Sequential and simultaneous treatment approaches to cannabis use disorder and tobacco use

Nicotine and cannabis routes of administration and dual use among U.S. young adults who identify as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White

Background

Use of cannabis and nicotine is at record levels among young adults, and health consequences vary by route of administration. However, there is a paucity of research characterizing use of both substances, especially among individuals of racial/ethnic minoritized identities.

Method

Participants (N = 1,032; age 18-25 years) completed a cross-sectional survey administered through an online panel in 2021 in eight U.S. states where cannabis was legal for both recreational and medical use and eight states where cannabis was not legal for medical or recreational purposes. Sampling was stratified by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White) and gender (male, female). Survey weighting was based on state-level gender and race/ethnicity data in the 2021 U.S. Census Bureau.

Results

Over one third (37.9%) of respondents reported current use of both cannabis and tobacco, more than double the proportion using tobacco (12.1%) or cannabis (4.1%) only. Vaporization was the most common method for using nicotine (40.2%). Disposable nicotine vape products were used more than any other method (27.1%). Smoking was the most common route of administration for cannabis (35.7%). Simultaneous use of tobacco and cannabis was common (27.0%) overall and greater among those who identify as non-Hispanic Black than non-Hispanic White. There were few differences in product use by gender or state legality.

Discussion

Dual cannabis and tobacco use is prevalent among young adults. Given the dynamic regulatory landscape, continued monitoring of specific cannabis formulations and tobacco products is recommended. Trends in simultaneous use of cannabis and tobacco and associated adverse effects warrant continued assessment.

Urgent need for treatment addressing co-use of tobacco and cannabis: An updated review and considerations for future interventions

BACKGROUND

There are no clinical practice guidelines addressing the treatment of tobacco-cannabis co-use and a dearth of studies to inform treatment for co-use. This narrative review aims to (1) summarize promising intervention components used in published co-use treatment studies, (2) describe key gaps and emerging issues in co-use, and (3) provide recommendations and considerations in the development and evaluation of co-use interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search in June 2024 across several databases to update previous reviews on tobacco-cannabis co-use treatment. We found 9 published intervention studies that specifically addressed treatment for both substances. Data from these studies were manually extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

Most of the 9 included studies (1) focused on acceptability and/or feasibility, (2) provided both psychosocial/behavioral and pharmacotherapy intervention components, (3) were conducted in adults, and (4) were delivered in-person, with some having digital asynchronous components, for a 5-to-12-week duration. The most common psychosocial/behavioral strategies used were Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, and Contingency Management; while the most common pharmacotherapy was Nicotine Replacement Therapy. There was no evidence of compensatory use of tobacco or cannabis when providing simultaneous treatment for both substances.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature to date provides support for well-integrated multi-component interventions of psychosocial/behavioral and pharmacotherapy strategies for co-use treatment. This review reinforces an urgent need for treatments targeting tobacco and cannabis co-use. Future interventions should address key gaps, including co-use of vaporized products among youth and young adults, tailored interventions for priority populations, and digital applications to increase reach and advance health equity.

Health-promotion interventions targeting multiple behaviors: A meta-analytic review of general and behavior-specific processes of change

Although health-promotion interventions that recommend changes across multiple behavioral domains are a newer alternative to single-behavior interventions, their general efficacy and their mechanisms of change have not been fully ascertained. This comprehensive meta-analysis (6,878 effect sizes from 803 independent samples from 364 research reports, N = 186,729 participants) examined the association between the number of behavioral recommendations in multiple-behavior interventions and behavioral and clinical change across eight domains (i.e., diet, smoking, exercise, HIV [Human Immunodeficiency Virus] prevention, HIV testing, HIV treatment, alcohol use, and substance use). Results showed a positive, linear effect of the number of behavioral recommendations associated with behavioral and clinical change across all domains, although approximately 87% of the samples included between 0 and 4 behavioral recommendations. This linear relation was mediated by improvements in the psychological well-being of intervention recipients and, in several domains (i.e., HIV, alcohol use, and drug use), suggested behavioral cuing. However, changes in information, motivation, and behavioral skills did not mediate the impact of the number of recommendations on behavioral and clinical change. The implications of these findings for theory and future intervention design are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Correlates of continued cannabis use during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use is increasingly common among pregnant women despite concern that it may be linked to adverse maternal and infant outcomes. Determining whether variables associated with cannabis use predict whether women continue or quit using during pregnancy may inform strategies to reduce prenatal use.

METHODS

Pregnant women who regularly used cannabis before pregnancy (n = 296) were recruited via Facebook. After finding out they were pregnant, 41 % reported quitting, 13 % quit then relapsed, 32 % reduced use, and 15 % continued use at the same rate. Differences among these four cannabis use status groups (quit, relapsed, reduced, continued) in sociodemographics, cannabis use, cigarette use, perceived risk/benefit, delay discounting, and communications about cannabis with their doctor were assessed.

RESULTS

Compared to those who quit, continuing use during pregnancy was associated with being unemployed (Relative Risk (RR) = .32, 95 %CI [.13, .78]), using cigarettes pre-pregnancy (RR = 3.43, 95 %CI [1.32, 8.94]), being in an earlier trimester (RR = 4.38, 95 %CI [1.18, 16.23]), less perceived risk (RR = .79, 95 %CI [.74, .85]), and more days per week of use pre-pregnancy (RR = .10, 95 %CI [.01, .84]). Unintended pregnancy, shorter time to cannabis use after waking pre-pregnancy, using cannabis more times per day pre-pregnancy, and greater perceived benefits of use had significant bivariate associations with continued use during pregnancy, but did not retain significance in a multinomial model.

CONCLUSIONS

Identification of these correlates provides potential targets for prevention of or intervention for prenatal cannabis use. However, much more research is needed to understand prenatal cannabis use and its effects in order to better educate women and healthcare providers, and to design optimal public health strategies.

Cigarette Use and Cannabis Use Disorder Onset, Persistence, and Relapse: Longitudinal Data From a Representative Sample of US Adults

Objective: The current study prospectively investigated the relationship between cigarette use and the onset of, persistence of, and relapse to cannabis use disorder (CUD) 3 years later among adults in the United States. Methods: Analyses included respondents who completed Waves 1 and 2 of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (2001-2002 and 2004-2005, respectively) and responded to questions about cigarette use, cannabis use, and CUD (n = 34,653). CUDs were defined by DSM-IV criteria using the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-Diagnostic Version IV. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds of CUD onset, persistence, and relapse at Wave 2 by Wave 1 cigarette use status. Analyses were adjusted for sociodemographics, psychiatric disorders, nicotine dependence, and alcohol and other substance use disorders. Results: Cigarette use at Wave 1 was associated with onset of CUD at Wave 2 among those without Wave 1 cannabis use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.35-1.94) but not among those with Wave 1 cannabis use (AOR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.19). Cigarette use at Wave 1 was also associated with persistence of CUD at Wave 2 among those with CUD at Wave 1 (AOR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30-2.00) and relapse to CUD at Wave 2 among those with remitted CUD at Wave 1 (AOR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.45). Conclusions: Among adults, cigarette use is associated with increased onset and persistence of and relapse to CUD 3 years later. Additional attention to cigarette use in community prevention and clinical treatment efforts aimed at reducing CUD may be warranted.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health in the two largest economies in the world: a comparison between the United States and China

The broad impact of the COVID-19 on self-reported daily behaviors and health in Chinese and US samples remains unknown. This study aimed to compare physical and mental health between people from the United States (U.S.) and China, and to correlate mental health parameters with variables relating to physical symptoms, knowledge about COVID-19, and precautionary health behaviors. To minimize risk of exposure, respondents were electronically invited by existing study respondents or by data sourcing software and surveys were completed via online survey platforms. Information was collected on demographics, physical symptoms, contact history, knowledge about COVID-19, psychologic parameters (i.e. IES-R; DASS-21), and health behaviors. The study included a total of 1445 respondents (584 U.S.; 861 China). Overall, Americans reported more physical symptoms, contact history, and perceived likelihood of contracting COVID-19. Americans reported more stress and depressive symptoms, while Chinese reported higher acute-traumatic stress symptoms. Differences were identified regarding face mask use and desires for COVID-19 related health information, with differential mental health implications. Physical symptoms that were possibly COVID-19 related were associated with adverse mental health. Overall, American and Chinese participants reported different mental and physical health parameters, health behaviors, precautionary measures, and knowledge of COVID-19; different risk and protective factors were also identified.

Treatment Implications Associated with Cannabis and Tobacco Co-Use

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The goal of this article is to summarize the treatment-focused literature on cannabis and tobacco co-use and the treatment implications of co-use. This review will focus on: 1) the impact of co-use on cessation outcomes, 2) compensatory use/substitution of the non-treated substance among co-users, and 3) treatment interventions to address co-use. This article will highlight the limitations to co-use captured in the literature and offer considerations and directives for co-use research and treatment moving forward.

RECENT FINDINGS

The degree to which co-use affects cessation for a single, targeted substance remains in question, as the literature is largely mixed. Cannabis treatment trials are better equipped to answer these questions given that they do not typically exclude tobacco users. While the relationship between tobacco use and poorer cannabis outcomes appears to have some evidence, the reverse relationship (cannabis use affecting tobacco outcomes) is not consistently supported.

SUMMARY

The co-use of cannabis and tobacco and its impact on single substance cessation and/or compensatory substance use during cessation is generally overlooked in treatment trials, while interventions to address both substances are rare. Capturing co-use adds burden for researchers, clinicians, and participants, but is warranted given the prevalence of co-use and a rapidly changing cannabis and tobacco regulatory environment, which may further complicate co-occurring substance use. Co-users are a heterogeneous population; trials focused on co-users, in addition to better data capture and consistent terminology, will aid in an understanding of nuanced patterns of co-use critical to inform treatment interventions.

A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of interventions which target or assess co-use of tobacco and cannabis in single- or multi-substance interventions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Tobacco and cannabis are commonly co-used, and evidence for the influence of co-use on quit outcomes for either substance is mixed. We sought to determine the efficacy of tobacco and/or cannabis use interventions delivered to co-users on cannabis and tobacco use outcomes.

METHOD

Systematic review with meta-analysis and narrative review, using five databases and author requests for co-use data. Controlled and uncontrolled intervention studies focusing on treatment of tobacco and/or cannabis use assessing use of both pre- and post-intervention were included. Prevention interventions were excluded. Bayesian meta-analysis was used across four outcome measures: risk ratio for tobacco and cannabis cessation post-intervention separately; standardized mean change for tobacco and cannabis reduction post-intervention separately. Narrative reporting of the same outcome measures in non-randomized clinical trials (non-RCTs) and quality assessment of all included studies were conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty studies (12 RCTs and eight uncontrolled) were included. Bayesian meta-analysis with informative priors based on existing data of 11 RCTs (six single-substance, five multi-substance interventions) delivered to co-users (n = up to 1117) showed weak evidence for an effect on cannabis cessation [risk ratio (RR) = 1.48, credibility interval (CrI) = 0.92, 2.49, eight studies] and no clear effect on tobacco cessation (RR = 1.10, CrI = 0.68, 1.87, nine studies). Subgroup analysis suggested that multi-substance interventions might be more effective than cannabis-targeted interventions on cannabis cessation (RR = 2.19, CrI = 1.10, 4.36 versus RR = 1.39, CrI = 0.75, 2.74). A significant intervention effect was observed on cannabis reduction (RR = 0.25, CrI = 0.03, 0.45, nine studies) but not on tobacco reduction (RR = 0.06, CrI = -0.11, 0.23, nine studies). Quality of evidence was moderate, although measurement of co-use and cannabis use requires standardization. Uncontrolled studies targeting both cannabis and tobacco use indicated feasibility and acceptability.

CONCLUSIONS

Single and multi-substance interventions addressing tobacco and/or cannabis have not shown a clear effect on either tobacco or cannabis cessation and reduction among co-users. However, dual substance interventions targeting tobacco and cannabis appear feasible.

Correlates of lifetime blunt/spliff use among cigarette smokers in substance use disorders treatment

BACKGROUND

Co-use of tobacco and cannabis has been associated with greater dependence on and lower quit rates for both substances. Tobacco/cannabis co-use among individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs), a population with high rates of cigarette smoking, may hinder the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions. We examined rates of lifetime (i.e., ever vs. never) cannabis use among current cigarette smokers in SUD treatment, and we identified the subgroup who had used tobacco and cannabis together in the form of blunts and/or spliffs. We then examined variables associated with lifetime use of blunts and/or spliffs.

METHODS

We surveyed 562 clients in 20 residential SUD treatment programs in California, USA, in 2019. Measures included demographics, lifetime use of any cannabis product, lifetime use of blunt/spliffs, patterns of tobacco use, and smoking cessation-related questions. We asked current cigarette smokers who also reported lifetime cannabis use whether they had ever used blunts and/or spliffs. We then assessed relationships of demographic, tobacco use, use of cannabis/tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in e-cigarettes/vape pens, and smoking cessation-related variables with ever use versus never use of blunts/spliffs.

RESULTS

Among 340 current cigarette smokers, 93.2% (n = 317) reported lifetime use of any cannabis product. Among current cigarette smokers with lifetime cannabis use, 64.4% reported lifetime blunt/spliff use. Compared to those who had never used blunts/spliffs, lifetime blunt/spliff users were more likely to be younger (OR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95), more likely to report lifetime use of cigars/cigarillos (OR = 2.95, CI 1.37-6.32), and to have ever used cannabis/THC in e-cigarettes/vape pens (OR = 4.26, CI 1.54-11.80). They were less often ready to quit smoking within 30 days (OR = 0.37, CI 0.23-0.60), but more likely to want help with smoking cessation (OR = 2.39, CI 1.52-3.77).

CONCLUSION

Current cigarette smokers in SUD treatment reported a high prevalence of lifetime cannabis use. Smokers with a history of blunt/spliff use were more likely to report lifetime use of e-cigarettes/vape pens for cannabis/THC delivery. They wanted help to quit smoking, but felt less prepared to quit in the next 30 days. Cannabis co-use may warrant clinicians' attention when providing smoking cessation interventions during SUD treatment.

Digital health for assessment and intervention targeting tobacco and cannabis co-use

Purpose of review

This article aims to summarize current research on digital health for assessment and intervention targeting tobacco and cannabis co-use and to answer the following questions: Which digital tools have been used? Which populations have been targeted? And what are implications for future research?

Recent findings

Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) via text messages or interactive voice response calls has been used to capture co-use patterns within a time window or co-administration of both substances via blunts among young adults. Feasibility of multicomponent interventions targeting dual cessation of both substances among adult co-users with cannabis use disorder, delivered via smartphone apps, online, and computer modules has been demonstrated.

Summary

Digital tools, particularly those using EMAs and mobile sensors, should be expanded to assess co-use of emerging tobacco and cannabis products. Digital cessation interventions should be tailored to different groups of co-users and address specific mechanisms underlying different co-use patterns.

Current cannabis use and smoking cessation among treatment seeking combustible smokers

INTRODUCTION

Combustible tobacco smoking and cannabis use frequently occur together, and the use of both substances is associated with overall greater severity of tobacco and cannabis related problems. Observational work has found that cannabis use is associated with tobacco cessation failure, but research directly testing the longitudinal associations of cannabis use on tobacco cessation during smoking cessation treatment is lacking. The current study examined the impact of current cannabis use on combustible tobacco cessation outcomes.

METHODS

207 daily combustible tobacco smokers (M_age = 38.24 years, SD = 14.84, 48.1 % male) were enrolled in a randomized controlled smoking cessation trial. Survival analyses and multi-level modeling were used to assess lapse and relapse behavior through 12-week follow up. The current study is a secondary data analysis.

RESULTS

Results of the current study suggest that cannabis use is associated with faster time to lapse (OR = 0.644, se = .188, p =  .019), but not relapse (OR = -0.218, se = .403, p =  .525), compared to combustible tobacco-only smokers. Additionally, cannabis use was associated with lower likelihood of achieving any 7-day point prevalence abstinence during the 12 week follow up (b = 0.93, se = 0 0.24, p =  0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study provides novel evidence that cannabis use may be related to combustible tobacco use in terms of faster time to lapse and lower likelihood of any 7-day point prevalence abstinence following smoking cessation treatment. Developing integrated cannabis-tobacco cessation treatments is an important next step in research focused on tobacco-cannabis use.