Medicinal Cannabis (MedCan 3): a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess THC/CBD (1:20) to relieve symptom burden in patients with cancer-a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Distressing symptoms are common in advanced cancer. Medicinal cannabinoids are commonly prescribed for a variety of symptoms. There is little evidence to support their use for most indications in palliative care. This study aims to assess a 1:20 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol (THC/CBD) cannabinoid preparation in the management of symptom distress in patients with advanced cancer undergoing palliative care. METHODS AND DESIGN: One hundred and fifty participants will be recruited across multiple sites in Queensland, Australia. A teletrial model will facilitate the recruitment of patients outside of major metropolitan areas. The study is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomised, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial of escalating doses of an oral 1:20 THC/CBD medicinal cannabinoid preparation (10 mg THC:200 mg CBD/mL). It will compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of a titrated dose range of 2.5 mg THC/50mgCBD to 30 mg THC/600 mg CBD per day against a placebo. There is a 2-week patient-determined titration phase, to reach a dose that achieves symptom relief or intolerable side effects, with a further 2 weeks of assessment on the final dose. The primary objective is to assess the effect of escalating doses of a 1:20 THC/CBD medicinal cannabinoid preparation against placebo on change in total symptom distress score, with secondary objectives including establishing a patient-determined effective dose, the effect on sleep quality and overall quality of life. Some patients will be enrolled in a sub-study which will more rigorously evaluate the effect on sleep. DISCUSSION: MedCan-3 is a high-quality, adequately powered, placebo-controlled trial which will help demonstrate the utility of a THC:CBD 1:20 oral medicinal cannabis product in reducing total symptom distress in this population. Secondary outcomes may lead to new hypotheses regarding medicinal cannabis' role in particular symptoms or in particular cancers. The sleep sub-study will test the feasibility of using actigraphy and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) in this cohort. This will be the first large-scale palliative care randomised clinical trial to utilise the teletrial model in Australia. If successful, this will have significant implications for trial access for rural and remote patients in Australia and internationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR ACTRN12622000083796 . Protocol number 001/20. Registered on 21 January 2022. Recruitment started on 8 August 2022.

Health Literacy and Demand for Medical Cannabis use among Colorectal Cancer Patients in Northern Thailand: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore health literacy and factors associated with demand for medical cannabis (MC) use among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in Northern Thailand as a target group. METHODS: This cross-sectional analytical study administered multistage random sampling to recruit 439 CRC patients in northern Thailand. Ethical approval and signed written informed consents were obtained from the patients, prior to the study. A standardized, self-administered structured questionnaire was used to obtain the sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, social support, attitudes toward MC, knowledge about MC, health literacy about MC, and questions on demand for MC use. The scores from all questionnaires were converted to percentages before analysis. RESULTS: A total of 146 (33.26%) of patients with CRC reported demand to use MC. The multivariable analysis revealed that factors associated with demand for MC among CRC patients included: had high levels of health literacy about MC (adj.OR = 7.71; 95% CI: 4.28 to 13.87), aged less than 45 years (adj.OR =5.09; 95% CI: 2.78 to 9.34), positive attitudes toward MC use (adj.OR = 4.66; 95% CI: 2.68 to 8.10), and higher levels of social support (adj.OR =4.14; 95% CI: 2.39 to 7.17) when controlling effect of other covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Health literacy is an important factor affecting the demand for MC use of CRC patients. Therefore, improving health literacy, social support, and attitudes about MC especially among younger CRC patients, could help increase demand for MC as a complementary and alternative medicine alongside cancer treatment.

Medical cannabis use in oncology and associated outcomes: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Natural and synthetic cannabinoids are being used worldwide to treat various symptoms in cancer patients. This study aims to map the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects associated with the use of cannabis-based drugs in these outcomes. METHODS: Following Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines a scoping review was conducted. The study protocol was available in the Open Science Framework public repository. An extensive search strategy involving databases like Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, Medline/PubMed, Lilacs, Google Scholar, and Open Gray for gray literature analysis was executed by a skilled librarian. The inclusion criteria were primary studies (observational and randomized) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids in cancer patients. The review encompassed studies of diverse designs, publication years, and types, as long as they addressed cannabinoids' impact in oncology. RESULTS: Twenty-nine (82.86%) out of total of 35 were randomized and 6 (14.14%) were non-randomized. About 57.1% of studies utilized registered products as interventions, with THC being the most natural cannabinoid cited in variable doses and administration routes. Moreover, 62.85% of studies specified the cancer types (breast, lung, sarcomas, hematological and reproductive system), while only one study detailed cancer staging. The evaluated outcomes encompassed nausea and vomiting (77.14%), appetite (11.43%), pain (8.57%), and tumor regression (2.86%) across different proportions of studies. CONCLUSION: Cannabinoids show promise in managing pain, emesis, and anorexia/cachexia linked to cancer progression. New randomized clinical trials with a larger number of participants and observational studies on long-term safety are crucial to affirm their medicinal utility for cancer patients unresponsive to conventional drugs.

Assessment of education in a community hospital on healthcare providers' knowledge of and attitudes toward medical marijuana.

INTRODUCTION: Although medical marijuana usage continues to become more socially acceptable and is increasingly regarded as a legitimate treatment alternative for certain medical conditions such as cancer and epilepsy, stigma remains. METHODS: This study examined whether offering an educational session addressing several key aspects of medical marijuana (e.g., pharmacology, legality) to healthcare providers in a community hospital setting improved knowledge about and/or altered attitudes toward marijuana use. This information was collected through administration of pre- and post-education session surveys. Multiple choice questions were utilized to assess knowledge of marijuana pharmacotherapy, pharmacodynamic interactions, and regulations, whereas descriptive analyses via Likert-scale questions determined attitudes toward medical marijuana. A secondary outcome entailed analysis of drug interactions with marijuana users via retrospective chart review. RESULTS: A total of 43 healthcare providers participated in the study. There were statistically significant increases in healthcare provider knowledge post-education session across multiple occupations (physician, P < .01; nurse, P < .001; pharmacist, P < .01; and nurse technician, P < .05). A total of 72 patients (83%) who self-reported marijuana use for medical or recreational purposes had a potential drug-drug interaction with marijuana. CONCLUSIONS: As both medical and recreational marijuana continue to become legalized across the United States, formal education surrounding marijuana use and laws becomes increasingly important for healthcare providers and can be highly effective in preventing misinformation.

Does medicinal cannabis affect depression, anxiety, and stress in people with cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies.

INTRODUCTION: Medicinal cannabis might have a role in supporting the mental health of people with cancer. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy and safety of medicinal cannabis, compared with any control, as an intervention for depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms in people living with cancer. A secondary aim was to examine the effect of low versus high Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) dose on these outcomes. METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched, and complemented with a snowball search from inception to May 2023, for any type of interventional study that included humans of any age with any cancer type. Primary outcomes were incidence and severity of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms. Secondary outcomes were mood, cognition, quality of life, appetite, nutrition status, gastrointestinal symptoms, and adverse events. Data were pooled using Review Manager. Evidence was appraised using Cochrane risk of bias tools. Confidence in the estimated effect of pooled outcomes was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Fifteen studies (n = 11 randomized trials, n = 4 non-randomized trials) of 18 interventions (N = 1898 total participants; 100 % ≥18 years of age) were included. Ten studies examined THC (70 % synthetic), two synthetic cannabidiol with or without THC, and six whole-plant extracts. No clinically significant effects of medicinal cannabis were found on primary outcomes. The likelihood of anxiety events increased with higher-dose synthetic THC compared with a lower dose (OR: 2.0; 95 % CI: 1.4, 2.9; p < 0.001; Confidence: very low). Medicinal cannabis (THC, cannabidiol, and whole-plant extract) increased the likelihood of improved appetite (OR: 12.3; 95 % CI: 3.5, 45.5; p < 0.001; n = 3 interventions; Confidence: moderate) and reduced severity of appetite loss (SMD: -0.4; 95 % CI: -0.8, -0.1; p = 0.009; Confidence: very low). There was very low confidence that higher doses of synthetic THC increased the likelihood of any adverse event (OR: 0.5; 95 % CI: 0.3, 0.7; p < 0.001). Medicinal cannabis had no effect on emotional functioning, mood changes, confusion, disorientation, quality of life, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Confidence in findings was limited by some studies having high or unclear risk of bias and imprecise pooled estimates. CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy and safety of medicinal cannabis as a therapeutic intervention for depression, anxiety, or stress in people with active cancer. Further research should explore whether medicinal cannabis might improve and maintain appetite and if high-dose synthetic THC might increase the incidence of side-effects, including anxiety. To inform clinical practice, well-powered and rigorously designed trials are warranted that evaluate the effects of medicinal cannabis prescribed to target anxiety, depression, and stress.

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

PURPOSE: People with cancer who use medicinal cannabis do so despite risks associated with limited clinical evidence, legalities, and stigma. This study investigated how Australians with cancer rationalise their medicinal cannabis use despite its risks. METHODS: Ten adults (5 males and 5 females; mean age of 53.3) who used cannabis medicinally for their cancer were interviewed in 2021-2022 about how they used and accessed the substance, attitudes and beliefs underpinning their use, and conversations with others about medicinal cannabis. RESULTS: Participants had cancer of the bowel, skin, oesophagus, stomach, thyroid, breast, and Hodgkin lymphoma for which they were receiving treatment (n = 5) or under surveillance (n = 5), with most (n = 6) encountering metastatic disease. Cannabis was used to treat a variety of cancer-related symptoms such as pain, poor sleep, and low mood. Cannabis was perceived as natural and thus less risky than pharmaceuticals. Participants legitimised their medicinal cannabis use by emphasising its natural qualities and distancing themselves from problematic users or riskier substances. Cost barriers and a lack of healthcare professional communication impeded prescription access. Similarly, participants navigated medicinal cannabis use independently due to a lack of guidance from healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for robust data regarding the harms and efficacy of medicinal cannabis and dissemination of such information among healthcare professionals and to patients who choose to use the substance. Ensuring healthcare professionals are equipped to provide non-judgmental and evidence-based guidance may mitigate potential safety and legal risks.

Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To guide clinicians, adults with cancer, caregivers, researchers, and oncology institutions on the medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids, including synthetic cannabinoids and herbal cannabis derivatives; single, purified cannabinoids; combinations of cannabis ingredients; and full-spectrum cannabis. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cohort studies on the efficacy and safety of cannabis and cannabinoids when used by adults with cancer. Outcomes of interest included antineoplastic effects, cancer treatment toxicity, symptoms, and quality of life. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to January 27, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The evidence base consisted of 13 systematic reviews and five additional primary studies (four RCTs and one cohort study). The certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low. RECOMMENDATIONS: Cannabis and/or cannabinoid access and use by adults with cancer has outpaced the science supporting their clinical use. This guideline provides strategies for open, nonjudgmental communication between clinicians and adults with cancer about the use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids. Clinicians should recommend against using cannabis or cannabinoids as a cancer-directed treatment unless within the context of a clinical trial. Cannabis and/or cannabinoids may improve refractory, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when added to guideline-concordant antiemetic regimens. Whether cannabis and/or cannabinoids can improve other supportive care outcomes remains uncertain. This guideline also highlights the critical need for more cannabis and/or cannabinoid research.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

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.

Palliative Medicine Fellows' Discussions, Perceptions, and Training Regarding Medical Cannabis.

CONTEXT: Medical cannabis is increasingly considered for palliation of pain, nausea/vomiting, anorexia, and other symptoms. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether training in hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) adequately prepares fellows to counsel patients about medical cannabis. METHODS: A previously validated questionnaire was adapted for HPM fellows. Domains included fellows' practices recommending cannabis and their knowledge of its effectiveness and risks compared with standard treatments. U.S. HPM fellowships were sent surveys in 2022 and 2023. RESULTS: Forty six programs participated, 123 fellows responded (response rate of 42%) including 69% female; 55% White, and 28% Asian. Of respondents, 65% reported receiving formal training regarding medical cannabis; 57% reported discussing medical cannabis with over five patients; 23% recommended medical cannabis to more than five patients in the preceding year. Only 19%, however, felt sufficiently informed to issue cannabis-related recommendations. HPM fellows with prior training were not more likely to feel sufficiently informed to discuss cannabis (RR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.82-1.66) or to recommend cannabis to patients (RR: 2.05, 95% CI: 0.89-4.71). Fellows rate cannabis as equally or more effective than conventional treatments for the following symptoms: anorexia/cachexia (63%), nausea/vomiting (43%), pain (25%), and neuropathic pain (21%). CONCLUSION: Most HPM fellows report formal training in the use of medical cannabis. Over half of trainees reported discussing medical cannabis with patients, but few considered themselves sufficiently informed to make cannabis-related clinical recommendations. These results suggest both a need for expanded high-quality evidence for medical cannabis in palliative care and for improved formal education for HPM fellows.

Available but inaccessible: patient experiences during the first 2 years of a primary care-based medical cannabis program at an academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Medical cannabis use and public acceptance in the United States have increased over the past 25 years. However, access to medical cannabis remains limited, particularly for underserved populations. To understand how patients experience medical cannabis accessibility, we measured medical cannabis use and barriers to use after medical cannabis certification in an urban safety-net academic medical center. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among patients seen in Montefiore's Medical Cannabis Program (MMCP) from 2017 to 2019. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics, as well purchase history of medical cannabis, were extracted from electronic medical records. We also administered a phone questionnaire to a subset of patients to assess usage patterns, effectiveness, and barriers to medical cannabis use. RESULTS: Among 562 patients who were newly certified for medical cannabis between 2017 and 2019, 45% purchased medical cannabis, while 55% did not. Patients who purchased medical cannabis were more likely to be white and have private insurance or Medicare. Unregulated cannabis use and current tobacco use were less common among those who purchased medical cannabis. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, unregulated cannabis use remained negatively associated with purchasing medical cannabis. Patients reported that affordability and dispensary accessibility were their main barriers to purchasing medical cannabis. CONCLUSION: Among patients certified for medical cannabis use, fewer than half purchased medical cannabis after certification. Improving access to medical cannabis is crucial for ensuring equitable access to regulated cannabis, and to reducing unregulated cannabis use.

Experience With Medical Marijuana in a Pediatric Palliative Care Clinic: Case Report.

Children receiving palliative care have life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, which include symptoms ranging from unpleasant to intolerable suffering. We describe three diverse cases of medical marijuana within ambulatory pediatric palliative care, highlighting use for spasticity, refractory seizures, and cancer-related symptoms. Included are caregiver perspectives of their child's experience with medical marijuana. This population has high potential for positive effects from medical marijuana therapy, particularly for maximizing quality of life.

Perceptions in orthopedic surgery on the use of cannabis in treating pain: a survey of patients with spine pain (POSIT Spine).

BACKGROUND: Back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Despite guidelines discouraging opioids as first-line treatment, opioids remain the most prescribed drugs for back pain. There is renewed interest in exploring the potential medical applications of cannabis, and with the recent changes in national legislation there is a unique opportunity to investigate the analgesic properties of cannabis. METHODS: This was a multi-center survey-based study examining patient perceptions regarding cannabis for spine pain. We included patients presenting with back or neck pain to one of three Orthopedic clinics in Ontario. Our primary outcome was perceived effect of cannabis on back pain, while secondary outcomes were perceptions regarding potential applications and barriers to cannabis use. RESULTS: 259 patients participated in this study, 35.3% (90/255) stating they used cannabis medically. Average pain severity was 6.5/10 ± 0.3 (95% CI 6.2-6.8). Nearly three-quarters were prescribed opioids (73.6%, 148/201), with oxycodone/oxycontin (45.9% 68/148) being the most common, and almost half of (49.3%, 73/148) had used an opioid in the last week. Patients estimated cannabis could treat 54.3% ± 4.0 (95% CI 50.3-58.3%) of their spine pain and replace 46.2% ± 6. 6 (95% CI 39.6-52.8%) of their current analgesics. Age (ß = - 0.3, CI - 0.6-0.0), higher pain severity (ß = 0.4, CI 0.1-0.6) and previous cannabis use (ß = 14.7, CI 5.1-24.4) were associated with a higher perceived effect of cannabis. Patients thought cannabis would be beneficial to treat pain (129/146, 88.4%), and reduce (116/146, 79.5%) or eliminate opioids (102/146, 69.9%). Not considering using cannabis for medical purposes (65/150, 43.3%) was the number one reported barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Patients estimated medical cannabis could treat more than half of their spine pain, with one in three patients already using medical cannabis. 79% of patients also believe cannabis could reduce opioid usage. This data will help support more research into cannabis for musculoskeletal pain.

Medical cannabis and its effect on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer treated with PARP inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) play a pivotal role in ovarian cancer management. With medical cannabis emerging as a novel component of supportive care, this study investigated the impact of medical cannabis use on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing PARPi therapy. METHODS: The study included patients from a single institution database treated for ovarian cancer between January 2014 and January 2020 who received PARPi maintenance therapy in a first-line or recurrent disease setting after a confirmed response to platinum-based treatment. The study categorized patients as cannabis users and cannabis-naïve. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess the effects of medical cannabis use on the duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Among the eligible patients (n=93), most were cannabis-naïve (69%, n=64) while the rest used medical cannabis (31%, n=29). Medical cannabis use rates were comparable for patients receiving PARPi therapy post-primary treatment or for recurrence (42%, n=9, vs 27%, n=20; p=0.1). Both groups exhibited similar median duration for PARPi therapy (12.1 vs 9.5 months; p=0.89) and progression-free survival (20 vs 21 months; p=0.83). Kaplan-Meier analysis detected no differences in progression-free survival associated with cannabis use. Although cannabis users had an extended overall survival compared with the cannabis-naïve group (129.3 vs 99 months; p=0.03), cannabis use was insignificant for overall survival on multivariate analysis (p=0.10). Multivariate analysis showed stage IV at diagnosis (p=0.02) to be the sole factor associated with progression-free survival (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Medical cannabis usage in patients receiving PARPi treatment showed no association with duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, or overall survival.

Toward reducing racialized pain care disparities: Approaching cannabis research and access through the lens of equity and inclusion.

There is growing interest in cannabis use for cancer pain. This commentary aims to discuss the evidence surrounding cannabis use for cancer pain in the context of the long-racialized landscape of cannabis policies and the disparity in pain control among cancer patients holding minoritized racial identities. Much evidence surrounding both the benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer patients, and all patients in general, is lacking. Although drawing on the research in cancer that is available, it is also important to illustrate the broader context about how cannabis' deep roots in medical, political, and social history impact patient use and health care policies. There are lessons we can learn from the racialized disparities in opioid risk mitigation strategies, so they are not replicated in the settings of cannabis for cancer symptom management. Additionally, the authors intentionally use the term "cannabis" here rather than "marijuana.: In the early 1900s, the lay press and government popularized the use of the word "marijuana" instead of the more common "cannabis" to tie the drug to anti-Mexican prejudice.

Medical cannabis is effective for cancer-related pain: Quebec Cannabis Registry results.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of medical cannabis (MC) in reducing pain and concurrent medications in patients with cancer. METHODS: This study analysed data collected from patients with cancer who were part of the Quebec Cannabis Registry. Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) questionnaires, total medication burden (TMB) and morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) recorded at 3-month, 6-month, 9-month and 12-month follow-ups were compared with baseline values. Adverse events were also documented at each follow-up visit. RESULTS: This study included 358 patients with cancer. Thirteen out of 15 adverse events reported in 11 patients were not serious; 2 serious events (pneumonia and cardiovascular event) were considered unlikely related to MC. Statistically significant decreases were observed at 3-month, 6-month and 9-month follow-up for BPI worst pain (5.5±0.7 baseline, 3.6±0.7, 3.6±0.7, 3.6±0.8; p<0.01), average pain (4.1±0.6 baseline, 2.4±0.6, 2.3±0.6, 2.7±0.7; p<0.01), overall pain severity (3.7±0.5 baseline, 2.3±0.6, 2.3±0.6, 2.4±0.6; p<0.01) and pain interference (4.3±0.6 baseline, 2.4±0.6, 2.2±0.6, 2.4±0.7, p<0.01). ESAS-r pain scores decreased significantly at 3-month, 6-month and 9-month follow-up (3.7±0.6 baseline, 2.5±0.6, 2.2±0.6, 2.0±0.7, p<0.01). THC:CBD balanced strains were associated with better pain relief as compared with THC-dominant and CBD-dominant strains. Decreases in TMB were observed at all follow-ups. Decreases in MEDD were observed at the first three follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world data from this large, prospective, multicentre registry indicate that MC is a safe and effective complementary treatment for pain relief in patients with cancer. Our findings should be confirmed through randomised placebo-controlled trials.

The potential for medicinal cannabis to help manage challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disability: A perspective review.

BACKGROUND: Around 2% of the population have intellectual disabilities. Over one-third people with intellectual disabilities (PwID) present with 'challenging behaviour', which nosologically and diagnostically is an abstract concept. Challenging behaviour is influenced by a range of bio-psycho-social factors in a population, which is unable to suitably comprehend and/or communicate concerns. This predisposes to poor health and social outcomes. There is no evidence-based treatments for managing challenging behaviour. Cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are being trialled for a range of disorders, which are over-represented in PwID and provoke challenging behaviours, such as severe epilepsy, spasticity, post-traumatic stress disorder, social phobia, pain, etc. METHODS: This perspective review explores the different conditions, which benefit from medicinal CBD/THC preparations, by analysing recent literature from neurobiological, pre-clinical and clinical studies related to the topic. The evidence is synthesised to build an argument of the therapeutic benefits and challenges of medicinal cannabis to manage severe challenging behaviour in PwID. RESULTS: There is developing evidence of medicinal CBD/THC improving psychiatric and behavioural presentations in general. In particular, there is emergent proof in certain key areas of influence of medicinal CBD/THC positively supporting challenging behaviour, for example in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. However, there are significant challenges in employing such treatments in vulnerable populations such as PwID. CONCLUSION: Further clinical research for the considered use of medicinal CBD/THC for challenging behaviour management in PwID is needed. Strong co-production with experts with lived experience is needed for further testing to be done in this exciting new area.

Knowledge and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis and complementary and integrative medicine (CIM): a survey of healthcare professionals working in a cancer hospital in Australia.

PURPOSE: We investigated attitudes and practices of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to medicinal cannabis (MC) and complementary and integrative medicine (CIM), including individual therapies, such as acupuncture, massage, herbs, dietary supplements, nutrition and exercise. We explored whether healthcare occupation influenced attitudes to CIM and MC; referral pathways for advice on CIM; and interest in a pharmacy service to evaluate herbs and supplements. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey. All clinical staff at a comprehensive cancer hospital were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire about CIM and MC. We used descriptive analysis to describe the respondent's knowledge and attitudes, and Fisher's exact test to test for differences by occupation, length of time at the hospital and age. RESULTS: Most of the 116 HCPs respondents supported integrating CIM into cancer care (94.8%) and wanted to learn more (90%) and to understand benefits and contraindications. Most respondents believed that CIM (87.9%) could benefit patients with cancer, and MC could benefit those with advanced cancer (49-51%). Whilst just over half (52.6%) felt confident discussing CIM with patients, only 10% felt they had sufficient knowledge to discuss MC. Most felt they did not have sufficient knowledge to specifically discuss mind and body practices (63.8%) or herbs and supplements (79%). HCPs (63%) would be more inclined to allow use of herbs and supplements with cancer treatment if a pharmacy service was available to evaluate interactions. Occupation, length of time at hospital and age influenced confidence and knowledge about CIM. CONCLUSIONS: The integration of evidence-based CIM and MC into cancer care is hampered by a lack of knowledge of benefits and contraindications, and gaps in education. Effective and safe integration may require targeted development of services such as pharmacy to evaluate the safety of herbs and supplements, and inclusion of cancer specialists who have received training in individual CIM therapies and MC.