Responsible and controlled use: Older cannabis users and harm reduction

Medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids containing products – Regulations in Europe and North America

Background: Although the relation between impulsivity and substance use outcomes is well-documented (Jones et al., 2014; Stautz et al., 2017), less is known about individual facets of impulsivity among individuals who use cannabis. There is some research suggesting that positive urgency, sensation seeking, and lack of premeditation are associated with greater cannabis use problems, but much of this research has been conducted in normative adolescent or young adult samples (VanderVeen et al., 2016). Given that more than 11% of legal cannabis users currently use daily/near daily (Goodman et al., 2020), this study examined relations between individual facets of impulsivity and cannabis use, alcohol use, simultaneous cannabis and alcohol use, and problem use within a sample of frequent, adult cannabis users. Methods: Individuals (n=167) with a mean age of 34.89 (SD=11.19) who reported using cannabis on average once per day completed measures of individual facets of impulsivity (positive urgency, negative urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, and sensation seeking; UPPS-P), cannabis use frequency, alcohol use frequency, simultaneous cannabis and alcohol use frequency, cannabis use problems, cannabis use disorder, and alcohol use disorder. Path models were used to predict frequency of use (cannabis, alcohol, and simultaneous cannabis/alcohol) and problem use (cannabis consequences, cannabis use disorder, and alcohol use disorder) from each facet of impulsivity. Models were first run using sex, age, and race as covariates, and subsequently run after adding depressive and anxiety symptoms as covariates. Results: After controlling for sex, age, and race, positive urgency was associated with less frequent cannabis use (b=-0.28, S.E.=0.13, p=0.03), more frequent simultaneous cannabis and alcohol use (b= 0.24, S.E.=0.11, p=.04), and greater cannabis consequences (b=0.30, S.E.=0.10, p=0.002). Negative urgency was associated with greater cannabis consequences (b=0.31, S.E.=0.09, p<0.001), cannabis use disorder (b=0.27, S.E.=0.09, p=0.002), and alcohol use disorder (b=0.27, S.E.=0.10, p=0.01). After including depressive and anxiety symptoms as covariates, relations with positive urgency, but not negative urgency, remained significant. Conclusions: The findings of the current study suggest that positive urgency may be uniquely linked to riskier behavior in frequent cannabis users given that no other facet of impulsivity was significantly associated with cannabis use outcomes after all covariates were included in the model. Although not directly assessed in the current study, the findings suggest that relations between negative urgency and cannabis use frequency and cannabis and alcohol use disorder may be mediated by depressive and anxiety symptoms. This possibility should be explicitly examined in future studies. The lack of relations between other facets of impulsivity and alcohol and cannabis use outcomes in the current study suggest that effects of impulsivity among daily users may be restricted to urgency, in contrast to studies in normative adolescent and young adult samples (VanderVeen et al., 2016).

e24125 Background: Despite lack of clinical trials reporting on beneficial effects of the cannabis plant for cancer-associated symptoms, its use is increasing worldwide. Approximately 10,000 Israeli cancer patients receive permits for the use of medical cannabis, making cannabis one of the most commonly prescribed oncology treatments in Israel and making the Israeli oncologists highly experienced with its use. The experience gained by the Israeli oncologists is therefore highly valuable. Methods: We conducted a web-based survey among all 238 Israeli oncologists, addressing personal experience; knowledge and attitudes toward the use of cannabis in oncology. Results: Response rate was 54% (n = 126), with the vast majority (87%) regularly prescribing cannabis to their patients. Anorexia, pain and nausea were the most common indications for cannabis use. While 90% of responders stated lack of sufficient knowledge regarding cannabis, its use was perceived as effective and safe. Interestingly, while most oncologists stated that opioids should be used as a first line treatment for cancer pain, most would prefer cannabis for pain relief if needed by a close relative. Oncologists who support cannabis legalization were more likely to prescribe it. Conclusions: Our findings indicate extensive use and perception of medical cannabis despite lack of knowledge, and support about efficacy and indicate a unique role for moral attitudes affecting clinical decisions. These data call for the implementation of an educational program and practical guidelines enabling more consistent and rational approach toward cannabis role in oncology.

A small body of work has started developing cannabis use "typologies" for use in treatment and prevention. Two potentially relevant dimensions for classifying cannabis use typologies are medical versus recreational cannabis use and the co-use of cannabis and alcohol. Here we compare alcohol use and related problems between cannabis users with and without medical cannabis recommendations. Data come from a larger general population study in Washington State conducted between January 2014 and October 2016. All participants in the analytic sample (n = 991) reported using both alcohol and cannabis in the past 12 months. The primary exposure was having a medical recommendation for cannabis. Outcomes were past-30-day drinking (drinks/day, frequency of 5+ drinks, and maximum number of drinks in a day) and past-12-month Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores. Compared with those without medical cannabis recommendations, cannabis users with medical cannabis recommendations had 0.59 times fewer drinks/day, 0.44 times fewer occasions drinking 5+, and 0.78 times the average maximum number of drinks in one day (all ps < .05). Those with a recommendation also had 0.87 times lower AUDIT total scores (p < .05) and 0.57 times lower AUDIT problem scores (p < .01). Cannabis users with medical cannabis recommendations drink less and have fewer alcohol-related problems than those without recommendations, even after adjusting for health status. Future studies should examine nonhealth reasons regarding how medical and nonmedical users use cannabis differently.

Baccalaureate nursing students' knowledge, attitudes, educational needs, and use of medical and non-medical cannabis at five institutions in Manitoba, Canada: A cross-sectional analysis

Background: Research suggests that individuals who experience four or more adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have increased rates of cannabis use. However, most prior research does not separate recreational and medical usage. Medical cannabis is used legally in many states to treat a variety of health conditions, many of which are also associated with ACEs. Objectives: Therefore, we explore the extent to which medical cannabis users differ from recreational cannabis users and whether medical use is associated with ACEs, poor health, or disability. Accordingly, we ask the following questions: Are ACEs associated with any cannabis use when controlling for measures of poor health and disability? Are ACEs associated with medical cannabis use? Are associations between ACEs and medical cannabis use explained by poor health and/or disability? Results: Using 2019 BRFSS data, we find that ACEs are significantly associated with cannabis use, but that disability and poor health fully account for the effect of ACEs on medical cannabis use. Conclusions: We conclude that practitioners screen for ACEs and disability status when prescribing medical cannabis.

Changes in medical cannabis use in Ontario, Canada (2014 to 2019): Trajectory of trends, medical authorization patterns and association with recreational cannabis legalization

Factors associated with cannabis use disorder among Australians using prescribed and illicitly-sourced medical cannabis

A longitudinal investigation of the association between cannabis use and alcohol use among people living with HIV

Background: In 2016, California transitioned from legalized medical cannabis use to adult-use. Little is known about how this policy change affected medicinal cannabis use among young adults. Objectives: To identify longitudinal groups of medicinal cannabis users and concurrent changes in health- and cannabis use-related characteristics among young adults in Los Angeles between 2014 and 2021. Methods: Cannabis users (210 patients and 156 non-patients; 34% female; ages 18–26 at baseline) were surveyed annually across six waves. Longitudinal latent class analysis derived groups from two factors – cannabis patient status and self-reported medicinal use. Trajectories of health symptoms, cannabis use motives, and cannabis use (daily/near daily use, concentrate use, and problematic use) were estimated across groups. Results: Three longitudinal latent classes emerged: Recreational Users (39.3%) – low self-reported medicinal use and low-to-decreasing patient status; Recreational Patients (40.4%) – low self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status; Medicinal Patients (20.3%) – high self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status. At baseline, Medicinal Patients had higher levels of physical health symptoms and motives than recreational groups (p < .05); both patient groups reported higher level of daily/near daily and concentrate use (p < .01). Over time, mental health symptoms increased in recreational groups (p < .05) and problematic cannabis use increased among Recreational Patients (p < .01). Conclusions: During the transition to legalized adult-use, patterns of medicinal cannabis use varied among young adults. Clinicians should monitor increases in mental health symptoms and cannabis-related problems among young adults who report recreational – but not medicinal – cannabis use.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is one of the most curable malignancies. Despite its effectiveness, chemotherapy is often associated with adverse events (AEs) such as nausea, anorexia, and impairment of general well-being. Our objective was to assess the extent of medical cannabis use among HL patients and evaluate its efficacy in controlling chemotherapy-related AEs. Patterns of medical cannabis use and efficacy were evaluated using physician-completed application forms, medical files, and patient-completed questionnaires, for all consecutive adult HL patients treated at the Tel-Aviv Medical Center between June 2010 and November 2016. One-hundred and thirty-three patients met the inclusion criteria. The median age of the cohort was 37 years, 53% were male, 46% were diagnosed at an early stage, and 88% achieved a complete response to treatment. Fifty-one patients (38%) used medical cannabis. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between cannabis users and nonusers. Cannabis users reported improvement in pain, general well-being, appetite, and nausea in 94, 87, 82, and 79% of cases, respectively. Importantly, 81.5% reported a high overall efficacy of cannabis in relieving symptoms. AEs related to cannabis use itself were mild. Thus, medical cannabis use is prevalent in this HL cohort, and appears to be effective in ameliorating chemotherapy-related AEs.

IntroductionEvidence supporting associations between cannabis use and many health outcomes is growing, however it remains unclear how such associations vary across the lifespan. We therefore aim to answer the following questions: (1) Are the risks of cannabis’s adverse effects on mental health and addiction-related outcomes different in adolescents than in adults? (2) What are the relationships between these cannabis’s adverse effects and (a) an individual’s age at first cannabis use, (b) age at assessment, and (c) duration of cannabis use?MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychINFO from inception to 18 October 2021. Two reviewers independently screened studies and descriptively synthesized results.ResultsWe included 140 studies. Cannabis effects on mental health and addiction-related outcomes were worse in adolescents, early cannabis initiators and cannabis users who consumed for longest periods. Evidence of worse long-term adverse effects in adolescents was substantial for psychosis, cannabis, and nicotine use disorders; mixed for depression, suicidality, other substance use and disorders; and limited for anxiety. Additionally, acute cannabis exposure had the opposite trend with adults more often reporting adverse effects than adolescents.ConclusionThe available evidence suggests that cannabis use should be delayed as late as possible in adulthood and shortened in duration across the lifespan to decrease the risk of negative outcomes, while emphasizing the need for adapted harm reduction approaches. This scoping review provides evidence on the role of age and duration of exposure as determinants of cannabis-related adverse effects, which may inform prevention and harm reduction strategies.Systematic review registrationhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BYG72

BackgroundSince 2001, Canadians have been able to obtain cannabis for medical purposes, initially through the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (ACMPR). The Cannabis Act (Bill C-45) came into force on October 17, 2018, replacing the ACMPR. The Cannabis Act enables Canadians to possess cannabis purchased from a licensed retailer without authorization for either medical or nonmedical purposes. The Cannabis Act is currently the guiding legislation which governs both medical and nonmedical access. The Cannabis Act contains some improvements for patients but is essentially the same as its previous legislation. Beginning in October 2022, the federal government is conducting a review of the Cannabis Act and is questioning whether a distinct medical cannabis stream is still required, given the ease of access to cannabis and cannabis products. Although there is overlap in the reasons for medical and recreational cannabis use, the distinct legislation of medical versus recreational use of cannabis in Canada may be under threat.Main bodyA large segment of the medical, academic, research, and lay communities agree that there is a need for distinct medical and recreational cannabis streams. Perhaps most importantly, separation of these streams is necessary to ensure that both medical cannabis patients and healthcare providers receive the required support needed to optimize benefits while minimizing risks associated with medical cannabis use. Preservation of distinct medical and recreational streams can help to ensure that needs of different stakeholders are met. For example, patients require guidance in the form of assessing the appropriateness of cannabis use, selection of appropriate products and dosage forms, dosing titration, screening for drug interactions, and safety monitoring. Healthcare providers require access to undergraduate and continuing health education as well as support from their professional organizations to ensure medical cannabis is appropriately prescribed. Although there are challenges in conducing research, as motives for cannabis use frequently straddle boundaries between medical versus recreational cannabis use, maintenance of a distinct medical stream is also necessary to ensure adequate supply of cannabis products appropriate for medical use, to reduce stigma associated with cannabis in both patients and providers, to help enable reimbursement for patients, to facilitate removal of taxation on cannabis used for medical purposes, and to promote research on all aspects of medical cannabis.ConclusionCannabis products for medical and recreational purposes have different objectives and needs, requiring different methods of distribution, access, and monitoring. HCPs, patients, and the commercial cannabis industry would serve Canadians well to continue to advocate to policy makers to ensure the continued existence of two distinct streams and must strive to make ongoing improvements to the current programs.

The lockdown measures implemented to curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2 may affect (illicit) drug consumption patterns. This rapid response study investigated changes in cannabis use in a non-probability sample of cannabis users in the Netherlands during the early lockdown period. We fielded an online cross-sectional survey 4–6 weeks after implementation of lockdown measures in the Netherlands on March 15, 2020. We measured self-reported \\motives for changes in use, and assessed cannabis use frequency (use days), number of joints per typical use day, and route of administration in the periods before and after lockdown implementation. 1,563 cannabis users were recruited. Mean age was 32.7 ± 12.0 years; 66.3% were male and 67.9% used cannabis (almost) daily. In total, 41.3% of all respondents indicated that they had increased their cannabis use since the lockdown measures, 49.4% used as often as before, 6.6% used less often, and 2.8% stopped (temporarily). One-third of those who were not daily users before the lockdown became (almost) daily users. Before the lockdown, most respondents (91.4%) used cannabis in a joint mixed with tobacco and 87.6% still did so. Among users of joints, 39.4% reported an increase in the average number consumed per use day; 54.2% stayed the same and 6.4% used fewer joints. This rapid response study found evidence that during the lockdown more users increased rather than decreased cannabis consumption according to both frequency and quantity. These data highlight the need to invest more resources in supporting cessation, harm reduction, and monitoring longer term trends in cannabis use.

The German government intends to reduce the barriers for the medical use of cannabis products. A discussion on the indications and contraindications of the medical use of cannabis and on the changes of the regulatory framework has already begun in Germany. It is useful to draw from the experiences of other countries with a more liberal medical use of cannabis. The Israeli and Canadian experience is outlined by physicians who have been charged with expertise on the medical use of cannabis by their jurisdiction. In Israel, only the plant-based cannabinoid nabiximol (mixture of tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol) can be prescribed for spasticity/chronic pain in multiple sclerosis and for cancer pain. The costs of nabiximole are reimbursed by some, but not by all health maintenance organizations. The medical use of marijuana is permitted; however, it is strictly regulated by the government. Selected companies are allowed to produce marijuana for medical use, and only certain physicians are licensed to prescribe marijuana as a therapeutic drug for specific indications such as chronic neuropathic, and cancer pain, inflammatory bowel diseases, or posttraumatic stress disorder if conventional treatments have failed. The costs of marijuana are not reimbursed by health insurance companies. In Canada, synthetic cannabinoids and the plant-based (nabiximol) are licensed for neuropathic and cancer pain, HIV-related anorexia and chemotherapy-associate nausea. The costs of these synthetic cannabinoids are covered by health insurance companies. The medical use of marijuana as a treatment option is allowed for individual patients suffering from any medical condition when authorized by a medical practitioner or nurse. Licensed producers are the only source for patients to newly access medical cannabis, although those with previous permission to grow may continue cultivation at the present time. The costs of marijuana are not reimbursed by health insurance companies. There are multiple contraindications for the medical use of cannabis products in both countries. The use of standardized, synthetic, and plant-based cannabis products should be allowed in Germany for defined medical conditions when high-level evidence of efficacy and safety exists. The costs should be reimbursed by the health insurance companies. Contraindications for the medical use of cannabis should be defined. Growing marijuana by patients for their medical use should not be allowed.