[ROUTES OF MEDICAL CANNABIS ADMINISTRATION- IS SMOKING THE PREFERRED ROUTE?]

INTRODUCTION: The number of medical cannabis licenses in Israel is increasing persistently (over 120,000 approved licenses in October 2022), reaching about 1.5% of adult population. Medical cannabis products are available in two main forms: inflorescence (administered by smoking or evaporation) and cannabis oil (administered sub-lingually). Data from the Israel ministry of health, regarding the split between these forms, show a major preference for inflorescence products over cannabis oils. This preference is increasing over time. This article reviews the main differences between the administration of these forms and their effects on the quality of treatment. It's conclusion is that for the most common cases of cannabis treatment, sublingual oils should be preferred and that the medical community has an important role in driving this change.

Adolescent Δ8-THC and Marijuana Use in the US.

Importance: Gummies, flavored vaping devices, and other cannabis products containing psychoactive hemp-derived Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are increasingly marketed in the US with claims of being federally legal and comparable to marijuana. National data on prevalence and correlates of Δ8-THC use and comparisons to marijuana use among adolescents in the US are lacking. Objective: To estimate the self-reported prevalence of and sociodemographic and policy factors associated with Δ8-THC and marijuana use among US adolescents in the past 12 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative cross-sectional analysis included a randomly selected subset of 12th-grade students in 27 US states who participated in the Monitoring the Future Study in-school survey during February to June 2023. Exposures: Self-reported sex, race, ethnicity, and parental education; census region; state-level adult-use (ie, recreational) marijuana legalization (yes vs no); and state-level Δ8-THC policies (regulated vs not regulated). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was self-reported Δ8-THC and marijuana use in the past 12 months (any vs no use and number of occasions used). Results: In the sample of 2186 12th-grade students (mean age, 17.7 years; 1054 [48.9% weighted] were female; 232 [11.1%] were Black, 411 [23.5%] were Hispanic, 1113 [46.1%] were White, and 328 [14.2%] were multiracial), prevalence of self-reported use in the past 12 months was 11.4% (95% CI, 8.6%-14.2%) for Δ8-THC and 30.4% (95% CI, 26.5%-34.4%) for marijuana. Of those 295 participants reporting Δ8-THC use, 35.4% used it at least 10 times in the past 12 months. Prevalence of Δ8-THC use was lower in Western vs Southern census regions (5.0% vs 14.3%; risk difference [RD], -9.4% [95% CI, -15.2% to -3.5%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 0.35 [95% CI, 0.16-0.77]), states in which Δ8-THC was regulated vs not regulated (5.7% vs 14.4%; RD, -8.6% [95% CI, -12.9% to -4.4%]; aRR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.23-0.74]), and states with vs without legal adult-use marijuana (8.0% vs 14.0%; RD, -6.0% [95% CI, -10.8% to -1.2%]; aRR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.35-0.91]). Use in the past 12 months was lower among Hispanic than White participants for Δ8-THC (7.3% vs 14.4%; RD, -7.2% [95% CI, -12.2% to -2.1%]; aRR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.34-0.87]) and marijuana (24.5% vs 33.0%; RD, -8.5% [95% CI, -14.9% to -2.1%]; aRR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94]). Δ8-THC and marijuana use prevalence did not differ by sex or parental education. Conclusions and Relevance: Δ8-THC use prevalence is appreciable among US adolescents and is higher in states without marijuana legalization or existing Δ8-THC regulations. Prioritizing surveillance, policy, and public health efforts addressing adolescent Δ8-THC use may be warranted.

Individual differences in legal and illicit cannabis purchasing behaviour in British Columbia, Canada: Findings from a 2021 cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite thousands of licensed cannabis retail stores operating across Canada, there remains a significant illicit cannabis market. Some cannabis users continue to buy cannabis from dealers, illicit stores, and/or illicit online retailers. METHODS: Data are from the 2021 British Columbia Cannabis Use Survey. Respondents (n = 8473) were 19 years or older, lived in British Columbia at the time of the survey, and reported using cannabis in the past 12 months. RESULTS: Buying cannabis from all types of illicit sources was more common among younger cannabis users, those who use cannabis more frequently and started using cannabis before the age of 17 (vs. 19 or older), and among those who co-use cannabis with other drugs. Specifically, buying cannabis from a dealer was more common among men, those with lower educational attainment, and those who seek the lowest prices when buying cannabis. In contrast, those using cannabis for medical (vs. non-medical) purposes were more likely to report getting cannabis from illicit retail stores, while buying cannabis from illicit websites was more common among people who use edible cannabis products. CONCLUSION: Consistent with other studies, younger and more frequent cannabis users were more likely to report buying cannabis from illicit sources. However, these findings suggest there is significant heterogeneity among those who buy cannabis from different types of illicit sources, which should be carefully considered when developing policies and strategies aimed at encouraging consumers to transition to legal sources.

Medicinal cannabis use among young adults during California's transition from legalized medical use to adult-use: a longitudinal analysis.

Background: In 2016, California transitioned from legalized medical cannabis use to adult-use. Little is known about how this policy change affected medicinal cannabis use among young adults.Objectives: To identify longitudinal groups of medicinal cannabis users and concurrent changes in health- and cannabis use-related characteristics among young adults in Los Angeles between 2014 and 2021.Methods: Cannabis users (210 patients and 156 non-patients; 34% female; ages 18-26 at baseline) were surveyed annually across six waves. Longitudinal latent class analysis derived groups from two factors - cannabis patient status and self-reported medicinal use. Trajectories of health symptoms, cannabis use motives, and cannabis use (daily/near daily use, concentrate use, and problematic use) were estimated across groups.Results: Three longitudinal latent classes emerged: Recreational Users (39.3%) - low self-reported medicinal use and low-to-decreasing patient status; Recreational Patients (40.4%) - low self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status; Medicinal Patients (20.3%) - high self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status. At baseline, Medicinal Patients had higher levels of physical health symptoms and motives than recreational groups (p < .05); both patient groups reported higher level of daily/near daily and concentrate use (p < .01). Over time, mental health symptoms increased in recreational groups (p < .05) and problematic cannabis use increased among Recreational Patients (p < .01).Conclusions: During the transition to legalized adult-use, patterns of medicinal cannabis use varied among young adults. Clinicians should monitor increases in mental health symptoms and cannabis-related problems among young adults who report recreational - but not medicinal - cannabis use.

Social Norms for Cannabis Use After Nonmedical Legalization in Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Social norms play an important role in cannabis use; however, there is little evidence on how social norms change in jurisdictions that legalize cannabis. This study examined trends in social norms before and after legalization of nonmedical cannabis in Canada in 2018. METHODS: Data are from the International Cannabis Policy Study, a series of cross-sectional surveys conducted annually with Canadian respondents aged 16-65 years. Analyses were conducted in 2023 and included data from 58,045 respondents across 4 waves: the year immediately before legalization (2018) and 3 post-legalization waves (2019-2021). Regression models examined trends in injunctive norms (perceived approval of cannabis) and comfort in using cannabis in six different social contexts, adjusting for cannabis use frequency, medical authorization, and sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: Perceived social approval of cannabis use and comfort using cannabis in different social contexts was highest among males, frequent cannabis consumers, and those who reported medical authorization (p<0.05 in all cases). No changes in perceived approval were observed across years, except a temporary decrease in 2020 versus 2018 (OR=0.87, 95% CI=0.80, 0.95). Modest increases in comfort of using cannabis in 6 different social contexts were observed in 2019 (ß=0.10, p=0.001), 2020 (ß=0.10, p=0.001), and 2021 (ß=0.12, p<0.001) versus in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Social norms have remained relatively stable after nonmedical legalization in Canada, with only modest increases in comfort of using cannabis in different social settings. The findings may reflect widespread cannabis use in Canada prior to nonmedical legalization in 2018 as well as comprehensive restrictions on promotion and advertising.

Acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana among adults in Selangor, Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION: The issue of decriminalization of medical marijuana has gained public attention globally due to the decisions of various governments in developed and developing countries who have decriminalized marijuana for medical purposes. The action was the result of the change in perception towards medical marijuana use, which is now believed to be safe, acceptable, and should be decriminalized. Due to the progress of modernization and the wide access to information, the change in perception towards medical marijuana seems to be inevitable and might have already permeated among the public in Malaysia. However, at the moment there is no baseline data to determine any of this claim. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and factors associated with acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana among adults in Selangor, Malaysia. METHODOLOGY: The study was a cross-sectional study conducted in year 2021 among 462 adults aged 18 years old and above in Selangor, Malaysia. The respondents were sampled using a multistage random sampling. The data was collected via self-administered questionnaires and has been analyzed using SPSS version 25. RESULT: More than half of the respondents in this study (64.7%) show acceptance towards the decriminalization of medical marijuana in Malaysia. The results of statistical tests indicate that there are significant associations between age (p < 0.001), gender (p = 0.005), ethnicity (p < 0.012), level of education (p < 0.011), employment status (p = 0.001), ever smoked (p < 0.001), given up smoking (p = 0.002), ever used substance (p < 0.001), current substance use (p < 0.001), given up substance (p < 0.001), exposure to medical marijuana-related content (p < 0.001), perceived risk associated with medical marijuana use (p < 0.001), perceived risk of harm of medical marijuana use (p < 0.001), and perceived approval of medical marijuana use (p < 0.001) with acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana. The predictors for acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana are perceived high approval of medical marijuana use (aOR = 7.023, p < 0.001, 95%CI = 3.534,13.955), perceived low risk of medical marijuana (aOR = 5.716, p < 0.001, 95%CI = 2.828,11.554), perceived low risk of harm from medical marijuana use (aOR = 3.480, p = 0.001, 95%CI = 1.702,7.114), current substance use (aOR = 2.264, p = 0.050, 95%CI = 1.001,5.118), and ever used substance (aOR = 2.005, p = 0.004, 95% CI = 0.054,0.576). CONCLUSION: The results of the survey show that the current acceptance level towards decriminalization of medical marijuana is considerably high. However, the acceptance is mainly among those who are exposed to the substance and those who perceive low risk of medical marijuana. Thus, a further exploration of this phenomenon is needed, especially by increasing the sample size and expanding the study location to other states.

Changes in cannabis policy and prevalence of recreational cannabis use among adolescents and young adults in Europe-An interrupted time-series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis policy varies greatly across European countries, but evidence of how such policy impacts on recreational cannabis use among young people is conflicting. This study aimed to clarify this association by investigating how changes in cannabis legislation influenced cannabis use. METHODS: Available data on self-reports of recreational cannabis use among individuals aged 15-34 years was retrieved from EMCDDA. Information on cannabis policy changes was categorized as more lenient (decriminalisation or depenalisation) or stricter (criminalisation, penalisation). Countries that had implemented changes in cannabis legislation or had information on prevalence of use for at least eight calendar years, were eligible for inclusion. We used interrupted time-series linear models to investigate changes in country-specific trajectories of prevalence over calendar time and in relation to policy changes. RESULTS: Data from Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom, for 1994-2017 was available for analyses. Cannabis use varied considerably over the study period and between countries. On average, use was stable or weakly increasing in countries where legislation was not changed or changed at the extremes of the study period (+0.08 percent per year [95% CI -0.01, 0.17 percent]). In contrast, the pooled average use decreased after changes in legislation, regardless of whether it had become more lenient (-0.22 [-1.21, 0.77]) or stricter (-0.44 [-0.91, 0.03]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings do not support any considerable impact of cannabis legislation on the prevalence of recreational cannabis use among youth and young adults in Europe.

Further Consideration of the Impact of Tobacco Control Policies on Young Adult Smoking in Light of the Liberalization of Cannabis Policies.

INTRODUCTION: Changing patterns of cannabis consumption related to the liberalization of cannabis policies may have a countervailing effect on tobacco use. We analyzed whether cannabis policies have tempered the effects of tobacco control policies as well as the extent to which they were associated with young adult cigarette smoking. AIMS AND METHODS: Combining data on tobacco and cannabis policies at the state, county, and city levels with the nationally-representative geocoded National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 and Census data, we use multilevel regression and fixed effect analyses to examine the impact of cannabis policies on any past 30-day cigarette smoking, frequency of smoking, and past 30-day near-daily smoking among young adults while accounting for community and individual covariates. RESULTS: Tobacco control policies, including significant effects of comprehensive smoking bans, total vending machine restrictions, single cigarette sale restrictions, and advertising restrictions, remain robust in reducing young adult smoking, net of cannabis policy liberalization, including the legal status of possession, penalties for sale, and medical cannabis. Cannabis policies do not directly affect young adult smoking patterns in an adverse way. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides evidence that the liberalization of cannabis laws has not adversely affected the efficacy of tobacco control efforts. IMPLICATIONS: While the effects of tobacco control policies on smoking are well-established, little research has considered how the liberalization of cannabis policies may affect these relationships, which is important given the co-use of these substances. This paper provides evidence that the liberalization of cannabis laws has not adversely affected tobacco control efforts.

Cannabis legalisation: should doctors be concerned?

A referendum on the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill was held in New Zealand. The Bill was meant to oversee government control over the production, supply and use of cannabis and reduce cannabis-related harm. Public health control was proposed over cannabis market by imposing licenses and cultivation, the quality and strength of marketed cannabis, and sale restrictions. Under this Bill, cannabis was only meant to be available to adults aged over 20 years through licenced stores. The potency of cannabis was to be limited. Cannabis use and was going to be permitted in private homes and specifically licensed premises. The Electoral Commission announced on 6 November 2020 that 50.7% of voters opposed the Bill and 48.4% supported it. Despite the outcome of the referendum, legalisation of cannabis may remain a live issue for many people, and doctors need to have an informed view about the impact of legalisation on mental health conditions. Experience from other countries shows that access to and potency of cannabis increased with legalisation. Despite the intent to prevent harm, cannabis legislation has been associated with adverse effects on mental health, emergency hospital presentations and crime. Public health strategies, including educating public about harm associated with cannabis, surveillance of potency and labelling, increasing minimal age for legal recreational cannabis use and bolstering treatment capacity for problematic cannabis use, including those with psychiatric disorders, should be funded by revenue generated from cannabis legislation.

Acute and Severe Acute Pancreatitis and the Effect of Cannabis in States Before and After Legalization Compared With States Without Legalized Cannabis.

OBJECTIVES: Cannabis legalization has increased its use. The incidence of acute pancreatitis (AP) and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) has also increased. In this study, data on pancreatitis were obtained from 2 states before and after cannabis legalization and compared with 2 states without legalized cannabis. METHODS: Data were extracted from State Inpatient Databases from the states of Colorado and Washington before recreational cannabis legalization (2011) and after legalization (2015). Arizona and Florida were used as the nonlegalized cannabis states. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit for AP and SAP to determine a trend difference between legalized and nonlegalized cannabis states. RESULTS: Cannabis use, AP, and SAP increased in all states. The increase in AP and SAP was not significantly different between the states that legalized cannabis use and those that did not. Legalized cannabis states had lower charges for AP and SAP and shorter length of hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: The trend of AP and SAP increased during the study period, but this was not correlated to cannabis use. Cannabis users had lower hospitalization costs and hospital stay. The effects of other confounders such as cannabis dose and delivery methods, alcohol, tobacco, and others need to be studied further as use increases.

Looking back from 2020, how cannabis use and related behaviours changed in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian government legalized non-medical cannabis use by adults in October 2018 to minimize associated harms and redirect profits from criminals. In October 2019, a wider array of products, including edibles, was legalized, with entry into the legal market beginning in December. DATA AND METHODS: Three quarters (the first quarters of 2018 and 2019 and the fourth quarter of 2020) of the National Cannabis Survey were used to examine changes in cannabis use (overall use and daily or almost daily (DAD) use), consumption methods, products and sources. RESULTS: Cannabis use in the past three months was higher in late 2020 (20.0%) than in 2019 (17.5%) and 2018 (14.0%), and this was particularly the case among: females (for whom rates rose to equal male rates for the first time), adults aged 25 and older, and some provinces. Similarly, DAD use, at 7.9% also increased. Higher percentages of Canadians reported getting at least some of their cannabis from legal sources or growing it, and fewer were relying on friends and family or illegal sources in 2020. DISCUSSION: This study spans three years-from before legalization to about two years after. It provides a more complete picture of the law's impact on cannabis use and related behaviours, given the more established legal cannabis industry better equipped to compete with the black market on price, convenience and selection. Findings demonstrate that change is continuing, and, as before, some cautions and assurances remain. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cannabis use continues to be difficult to measure. Monitoring remains important, given the ever-changing provincial retail landscapes; the introduction of new products; and the pressure by the industry to remove or adjust potency limits, and allow widespread delivery, farm-gate sales and cannabis lounges.

Trends over time in adult cannabis use: A review of recent findings.

In the United States, policies regarding the medical and nonmedical use of cannabis are changing rapidly. In 2021, a total of 34 US states have legalized cannabis for adult medical use, and 15 of these states have legalized adult non-medical use. These changing policies have raised questions about increasing prevalences of cannabis use, changing perceptions regarding frequent use, and potentially related outcomes such as comorbid psychiatric illness or driving under the influence of cannabis. Research regarding the correlates of any and frequent cannabis use is also developing quickly. This article reviews recent empirical studies concerning (1) adult trends in cannabis use, (2) state cannabis laws and related outcomes, and (3) emerging evidence regarding how the global coronavirus 19 pandemic may impact cannabis use patterns. We summarize recent findings and conclude with suggestions to address unanticipated effects of rapidly changing cannabis laws and policies.

Canadian Society of Transplantation White Paper: Ethical and Legal Considerations for Alcohol and Cannabis Use in Solid Organ Listing and Allocation.

Alcohol and cannabis use as a contraindication to organ transplantation is a controversial issue. Until recently, patients in Canada with alcohol-associated liver disease were required to demonstrate abstinence for 6 mo to receive a liver transplant. There is no equivalent rule that is applied consistently for cannabis use. There is some evidence that alcohol and cannabis use disorder pretransplant could be associated with worse outcomes posttransplantation. However, early liver transplantation for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease in France and in the United States has led to challenges of the 6-mo abstinence rule in Canada in the media. It has also resulted in several legal challenges arguing that the rule violates human rights laws regarding discrimination in the provision of medical services and that the rule is also unconstitutional (this challenge is still before the court). Recent legalization of cannabis use for adults in Canada has led to questions about the appropriateness of limiting transplant access based on cannabis use. The ethics committee of the Canadian Society of Transplantation was asked to provide an ethical analysis of cannabis and alcohol abstinence policies. Our conclusions were as follows: neither cannabis use nor the 6-mo abstinence rule for alcohol use should be an absolute contraindication to transplantation, and transplant could be offered to selected patients, further research should be conducted to ensure evidence-based policies; and the transplant community has a duty not to perpetuate stigma associated with alcohol and cannabis use disorders.

Assessing New Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill: prospects and challenges.

BACKGROUND: Few countries have developed detailed legislative proposals for legalizing cannabis. New Zealand recently released the Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill (CLCB) that will be the subject of a referendum in September 2020. AIMS: To assess the CLCB, drawing on emerging evidence from cannabis legalization overseas, public health research on alcohol and tobacco and the attempt to establish a regulated market for 'legal highs' in New Zealand. DISCUSSION: The CLCB proposes a strictly regulated commercial cannabis market that resembles the Canadian approach, but notably without on-line sales or regional heterogeneity in retail distribution. The objective of the CLCB of lowering cannabis use over time appears at odds with the largely commercial cannabis sector that will focus on expanding sales. The CLCB includes provision for home cultivation and social benefit operators, but it is not clear what priority these operators will receive. A potency cap of 15% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) for cannabis plants is included, and this is at the high end of black-market cannabis. The proposed progressive product tax based on THC will be challenging to implement. There is no formal minimum price, but rather discretionary powers to raise the excise if the price drops too much. The CLCB includes a comprehensive ban on advertising, but non-conventional on-line promotion will be difficult to suppress. The central government cannabis authority is tasked with developing local retail outlet policies. We caution against the temptation to employ an interim regulatory regime following a positive referendum result, because a partially regulated market will expose users to health risks and undermine public support. CONCLUSIONS: New Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill's objective of reducing cannabis use via a commercial market will be challenging to achieve. The bill could be strengthened with formal minimum pricing, lower potency cap and greater clarity concerning social benefit operators and the role of local government.

The Clinical Conundrum of Cannabis: Current Practices and Recommendations for Transplant Clinicians: An Opinion of the Immunology/Transplantation PRN of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy.

Cannabis, or marijuana, comprises many compounds with varying effects. It has become a treatment option for chronic diseases and debilitating symptoms, and evidence suggests that it has immunomodulatory and antiinflammatory properties. Transplant centers are more frequently facing issues about cannabis, as indications and legalization expand. As of February 2020, 33 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical cannabis, and 14 have legalized recreational cannabis. Moreover, 8 states have passed legislation prohibiting the denial of transplant listing solely based on cannabis use. Studies demonstrate the potential for significant pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between cannabis and immunosuppression. Additionally, safety concerns include increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, tachyarrhythmias, malignancy, neurocognitive deficits, psychosis, other neuropsychiatric disorders, cannabis use disorder, respiratory symptoms, and infection. A recent retrospective database study found a negative association between documented cannabis use disorder and graft survival, but little additional evidence exists evaluating this relationship. In the absence of robust clinical data, transplant centers need a clear, reasoned, and systematic approach to cannabis. The results of our national survey, unfortunately, found little consensus among institutions. As both recreational and medicinal cannabis become more ubiquitous nationwide, transplant centers will need to develop comprehensive policies to address its use.

Patterns and correlates of workplace and non-workplace cannabis use among Canadian workers before the legalization of non-medical cannabis.

BACKGROUND: Little information exists about cannabis use and its correlates among workers, particularly use before or at work, which may impact occupational safety. This study explores overall and workplace cannabis use patterns before legalization among Canadian workers and estimates the associations of personal and work-related characteristics with workplace and non-workplace cannabis use. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected from 1651 Canadian workers in June 2018. The primary outcome was past-year cannabis use pattern: use, including before/at work (past-year workplace use); use, but not before/at work (past-year non-workplace use); no past-year use (non-past-year use). The associations of personal (sociodemographic, health) and work-related factors with workplace and non-workplace cannabis use were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: A quarter of respondents reporting past-year cannabis use used cannabis before and/or at work. Respondents reporting workplace use were more likely to report more frequent cannabis use, use for medical or mixed purposes, and high THC cannabis use than workers reporting non-workplace use. Several personal factors were positively associated with workplace and non-workplace use (e.g., younger age, lower education). A safety-sensitive job, drug testing, supervisor role, less job visibility, lower perceived ability of supervisors to identify use/impairment, and less restrictive workplace smoking policies were positively associated with workplace use only. CONCLUSIONS: A non-trivial proportion of workers reported workplace use, but the nature of this use is complex. Work-related factors addressing the likelihood of detection and being in a safety-sensitive job were associated with workplace use. Worker education on lower risk use appears warranted.

Impact of state-level cannabis legalization on poly use of alcohol and cannabis in the United States, 2004-2017.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis policy has shifted toward legalization in many parts of the United States (US). While attention has been focused on whether legalization will lead to changes in cannabis use, it is conceivable that legalization will also affect use of substances that individuals frequently use with cannabis. This study assessed whether cannabis legalization impacted the prevalence of poly use of cannabis and alcohol from 2004 to 2017 and estimated the prevalence of cannabis and alcohol poly use in 2017. METHODS: Public and restricted-use data from the US 2004-2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health were analyzed. Data on past-month cannabis and alcohol use were assessed each year. Cannabis legalization was determined by the presence or absence of medical marijuana laws (MML) and recreational marijuana laws (RML) in each state. Difference-in-difference approach was used to estimate the association of MML and RML on cannabis and alcohol use overall and by sociodemographic subgroups (e.g., age, income, education). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2017, poly use of cannabis and alcohol increased while alcohol-only use decreased. MML were associated with increases in poly use only among adults over age 50 and among those with higher annual incomes and higher education, while RML were associated with increases in poly use broadly among adults across sociodemographic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Legalization of cannabis was associated with increases in cannabis-alcohol poly use in the US. RML were associated with increases across demographics, while the impact of MML was more limited to certain sociodemographic groups.