A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group study of THC/CBD spray in peripheral neuropathic pain treatment

Permeation-Enhancing Strategies for Transdermal Delivery of Cannabinoids

Introduction: This review aims to provide an overview of the advancements and status of clinical studies and potential permeation-enhancing strategies in the transdermal delivery of cannabinoids. Methods: A systematic and comprehensive literature search across academic databases, search engines, and online sources to identify relevant literature on the transdermal administration of cannabinoids. Results: Cannabinoids have proven beneficial in the treatment of wide-ranging physical and psychological disorders. A shift toward legalized cannabinoid products has increased both interests in cannabinoid research and the development of novel medicinal exploitations of cannabinoids in recent years. Oral and pulmonary delivery of cannabinoids has several limitations, including poor bioavailability, low solubility, and potential side effects. This has diverted scientific attention toward the transdermal route, successfully overcoming these hurdles by providing higher bioavailability, safety, and patient compliance. Yet, due to the barrier properties of the skin and the lipophilic nature of cannabinoids, there is a need to increase the permeation of the drugs to the underneath layers of skin to reach desired therapeutic plasma levels. Literature describing detailed clinical trials on cannabinoid transdermal delivery, either with or without permeation-enhancing strategies, is limited. Conclusion: The limited number of reports indicates that increased attention is needed on developing and examining efficient transdermal delivery systems for cannabinoids, including patch design and composition, drug-patch interaction, clinical effectiveness and safety in vivo, and permeation-enhancing strategies.

Pierre M, Belle-Isle L, Gagnon M, Bevan S, Sanchez T, Arlt S, Monahan-Ellison M, O'Hara J, Boivin M, Costiniuk C. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Cannabis and Cannabinoid-Based Medicines in the Management of Chronic Pain and Co-Occurring Conditions

Background: One in five individuals live with chronic pain globally, which often co-occurs with sleep problems, anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. Although these conditions are commonly managed with cannabinoid-based medicines (CBM), health care providers report lack of information on the risks, benefits, and appropriate use of CBM for therapeutic purposes. Aims: We present these clinical practice guidelines to help clinicians and patients navigate appropriate CBM use in the management of chronic pain and co-occurring conditions. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies investigating the use of CBM for the treatment of chronic pain. Articles were dually reviewed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Clinical recommendations were developed based on available evidence from the review. Values and preferences and practical tips have also been provided to support clinical application. The GRADE system was used to rate the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence. Results: From our literature search, 70 articles met inclusion criteria and were utilized in guideline development, including 19 systematic reviews and 51 original research studies. Research typically demonstrates moderate benefit of CBM in chronic pain management. There is also evidence for efficacy of CBM in the management of comorbidities, including sleep problems, anxiety, appetite suppression, and for managing symptoms in some chronic conditions associated with pain including HIV, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, and arthritis. Conclusions: All patients considering CBM should be educated on risks and adverse events. Patients and clinicians should work collaboratively to identify appropriate dosing, titration, and administration routes for each individual. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO no. 135886.

Phytocannabinoids for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain: A Scoping Review of Randomised Controlled Trials Published Between 2012 and 2023

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neuropathic pain (NP) remains a challenge to treat, with 50% of patients experiencing limited efficacy from current treatments. Medicinal cannabis, which contains tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) and other minor cannabinoids, is garnering attention as an alternative treatment for NP. This paper reviews the clinical evidence for phytocannabinoid treatment of NP.

RECENT FINDINGS

Seventeen randomised controlled trials (RCT) were identified for inclusion in this review. Of these, ten studies using phytocannabinoid preparations containing THC alone had the most evidence for pain relief. Four studies investigating THC/CBD combinations showed some reductions in pain scores, although not all findings were statistically significant, whereas studies investigating CBD (two studies) or cannabidivarin (one study) showed no analgesic effect over placebo. However, CBD studies were of small sample size when compared to other studies in the review and short duration. Results for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy patients with THC showed better improvements over those for NP induced by chemotherapy and multiple sclerosis, with these trials using vaporised whole plant cannabis. This formulation may have trace amounts of other minor cannabinoids, compared with synthetic cannabinoids such as dronabinol or nabilone that were investigated in other studies. This review provides an overview of RCTs that have investigated phytocannabinoid use for the treatment of NP. There appears to be evidence to necessitate further high quality RCTs into novel formulations of phytocannabinoids for the treatment of NP.

Cannabidiol Intervention for Muscular Tension, Pain, and Sleep Bruxism Intensity-A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are the most prevalent non-dental pain issues in the maxillofacial region. Despite advancements, diagnosing and managing TMDs continues to pose challenges. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of cannabidiol (CBD) formulations, with different concentrations, in patients experiencing sleep bruxism and muscle-related TMDs, with a particular emphasis on their myorelaxant, pain-relieving, and bruxism-reducing properties. Methods: The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMDs) was utilized as the diagnostic framework. Sixty patients completed the study, which followed a parallel-group, three-arm, randomized, double-blind clinical trial design, with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio across three groups: 1a, 1b, and 2. Groups 1a and 1b received CBD formulations at concentrations of 10% and 5%, respectively, while Group 2 received a placebo formulation. The trial consisted of four main visits, namely screening, baseline, first follow-up after 14 days, and second follow-up after 30 days, during which surface electromyography (sEMG), the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain assessment, and Bruxoff examinations were conducted. Results: The reduction in pain, as measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), among patients using the 10% CBD formulation was 57.4% (p < 0.05), accompanied by a decrease in sEMG activity by 42.1% (p < 0.05). Conversely, individuals using the 5% CBD formulation experienced a 40.8% (p < 0.05) decrease in pain. Regarding the decrease in the sleep bruxism index, users of the 10% CBD formulation saw the highest reduction of 51% (p < 0.05). These findings underscore the efficacy of the proposed treatment in both experimental groups, with a notable advantage observed in Group 1a. Conversely, the outcomes of the selected variables for the control group did not exhibit significant differences throughout the study. Conclusions: The intraoral use of CBD formulations in patients with TMDs have proven to be a successful treatment for reducing pain, muscle tension, and bruxing activity in individuals with sleep bruxism and muscle-related TMDs. Specifically, a concentration of 10% CBD has demonstrated superior results compared to 5% CBD.

Supporting gut health with medicinal cannabis in people with advanced cancer: potential benefits and challenges

The side effects of cancer therapy continue to cause significant health and cost burden to the patient, their friends and family, and governments. A major barrier in the way in which these side effects are managed is the highly siloed mentality that results in a fragmented approach to symptom control. Increasingly, it is appreciated that many symptoms are manifestations of common underlying pathobiology, with changes in the gastrointestinal environment a key driver for many symptom sequelae. Breakdown of the mucosal barrier (mucositis) is a common and early side effect of many anti-cancer agents, known to contribute (in part) to a range of highly burdensome symptoms such as diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting, infection, malnutrition, fatigue, depression, and insomnia. Here, we outline a rationale for how, based on its already documented effects on the gastrointestinal microenvironment, medicinal cannabis could be used to control mucositis and prevent the constellation of symptoms with which it is associated. We will provide a brief update on the current state of evidence on medicinal cannabis in cancer care and outline the potential benefits (and challenges) of using medicinal cannabis during active cancer therapy.

Medicinal Plants for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Neuropathic pain is a disabling condition caused by various diseases and can profoundly impact the quality of life. Unfortunately, current treatments often do not produce complete amelioration and can be associated with potential side effects. Recently, herbal drugs have garnered more attention as an alternative or a complementary treatment. In this article, we summarized the results of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the effects of various phytomedicines on neuropathic pain. In addition, we discussed their main bioactive components and potential mechanisms of action to provide a better view of the application of herbal drugs for treating neuropathic pain.

URB937 Prevents the Development of Mechanical Allodynia in Male Rats with Trigeminal Neuralgia

Cannabinoids are proposed for alleviating neuropathic pain, but their use is limited by cannabimimetic side effects. The inhibition of the fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH), the degrading enzyme of the endocannabinoid anandamide, has received attention as an alternative to cannabinoids in the treatment of neuropathic pain. Here, we investigated the effect of URB937, a blood-brain barrier impermeant FAAH inhibitor, on experimentally induced mechanical allodynia in an animal model of trigeminal neuralgia. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were subjected to chronic constriction injury of the infraorbital nerve (IoN-CCI); operated animals were treated sub-chronically with URB937 (1 mg/kg, i.p.) or vehicle before or after trigeminal mechanical allodynia establishment. We also assayed mRNA expression levels of the pain neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and cytokines in the medulla, cervical spinal cord, and trigeminal ganglion ipsilateral to IoN-CCI using rt-PCR. URB937 treatment prevented the development of mechanical allodynia and IoN-CCI-induced changes in mRNA expression levels of CGRP and cytokines in the evaluated areas. When administered after allodynia development, URB937 prevented IoN-CCI-induced changes in CGRP and cytokine gene expression; this was not associated with a significant abrogation of the mechanical allodynia. These findings suggest that URB937 may counteract, but not reverse, the development of allodynia in trigeminal neuralgia. Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms.

Cannabis constituents for chronic neuropathic pain; reconciling the clinical and animal evidence

Chronic neuropathic pain is a debilitating pain syndrome caused by damage to the nervous system that is poorly served by current medications. Given these problems, clinical studies have pursued extracts of the plant Cannabis sativa as alternative treatments for this condition. The vast majority of these studies have examined cannabinoids which contain the psychoactive constituent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). While there have been some positive findings, meta-analyses of this clinical work indicates that this effectiveness is limited and hampered by side-effects. This review focuses on how recent preclinical studies have predicted the clinical limitations of THC-containing cannabis extracts, and importantly, point to how they might be improved. This work highlights the importance of targeting channels and receptors other than cannabinoid CB1 receptors which mediate many of the side-effects of cannabis.

A cross-sectional survey exploring the knowledge, experiences and attitudes of Australian pharmacists toward medicinal cannabis

BACKGROUND

Australian pharmacists currently dispense a wide range of prescription-only cannabis-based medicines. Recent regulatory changes will expand the role of pharmacists, allowing certain low-dose cannabidiol products to be supplied without a prescription in pharmacies. This harmonises Australia with many other countries where cannabidiol products are readily available to consumers.

AIM

To examine Australian pharmacists' experience, knowledge and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis and their preparedness to supply over-the-counter low-dose cannabidiol products.

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional study using a 51-item on-line questionnaire that was informed by previous surveys of health professionals and assessed for face validity. Australian pharmacists were recruited to complete the survey between May and December 2021, primarily through professional pharmacy organisations. Pharmacists were included in the final dataset if they completed the demographic characteristics section and at least one additional section of the questionnaire. Data were analysed using descriptive and relational statistical tests.

RESULTS

There were 272 attempts to complete this survey and 217 responses included in the final dataset. Over half of the respondents (60.0%, 130/217) had dispensed at least one medicinal cannabis prescription during their career and 58.5% (127/217) had received at least one medicinal cannabis enquiry in the last fortnight. Only around half (53.9%, 117/217) felt comfortable supplying medicinal cannabis products and fewer (39.3%, 79/201) were confident discussing cannabis-related enquiries. More than half of the respondents (58.7%, 118/201) supported the provision of low-dose cannabidiol products through pharmacies. Two-thirds (67.8%, 80/118) of respondents achieved relatively low scores (< 60%) in the knowledge component of the survey. Most respondents (94.2%, 178/189) endorsed a need for further training in this area.

CONCLUSION

Australian pharmacists tended to support medicinal cannabis availability and improved access to low-dose cannabidiol products via pharmacies. However, results highlight a need for improved training and education of pharmacists around cannabis-based medicines.

Evaluating the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health and pain in patients with chronic neuropathic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Chronic neuropathic pain is often debilitating and can have a significant impact on sleep health and quality of life. There is limited information on the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health when treating neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to determine the effect of cannabinoids on sleep quality, pain intensity, and patient impression of treatment efficacy in patients with neuropathic pain.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Nine available medical literature databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing synthetic and natural cannabinoids to placebo in patients with neuropathic pain syndromes. Data on validated tools for sleep quality, pain intensity, patients' global impression of change (PGIC), and incidence of adverse effects of cannabinoids were extracted and synthesized.

FINDINGS

Of the 3491 studies screened, eight randomized controlled trials satisfied the inclusion criteria for this review. Analyses were performed using R -4.1.2. using the metafor package and are interpreted using alpha=0.05 as the threshold for statistical significance. Validated measures for sleep health were not used in most studies. Meta-analysis of data from six studies showed that cannabinoids were associated with a significant improvement in sleep quality (standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19 to -0.61, 95% prediction interval (PI): -0.12 to 0.88, p-value=0.002, I2=55.26, τ2=0.05, Q-statistic=16.72, GRADE: moderate certainty). Meta-analysis of data from eight studies showed a significant reduction in daily pain scores in the cannabinoid (CB) group (SMD: -0.55, 95% CI:-0.69 to -0.19, 95% PI: -1.51 to 0.39, p=0.003, I2=82.49, τ2=0.20, Q-statistic=47.69, GRADE: moderate certainty). However, sleep health and analgesic benefits were associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing daytime somnolence, nausea, and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids have a role in treating chronic neuropathic pain as evidenced by significant improvements in sleep quality, pain intensity, and PGIC. More research is needed to comprehensively evaluate the impact of cannabinoids on sleep health and analgesic efficacy.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017074255.

Oral capsules of tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) and their combination in peripheral neuropathic pain treatment

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids are often prescribed for neuropathic pain, but the evidence-based recommendation is 'weak against'.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to examine the effect of two cannabinoids and their combination in peripheral neuropathic pain.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, trial with treatment arms for cannabidiol (CBD), tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), CBD and THC combination (CBD/THC), and placebo in a 1:1:1:1 ratio and flexible drug doses (CBD 5-50 mg, THC 2.5-25 mg, and CBD/THC 5 mg/2.5 mg-50 mg/25 mg). Treatment periods of 8-week duration were proceeded by 1 week for baseline observations. Patients with painful polyneuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia and peripheral nerve injury (traumatic or surgical) failing at least one previous evidence-based pharmacological treatment were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the change in weekly average of daily pain measured with a numeric rating scale (NRS). Trail Making Test (TMT) was used as one of the tests of mental functioning.

RESULTS

In all, 145 patients were included in the study of which 118 were randomized and 115 included in the intention-to-treat analysis. None of the treatments reduced pain compared to placebo (p = 0.04-0.60). Effect sizes as estimated in week 8 (positive values worse and negative better than placebo) were CBD mean 1.14 NRS points (95% CI 0.11-2.19), THC 0.38 (CI -0.65 to 1.4) and CBD/THC -0.12 (-1.13 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

CBD, THC and their combination did not relieve peripheral neuropathic pain in patients failing at least one previous evidence-based treatment for neuropathic pain.

Topical cannabidiol is well tolerated in individuals with a history of elite physical performance and chronic lower extremity pain

INTRODUCTION

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a potential therapeutic for pain management. Yet, there exists a dearth of studies of its tolerability and efficacy, especially in special populations. Former elite athletes are a special population both susceptible to chronic pain and also highly trained and attuned to assess medication tolerability concerns. The purpose of the present open-label pilot study was to assess the tolerability of CBD in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis was conducted in deidentified data from 20 individuals who were all previously professional athletes in US/American football, track and field, or basketball, with careers ranging from 4 to 10 years. Participants received topical CBD (10 mg twice daily by controlled dispenser) for chronic pain resulting from acute lower extremity injuries. Assessments of tolerability and secondary analyses of pain, pain-related disability, and activities of daily living were collected by self-report over the 6-week study period. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics, pairwise t-test, and linear regression.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of participants completed the study. Of the individuals who completed the study, 50% reported minor adverse effects, none of which required medical attention, and 50% did not report any adverse effects. The mostly commonly reported effects were skin dryness (43% of study completers) and skin rash (21% of study completers), which rapidly resolved. There was a significant improvement in self-reported pain levels (intake mean 3.5 ± 0.29; exit mean 1.7 ± 0.23; P < 0.001) and pain-related disability, including family and home responsibilities, life support activities, occupational activities, recreational activities, self-care, sexual function, and social activities (all P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess CBD treatment in elite athletes, who are disproportionally susceptible to disabling injuries. Topical administration of CBD was tolerated well by this population and resulted in only minor adverse effects. As elite athletes are trained and attuned to assess their own bodies due to their professional lives, this population is likely to detect tolerability concerns. However, this study was limited to a convenience sample and self-reported data. These pilot findings warrant further study of topical CBD in randomized and controlled studies of elite athletes.

Development of cannabis use disorder in medical cannabis users: A 9-month follow-up of a randomized clinical trial testing effects of medical cannabis card ownership

Background

Evidence for long-term effectiveness of commercial cannabis products used to treat medical symptoms is inconsistent, despite increasingly widespread use.

Objective

To prospectively evaluate the effects of using cannabis on self-reported symptoms of pain, insomnia, anxiety, depression, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) after 12 months of use.

Methods

This observational cohort study describes outcomes over 9 months following a 12-week randomized, waitlist-controlled trial (RCT: NCT03224468) in which adults (N = 163) who wished to use cannabis to alleviate insomnia, pain, depression, or anxiety symptoms were randomly assigned to obtain a medical marijuana card immediately (immediate card acquisition group) or to delay obtaining a card for 12 weeks delay (delayed card acquisition group). During the 9-month post-randomization period, all participants could use cannabis as they wished and choose their cannabis products, doses, and frequency of use. Insomnia, pain, depression, anxiety, and CUD symptoms were assessed over the 9-month post-randomization period.

Results

After 12 months of using cannabis for medical symptoms, 11.7% of all participants (n = 19), and 17.1% of those using cannabis daily or near-daily (n = 6) developed CUD. Frequency of cannabis use was positively correlated with pain severity and number of CUD symptoms, but not significantly associated with severity of self-reported insomnia, depression, or anxiety symptoms. Depression scores improved throughout the 9 months in all participants, regardless of cannabis use frequency.

Conclusions

Frequency of cannabis use was not associated with improved pain, anxiety, or depression symptoms but was associated with new-onset cannabis use disorder in a significant minority of participants. Daily or near-daily cannabis use appears to have little benefit for these symptoms after 12 months of use.

Cannabinoids as Prospective Anti-Cancer Drugs: Mechanism of Action in Healthy and Cancer Cells

Endogenous and exogenous cannabinoids modulate many physiological and pathological processes by binding classical cannabinoid receptors 1 (CB1) or 2 (CB2) or non-cannabinoid receptors. Cannabinoids are known to exert antiproliferative, apoptotic, anti-migratory and anti-invasive effect on cancer cells by inducing or inhibiting various signaling cascades. In this chapter, we specifically emphasize the latest research works about the alterations in endocannabinoid system (ECS) components in malignancies and cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, angiogenesis, autophagy, and death by cannabinoid administration, emphasizing their mechanism of action, and give a future perspective for clinical use.

Quality of Life in Patients Receiving Medical Cannabis

INTRODUCTION

Medical cannabis has been used to relieve the symptoms of people with various chronic diseases. Despite of this, it has been stigmatized, even after its legalization in many countries.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of life of patients receiving medical cannabis.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

One hundred patients receiving medical cannabis were given (a) a socio-demographic and clinical questionnaire, and (b) the SF-36 Health Survey scale for assessing quality of life.

RESULTS

The majority of our patients who received medical cannabis to treat their neurological disorders (58%) reported decrease in their symptoms (96%), better energy and vitality (68%), ability to perform their professional duties (88%), and an improvement in sleeping and appetite (79% and 71%, respectively) after receiving medical cannabis. Our participants exhibited very few restrictions in activities due to emotional difficulties, a moderate general health status as well as moderate vitality and energy. Participants, who reported a longer period of receiving medical cannabis, reported statistically significant more energy and vitality (p = 0.000), but also better mental (p = 0.000) and general health status (p = 0.001). Furthermore, the majority of patients have disclosed medical cannabis use to their family members (85%) and enjoyed their support (93%), but they haven't revealed their medication treatment to their social environment (81%).

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate knowledge could significantly help health professionals in the field of planning and implementation of personalized nursing care in order to achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes.

Dysmenorrhoea: Can Medicinal Cannabis Bring New Hope for a Collective Group of Women Suffering in Pain, Globally?

Dysmenorrhoea effects up to 90% of women of reproductive age, with medical management options including over-the-counter analgesia or hormonal contraception. There has been a recent surge in medicinal cannabis research and its analgesic properties. This paper aims to critically investigate the current research of medicinal cannabis for pain relief and to discuss its potential application to treat dysmenorrhoea. Relevant keywords, including medicinal cannabis, pain, cannabinoids, tetrahydrocannabinol, dysmenorrhoea, and clinical trial, have been searched in the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library (Wiley) databases and a clinical trial website (clinicaltrials.gov). To identify the relevant studies for this paper, 84 papers were reviewed and 20 were discarded as irrelevant. This review critically evaluated cannabis-based medicines and their mechanism and properties in relation to pain relief. It also tabulated all clinical trials carried out investigating medicinal cannabis for pain relief and highlighted the side effects. In addition, the safety and toxicology of medicinal cannabis and barriers to use are highlighted. Two-thirds of the clinical trials summarised confirmed positive analgesic outcomes, with major side effects reported as nausea, drowsiness, and dry mouth. In conclusion, medicinal cannabis has promising applications in the management of dysmenorrhoea. The global medical cannabis market size was valued at USD 11.0 billion in 2021 and is expected to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.06% from 2022 to 2030. This will encourage academic as well as the pharmaceutical and medical device industries to study the application of medical cannabis in unmet clinical disorders.

Safety and Tolerability of Oral Cannabinoids in People Living with HIV on Long-Term ART: A Randomized, Open-Label, Interventional Pilot Clinical Trial (CTNPT 028)

BACKGROUND

With anti-inflammatory properties, cannabinoids may be a potential strategy to reduce immune activation in people living with HIV (PLWH) but more information on their safety and tolerability is needed.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label interventional pilot study at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Canada. PLWH were randomized to oral Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC): cannabidiol (CBD) combination (THC 2.5 mg/CBD 2.5 mg) or CBD-only capsules (CBD 200 mg). Individuals titrated doses as tolerated to a maximum daily dose THC 15 mg/CBD 15 mg or 800 mg CBD, respectively, for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants without any significant toxicity based on the WHO toxicity scale (Grades 0-2 scores).

RESULTS

Out of ten individuals, eight completed the study. Two from the CBD-only arm were withdrawn for safety concerns: phlebotomy aggravating pre-existing anemia and severe hepatitis on 800 mg CBD with newly discovered pancreatic adenocarcinoma, respectively. Seven did not have any significant toxicity. Cannabinoids did not alter hematology/biochemistry profiles. CD4 count, CD4/CD8 ratio, and HIV suppression remained stable. Most adverse effects were mild-moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

In PLWH, cannabinoids seem generally safe and well-tolerated, though larger studies are needed. Screening for occult liver pathology should be performed and hepatic enzymes monitored, especially with high CBD doses.

Cys-loop receptors on cannabinoids: All high?

Endocannabinoids (eCBS) are endogenously derived lipid signaling molecules that serve as tissue hormones and interact with multiple targets, mostly within the endocannabinoid system (ECS). The ECS is a highly conserved regulatory system involved in homeostatic regulation, organ formation, and immunomodulation of chordates. The term “cannabinoid” evolved from the distinctive class of plant compounds found in Cannabis sativa, an ancient herb, due to their action on CB1 and CB2 receptors. CB1/2 receptors are the primary targets for eCBs, but their effects are not limited to the ECS. Due to the high interest and extensive research on the ECS, knowledge on its constituents and physiological role is substantial and still growing. Crosstalk and multiple targeting of molecules are common features of endogenous and plant compounds. Cannabimimetic molecules can be divided according to their origin, natural or synthetic, including phytocannabinoids (pCB’s) or synthetic cannabinoids (sCB’s). The endocannabinoid system (ECS) consists of receptors, transporters, enzymes, and signaling molecules. In this review, we focus on the effects of cannabinoids on Cys-loop receptors. Cys-loop receptors belong to the class of membrane-bound pentameric ligand gated ion channels, each family comprising multiple subunits. Mammalians possess GABA type A receptors (GABAAR), glycine receptors (GlyR), serotonin receptors type 3 (5-HT3R), and nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR). Several studies have shown different modulatory effects of CBs on multiple members of the Cys-loop receptor family. We highlight the existing knowledge, especially on subunits and protein domains with conserved binding sites for CBs and their possible pharmacological and physiological role in epilepsy and in chronic pain. We further discuss the potential for cannabinoids as first line treatments in epilepsy, chronic pain and other neuropsychiatric conditions, indicated by their polypharmacology and therapeutic profile.

Use of Cannabidiol in the Management of Insomnia: A Systematic Review

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD), one of the major cannabinoids derived from the cannabis plant, is available over the counter. CBD is often used by patients for the management of insomnia, yet research supporting CBDs effectiveness as a treatment for insomnia is inadequate. Objective: The objective of this review was to critically evaluate the literature regarding the therapeutic benefits of CBD in the management of insomnia. Methods: A comprehensive search of the following databases from inception to December 29, 2021, was conducted: Ovid MEDLINE^® and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. The search included randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized experimental studies, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case series, and case reports. Risk of bias was assessed with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality design-specific recommended criteria. Results: Thirty-four studies were eligible for inclusion. All studies reported improvement in the insomnia symptoms of at least a portion of their participants. Of the 34 studies, 19 studies used CBD predominant therapy and 21 studies used nearly equal ratios of CBD to Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Of the studies that performed hypothesis testing, 4 of 7 studies with a CBD predominant arm and 12 of 16 studies with a nearly equal ratio of CBD to THC arm reported significant improvement in insomnia outcomes. However, only 2 of the 34 studies focused on patients with insomnia, of which 1 study was a case report. Additionally, several studies used nonvalidated subjective measures, and most studies failed to include objective measures for symptom assessment. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review suggest that CBD alone or with equal quantities of THC may be beneficial in alleviating the symptoms of insomnia. Nevertheless, future research assessing CBDs effectiveness in population of patients specifically with insomnia utilizing validated subjective and objective measures is necessary before definitive inferences can be made.

Online survey of medicinal cannabis users: Qualitative analysis of patient-level data

Aim: To characterize perceived benefits and challenges experienced by medicinal cannabis users.

Methods: An anonymous online survey collected demographics, health information, and open-ended responses from medicinal cannabis users regarding perceptions, motivations, and experience of treatment. Qualitative open-ended responses were thematically analyzed.

Results: Respondents (N = 808) were predominantly White (79%), female (63%), with a mean (SD) age of 38 (20). Two hundred eighty-four (35%) respondents provided data on a dependent family member (e.g., child; 22% of total sample). Most used cannabidiol (CBD)-dominant products (58%), primarily for neurological disorders (38%) or pain (25%). Primary motivations for medicinal cannabis use were based on beliefs that traditional treatments were ineffective and/or had intolerable side effects (51%), positive scientific or media portrayals of the safety/efficacy of cannabis as a therapeutic (29%), or preference for “natural” treatments over pharmaceuticals (21%). A majority of respondents (77%) attributed positive effects to the medicinal use of cannabis/cannabinoids. These included physical symptom improvements such as reduced pain (28%), improved sleep (18%), and seizure reduction (18%), and mental health improvements including reduced anxiety (22%) and improved mood (11%). Additionally, respondents reported reduced use of other medications (e.g., opioids) (12%), and improved quality of life (14%). Problems associated with use were cited by 41% of respondents, and included unwanted side effects (16%), lack of information or medical support (16%), prohibitive costs (12%), and legal concerns (10%).

Conclusion: Most participants reported benefits from cannabis use for a variety of conditions where traditional treatments were ineffective or unacceptable. Concerns regarding cannabis side effects, legality, lack of information, and cost were raised. Data indicate greater research and education on the safety and efficacy of medicinal cannabis/cannabinoid use is warranted.

Effects of rich cannabidiol oil on behavioral disturbances in patients with dementia: A placebo controlled randomized clinical trial

Background

Almost 90% of patients with dementia suffer from some type of neurobehavioral symptom, and there are no approved medications to address these symptoms.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the medical cannabis oil “Avidekel” for the reduction of behavioral disturbances among patients with dementia.

Materials and methods

In this randomized, double-blind, single-cite, placebo-controlled trial conducted in Israel (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03328676), patients aged at least 60, with a diagnosis of major neurocognitive disorder and associated behavioral disturbances were randomized 2:1 to receive either “Avidekel,” a broad-spectrum cannabis oil (30% cannabidiol and 1% tetrahydrocannabinol: 295 mg and 12.5 mg per ml, respectively; n = 40) or a placebo oil (n = 20) three times a day for 16 weeks. The primary outcome was a decrease, as compared to baseline, of four or more points on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score by week 16.

Results

From 60 randomized patients [mean age, 79.4 years; 36 women (60.0%)], 52 (86.7%) completed the trial (all eight patients who discontinued treatment were from the investigational group). There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of subjects who had a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score reduction of ≥ 4 points at week 16: 24/40 (60.0%) and 6/20 (30.0%) for investigational and control groups, respectively (χ2 = 4.80, P = 0.03). There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of subjects who had a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score reduction of ≥ 8 points at week 16: 20/40 (50%) and 3/20 (15%), respectively (χ2 = 6.42, P = 0.011). The ANOVA repeated measures analysis demonstrated significantly more improvement in the investigational group compared to the control group at weeks 14 and 16 (F = 3.18, P = 0.02). Treatment was mostly safe, with no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events between the two groups.

Conclusion

In this randomized controlled trial, ‘Avidekel’ oil significantly reduced agitation over placebo in patients suffering from behavioral disturbances related to dementia, with non-serious side-effects. Further research is required with a larger sample size.

Medical cannabinoids: a pharmacology-based systematic review and meta-analysis for all relevant medical indications

BACKGROUND

Medical cannabinoids differ in their pharmacology and may have different treatment effects. We aimed to conduct a pharmacology-based systematic review (SR) and meta-analyses of medical cannabinoids for efficacy, retention and adverse events.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed (registered at PROSPERO: CRD42021229932) eight databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dronabinol, nabilone, cannabidiol and nabiximols for chronic pain, spasticity, nausea /vomiting, appetite, ALS, irritable bowel syndrome, MS, Chorea Huntington, epilepsy, dystonia, Parkinsonism, glaucoma, ADHD, anorexia nervosa, anxiety, dementia, depression, schizophrenia, PTSD, sleeping disorders, SUD and Tourette. Main outcomes and measures included patient-relevant/disease-specific outcomes, retention and adverse events. Data were calculated as standardized mean difference (SMD) and ORs with confidence intervals (CI) via random effects. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools.

RESULTS

In total, 152 RCTs (12,123 participants) were analysed according to the type of the cannabinoid, outcome and comparator used, resulting in 84 comparisons. Significant therapeutic effects of medical cannabinoids show a large variability in the grade of evidence that depends on the type of cannabinoid. CBD has a significant therapeutic effect for epilepsy (SMD - 0.5[CI - 0.62, - 0.38] high grade) and Parkinsonism (- 0.41[CI - 0.75, - 0.08] moderate grade). There is moderate evidence for dronabinol for chronic pain (- 0.31[CI - 0.46, - 0.15]), appetite (- 0.51[CI - 0.87, - 0.15]) and Tourette (- 1.01[CI - 1.58, - 0.44]) and moderate evidence for nabiximols on chronic pain (- 0.25[- 0.37, - 0.14]), spasticity (- 0.36[CI - 0.54, - 0.19]), sleep (- 0.24[CI - 0.35, - 0.14]) and SUDs (- 0.48[CI - 0.92, - 0.04]). All other significant therapeutic effects have either low, very low, or even no grade of evidence. Cannabinoids produce different adverse events, and there is low to moderate grade of evidence for this conclusion depending on the type of cannabinoid.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids are effective therapeutics for several medical indications if their specific pharmacological properties are considered. We suggest that future systematic studies in the cannabinoid field should be based upon their specific pharmacology.

Cannabis-Based Products for Chronic Pain : A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Contemporary data are needed about the utility of cannabinoids in chronic pain.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the benefits and harms of cannabinoids for chronic pain.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus to January 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language, randomized, placebo-controlled trials and cohort studies (≥1 month duration) of cannabinoids for chronic pain.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data abstraction, risk of bias, and strength of evidence assessments were dually reviewed. Cannabinoids were categorized by THC-to-CBD ratio (high, comparable, or low) and source (synthetic, extract or purified, or whole plant).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eighteen randomized, placebo-controlled trials (n = 1740) and 7 cohort studies (n = 13 095) assessed cannabinoids. Studies were primarily short term (1 to 6 months); 56% enrolled patients with neuropathic pain, with 3% to 89% female patients. Synthetic products with high THC-to-CBD ratios (>98% THC) may be associated with moderate improvement in pain severity and response (≥30% improvement) and an increased risk for sedation and are probably associated with a large increased risk for dizziness. Extracted products with high THC-to-CBD ratios (range, 3:1 to 47:1) may be associated with large increased risk for study withdrawal due to adverse events and dizziness. Sublingual spray with comparable THC-to-CBD ratio (1.1:1) probably is associated with small improvement in pain severity and overall function and may be associated with large increased risk for dizziness and sedation and moderate increased risk for nausea. Evidence for other products and outcomes, including longer-term harms, were not reported or were insufficient.

LIMITATION

Variation in interventions; lack of study details, including unclear availability in the United States; and inadequate evidence for some products.

CONCLUSION

Oral, synthetic cannabis products with high THC-to-CBD ratios and sublingual, extracted cannabis products with comparable THC-to-CBD ratios may be associated with short-term improvements in chronic pain and increased risk for dizziness and sedation. Studies are needed on long-term outcomes and further evaluation of product formulation effects.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (PROSPERO: CRD42021229579).

A bibliometric analysis of the cannabis and cannabinoid research literature

Background

Cannabis refers to a plant in the family Cannabaceae, which has been used medically, recreationally, and industrially. The last two decades, in particular, have seen a large increase in the volume of literature on this topic. The present bibliometric analysis aims to capture the characteristics of scholarly journal publications on the topic of cannabis and cannabinoid research.

Methods

Searches were run on the Scopus database on April 02, 2021, as follows “(TITLE (cannabi* OR hashish OR marijuana OR marihuana)) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE,"ar" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE,"re" ) )”. Results were exported on the same day to prevent discrepancies between daily database updates. Only “article” and “review” publication types were included; no further search limits were applied. The “article” publication type includes publications featuring original research, whereas “review” includes reviews and conference papers. The following data were collected: number of publications (in total and per year), authors, and journals; open access status; publications per journal; journals publishing the highest volume of literature and their impact factors, language of publication; document type; publication country; author affiliations; funding sponsors; most highly cited publications; and most highly published authors. Trends in this subset of publications were identified and presented. Bibliometric networks were constructed using the software tool VOSviewer.

Results

A total of 29 802 publications (10 214 open access), published by 65 109 authors, were published in 5474 journals from 1829 to 2021. The greatest number of publications was published over the last 20 years. The journal that published the largest number of publications was Drug and Alcohol Dependence (n = 705). The most productive countries included the USA (n = 12 420), the UK (n = 2236), and Canada (n = 2062); many of the most common institutional affiliations and funding sponsors originated from these countries.

Conclusions

The number of publications published on the topic of cannabis follows an upward trend. Over the past 20 years, the volume of cannabis research has grown steeply, which can be attributed to a large amount of funding dedicated to researching this topic. Future research should continue to investigate changes in the publication characteristics of emerging research, as the volume of publications on this topic is expected to rapidly grow.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42238-022-00133-0.

Dorsal Column Stimulation and Cannabinoids in the Treatment of Chronic Nociceptive and Neuropathic Pain: a Review of the Clinical and Pre-clinical Data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The main objective of this review is to appraise the literature on the role of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), cannabinoid therapy, as well as SCS and cannabinoid combination therapy for the management of chronic neuropathic and nociceptive pain. Current research suggests that SCS reduces pain and increases functional status in carefully selected patients with minimal side effects.

RECENT FINDINGS

As cannabinoid-based medications become a topic of increasing interest in pain management, data remains limited regarding the clinical efficacy of cannabinoids for pain relief. Furthermore, from a mechanistic perspective, although various pain treatment modalities utilize overlapping pain-signaling pathways, clarifying whether cannabinoids work synergistically with SCS via shared mechanisms remains to be determined. In considering secondary outcomes, the current literature suggests cannabinoids improve quality of life, specifically sleep quality, and that SCS decreases opioid consumption, increases functional capacity, and decreases long-term healthcare costs. These findings, along with the high safety profiles of SCS and cannabinoids overall, incentivize further exploration of cannabinoids as an adjunctive therapy to SCS in the treatment of neuropathic and nociceptive pain.

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Nabiximols (THC:CBD) Oromucosal Spray versus Oral Dronabinol (THC) as Add-on Treatment for Severe Neuropathic Pain in Real-World Clinical Practice: Retrospective Analysis of the German Pain e-Registry

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of add-on treatment with nabiximols (NBX: delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: cannabidiol) oromucosal spray or oral dronabinol (DRO: synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol) in patients with severe neuropathic pain poorly responsive to established treatments.

Methods

An analysis was conducted of anonymized, propensity score-matched real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry, using a sequential non-inferiority superiority approach, for adult outpatients with neuropathic pain who had initiated treatment with NBX or DRO between 10 March 2017 and 31 December 2019. The primary effectiveness variable was percent change from baseline in a 9-factor aggregated symptom relief (ASR-9) score, a composite index of nine distinct pain- and health-related parameters assessed using validated patient-reported instruments. Safety was assessed by the incidence of physician-confirmed treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and TRAEs leading to discontinuation.

Results

Propensity score-matched data were analyzed for 337 patients treated with NBX and 337 patients treated with DRO. Mean (standard deviation) THC dose over the 24-week evaluation period was 16.6 (6.5) mg for NBX and 17.2 (7.6) mg for DRO (p<0.001). Median (standard error) improvement relative to baseline in the ASR-9 composite score was 55.4% (0.5) for NBX and 40.5% (0.5) for DRO (least squares mean difference, 14.0 (0.7), 95% confidence interval 12.6–15.4; p<0.001), and incidences of TRAEs (21.1 vs 35%) and TRAE-related discontinuations (5.9 vs 14.8%) were significantly lower with NBX than DRO (p<0.001 for both), collectively indicating pre-specified non-inferiority and superiority of NBX. More NBX- than DRO-treated patients discontinued non-cannabinoid background pain medications and rescue analgesics, especially opioid analgesics (p<0.001 for both).

Conclusion

Add-on treatment with cannabinoids is effective for treatment of severe neuropathic pain with inadequate response to established treatments. In daily practice, NBX had superior effectiveness and tolerability compared to DRO. The results emphasize the importance of combining CBD with THC in this patient population.

Cannabis-Based Medicines and Medical Cannabis for Chronic Neuropathic Pain

Neuropathic pain represents a broad category of pain syndromes that include a wide variety of peripheral and central disorders. The overall prevalence of neuropathic pain in the general population is reported to be between 7 and 10%. Management of neuropathic pain presents an unmet clinical need, with less than 50% of patients achieving substantial pain relief with medications currently recommended such as pregabalin, gabapentin, duloxetine and various tricyclic antidepressants. It has been suggested that cannabis-based medicines (CbMs) and medical cannabis (MC) may be a treatment option for those with chronic neuropathic pain. CbMs/MC are available in different forms: licensed medications or medical products (plant-derived and/or synthetic products such as tetrahydrocannabinol or cannabidiol); magistral preparations of cannabis plant derivatives with defined molecular content such as dronabinol (tetrahydrocannabinol); and herbal cannabis with a defined content of tetrahydrocannabinol and/or cannabidiol, together with other active ingredients (phytocannabinoids other than cannabidiol/tetrahydrocannabinol, terpenes and flavonoids). The availability of different types of CbMs/MC varies between countries worldwide. Systematic reviews of available randomised controlled trials have stated low-quality evidence for CbMs and MC for chronic neuropathic pain. Depending on the studies included in the various quantitative syntheses, authors have reached divergent conclusions on the efficacy of CbMs/MC for chronic neuropathic pain (from not effective to a clinically meaningful benefit). Clinically relevant side effects of CbMs/MC, especially for central nervous system and psychiatric disorders, have been reported by some systematic reviews. Recommendations for the use of CbMs/MC for chronic neuropathic pain by various medical associations also differ, from negative recommendations, no recommendation possible, recommended as third-line therapy, or recommended as an alternative in selected cases failing standard therapies within a multimodal concept. After reading this paper, readers are invited to formulate their own conclusions regarding the potential benefits and harms of CbMs/MC for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain.

Efficacy of cannabis-based medications compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Chronic neuropathic pain (NP) presents therapeutic challenges. Interest in the use of cannabis-based medications has outpaced the knowledge of its efficacy and safety in treating NP. The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of cannabis-based medications in individuals with chronic NP.

Methods

Randomized placebo-controlled trials using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabidivarin (CBDV), or synthetic cannabinoids for NP treatment were included. The MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were examined. The primary outcome was the NP intensity. The risk of bias analysis was based on the Cochrane handbook.

Results

The search of databases up to 2/1/2021 yielded 379 records with 17 RCTs included (861 patients with NP). Meta-analysis showed that there was a significant reduction in pain intensity for THC/CBD by -6.624 units (P < .001), THC by -8.681 units (P < .001), and dronabinol by -6.0 units (P = .008) compared to placebo on a 0-100 scale. CBD, CBDV, and CT-3 showed no significant differences. Patients taking THC/CBD were 1.756 times more likely to achieve a 30% reduction in pain (P = .008) and 1.422 times more likely to achieve a 50% reduction (P = .37) than placebo. Patients receiving THC had a 21% higher improvement in pain intensity (P = .005) and were 1.855 times more likely to achieve a 30% reduction in pain than placebo (P < .001).

Conclusion

Although THC and THC/CBD interventions provided a significant improvement in pain intensity and were more likely to provide a 30% reduction in pain, the evidence was of moderate-to-low quality. Further research is needed for CBD, dronabinol, CT-3, and CBDV.

Medical Cannabis as Adjunctive Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer Patients

The goal of this systematic review was to define a consensus within the current literature regarding the impact/effect of cannabis or cannabinoids on the treatment of patients with head and neck cancer. We conducted a review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases, using a comprehensive search strategy, focusing on articles relating to head & neck cancer and cannabis/cannabinoids without a time limit for publication.

Two, independent reviewers screened articles based on title/abstract and included the ones selected by both. We then conducted a full-text review and excluded all articles which did not meet inclusion criteria. A single reviewer then assessed studies for methodological quality and extracted relevant data using a premade data collection tool. We identified five studies that met inclusion criteria. Studies were of varying quality and the majority investigated recreational cannabis use with only one study reporting dosing across participants. Lack of standardized cannabis exposure presents a wide array of potential confounding variables across the remaining studies. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to variability in reported outcomes.

It is impossible to draw any conclusions regarding the benefit or adverse effects of current medical cannabis products in this patient population. The literature regarding the effect of cannabis/cannabinoids on head & neck cancer patients is limited. However, the current lack of evidence does not definitively disprove the efficacy of cannabis. High-quality studies are necessary for physicians to provide advice to patients who are either using or interested in cannabis as an adjunctive treatment.

Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids for Impaired Sleep: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review to explore the effectiveness of medical cannabis for impaired sleep.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PsychINFO to January 2021 for randomized trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for impaired sleep vs. any non-cannabis control. When possible, we pooled effect estimates for all patient-important sleep-related outcomes and used the GRADE approach to appraise the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine trials (5,100 patients) were eligible for review, of which 38 evaluated oral cannabinoids and 1 administered inhaled cannabis. The median follow-up was 35 days, and most trials (33 of 39) enrolled patients living with chronic cancer or noncancer chronic pain. Among patients with chronic pain, moderate certainty evidence found that medical cannabis probably results in a small improvement in sleep quality versus placebo (modeled risk difference [RD] for achieving the minimally important difference [MID], 8% [95% CI, 3 to 12]). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis vs. placebo results in a small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic non-cancer pain (modeled RD for achieving the MID, 19% [95% CI, 11 to 28]) and a very small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic cancer pain (WMD of -0.19cm [95%CI, -0.36 to -0.03cm]; interaction p=0.03). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows medical cannabis, versus placebo, results in a substantial increase in the risk of dizziness (RD 29% [95%CI, 16 to 50], for trials with ≥3 months follow-up), and a small increase in the risk of somnolence, dry mouth, fatigue, and nausea (RDs ranged from 6% to 10%).

CONCLUSION

Medical cannabis and cannabinoids may improve impaired sleep among people living with chronic pain, but the magnitude of benefit is likely small.

Medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic pain: a clinical practice guideline

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the role of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for people living with chronic pain due to cancer or non-cancer causes?

CURRENT PRACTICE

Chronic pain is common and distressing and associated with considerable socioeconomic burden globally. Medical cannabis is increasingly used to manage chronic pain, particularly in jurisdictions that have enacted policies to reduce use of opioids; however, existing guideline recommendations are inconsistent, and cannabis remains illegal for therapeutic use in many countries.

RECOMMENDATION

The guideline expert panel issued a weak recommendation to offer a trial of non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids, in addition to standard care and management (if not sufficient), for people living with chronic cancer or non-cancer pain.

HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED

An international guideline development panel including patients, clinicians with content expertise, and methodologists produced this recommendation in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines using the GRADE approach. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. The panel applied an individual patient perspective.

THE EVIDENCE

This recommendation is informed by a linked series of four systematic reviews summarising the current body of evidence for benefits and harms, as well as patient values and preferences, regarding medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic pain.

UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation is weak because of the close balance between benefits and harms of medical cannabis for chronic pain. It reflects a high value placed on small to very small improvements in self reported pain intensity, physical functioning, and sleep quality, and willingness to accept a small to modest risk of mostly self limited and transient harms. Shared decision making is required to ensure patients make choices that reflect their values and personal context. Further research is warranted and may alter this recommendation.

Medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer and cancer related pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the benefits and harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos, and trial registries up to January 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised clinical trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids versus any non-cannabis control for chronic pain at ≥1 month follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects models meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 32 trials with 5174 adult patients were included, 29 of which compared medical cannabis or cannabinoids with placebo. Medical cannabis was administered orally (n=30) or topically (n=2). Clinical populations included chronic non-cancer pain (n=28) and cancer related pain (n=4). Length of follow-up ranged from 1 to 5.5 months. Compared with placebo, non-inhaled medical cannabis probably results in a small increase in the proportion of patients experiencing at least the minimally important difference (MID) of 1 cm (on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS)) in pain relief (modelled risk difference (RD) of 10% (95% confidence interval 5% to 15%), based on a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.50 cm (95% CI -0.75 to -0.25 cm, moderate certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally results in a very small improvement in physical functioning (4% modelled RD (0.1% to 8%) for achieving at least the MID of 10 points on the 100-point SF-36 physical functioning scale, WMD of 1.67 points (0.03 to 3.31, high certainty)), and a small improvement in sleep quality (6% modelled RD (2% to 9%) for achieving at least the MID of 1 cm on a 10 cm VAS, WMD of -0.35 cm (-0.55 to -0.14 cm, high certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally does not improve emotional, role, or social functioning (high certainty). Moderate certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis taken orally probably results in a small increased risk of transient cognitive impairment (RD 2% (0.1% to 6%)), vomiting (RD 3% (0.4% to 6%)), drowsiness (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), impaired attention (RD 3% (1% to 8%)), and nausea (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), but not diarrhoea; while high certainty evidence shows greater increased risk of dizziness (RD 9% (5% to 14%)) for trials with <3 months follow-up versus RD 28% (18% to 43%) for trials with ≥3 months follow-up; interaction test P=0.003; moderate credibility of subgroup effect).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids results in a small to very small improvement in pain relief, physical functioning, and sleep quality among patients with chronic pain, along with several transient adverse side effects, compared with placebo. The accompanying BMJ Rapid Recommendation provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/3pwn2.

Effectiveness, safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray versus typical oral long-acting opioid analgesics in patients with severe neuropathic back pain: analysis of 6-month real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry

Objective

To compare the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of add-on nabiximols (NBX) oromucosal spray vs typical oral long-acting opioid (LAO) analgesics in patients with severe (± chronic) peripheral neuropathic back pain poorly responsive to other treatments.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score–matched data from the German Pain e-Registry of adult outpatients who initiated NBX or LAO between March 2017 and March 2020.

Results

Data were analyzed from propensity score–matched patients treated with NBX (n = 655) or LAO (n = 655): mean age ≈51 years; 57% female; mean pain duration ≈2.6 years; chronic pain 61%; severe dysfunctional pain 93%. At 6 months, NBX was noninferior to LAO for overall symptom relief, based on the least-squares mean difference between cohorts in change from baseline in patient-reported, pain-related aggregated nine-item scale scores (−27.84%; 95% confidence interval [CI] −29.71 to −25.96; P < 0.001) and individual pain-related scale scores. Subsequent prespecified superiority analysis of the primary endpoint showed that NBX was superior to LAO: all secondary endpoints measuring symptoms of pain and physical function improved significantly with NBX and LAO, with between-group differences favoring NBX (all P < 0.001). Fewer patients treated with NBX than LAO experienced treatment-related adverse events (25.5% vs 76.0%; P < 0.001) or discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events (7.9% vs 29.3%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Within study limitations (e.g., observational design, all potential biases), add-on NBX was superior to and better tolerated than add-on treatment with typical oral LAO analgesics in patients with neuropathic back pain inadequately controlled by recommended/established systemic therapies.

Safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray: a review of more than 15 years" accumulated evidence from clinical trials

Introduction: Nabiximols, a cannabinoid-based oromucosal spray, is indicated as add-on therapy for symptomatic relief of spasticity in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). This review compiles tolerability and safety data from clinical trials that investigated nabiximols for spasticity and/or chronic pain.Areas covered: Systematic searches identified 38 placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or post-RCT open-label studies reporting safety data: 15 in spasticity; 16 in neuropathic pain; six in chronic cancer pain; and one in rheumatoid arthritis pain. In RCTs, discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) for nabiximols and placebo were lower in spasticity studies (5.4% and 2.8%) than in neuropathic pain (12.9% and 5.3%) or cancer pain (19.5% and 16.6%) studies. The most consistently identified AEs were dizziness, nausea and fatigue in spasticity or neuropathic pain studies; and dizziness, nausea, vomiting and somnolence in cancer pain studies. Serious AE (SAE) rates for nabiximols and placebo were higher in cancer pain (21.8% and 16.9%) than in MS spasticity (4.7% vs. 0.8%) and neuropathic pain (4.1% vs. 3.1%) studies despite similar dose ranges. Treatment-related SAEs showed no particular pattern.Expert opinion: More than 15 years of investigation of nabiximols oromucosal spray in spasticity and chronic pain conditions indicates an acceptable overall safety profile.

Marie B, Milavetz G, Herr K. Cannabidiol (CBD) Use by Older Adults for Acute and Chronic Pain

Legalization of cannabidiol (CBD) products has ignited interest in clinical practice and research. One desired indication includes possible pain-relieving effects of CBD. The purposes of the current article are to (1) clarify terminology relevant to cannabinoids; (2) explain and understand the pharmacotherapeutics of CBD; (3) examine research of the current use of CBD by older adults for treating pain; (4) discuss safety considerations with using CBD products; and (5) provide best practice recommendations for clinicians as they advise their older adult patients. A review of the literature demonstrated mixed results on the efficacy of CBD in relieving pain in older adults. There is inconsistency in the labeling of over-the-counter CBD products that can result in safety issues and will require more federal quality control. Likewise, gaps in knowledge regarding safety and efficacy of CBD use in older adults are vast and require further research. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 47(7), 6-15.].

Cannabis for Chronic Osteoarthritis Pain: A Case of an Older Person

OBJECTIVE: To review the safety and efficacy of cannabis use for chronic pain in older people.<br/> SETTING: The case took place in a geriatric primarycare clinic in Colorado.<br/> PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: The clinic serves adults 75 years of age and older where clinical pharmacists are used for medication consults and follow-up.<br/> PRACTICE INNOVATION: Older people are using cannabis to treat a variety of conditions, with use increasing as more states legalize cannabis medically and recreationally. The primary reason for use is pain. Pharmacists in Colorado can assist with education regarding cannabis use and evaluate if cannabis may be safe for older people.<br/> MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: This case evaluates the use of a combination CBD:THC cannabis product in a 78-year-old female patient who was previously using opioids for degenerative disc disease and osteoarthritis.<br/> RESULTS: The patient found improvement in her pain when using the combination cannabis product without any adverse effects.<br/> CONCLUSION: Further safety and efficacy evidence is needed for using combination cannabis products for pain management in older people.

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine for pain management: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

ABSTRACT

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) are increasingly used to manage pain, with limited understanding of their efficacy and safety. We summarised efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of these types of drugs for treating pain using randomised controlled trials: in people of any age, with any type of pain, and for any treatment duration. Primary outcomes were 30% and 50% reduction in pain intensity, and AEs. We assessed risk of bias of included studies, and the overall quality of evidence using GRADE. Studies of <7 and >7 days treatment duration were analysed separately. We included 36 studies (7217 participants) delivering cannabinoids (8 studies), cannabis (6 studies), and CBM (22 studies); all had high and/or uncertain risk of bias. Evidence of benefit was found for cannabis <7 days (risk difference 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.20-0.46; 2 trials, 231 patients, very low-quality evidence) and nabiximols >7 days (risk difference 0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.12; 6 trials, 1484 patients, very low-quality evidence). No other beneficial effects were found for other types of cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in our primary analyses; 81% of subgroup analyses were negative. Cannabis, nabiximols, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol had more AEs than control. Studies in this field have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had GRADE rating of low- or very low-quality evidence. We have little confidence in the estimates of effect. The evidence neither supports nor refutes claims of efficacy and safety for cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in the management of pain.

Targeting the endocannabinoid system for management of HIV-associated neuropathic pain: A systematic review

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and antiretroviral therapy can independently induce HIV-associated neuropathic pain (HIV-NP). There is a dearth of drugs or therapeutic modalities that can alleviate HIV-NP. Smoked cannabis has been reported to improve pain measures in patients with neuropathic pain. Cannabis, phytocannabinoids, and the endocannabinoids such N-arachidonoylethanolamine (anandamide; AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), produce some of their effects via cannabinoid receptors (CBRs). Endocannabinoids are degraded by various enzymes such as fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, clinicaltrials.gov and clinicaltrialsregister.eu using various key words and their combinations for published papers that studied HIV-NP and cannabis, cannabinoids, or endocannabinoids up to 27th December 2020. All original research articles that evaluated the efficacy of molecules that modulate the endocannabinoid system (ECS) for the prevention and/or treatment of pain in HIV-NP animal models and patients with HIV-NP were included. The PubMed search produced a total of 117 articles, whereas the Google Scholar search produced a total of 9467 articles. Amongst the 13 articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria 11 articles were found in both searches whereas 2 articles were found in Google Scholar only. The clinicaltrials.gov and clinicaltrialsregister.eu searches produced five registered trials of which three were completed and with results. Ten preclinical studies found that the endocannabinoids (2-AG and AEA), synthetic mixed CB1R/CB2R agonist WIN 55,212-2, a CB2R-selective phytocannabinoid β-caryophyllene, synthetic CB2R-selective agonists (AM1710, JWH015, JWH133 and Gp1a, but not HU308); FAAH inhibitors (palmitoylallylamide, URB597 and PF-3845) and a drug combination of indomethacin plus minocycline, which produces its effects in a CBR-dependent manner, either prevented the development of and/or attenuated established HIV-NP. Two clinical trials demonstrated greater efficacy of smoked cannabis over placebo in alleviating HIV-NP, whereas another clinical trial demonstrated that cannabidivarin, a cannabinoid that does not activate CBRs, did not reduce HIV-NP. The available preclinical results suggest that targeting the ECS for prevention and treatment of HIV-NP is a plausible therapeutic option. Clinical evidence shows that smoked cannabis alleviates HIV-NP. Further research is needed to find out if non-psychoactive drugs that target the ECS and are delivered by other routes than smoking could be useful as treatment options for HIV-NP.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of cardiovascular toxicity of medical cannabinoids

BACKGROUND

Several systematic reviews (SRs) have summarized the potential effectiveness of medical cannabinoids, but it is unclear to what extent safety-related outcomes were incorporated.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cardiovascular toxicity associated with medical use of cannabinoids.

METHODS

A 2-stage systematic review (SR) approach was undertaken to assess the current evidence on cannabinoid-associated cardiovascular events reported among randomized controlled trials (RCTs). First, we searched for SRs in multiple sources until June 2019. Second, RCTs identified from the SRs were included if they assessed medical cannabis and reported cardiovascular events. The outcomes of interest were all types of cardiovascular events. Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias. A statistical test of heterogeneity was performed. The summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies involving 2800 patients were included. The median duration of cannabinoid use was 15.8 days (range 1 to 322), and 45% of the studies excluded patients with underlying cardiovascular diseases. Cannabinoid use was significantly associated with increased risks of orthostatic hypotension (RR 3.16 [95% CI 2.27-4.40], I² = 2.3%) and hypotension (3.55 [1.45-8.71], I² = 31.8%), with a trend of increased risk of tachycardia (1.94 [0.81-4.64], I² = 48.6%). No study reported serious cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoid use was associated with tachycardia, hypotension, and orthostatic hypotension. There is a paucity of data for other cardiovascular events among medical cannabis users. More data, especially regarding long-term effects among patients with existing cardiovascular diseases, are needed.

Nabiximols in Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Pooled analysis of nabiximols and placebo in randomized controlled studies (RCTs) of chronic neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs of nabiximols for chronic neuropathic pain. The clinical endpoint of interest was change from baseline in mean pain score on 11-point numerical rating scales. Mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD, Hedges' g) were calculated using fixed effect (FE) and random effects (RE) models. Strength of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2).

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with 1289 participants were included. Quality of evidence (GRADE) was moderate. One study had a high risk of bias (RoB 2) and five had some concerns. For the pooled endpoint of change from baseline in mean pain score, nabiximols was superior to placebo, with a MD of -0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -.59 to -.21; FE, P < .0001) or -0.44 (95% CI: -.70 to -.19; RE, P = .0006). A SMD of -0.21 (95% CI: -.32 to -.10; FE) or -0.26 (95% CI: -.42 to -.10; RE) indicated an incremental benefit over background analgesia. Results in favor of nabiximols were maintained in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Nabiximols was superior to placebo for reduction of chronic neuropathic pain, with a small effect size. Larger RCTs designed to assess the effect of nabiximols in neuropathic pain are required to reach more definitive conclusions.

Repurposing Cannabidiol as a Potential Drug Candidate for Anti-Tumor Therapies

In recent years, evidence has accumulated that cannabinoids-especially the non-psychoactive compound, cannabidiol (CBD)-possess promising medical and pharmacological activities that might qualify them as potential anti-tumor drugs. This review is based on multiple studies summarizing different mechanisms for how CBD can target tumor cells including cannabinoid receptors or other constituents of the endocannabinoid system, and their complex activation of biological systems that results in the inhibition of tumor growth. CBD also participates in anti-inflammatory activities which are related to tumor progression, as demonstrated in preclinical models. Although the numbers of clinical trials and tested tumor entities are limited, there is clear evidence that CBD has anti-tumor efficacy and is well tolerated in human cancer patients. In summary, it appears that CBD has potential as a neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant drug in therapy for cancer.

Safety and tolerability of natural and synthetic cannabinoids in adults aged over 50 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoid-based medicines (CBMs) are being used widely in the elderly. However, their safety and tolerability in older adults remains unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and tolerability of CBMs in adults of age ≥50 years.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL PsychInfo, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 1990 to 3 October 2020). Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of CBMs in those with mean age of ≥50 years for all indications, evaluating the safety/tolerability of CBMs where adverse events have been quantified, were included. Study quality was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Two reviewers conducted all review stages independently. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as incident rate ratio (IRR) for outcome data such as adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and death and risk ratio (RR) for withdrawal from study and reported separately for studies using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), THC:cannabidiol (CBD) combination, and CBD. A total of 46 RCTs were identified as suitable for inclusion of which 31 (67%) were conducted in the United Kingdom and Europe. There were 6,216 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.5 years; 51% male) included in the analysis, with 3,469 receiving CBMs. Compared with controls, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing CBMs significantly increased the incidence of all-cause and treatment-related AEs: THC alone (IRR: 1.42 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78]) and (IRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.26 to 2.04]); THC:CBD combination (IRR: 1.58 [95% CI,1.26 to 1.98]) and (IRR: 1.70 [95% CI,1.24 to 2.33]), respectively. IRRs of SAEs and deaths were not significantly greater under CBMs containing THC with or without CBD. THC:CBD combination (RR: 1.40 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.80]) but not THC alone (RR: 1.18 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.57]) significantly increased risk of AE-related withdrawals. CBD alone did not increase the incidence of all-cause AEs (IRR: 1.02 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.16]) or other outcomes as per qualitative synthesis. AE-related withdrawals were significantly associated with THC dose in THC only [QM (df = 1) = 4.696, p = 0.03] and THC:CBD combination treatment ([QM (df = 1) = 4.554, p = 0.033]. THC-containing CBMs significantly increased incidence of dry mouth, dizziness/light-headedness, and somnolence/drowsiness. Study limitations include inability to fully exclude data from those <50 years of age in our primary analyses as well as limitations related to weaknesses in the included trials particularly incomplete reporting of outcomes and heterogeneity in included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis, using data from RCTs with mean participant age ≥50 years, suggests that although THC-containing CBMs are associated with side effects, CBMs in general are safe and acceptable in older adults. However, THC:CBD combinations may be less acceptable in the dose ranges used and their tolerability may be different in adults over 65 or 75 years of age.

Implications of Breast Cancer Chemotherapy-Induced Inflammation on the Gut, Liver, and Central Nervous System

Breast Cancer is still one of the most common cancers today; however, with advancements in diagnostic and treatment methods, the mortality and survivorship of patients continues to decrease and increase, respectively. Commonly used treatments today consist of drug combinations, such as doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide; docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide; or doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel. Although these combinations are effective at destroying cancer cells, there is still much to be understood about the effects that chemotherapy can have on normal organ systems such as the nervous system, gastrointestinal tract, and the liver. Patients can experience symptoms of cognitive impairments or “chemobrain”, such as difficulty in concentrating, memory recollection, and processing speed. They may also experience gastrointestinal (GI) distress symptoms such as diarrhea and vomiting, as well as hepatotoxicity and long term liver damage. Chemotherapy treatment has also been shown to induce peripheral neuropathy resulting in numbing, pain, and tingling sensations in the extremities of patients. Interestingly, researchers have discovered that this array of symptoms that cancer patients experience are interconnected and mediated by the inflammatory response.

Considerations for Cannabis Use to Treat Pain in Sickle Cell Disease

Pain in Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) is a major comorbidity and unique with acute pain due to recurrent and episodic vaso-occlusive crises as well as chronic pain, which can span an individual's entire life. Opioids are the mainstay treatment for pain in SCD. Due to recent health crises raised by adverse effects including deaths from opioid use, pain management in SCD is adversely affected. Cannabis and its products are most widely used for pain in multiple conditions and also by patients with SCD on their own. With the availability of "Medical Cannabis" and approval to use cannabis as medicine across majority of States in the United States as well as over-the-counter preparations, cannabis products are being used increasingly for SCD. The reliability of many of these products remains questionable, which poses a major health risk to the vulnerable individuals seeking pain relief. Therefore, this review provides up to date insights into available categories of cannabis-based treatment strategies, their mechanism of action and pre-clinical and clinical outcomes in SCD. It provides evidence for the benefits and risks of cannabis use in SCD and cautions about the unreliable and unvalidated products that may be adulterated with life-threatening non-cannabis compounds.

Cannabidiol for Pain Treatment: Focus on Pharmacology and Mechanism of Action

Cannabis has a long history of medical use. Although there are many cannabinoids present in cannabis, Δ9tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are the two components found in the highest concentrations. CBD itself does not produce typical behavioral cannabimimetic effects and was thought not to be responsible for psychotropic effects of cannabis. Numerous anecdotal findings testify to the therapeutic effects of CBD, which in some cases were further supported by research findings. However, data regarding CBD’s mechanism of action and therapeutic potential are abundant and omnifarious. Therefore, we review the basic research regarding molecular mechanism of CBD’s action with particular focus on its analgesic potential. Moreover, this article describes the detailed analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of CBD in various models, including neuropathic pain, inflammatory pain, osteoarthritis and others. The dose and route of the administration-dependent effect of CBD, on the reduction in pain, hyperalgesia or allodynia, as well as the production of pro and anti-inflammatory cytokines, were described depending on the disease model. The clinical applications of CBD-containing drugs are also mentioned. The data presented herein unravel what is known about CBD’s pharmacodynamics and analgesic effects to provide the reader with current state-of-art knowledge regarding CBD’s action and future perspectives for research.