Cancer patients' use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis

Stigma, risks, and benefits of medicinal cannabis use among Australians with cancer

PURPOSE

People with cancer who use medicinal cannabis do so despite risks associated with limited clinical evidence, legalities, and stigma. This study investigated how Australians with cancer rationalise their medicinal cannabis use despite its risks.

METHODS

Ten adults (5 males and 5 females; mean age of 53.3) who used cannabis medicinally for their cancer were interviewed in 2021-2022 about how they used and accessed the substance, attitudes and beliefs underpinning their use, and conversations with others about medicinal cannabis.

RESULTS

Participants had cancer of the bowel, skin, oesophagus, stomach, thyroid, breast, and Hodgkin lymphoma for which they were receiving treatment (n = 5) or under surveillance (n = 5), with most (n = 6) encountering metastatic disease. Cannabis was used to treat a variety of cancer-related symptoms such as pain, poor sleep, and low mood. Cannabis was perceived as natural and thus less risky than pharmaceuticals. Participants legitimised their medicinal cannabis use by emphasising its natural qualities and distancing themselves from problematic users or riskier substances. Cost barriers and a lack of healthcare professional communication impeded prescription access. Similarly, participants navigated medicinal cannabis use independently due to a lack of guidance from healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSION

Findings highlight the need for robust data regarding the harms and efficacy of medicinal cannabis and dissemination of such information among healthcare professionals and to patients who choose to use the substance. Ensuring healthcare professionals are equipped to provide non-judgmental and evidence-based guidance may mitigate potential safety and legal risks.

Medical students' attitudes and perceived competence regarding medical cannabis and its suggestibility

INTRODUCTION

The global trend of legalizing medical cannabis (MC) is on the rise. In Germany, physicians have prescribed MC at the expense of health insurers since 2017. However, the teaching on MC has been scant in medical training. This study investigates medical students' attitudes and perceived competence regarding MC and evaluates how varying materials (videos/articles) impact their opinions.

METHODS

Fourth-year medical students were invited to participate in the cross-sectional study. During an online session, students viewed a video featuring a patient with somatoform pain discussing her medical history, plus one of four randomly assigned MC-related materials (each an article and a video depicting a positive or negative perspective on MC). Students' opinions were measured at the beginning [T0] and the end of the course [T1] using a standardized questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale. We assessed the influence of the material on the students' opinions using paired-sample t-tests. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey post-hoc tests were conducted to compare the four groups. Pearson correlations assessed correlations.

RESULTS

150 students participated in the course, the response rate being 75.3% [T0] and 72.7% [T1]. At T0, students felt a little competent regarding MC therapy (M = 1.80 ± 0.82). At T1, students in groups 1 (positive video) and 3 (positive article) rated themselves as more capable in managing MC therapy [Formula: see text], and students in groups 3 (positive article) and 4 (negative article) felt more skilled in treating patients with chronic pain [Formula: see text]. Compared to the other groups, group 2 students (negative video) felt significantly less competent. They perceived cannabis as addictive, hazardous and unsuitable for medical prescription.

DISCUSSION

This study showed that medical students lack knowledge and perceived competence in MC therapy. Material influences their opinions in different ways, and they seek more training on MC. This underlines that integrating MC education into medical curricula is crucial to address this knowledge gap.

Perspectives of Complementary and Alternative Medicine use by cancer patients in a regional hospital in North Queensland, Australia

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate CAMs used, and reasons for and disclosure of this use by cancer patients in a regional hospital in North Queensland, Australia.

METHODS

Patients attending the Day Oncology Unit of the Townsville University Hospital were invited to participate in a self-completed questionnaire or telephone interview regarding perspectives of their CAM use. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and chi-squared and independent t-tests were performed to allow comparison between the responses by CAM users and non-users.

RESULTS

102 completed questionnaires were used in the analysis, where 40.2 % of respondents were found to be using some form of CAM. Cannabis, magnesium, and massage were the most prominent therapies used, with cannabis use in cancer, not commonly reported in prior literature. The main reasons given for using CAM were to treat symptoms of cancer, side-effects of treatment or to improve general health. Two-thirds of these respondents disclosed their CAM use to health professionals mostly to obtain a professional opinion or due to concerns of interactions with cancer treatment. CAM users were statistically more likely to have used CAM prior to their cancer diagnosis and have lower emotional wellbeing than non-users. Non-CAM users indicated that a lack of knowledge of CAM or concerns regarding interactions with cancer treatment were the most popular reasons for not adopting these therapies.

CONCLUSION

While lower than the averages of previously published CAM use, our study highlights that there is still a significant group of cancer patients in the North Queensland region using CAMs.

Using a qualitative sub-study to inform the design and delivery of randomised controlled trials on medicinal cannabis for symptom relief in patients with advanced cancer

Background

Recruitment for randomised controlled trials in palliative care can be challenging; disease progression and terminal illness underpin high rates of attrition. Research into participant decision-making in medicinal cannabis randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is very limited. Nesting qualitative sub-studies within RCTs can identify further challenges to participation, informing revisions to study designs and recruitment practices. This paper reports on findings from a qualitative sub-study supporting RCTs of medicinal cannabis for symptom burden relief in patients with advanced cancer in one Australian city.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 48 patients with advanced cancer, eligible to participate in a medicinal cannabis RCT (n=28 who consented to participate in an RCT; n=20 who declined). An iterative and abductive approach to thematic analysis and data collection fostered exploration of barriers and enablers to participation.

Results

Key enablers included participants’ enthusiasm and expectations of medicinal cannabis as beneficial (to themselves and future patients) for symptom management, especially after exhausting currently approved options, and a safer alternative to opioids. Some believed medicinal cannabis to have anti-cancer effects. Barriers to participation were the logistical challenges of participating (especially due to driving restrictions and fatigue), reluctance to interfere with an existing care plan, cost, and concerns about receiving the placebo and the uncertainty of the benefit. Some declined due to concerns about side-effects or a desire to continue accessing cannabis independent of the study.

Conclusions

The findings support revisions to subsequent medicinal cannabis RCT study designs, namely, omitting a requirement that participants attend weekly hospital appointments. These findings highlight the value of embedding qualitative sub-studies into RCTs. While some challenges to RCT recruitment are universal, others are context (population, intervention, location) specific. A barrier to participation found in research conducted elsewhere—stigma—was not identified in the current study. Thus, findings have important implications for those undertaking RCTs in the rapidly developing context of medical cannabis.

Routes of administration, reasons for use, and approved indications of medical cannabis in oncology: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Some patients diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis to self-manage undesirable symptoms, including nausea and pain. To improve patient safety and oncological care quality, the routes of administration for use of medical cannabis, patients' reasons, and prescribed indications must be better understood.

METHODS

Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, a scoping review was conducted to map the current evidence regarding the use of medical cannabis in oncological settings based on the experiences of patients diagnosed with cancer and their healthcare providers. A search strategy was developed with a scientific librarian which included five databases (CINAHL, Web of Science, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO) and two grey literature sources (Google Scholar and ProQuest). The inclusion criteria were: 1) population: adults aged 18 and over diagnosed with cancer; 2) phenomena of interest: reasons for cannabis use and/or the prescribed indications for medical cannabis; 3) context: oncological setting. French- or English-language primary empirical studies, knowledge syntheses, and grey literature published between 2000 and 2021 were included. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and subjected to a thematic analysis. A narrative description approach was used to synthesize and present the findings.

RESULTS

We identified 5,283 publications, of which 163 met the eligibility criteria. Two main reasons for medical cannabis use emerged from the thematic analysis: limiting the impacts of cancer and its side effects; and staying connected to others. Our results also indicated that medical cannabis is mostly used for three approved indications: to manage refractory nausea and vomiting, to complement pain management, and to improve appetite and food intake. We highlighted 11 routes of administration for medical cannabis, with oils and oral solutions the most frequently reported.

CONCLUSION

Future studies should consider the multiple routes of administration for medical cannabis, such as inhalation and edibles. Our review highlights that learning opportunities would support the development of healthcare providers' knowledge and skills in assessing the needs and preferences of patients diagnosed with cancer who use medical cannabis.

Does Cannabidiol Have a Benefit as a Supportive Care Drug in Cancer?

OPINION STATEMENT

Cannabinoids have been purported as having a wide range of therapeutic uses although currently, there is minimal evidence to support these claims. Patients with advanced cancer experience many distressing symptoms, with some turning to medicinal cannabis to help alleviate these. Focus has fallen on cannabidiol (CBD) as a potential treatment for a variety of symptoms in advanced cancer due to the lack of psychoactive side effects and the potential molecular mechanisms of action associated with this cannabinoid. Many cannabinoid products are easily available in the community, and more countries are legalizing or allowing over the counter products. Studies show that CBD is generally well tolerated, but there are many potential drug interactions that have not been well studied. Few studies have specifically looked at the role of CBD in treating cancer symptoms, with most focusing on combination cannabinoid products. There are currently many unknowns associated with CBD, including which symptoms it might be best for, appropriate dosing, and route of administration. This is especially important in advanced cancer where patients often have significant organ dysfunction and frailty that could impact on the pharmacology of CBD. A small pilot study has shown promise for a role of CBD in the psychological symptoms associated with advanced cancer. Further research is currently underway to further clarify the role of CBD in this setting and to understand how best it might help our patients. Currently we advocate that CBD be used in supervised clinical trials, so that efficacy and adverse effects can be closely monitored.