Clinical trials of medicinal cannabis for appetite-related symptoms from advanced cancer: a survey of preferences, attitudes and beliefs among patients willing to consider participation

Perceptions and engagement of patients with chronic conditions on the use of medical cannabis: a scoping review

CONTEXT

Studies generally focus on one type of chronic condition and the effect of medical cannabis (MC) on symptoms; little is known about the perceptions and engagement of patients living with chronic conditions regarding the use of MC.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to explore: (1) what are the dimensions addressed in studies on MC that deal with patients' perceptions of MC? and (2) how have patients been engaged in developing these studies and their methodologies? Through these objectives, we have identified areas for improving future research.

METHODS

We searched five databases and applied exclusion criteria to select relevant articles. A thematic analysis approach was used to identify the main themes: (1) reasons to use, to stop using or not to use MC, (2) effects of MC on patients themselves and empowerment, (3) perspective and knowledge about MC, and (4) discussion with relatives and healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

Of 53 articles, the main interest when assessing the perceptions of MC is to identify the reasons to use MC (n = 39), while few articles focused on the reasons leading to stop using MC (n = 13). The majority (85%) appraise the effects of MC as perceived by patients. Less than one third assessed patients' sense of empowerment. Articles determining the beliefs surrounding and knowledge of MC (n = 41) generally addressed the concerns about or the comfort level with respect to using MC. Only six articles assessed patients' stereotypes regarding cannabis. Concerns about stigma constituted the main topic while assessing relationships with relatives. Some articles included patients in the research, but none of them had co-created the data collection tool with patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review outlined that few studies considered chronic diseases as a whole and that few patients are involved in the co-construction of data collection tools as well. There is an evidence gap concerning the results in terms of methodological quality when engaging patients in their design. Future research should evaluate why cannabis' effectiveness varies between patients, and how access affects the decision to use or not to use MC, particularly regarding the relationship between patients and healthcare providers. Future research should consider age and gender while assessing perceptions and should take into consideration the legislation status of cannabis as these factors could in fact shape perception. To reduce stigma and stereotypes about MC users, better quality and accessible information on MC should be disseminated.

The Use of Cannabinoids in Pediatric Palliative Care-A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis

This data analysis aimed to systematically analyze a pediatric patient population with a life-limiting disease who were administered cannabinoids. It was a retrospective single-center analysis of patients under supervision of the specialized outpatient pediatric palliative care (SOPPC) team at the Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine of the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU). Thirty-one patients with a primary diagnosis of neuropediatric, oncologic, metabolic, and cardiologic categories were included. The indications we identified were spasticity, pain, restlessness, anxiety, loss of appetite, epilepsy, and paresis. Certain aspects of quality of life were improved for 20 of 31 patients (64.5%). For nine patients (29%), no improvement was detected. No conclusions could be drawn for two patients (6.5%). Adverse events were reported for six of the thirty-one patients (19.4%). These were graded as mild, including symptoms such as restlessness, nausea, and behavioral issues. We detected no clinically relevant interactions with other medications. We collected fundamental data on the use of cannabinoids by pediatric palliative patients. Cannabinoids are now frequently administered in pediatric palliative care. They seem to be safe to use and should be considered an add-on therapy for other drug regimens.

Quality of life beyond measure: Advanced cancer patients, wellbeing and medicinal cannabis

Experiences of advanced cancer are assembled and (re)positioned with reference to illness, symptoms and maintaining 'wellbeing'. Medical cannabis is situated at a borderline in this and the broader social domain: between stigmatised and normalised; recreational and pharmaceutical; between perception, experience, discourse and scientific proof of benefit. Yet, in the hyper-medicalised context of randomised clinical trials (RCTs), cancer, wellbeing and medical cannabis are narrowly assessed using individualistic numerical scores. This article attends to patients' perceptions and experiences at this borderline, presenting novel findings from a sociological sub-study embedded within RCTs focused on the use of medical cannabis for symptom relief in advanced cancer. Through a Deleuzo-Guattarian-informed framework, we highlight the fragmentation and reassembling of bodies and propose body-situated experiences of wellbeing in the realm of advanced cancer. Problematising 'biopsychosocial' approaches that centre an individualised disconnected patient body in understandings of wellbeing, experiences of cancer and potential treatments, our findings foreground relational affect and embodied experience, and the role of desire in understanding what wellbeing is and can be. This also underpins and enables exploration of the affective reassembling ascribed to medical cannabis, with particular focus on how it is positioned within RCTs.

Cannabis use among recently treated cancer patients: perceptions and experiences

PURPOSE

To characterize cannabis use among cancer patients, we aimed to describe 1) patterns of cannabis use across multiple cancer sites; 2) perceived goals, benefits, harms of cannabis; and 3) communication about cannabis.

METHODS

Patients with 9 different cancers treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between March and August 2021 completed an online or phone survey eliciting cannabis use, attitudes, and communication about cannabis. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the association of cancer type and cannabis use, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and prior cannabis use.

RESULTS

Among 1258 respondents, 31% used cannabis after diagnosis, ranging from 25% for lung cancer to 59% for testicular cancer. Characteristics associated with cannabis use included younger age, lower education level, and cancer type. In multivariable analysis, compared to lung cancer patients, gastrointestinal cancer patients were more likely to use cannabis (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-5.43). Cannabis use in the year prior to diagnosis was strongly associated with cannabis use after diagnosis (OR 19.13, 95% CI 11.92-30.72). Among users, reasons for use included difficulty sleeping (48%); stress, anxiety, or depression (46%); and pain (42%). Among respondents who used cannabis to improve symptoms, 70-90% reported improvement; < 5% reported that any symptom worsened. Only 25% discussed cannabis with healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost a third of cancer patients use cannabis, largely for symptom management. Oncologists may not know about their patients' cannabis use. To improve decision making about cannabis use during cancer care, research is needed to determine benefits and harms of cannabis use.

MASCC guideline: cannabis for cancer-related pain and risk of harms and adverse events

BACKGROUND

Approximately 18% of patients with cancer use cannabis at one time as palliation or treatment for their cancer. We performed a systematic review of randomized cannabis cancer trials to establish a guideline for its use in pain and to summarize the risk of harm and adverse events when used for any indication in cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized trials with or without meta-analysis was carried out from MEDLINE, CCTR, Embase, and PsychINFO. The search involved randomized trials of cannabis in cancer patients. The search ended on November 12, 2021. The Jadad grading system was used for grading quality. Inclusion criteria for articles were randomized trials or systematic reviews of randomized trials of cannabinoids versus either placebo or active comparator explicitly in adult patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Thirty-four systematic reviews and randomized trials met the eligibility criteria for cancer pain. Seven were randomized trials involving patients with cancer pain. Two trials had positive primary endpoints, which could not be reproduced in similarly designed trials. High-quality systematic reviews with meta-analyses found little evidence that cannabinoids are an effective adjuvant or analgesic to cancer pain. Seven systematic reviews and randomized trials related to harms and adverse events were included. There was inconsistent evidence about the types and levels of harm patients may experience when using cannabinoids.

CONCLUSION

The MASCC panel recommends against the use of cannabinoids as an adjuvant analgesic for cancer pain and suggests that the potential risk of harm and adverse events be carefully considered for all cancer patients, particularly with treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor.

Medicinal cannabis in palliative medicine: lessons learnt from randomised controlled trials

Objectives

To detail important lessons learnt while conducting several large, medicinal cannabis (MC) randomised clinical trials in a palliative cancer population.

Methods

Investigators involved in these trials had several meetings to agree on the major lessons learnt and how the various challenges could be mitigated in the future.

Results

The lessons were sorted into separate categories: patient confidentiality, family dynamics, driving, cost, unfounded beliefs, accessing specific MC products, trial funding, telehealth and COVID-19, and miscellaneous issues.

Conclusion

Using MC as the intervention arm in such trials entails some unique regulatory, logistical and other challenges. This short report presents key lessons learnt in conducting these randomised controlled trials in a palliative care population for the benefit of future investigators planning similar trials in a similar patient population.

'What price do you put on your health?': Medical cannabis, financial toxicity and patient perspectives on medication access in advanced cancer

INTRODUCTION

Following 2016 legislation permitting limited access to cannabis for research and medicinal purposes, the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis (MC) on symptom burden relief in cancer contexts has increased in Australia. This study aimed to understand the perceptions, hopes and concerns of people with advanced cancer regarding the future availability and regulation of MC in Australia.

METHODS

This qualitative study draws on semistructured interviews conducted between February 2019 and October 2020 in Brisbane, Australia, as part of an MC RCT substudy. Interviews were undertaken on 48 patients with advanced cancer in palliative care eligible to participate in an MC trial (n = 26 participated in an RCT; n = 2 participated in a pilot study; n = 20 declined). Interviews included a discussion of patients' decision-making regarding trial participation, concerns about MC and perceptions of future availability, including cost. Transcribed interviews were analysed inductively and abductively, informed by constructivist thematic analysis conventions.

RESULTS

Overall, participants supported making MC legally accessible as a prescription-only medication. Fear of financial toxicity, however, compromised this pathway. Steep posttrial costs of accessing MC prompted several people to decline trial participation, and others to predict-if found effective-that many would either access MC through alternative pathways or reduce their prescribed dosage to enable affordable access.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that-despite a relatively robust universal healthcare system-Australians are potentially vulnerable to and fearful of financial toxicity. Prevalent in the United States, financial toxicity occurs when disadvantaged cancer patients access necessary but expensive medications with lasting consequences: bankruptcy, ongoing anxiety and cancer worry. Interview transcripts indicate that financial fears-and the systems sustaining them-may pose a threat to RCT completion and to equitable access to legal MC. Such findings support calls for embedding qualitative substudies and community partnerships within RCTs, while also suggesting the importance of subsidisation to overcoming injustices.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A patient advisory committee informed RCT design. This qualitative substudy foregrounds patients' decision-making, perceptions and experiences.

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.

Fact versus fiction: bridging contrasting medicinal cannabis information needs

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

Cancer patients' use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis

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

Oral medicinal cannabinoids to relieve symptom burden in the palliative care of patients with advanced cancer: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial of efficacy and safety of 1:1 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD)

Background

Despite improvements in medical care, patients with advanced cancer still experience substantial symptom distress. There is increasing interest in the use of medicinal cannabinoids but little high-quality evidence to guide clinicians. This study aims to define the role of a 1:1 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol (THC/CBD) cannabinoid preparation in the management of symptom burden in patients with advanced cancer undergoing standard palliative care.

Methods and design

One hundred fifty participants will be recruited from five sites within the Queensland Palliative Care Research Group (QPCRG) and randomly assigned to an active treatment or placebo group. This study is a pragmatic multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial of escalating doses of an oral 1:1 THC/CBD cannabinoid preparation. It will compare efficacy and safety outcomes of a titrated dose (10 mg/10 mg/mL oral solution formulation, dose range 2.5 mg/2.5 mg–30 mg/30 mg/day) against placebo. There is a 2-week patient-determined titration phase, using escalating doses of 1:1 THC/CBD or placebo, to reach a dose that achieves symptom relief with tolerable side effects. This is then followed by a further 2-week assessment period on the stable dose determined in collaboration with clinicians. The primary objective is to assess the effect of escalating doses of a 1:1 THC/CBD cannabinoid preparation against placebo on change in total symptom score, with secondary objectives including establishing a patient-determined effective dose, the change in total physical and emotional sores, global impression of change, anxiety and depression, opioid use, quality of life and adverse effects.

Discussion

This will be the first placebo-controlled clinical trial to rigorously evaluate the efficacy, safety and acceptability of 1:1 THC/CBD for symptom relief in advanced cancer patients. This study will allow the medical community to have some evidence to present to patients wishing to access cannabis for their symptoms caused by advanced malignancy.

Trial registration

ACTRN, ACTRN12619000037101. Registered on 14 January 2019.

Trial Sponsor: Mater Misericordiae Limited (MML) and Mater Medical Research Institute Limited (MMRI)—Raymond Terrace, South Brisbane, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Oral medicinal cannabinoids to relieve symptom burden in the palliative care of patients with advanced cancer: a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomised clinical trial of efficacy and safety of cannabidiol (CBD)

Background

Despite improvements in medical care, patients with advanced cancer still experience substantial symptom distress. There is increasing interest in the use of medicinal cannabinoids, but there is little high quality evidence to guide clinicians. This study aims to define the role of cannabidiol (CBD) in the management of symptom burden in patients with advanced cancer undergoing standard palliative care.

Methods and design

This study is a multicentre, randomised, placebo controlled, two arm, parallel trial of escalating doses of oral CBD. It will compare efficacy and safety outcomes of a titrated dose of CBD (100 mg/mL formulation, dose range 50 mg to 600 mg per day) against placebo. There is a 2-week patient determined titration phase, using escalating doses of CBD or placebo to reach a dose that achieves symptom relief with tolerable side effects. This is then followed by a further 2-week assessment period on the stable dose determined in collaboration with clinicians.

Discussion

A major strength of this study is that it will target symptom burden as a whole, rather than just individual symptoms, in an attempt to describe the general improvement in wellbeing previously reported by some patients in open label, non controlled trials of medicinal cannabis. Randomisation with placebo is essential because of the well-documented over reporting of benefit in uncontrolled trials and high placebo response rates in cancer pain trials. This will be the first placebo controlled clinical trial to evaluate rigorously the efficacy, safety and acceptability of CBD for symptom relief in advanced cancer patients. This study will provide the medical community with evidence to present to patients wishing to access medicinal cannabis for their cancer related symptoms.

Trial registration number

ALCTRN12618001220257 Registered 20/07/2018.

An Open-Label Pilot Study Testing the Feasibility of Assessing Total Symptom Burden in Trials of Cannabinoid Medications in Palliative Care

Background: There is considerable interest in the use of cannabinoids for symptom control in palliative care, but there is little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice.

Objectives: Assess the feasibility of using global symptom burden measures to assess response to medicinal cannabis, to determine median tolerated doses of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and to document adverse events (AEs).

Design: Prospective two-arm open-label pilot trial of escalating doses of CBD and THC oil.

Setting/Subjects: Participants had advanced cancer and cancer-related symptoms in a palliative and supportive care service in an Australian cancer center.

Measurements: The main outcome measures were the number of participants screened and randomized over the time frame, the number of participants completing days 14 and 28 and providing total symptom distress scores (TSDSs) (measured using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale), and the change from baseline of the TSDS at day 14.

Results: Of the 21 participants enrolled (CBD, n = 16; THC, n = 5), 18 (86%) completed the primary outcome measure at day 14 and 8 completed at day 28. The median maximum tolerated doses were CBD, 300 mg/day (range 100–600 mg); THC, 10 mg/day (range 5–30 mg). Nine of 21 patients (43%) met the definition of response (≥6 point reduction in TSDS). Drowsiness was the most common AE.

Conclusions: Trials of medicinal cannabis in advanced cancer patients undergoing palliative care are feasible. The doses of THC and CBD used in this study were generally well tolerated and the outcome measure of total symptom distress is promising as a measure of overall symptom benefit. Trial registration: ACTRN12618001205224.

Attitudes and Beliefs About Medical Usefulness and Legalization of Marijuana among Cancer Patients in a Legalized and a Nonlegalized State

Background: There is a growing preference for the use of marijuana for medical purposes, despite limited evidence regarding its benefits and potential safety risks. Legalization status may play a role in the attitudes and preferences toward medical marijuana (MM). Objectives: The attitudes and beliefs of cancer patients in a legalized (Arizona) versus nonlegalized state (Texas) regarding medical and recreational legalization and medical usefulness of marijuana were compared. Settings/Subjects: Two hundred adult cancer patients were enrolled from outpatient Palliative Care centers at Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center in Gilbert, AZ (n = 100) and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX (n = 100). Design and Measurements: Adult cancer patients seen by the Palliative Care teams in the outpatient centers were evaluated. Various physical and psychosocial assessments were conducted, including a survey of attitudes and beliefs toward marijuana. Results: The majority of individuals support legalization of marijuana for medical use (Arizona 92% [85-97%] vs. Texas 90% [82-95%]; p = 0.81) and belief in its medical usefulness (Arizona 97% [92-99%] vs. Texas 93% [86-97%]; p = 0.33) in both states. Overall, 181 (91%) patients supported legalization for medical purposes whereas 80 (40%) supported it for recreational purposes (p < 0.0001). Patients preferred marijuana over current standard treatments for anxiety (60% [51-68%]; p = 0.003). Patients found to favor legalizing MM were younger (p = 0.027), had worse fatigue (p = 0.015), appetite (p = 0.004), anxiety (p = 0.017), and were Cut Down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye Opener-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) positive for alcohol/drugs (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Cancer patients from both legalized and nonlegalized states supported legalization of marijuana for medical purposes and believed in its medical use. The support for legalization for medical use was significantly higher than for recreational use in both states.

Opportunities for cannabis in supportive care in cancer

Cannabis has the potential to modulate some of the most common and debilitating symptoms of cancer and its treatments, including nausea and vomiting, loss of appetite, and pain. However, the dearth of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of cannabis in treating these symptoms in patients with cancer poses a challenge to clinicians in discussing this option with their patients. A review was performed using keywords related to cannabis and important symptoms of cancer and its treatments. Literature was qualitatively reviewed from preclinical models to clinical trials in the fields of cancer, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and others, to prudently inform the use of cannabis in supportive and palliative care in cancer. There is a reasonable amount of evidence to consider cannabis for nausea and vomiting, loss of appetite, and pain as a supplement to first-line treatments. There is promising evidence to treat chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, gastrointestinal distress, and sleep disorders, but the literature is thus far too limited to recommend cannabis for these symptoms. Scant, yet more controversial, evidence exists in regard to cannabis for cancer- and treatment-related cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and fatigue. Adverse effects of cannabis are documented but tend to be mild. Cannabis has multifaceted potential bioactive benefits that appear to outweigh its risks in many situations. Further research is required to elucidate its mechanisms of action and efficacy and to optimize cannabis preparations and doses for specific populations affected by cancer.

Cannabis use in cancer: a survey of the current state at BC Cancer before recreational legalization in Canada

Background

Cancer patients experience multiple symptoms throughout their illness, and some report benefit from the use of cannabis. There are concerns that many patients are accessing products inappropriate for their situation and potentially putting themselves at risk. In the present study, we aimed to capture the prevalence of cannabis use among cancer patients at BC Cancer before recreational legalization in Canada and to identify the reasons that patients take cannabis, the various routes of administration they use, and the reasons that prior users stopped.

Methods

Patients were eligible if, on the selected study day (15 August 2018), they were scheduled for an appointment at any of the 6 BC Cancer sites. Eligible patients were mailed a survey.

Results

Of surveys sent to 2998 patients, 821 (27.4%) were returned and included in analysis. Of those respondents, 23% were currently using cannabis-based products, almost exclusively for medical purposes, and an additional 28% had been users in the past (most often recreationally). Of the patients currently using cannabis, 31% had medical authorization. The most common symptoms that the current users were targeting were pain, insomnia, nausea, and anxiety; many were also hoping for anticancer effects.

Conclusions

More than half the respondents had tried cannabis at some time, and almost one quarter of respondents were currently taking cannabis to help manage their symptoms or treat their cancer, or both. Many more patients would consider use with appropriate guidance from a health care professional. More research is needed to inform physicians and patients about safe uses and doses and about the potential adverse effects of cannabis use.

What cancer patients actually know regarding medical cannabis? A cross-sectional survey with a critical analysis of the current attitudes

BACKGROUND

In Italy medical cannabis is a prescription drug since 1998. Even though it could not be considered a therapy as such, it is indicated as a symptomatic treatment also in cancer patients, to cure iatrogenic nausea/vomiting and chronic pain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a knowledge survey about medical cannabis among cancer patients referred to two outpatient cancer care centers and a home care service.

RESULTS

From February to April 2018, 232 patient were enrolled; 210 patients were on active disease-oriented treatment (90.5%), while 22 (9.5%) not. Eighty-one percent of the patients have heard about medical cannabis, but only 2% from healthcare professionals. Thirty-four percent of responders thought about using cannabis to treat one or more of their own health problems, especially pain (55%). Despite that, 18% of the participants believe that medical cannabis could have negative effects on their own symptoms. Patients with high educational level better knew cannabis (odds ratio = 3.52; 95% confidence interval: 1.07-11.53), and medical cannabis (odds ratio = 3.21; 95% confidence interval: 1.48-6.98), when compared to patient with low educational level. Patients who were on active disease-oriented treatment better knew medical cannabis (odds ratio = 3.91; 95% confidence interval: 1.26-12.11) compared to "out of treatment" patients. Metastatic patients were less informed about medical cannabis compared to patients on adjuvant treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey shows that most of Italian cancer patients know medical cannabis and a third of them have considered using cannabis to treat one (or more) of their own health problems. In the same time, they are poorly informed and do not tend to ask for information about medical cannabis to healthcare professionals.

Medicinal cannabis in Australia, 2016: the Cannabis as Medicine Survey (CAMS-16)

OBJECTIVE

To explore patterns of cannabis use for medical purposes in Australia immediately prior to the 2016 legislation for frameworks for medical cannabis use. Design, setting: Anonymous online survey with convenience sample, April-October 2016. Participants were recruited through online media and at professional and consumer forums.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (at least 18 years of age) who reported using a cannabis product for self-identified medical or therapeutic reasons during the preceding 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Consumer characteristics; indications and patterns of medical cannabis use; perceived benefits and harms; views on appropriate availability of medical cannabis.

RESULTS

Most of the 1748 participants were men (68.1%) and employed (56.6%), with a mean age of 37.9 years (SD, 13.4 years) and mean reported period of medical cannabis use of 9.8 years (SD, 12.5 years). The most frequent reasons for medical cannabis use were anxiety (50.7%), back pain (50.0%), depression (49.3%), and sleep problems (43.5%). Respondents had used medical cannabis on a mean of 19.9 of the previous 28 days (SD, 10.0 days), spending a mean $68.60 (SD, $85.00) per week, and 83.4% had inhaled the substance. Participants reported high levels of clinical effectiveness and frequent side effects, including drowsiness, ocular irritation, lethargy and memory impairment; 17% met DSM-5 criteria for moderate or severe cannabis use disorder. Many reported harms or concerns related to the illicit status of cannabis. Participants believed that medical cannabis should be integrated into mainstream health care, and that products should be required to meet consistency and safety standards.

CONCLUSION

Illicitly sourced cannabis is used to treat a broad range of medical conditions in Australia. Future models of prescribed medical cannabis take consumer patterns of use and demand into consideration.

Medicinal cannabinoids in palliative care

The treatment of symptoms in people with palliative diagnoses begins with meticulous clinical assessment with treatment choice(s) selected based on an understanding of the symptom aetiology and the evidence which underpins its treatment. Increasingly, the merits of palliative care have been established earlier in the disease trajectory where treatment outcomes may include increased survival and maintenance of function. There is strong public support for the availability of medicinal cannabis, particularly for people with palliative diagnoses. There are several areas where there is potential for symptom benefits through modulation of the endocannabinoid system, though clinical data to date has been inconclusive in key symptoms such as pain and nausea, and data from other settings such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting not readily extrapolated. Ideally exploration of medicinal cannabinoids should occur within a clinical trial to accelerate the evidence base to inform practice. In people with refractory symptoms, the consideration of unregistered products or off-label prescribing should be guided by the potential influences of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and drug-drug interactions, supported by an informed discussion with the patient, and regular review of net clinical benefit.

Rates of cannabis use in patients with cancer

Background

A comprehensive assessment of cannabis use by patients with cancer has not previously been reported. In this study, we aimed to characterize patient perspectives about cannabis and its use.

Methods

An anonymous survey about cannabis use was offered to patients 18 years of age and older attending 2 comprehensive and 2 community cancer centres, comprising an entire provincial health care jurisdiction in Canada (ethics id: hreba-17011).

Results

Of 3138 surveys distributed, 2040 surveys were returned (65%), with 1987 being sufficiently complete for analysis (response rate: 63%). Of the respondents, 812 (41%) were less than 60 years of age; 45% identified as male, and 55% as female; and 44% had completed college or higher education.Of respondents overall, 43% reported any lifetime cannabis use. That finding was independent of age, sex, education level, and cancer histology. Cannabis was acquired through friends (80%), regulated medical dispensaries (10%), and other means (6%). Of patients with any use, 81% had used dried leaves.Of the 356 patients who reported cannabis use within the 6 months preceding the survey (18% of respondents with sufficiently complete surveys), 36% were new users. Their reasons for use included cancer-related pain (46%), nausea (34%), other cancer symptoms (31%), and non-cancer-related reasons (56%).

Conclusions

The survey demonstrated that prior cannabis use was widespread among patients with cancer (43%). One in eight respondents identified at least 1 cancer-related symptom for which they were using cannabis.

Cannabis use among patients at a comprehensive cancer center in a state with legalized medicinal and recreational use

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is purported to alleviate symptoms related to cancer treatment, although the patterns of use among cancer patients are not well known. This study was designed to determine the prevalence and methods of use among cancer patients, the perceived benefits, and the sources of information in a state with legalized cannabis.

METHODS

A cross‐sectional, anonymous survey of adult cancer patients was performed at a National Cancer Institute–designated cancer center in Washington State. Random urine samples for tetrahydrocannabinol provided survey validation.

RESULTS

Nine hundred twenty‐six of 2737 eligible patients (34%) completed the survey, and the median age was 58 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46‐66 years). Most had a strong interest in learning about cannabis during treatment (6 on a 1‐10 scale; IQR, 3‐10) and wanted information from cancer providers (677 of 911 [74%]). Previous use was common (607 of 926 [66%]); 24% (222 of 926) used cannabis in the last year, and 21% (192 of 926) used cannabis in the last month. Random urine samples found similar percentages of users who reported weekly use (27 of 193 [14%] vs 164 of 926 [18%]). Active users inhaled (153 of 220 [70%]) or consumed edibles (154 of 220 [70%]); 89 (40%) used both modalities. Cannabis was used primarily for physical (165 of 219 [75%]) and neuropsychiatric symptoms (139 of 219 [63%]). Legalization significantly increased the likelihood of use in more than half of the respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of cancer patients in a state with legalized cannabis found high rates of active use across broad subgroups, and legalization was reported to be important in patients' decision to use. Cancer patients desire but are not receiving information about cannabis use during their treatment from oncology providers. Cancer 2017;123:4488‐97. © 2017 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Cannabis use is common among patients receiving treatment at a large cancer center in a state with legalized recreational and medical cannabis. Active use is reported across broad demographic and diagnostic cancer subgroups, and legalization is reported to be important in patients' decision to use.