regarding the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes and how they may be meaningfully addressed. Particular focus should be placed toward older, unemployed males. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The objective of this article is to describe the potential benefits of medicinal cannabis in emesis control and the position of nurses looking after palliative patients who are on medicinal cannabis treatment in Australia. Setting Palliative care Primary argument Cannabis is the most commonly abused drug and its use for medical purposes was restricted throughout the world since the early 20th century. However many clinical studies show that the natural cannabinoid compounds can stimulate the cannabinoid receptors in the brain leading to attenuation of signal transmission, resulting in alleviation of the vomiting stimuli. The debate about the use of cannabis as an anti-emetic agent in patients with life-limiting conditions has renewed interest in recent years. The principle of palliative care is to improve the quality of life of patients living with life-limiting conditions based on the best evidence available. Although some evidence suggests cannabis may have therapeutic effects on some palliative patients and the Australian Commonwealth Government has recently changed the legislation, the concept of using medicinal cannabis in emesis control is very new to many Australians including the health care providers. Conclusion In comparison to conventional medications, medicinal use of cannabis in palliative care is a new phenomenon and nurses as well as general public may be less prepared for the use of cannabis as a medical modality in all clinical settings. This review is intended to raise awareness of the physiological mechanism of cannabis and its medicinal use to the nurses in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A decline in response rates in traditional household surveys, combined with increased internet coverage and decreased research budgets, has resulted in increased attractiveness of web survey research designs based on purposive and voluntary opt-in sampling strategies. In the study of hidden or stigmatised behaviours, such as cannabis use, web survey methods are increasingly common. However, opt-in web surveys are often heavily criticised due to their lack of sampling frame and unknown representativeness. In this article, we outline the current state of the debate about the relevance of pursuing representativeness, the state of probability sampling methods, and the utility of non-probability, web survey methods especially for accessing hidden or minority populations. Our article has two aims: (1) to present a comprehensive description of the methodology we use at Global Drug Survey (GDS), an annual cross-sectional web survey and (2) to compare the age and sex distributions of cannabis users who voluntarily completed (a) a household survey or (b) a large web-based purposive survey (GDS), across three countries: Australia, the United States, and Switzerland. We find that within each set of country comparisons, the demographic distributions among recent cannabis users are broadly similar, demonstrating that the age and sex distributions of those who volunteer to be surveyed are not vastly different between these non-probability and probability methods. We conclude that opt-in web surveys of hard-to-reach populations are an efficient way of gaining in-depth understanding of stigmatised behaviours and are appropriate, as long as they are not used to estimate drug use prevalence of the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the public and political debate surrounding the availability and use of cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) for therapeutic purposes. Topics discussed include history of curative and recuperative powers of thalidomide used in Australia, effectiveness, safety and cost factor of cannabis or its derivatives, and need for randomized controlled trials to determine effectiveness.

The article focuses on the social and moral factor influenced by medicinal cannabis as a panacea for curing everything, or a recreational drug in Australia. Topics discussed include Medical Cannabis Regulators Bill, doubts on the safety of cannabis, pragmatic, ethical and economically rational approach to medicinal cannabis in Australia.

Background: Medicinal cannabis has recently attracted much media attention in Australia and across the world. With the exception of a few countries, cannabinoids remain illegal–known for their adverse effects rather than their medicinal application and therapeutic benefit. However, there is mounting evidence demonstrating the therapeutic benefits of cannabis in alleviating neuropathic pain, improving multiple sclerosis spasticity, reducing chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting, and many other chronic conditions. Many are calling for the legalisation of medicinal cannabis including consumers, physicians and politicians. Pharmacists are the gatekeepers of medicines and future administrators/dispensers of cannabis to the public, however very little has been heard about pharmacists’ perspectives. Therefore the aim of this study was to explore pharmacists’ views about medicinal cannabis; its legalisation and supply in pharmacy. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 34 registered pharmacists in Australia were conducted. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed ad verbatim and thematically analysed using the NVivo software. Results: Emergent themes included stigma, legislation, safety and collaboration. Overall the majority of pharmacists felt national legalisation of a standardised form of cannabis would be suitable, and indicated various factors and strategies to manage its supply. The majority of participants felt that the most suitable setting would be via a community pharmacy setting due to the importance of accessibility for patients. Discussion: This study explored views of practicing pharmacists, revealing a number of previously undocumented views and barriers about medicinal cannabis from a supply perspective. There were several ethical and professional issues raised for consideration. These findings highlight the important role that pharmacists hold in the supply of medicinal cannabis. Additionally, this study identified important factors, which will help shape future policies for the successful implementation of medicinal cannabis in healthcare. We recommend that these views and strategies be incorporated in the development of policies and legislations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a developing body of research looking at cannabis use opportunity, but little research examining timing of opportunity to use cannabis.Aims: Identify factors associated with (1) earlier opportunity to use cannabis and (2) faster progression from opportunity to cannabis dependence.Method: Cross-sectional study of 3824 Australian twins and siblings, measuring age of onset of cannabis use opportunity and DSM-IV cannabis dependence. Survival analysis identified factors associated with faster progression to opportunity or dependence.Results: Factors associated with both speed of progression to opportunity and dependence were conduct disorder (opportunity HR 5.57, 95%CI 1.52-20.47; dependence HR 2.49, 95%CI 1.91-3.25), parental drug problems (opportunity HR 7.29, 95%CI 1.74-30.62; dependence HR 3.30, 95%CI 1.63-6.69), weekly tobacco use (opportunity HR 8.57, 95%CI 3.93-18.68; dependence HR 2.76, 95% CI 2.10-3.64), and female gender (opportunity HR 0.69, 95%CI 0.64-0.75; dependence HR 0.44, 95%CI 0.34-0.55). Frequent childhood religious attendance (HR 0.74, 95%CI 0.68-0.80), parental conflict (HR 1.09, 95%CI 1.00-1.18), parental alcohol problems (HR 1.19, 95%CI 1.08-1.30) and childhood sexual abuse (HR 1.17, 95%CI 1.01-1.34) were uniquely associated with transition to opportunity. Depressive episode (HR 1.44, 95%CI 1.12-1.85), tobacco dependence (HR 1.36, 95%CI 1.04-1.78), alcohol dependence (HR 2.64, 95%CI 1.53-4.58), other drug use (HR 2.10, 95%CI 1.64-2.69) and other drug dependence (HR 2.75, 95%CI 1.70-4.43) were uniquely associated with progression to dependence.Conclusion: The profile of factors associated with opportunity to use cannabis and dependence only partially overlaps, suggesting targeting of interventions may benefit from being tailored to the stages of drug use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors discuss the possibility of prescribing medical cannabinoids for pain relief by physicians in Australia and New Zealand. They acknowledge the implementation of laws that prohibit possession and use of cannabis even for medical reasons in the regions, noting that there have been recommendations for its legalisation particularly for certain ailments. They also explore its common adverse effects and studies that suggest its effectiveness particularly for neuropathic pain.

The article presents several reports regarding addiction of drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. The Australian federal government has stopped its financial support on the Alcohol and Other Drugs Council of Australia (ADCA). The opening of the drug consumption room for drug addicts with infectious disease in Greece which runs by the country's Organization Against Drugs (OKANA). The launch of the plain packaging cigarettes in London, England.

This paper uses duration models and self-reported cannabis histories from young Australians to study the dynamics of cannabis use. We find that low cannabis prices are associated with early initiation into cannabis use. While the decision to quit does not appear to be directly influenced by price, we find that the younger an individual is when they start using cannabis the less likely they are to quit. Therefore, low cannabis prices lead to early use and because of that they lead to a low quit rate and hence a longer duration of use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

With cannabis medicines now obtaining legal status in many international jurisdictions (generally on the authorisation of a medical professional), a rapid increase in consumer demand for access to cannabis as a therapeutic option in the treatment and management of a range of indications is being noted. Despite this accessibility, knowledge on optimal use is lacking. Further drug development and clinical trials at regulatory standards are necessary both if a better understanding of the efficacy of cannabis medicines, optimal product formulation and indication-specific dosing is needed and to ensure the broader quality and safety of cannabis medicines in the clinical setting.To enable this, clinical, academic and public calls for the undertaking of rigorous clinical trials to establish an evidence base for the therapeutic use of cannabis medicines have been made internationally. While this commitment to undertake human studies with cannabis medicines is welcomed, it has highlighted unique challenges, notably in the review stages of ethics and governance. This often results in lengthy delays to approval by Human Research Ethics Committees (herein 'HREC', Australia's nomenclature for Institutional Review Boards) and trial commencement. A principal concern in these cases is that in contrast to clinical trials using other more conventional pharmaceutical products, trials of cannabis medicines in humans often involve the use of an investigational product prior to some (or any) of the preclinical and pharmaceutical safety issues being established. This paucity of data around product safety, potential drug interactions, continuity of supply, shelf life and product storage results in apprehension by HRECs and governance bodies to endorse trials using cannabis medicines.This manuscript draws from the experiences of Australian researchers and staff involved in clinical trials of cannabis medicines to describe some of the common difficulties that may be faced in the HREC approval process. It also presents practical advice aimed to assist researchers, HRECs and governance officers navigate this complex terrain. While the authors' experiences are situated within the Australian setting, many of the barriers described are applicable within the international context and thus, the solutions that have been proposed are typically adaptive for use within other jurisdictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectivesAccess to medicinal cannabis is a timely and important issue in cancer care. Recent legislative changes in Australia have increased access to medicinal cannabis, but the views of people with cancer on this topic are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis among people with cancer.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed using an anonymous, 15-item study-specific paper-based survey. The survey was administered over a 2-week period in August 2017 in the waiting rooms of a specialist cancer hospital.ResultsIn all, 339 patients completed the survey (mean (±s.d.) age 59±15 years; 52% male). Fourteen respondents (4%) were currently using cannabis medicinally. Only one of these respondents had a prescription for their cannabis product. Most respondents would consider using a medicinal cannabis product if recommended by their doctor (n =271; 80%).ConclusionThis study is the first of its kind to survey the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis in a broad sample of Australian people with cancer. Few respondents were currently using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but an overwhelming majority were in favour of increasing access and would consider using a prescribed product.What is known about the topic?Cannabis may have a wide variety of medicinal uses, particularly in the cancer setting. Currently, people with cancer in Victoria have limited access to medicinal cannabis despite recent legislative changes.What does this paper add?In a general sample of people with cancer, few were using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but most were in favour of widening access and would consider using a product their doctor prescribed.What are the implications for practitioners?Despite supporting access, patients indicated that the recommendations of doctors and increasing the evidence base are necessary requirements to their use of medicinal cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including judement in legal case of Australia, 2005 court case of Gonzales v. Raich in the U.S. and Bridgewater v Leahy case in Australia.