-
Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Jun 2022Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction, associated with the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction, associated with the presence of restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities. Cannabis has been used to alleviate symptoms associated with ASD.
METHOD
We carried out a systematic review of studies that investigated the clinical effects of cannabis and cannabinoid use on ASD, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA checklist). The search was carried out in four databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Scopus, and Web of Science. No limits were established for language during the selection process. Nine studies were selected and analyzed.
RESULTS
Some studies showed that cannabis products reduced the number and/or intensity of different symptoms, including hyperactivity, attacks of self-mutilation and anger, sleep problems, anxiety, restlessness, psychomotor agitation, irritability, aggressiveness perseverance, and depression. Moreover, they found an improvement in cognition, sensory sensitivity, attention, social interaction, and language. The most common adverse effects were sleep disorders, restlessness, nervousness and change in appetite.
CONCLUSION
Cannabis and cannabinoids may have promising effects in the treatment of symptoms related to ASD, and can be used as a therapeutic alternative in the relief of those symptoms. However, randomized, blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials are necessary to clarify findings on the effects of cannabis and its cannabinoids in individuals with ASD.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), code 164161.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Cannabinoids; Cannabis; Humans; Psychomotor Agitation
PubMed: 34043900
DOI: 10.47626/2237-6089-2020-0149 -
Journal of Parkinson's Disease 2022The legalization of cannabis in many countries has allowed many Parkinson's disease (PD) patients to turn to cannabis as a treatment. As such there is a growing interest... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The legalization of cannabis in many countries has allowed many Parkinson's disease (PD) patients to turn to cannabis as a treatment. As such there is a growing interest from the PD community to be properly guided by evidence regarding potential treatment benefits of cannabis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compile the best available evidence to help guide patients and their family, clinicians and researchers make informed decisions. A systematic search of the literature was conducted in June 2021. Five randomized controlled studies and eighteen non-randomized studies investigated cannabis treatment in PD patients. No compelling evidence was found to recommend the use of cannabis in PD patients. However, a potential benefit was identified with respect to alleviation of PD related tremor, anxiety, pain, improvement of sleep quality and quality of life. Given the relative paucity of well-designed randomized studies, there is an identified need for further investigation, particularly in these areas.
Topics: Analgesics; Cannabis; Humans; Medical Marijuana; Parkinson Disease; Quality of Life; Tremor
PubMed: 34958046
DOI: 10.3233/JPD-212923 -
JAMACannabis and cannabinoid drugs are widely used to treat disease or alleviate symptoms, but their efficacy for specific indications is not clear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
IMPORTANCE
Cannabis and cannabinoid drugs are widely used to treat disease or alleviate symptoms, but their efficacy for specific indications is not clear.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the benefits and adverse events (AEs) of cannabinoids.
DATA SOURCES
Twenty-eight databases from inception to April 2015.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials of cannabinoids for the following indications: nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy, appetite stimulation in HIV/AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity due to multiple sclerosis or paraplegia, depression, anxiety disorder, sleep disorder, psychosis, glaucoma, or Tourette syndrome.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. All review stages were conducted independently by 2 reviewers. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Patient-relevant/disease-specific outcomes, activities of daily living, quality of life, global impression of change, and AEs.
RESULTS
A total of 79 trials (6462 participants) were included; 4 were judged at low risk of bias. Most trials showed improvement in symptoms associated with cannabinoids but these associations did not reach statistical significance in all trials. Compared with placebo, cannabinoids were associated with a greater average number of patients showing a complete nausea and vomiting response (47% vs 20%; odds ratio [OR], 3.82 [95% CI, 1.55-9.42]; 3 trials), reduction in pain (37% vs 31%; OR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.99-2.00]; 8 trials), a greater average reduction in numerical rating scale pain assessment (on a 0-10-point scale; weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.46 [95% CI, -0.80 to -0.11]; 6 trials), and average reduction in the Ashworth spasticity scale (WMD, -0.36 [95% CI, -0.69 to -0.05]; 7 trials). There was an increased risk of short-term AEs with cannabinoids, including serious AEs. Common AEs included dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, fatigue, somnolence, euphoria, vomiting, disorientation, drowsiness, confusion, loss of balance, and hallucination.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
There was moderate-quality evidence to support the use of cannabinoids for the treatment of chronic pain and spasticity. There was low-quality evidence suggesting that cannabinoids were associated with improvements in nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy, weight gain in HIV infection, sleep disorders, and Tourette syndrome. Cannabinoids were associated with an increased risk of short-term AEs.
Topics: Anorexia; Cannabinoids; Chronic Pain; Glaucoma; Humans; Medical Marijuana; Mental Disorders; Muscle Spasticity; Nausea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tourette Syndrome
PubMed: 26103030
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.6358 -
The International Journal on Drug Policy Nov 2021This study aimed to determine the efficacy and acceptability of pharmacotherapies for cannabis use disorder (CUD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the efficacy and acceptability of pharmacotherapies for cannabis use disorder (CUD).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis, searching five electronic databases for randomized placebo-controlled trials of individuals diagnosed with CUD receiving pharmacotherapy with or without concomitant psychotherapy. Primary outcomes were the reduction in cannabis use and retention in treatment. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, discontinuation due to adverse events, total abstinence, withdrawal symptoms, cravings, and CUD severity. We applied a frequentist, random-effects Network Meta-Analysis model to pool effect sizes across trials using standardized mean differences (SMD, g) and rate ratios (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
We identified a total of 24 trials (n=1912, 74.9% male, mean age 30.2 years). Nabilone (d=-4.47 [-8.15; -0.79]), topiramate (d=-3.80 [-7.06; -0.54]), and fatty-acid amyl hydroxylase inhibitors (d=-2.30 [-4.75; 0.15]) reduced cannabis use relative to placebo. Dronabinol improved retention in treatment (RR=1.27 [1.02; 1.57]), while topiramate worsened treatment retention (RR=0.62 [0.42; 0.91]). Gabapentin reduced cannabis cravings (d=-2.42 [-3.53; -1.32], while vilazodone worsened craving severity (d=1.69 [0.71; 2.66]. Buspirone (RR=1.14 [1.00; 1.29]), venlafaxine (RR=1.78 [1.40; 2.26]), and topiramate (RR=9.10 [1.27; 65.11]) caused more adverse events, while topiramate caused more dropouts due to adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on this review, some medications appeared to show promise for treating individual aspects of CUD. However, there is a lack of robust evidence to support any particular pharmacological treatment. There is a need for additional studies to expand the evidence base for CUD pharmacotherapy. While medication strategies may become an integral component for CUD treatment one day, psychosocial interventions should remain the first line given the limitations in the available evidence.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Marijuana Abuse; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 34062288
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103295 -
JAMA Psychiatry Apr 2019Cannabis is the most commonly used drug of abuse by adolescents in the world. While the impact of adolescent cannabis use on the development of psychosis has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Cannabis is the most commonly used drug of abuse by adolescents in the world. While the impact of adolescent cannabis use on the development of psychosis has been investigated in depth, little is known about the impact of cannabis use on mood and suicidality in young adulthood.
OBJECTIVE
To provide a summary estimate of the extent to which cannabis use during adolescence is associated with the risk of developing subsequent major depression, anxiety, and suicidal behavior.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Proquest Dissertations and Theses were searched from inception to January 2017.
STUDY SELECTION
Longitudinal and prospective studies, assessing cannabis use in adolescents younger than 18 years (at least 1 assessment point) and then ascertaining development of depression in young adulthood (age 18 to 32 years) were selected, and odds ratios (OR) adjusted for the presence of baseline depression and/or anxiety and/or suicidality were extracted.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Study quality was assessed using the Research Triangle Institute item bank on risk of bias and precision of observational studies. Two reviewers conducted all review stages independently. Selected data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The studies assessing cannabis use and depression at different points from adolescence to young adulthood and reporting the corresponding OR were included. In the studies selected, depression was diagnosed according to the third or fourth editions of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or by using scales with predetermined cutoff points.
RESULTS
After screening 3142 articles, 269 articles were selected for full-text review, 35 were selected for further review, and 11 studies comprising 23 317 individuals were included in the quantitative analysis. The OR of developing depression for cannabis users in young adulthood compared with nonusers was 1.37 (95% CI, 1.16-1.62; I2 = 0%). The pooled OR for anxiety was not statistically significant: 1.18 (95% CI, 0.84-1.67; I2 = 42%). The pooled OR for suicidal ideation was 1.50 (95% CI, 1.11-2.03; I2 = 0%), and for suicidal attempt was 3.46 (95% CI, 1.53-7.84, I2 = 61.3%).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Although individual-level risk remains moderate to low and results from this study should be confirmed in future adequately powered prospective studies, the high prevalence of adolescents consuming cannabis generates a large number of young people who could develop depression and suicidality attributable to cannabis. This is an important public health problem and concern, which should be properly addressed by health care policy.
Topics: Adolescent; Adolescent Behavior; Age Factors; Anxiety; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Marijuana Use; Suicidal Ideation; Suicide, Attempted
PubMed: 30758486
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.4500 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Aug 2022Contemporary data are needed about the utility of cannabinoids in chronic pain. (Review)
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 ( = 1740) and 7 cohort studies ( = 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).
Topics: Analgesics; Cannabinoids; Cannabis; Chronic Pain; Dizziness; Dronabinol; Humans
PubMed: 35667066
DOI: 10.7326/M21-4520 -
Journal of Medical Toxicology :... Mar 2017Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is a syndrome of cyclic vomiting associated with cannabis use. Our objective is to summarize the available evidence on CHS... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is a syndrome of cyclic vomiting associated with cannabis use. Our objective is to summarize the available evidence on CHS diagnosis, pathophysiology, and treatment. We performed a systematic review using MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 through September 24, 2015. Articles eligible for inclusion were evaluated using the Grading and Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Data were abstracted from the articles and case reports and were combined in a cumulative synthesis. The frequency of identified diagnostic characteristics was calculated from the cumulative synthesis and evidence for pathophysiologic hypothesis as well as treatment options were evaluated using the GRADE criteria. The systematic search returned 2178 articles. After duplicates were removed, 1253 abstracts were reviewed and 183 were included. Fourteen diagnostic characteristics were identified, and the frequency of major characteristics was as follows: history of regular cannabis for any duration of time (100%), cyclic nausea and vomiting (100%), resolution of symptoms after stopping cannabis (96.8%), compulsive hot baths with symptom relief (92.3%), male predominance (72.9%), abdominal pain (85.1%), and at least weekly cannabis use (97.4%). The pathophysiology of CHS remains unclear with a dearth of research dedicated to investigating its underlying mechanism. Supportive care with intravenous fluids, dopamine antagonists, topical capsaicin cream, and avoidance of narcotic medications has shown some benefit in the acute setting. Cannabis cessation appears to be the best treatment. CHS is a cyclic vomiting syndrome, preceded by daily to weekly cannabis use, usually accompanied by symptom improvement with hot bathing, and resolution with cessation of cannabis. The pathophysiology underlying CHS is unclear. Cannabis cessation appears to be the best treatment.
Topics: Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Marijuana Abuse; Syndrome; Vomiting
PubMed: 28000146
DOI: 10.1007/s13181-016-0595-z -
The Lancet. Psychiatry Sep 2022Cannabis potency, defined as the concentration of Δ-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), has increased internationally, which could increase the risk of adverse health outcomes... (Review)
Review
Cannabis potency, defined as the concentration of Δ-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), has increased internationally, which could increase the risk of adverse health outcomes for cannabis users. We present, to our knowledge, the first systematic review of the association of cannabis potency with mental health and addiction (PROSPERO, CRD42021226447). We searched Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE (from database inception to Jan 14, 2021). Included studies were observational studies of human participants comparing the association of high-potency cannabis (products with a higher concentration of THC) and low-potency cannabis (products with a lower concentration of THC), as defined by the studies included, with depression, anxiety, psychosis, or cannabis use disorder (CUD). Of 4171 articles screened, 20 met the eligibility criteria: eight studies focused on psychosis, eight on anxiety, seven on depression, and six on CUD. Overall, use of higher potency cannabis, relative to lower potency cannabis, was associated with an increased risk of psychosis and CUD. Evidence varied for depression and anxiety. The association of cannabis potency with CUD and psychosis highlights its relevance in health-care settings, and for public health guidelines and policies on cannabis sales. Standardisation of exposure measures and longitudinal designs are needed to strengthen the evidence of this association.
Topics: Analgesics; Anxiety; Cannabis; Dronabinol; Hallucinogens; Humans; Mental Health
PubMed: 35901795
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00161-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2018This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat chronic neuropathic pain. Estimates of the population prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic components range... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat chronic neuropathic pain. Estimates of the population prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic components range between 6% and 10%. Current pharmacological treatment options for neuropathic pain afford substantial benefit for only a few people, often with adverse effects that outweigh the benefits. There is a need to explore other treatment options, with different mechanisms of action for treatment of conditions with chronic neuropathic pain. Cannabis has been used for millennia to reduce pain. Herbal cannabis is currently strongly promoted by some patients and their advocates to treat any type of chronic pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabis-based medicines (herbal, plant-derived, synthetic) compared to placebo or conventional drugs for conditions with chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
In November 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registries for published and ongoing trials, and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised, double-blind controlled trials of medical cannabis, plant-derived and synthetic cannabis-based medicines against placebo or any other active treatment of conditions with chronic neuropathic pain in adults, with a treatment duration of at least two weeks and at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently extracted data of study characteristics and outcomes of efficacy, tolerability and safety, examined issues of study quality, and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 30% and 50% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardised mean differences for pain intensity, sleep problems, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and psychological distress. For tolerability, we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawal due to adverse events and specific adverse events, nervous system disorders and psychiatric disorders. For safety, we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. Meta-analysis was undertaken using a random-effects model. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 studies with 1750 participants. The studies were 2 to 26 weeks long and compared an oromucosal spray with a plant-derived combination of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) (10 studies), a synthetic cannabinoid mimicking THC (nabilone) (two studies), inhaled herbal cannabis (two studies) and plant-derived THC (dronabinol) (two studies) against placebo (15 studies) and an analgesic (dihydrocodeine) (one study). We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess study quality. We defined studies with zero to two unclear or high risks of bias judgements to be high-quality studies, with three to five unclear or high risks of bias to be moderate-quality studies, and with six to eight unclear or high risks of bias to be low-quality studies. Study quality was low in two studies, moderate in 12 studies and high in two studies. Nine studies were at high risk of bias for study size. We rated the quality of the evidence according to GRADE as very low to moderate.Primary outcomesCannabis-based medicines may increase the number of people achieving 50% or greater pain relief compared with placebo (21% versus 17%; risk difference (RD) 0.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.09); NNTB 20 (95% CI 11 to 100); 1001 participants, eight studies, low-quality evidence). We rated the evidence for improvement in Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) with cannabis to be of very low quality (26% versus 21%;RD 0.09 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.17); NNTB 11 (95% CI 6 to 100); 1092 participants, six studies). More participants withdrew from the studies due to adverse events with cannabis-based medicines (10% of participants) than with placebo (5% of participants) (RD 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.07); NNTH 25 (95% CI 16 to 50); 1848 participants, 13 studies, moderate-quality evidence). We did not have enough evidence to determine if cannabis-based medicines increase the frequency of serious adverse events compared with placebo (RD 0.01 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.03); 1876 participants, 13 studies, low-quality evidence).Secondary outcomesCannabis-based medicines probably increase the number of people achieving pain relief of 30% or greater compared with placebo (39% versus 33%; RD 0.09 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15); NNTB 11 (95% CI 7 to 33); 1586 participants, 10 studies, moderate quality evidence). Cannabis-based medicines may increase nervous system adverse events compared with placebo (61% versus 29%; RD 0.38 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.58); NNTH 3 (95% CI 2 to 6); 1304 participants, nine studies, low-quality evidence). Psychiatric disorders occurred in 17% of participants using cannabis-based medicines and in 5% using placebo (RD 0.10 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.15); NNTH 10 (95% CI 7 to 16); 1314 participants, nine studies, low-quality evidence).We found no information about long-term risks in the studies analysed.Subgroup analysesWe are uncertain whether herbal cannabis reduces mean pain intensity (very low-quality evidence). Herbal cannabis and placebo did not differ in tolerability (very low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The potential benefits of cannabis-based medicine (herbal cannabis, plant-derived or synthetic THC, THC/CBD oromucosal spray) in chronic neuropathic pain might be outweighed by their potential harms. The quality of evidence for pain relief outcomes reflects the exclusion of participants with a history of substance abuse and other significant comorbidities from the studies, together with their small sample sizes.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Analgesics, Opioid; Cannabidiol; Chronic Pain; Codeine; Dronabinol; Humans; Medical Marijuana; Neuralgia; Numbers Needed To Treat; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29513392
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012182.pub2 -
JAMA Network Open Nov 2019Marijuana use is common and growing in the United States amid a trend toward legalization. Exposure to tobacco smoke is a well-described preventable cause of many... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Marijuana use is common and growing in the United States amid a trend toward legalization. Exposure to tobacco smoke is a well-described preventable cause of many cancers; the association of marijuana use with the development of cancer is not clear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association of marijuana use with cancer development.
DATA SOURCES
A search of PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted on June 11, 2018, and updated on April 30, 2019. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published from January 1, 1973, to April 30, 2019, and references of included studies were performed, with data analyzed from January 2 through October 4, 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language studies involving adult marijuana users and reporting cancer development. The search strategy contained the following 2 concepts linked together with the AND operator: marijuana OR marihuana OR tetrahydrocannabinol OR cannabinoid OR cannabis; AND cancer OR malignancy OR carcinoma OR tumor OR neoplasm.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full-text articles; 3 reviewers independently assessed study characteristics and graded evidence strength by consensus.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Rates of cancer in marijuana users, with ever use defined as at least 1 joint-year exposure (equivalent to 1 joint per day for 1 year), compared with nonusers. Meta-analysis was conducted if there were at least 2 studies of the same design addressing the same cancer without high risk of bias when heterogeneity was low to moderate for the following 4 cancers: lung, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, oral squamous cell carcinoma, and testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT), with comparisons expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
Twenty-five English-language studies (19 case-control, 5 cohort, and 1 cross-sectional) were included; few studies (n = 2) were at low risk of bias. In pooled analysis of case-control studies, ever use of marijuana was not associated with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma or oral cancer. In pooled analysis of 3 case-control studies, more than 10 years of marijuana use (joint-years not reported) was associated with TGCT (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.03-1.81; P = .03; I2 = 0%) and nonseminoma TGCT (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.10-3.11; P = .04; I2 = 0%). Evaluations of ever use generally found no association with cancers, but exposure levels were low and poorly defined. Findings for lung cancer were mixed, confounded by few marijuana-only smokers, poor exposure assessment, and inadequate adjustment; meta-analysis was not performed for several outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Low-strength evidence suggests that smoking marijuana is associated with developing TGCT; its association with other cancers and the consequences of higher levels of use are unclear. Long-term studies in marijuana-only smokers would improve understanding of marijuana's association with lung, oral, and other cancers.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO identifier: CRD42018102457.
Topics: Humans; Marijuana Use; Neoplasms; Risk Factors
PubMed: 31774524
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.16318