Effects of cannabidiol on anandamide levels in individuals with cannabis use disorder: findings from a randomised clinical trial for the treatment of cannabis use disorder.

Cannabidiol (CBD) has shown promise in treating psychiatric disorders, including cannabis use disorder - a major public health burden with no approved pharmacotherapies. However, the mechanisms through which CBD acts are poorly understood. One potential mechanism of CBD is increasing levels of anandamide, which has been implicated in psychiatric disorders including depression and cannabis use disorder. However, there is a lack of placebo-controlled human trials investigating this in psychiatric disorders. We therefore assessed whether CBD affects plasma anandamide levels compared to placebo, within a randomised clinical trial of CBD for the treatment of cannabis use disorder. Individuals meeting criteria for cannabis use disorder and attempting cannabis cessation were randomised to 28-day administration with placebo (n = 23), 400 mg CBD/day (n = 24) or 800 mg CBD/day (n = 23). We estimated the effects of each CBD dose compared to placebo on anandamide levels from baseline to day 28. Analyses were conducted both unadjusted and adjusted for cannabis use during the trial to account for effects of cannabis on the endocannabinoid system. We also investigated whether changes in plasma anandamide levels were associated with clinical outcomes relevant for cannabis use disorder (cannabis use, withdrawal, anxiety, depression). There was an effect of 800 mg CBD compared to placebo on anandamide levels from baseline to day 28 after adjusting for cannabis use. Pairwise comparisons indicated that anandamide levels unexpectedly reduced from baseline to day 28 in the placebo group (-0.048, 95% CI [-0.089, -0.007]), but did not change in the 800 mg CBD group (0.005, 95% CI [-0.036, 0.047]). There was no evidence for an effect of 400 mg CBD compared to placebo. Changes in anandamide levels were not associated with clinical outcomes. In conclusion, this study found preliminary evidence that 28-day treatment with CBD modulates anandamide levels in individuals with cannabis use disorder at doses of 800 mg/day but not 400 mg/day compared to placebo.

Effect of four-week cannabidiol treatment on cognitive function: secondary outcomes from a randomised clinical trial for the treatment of cannabis use disorder.

RATIONALE: Chronic cannabis use is associated with impaired cognitive function. Evidence indicates cannabidiol (CBD) might be beneficial for treating cannabis use disorder. CBD may also have pro-cognitive effects; however, its effect on cognition in people with cannabis use disorder is currently unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess whether a 4-week CBD treatment impacted cognitive function. We hypothesised that CBD treatment would improve cognition from baseline to week 4, compared to placebo. METHODS: Cognition was assessed as a secondary outcome in a phase 2a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group and placebo-controlled clinical trial of 4-week daily 200 mg, 400 mg and 800 mg CBD for the treatment of cannabis use disorder. Participants had moderate or severe DSM-5 cannabis use disorder and intended to quit cannabis use. Our pre-registered primary cognitive outcome was delayed prose recall. Secondary cognitive outcomes were immediate prose recall, stop signal reaction time, trail-making task performance, verbal fluency and digit span. RESULTS: Seventy participants were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 23), 400 mg CBD (n = 24) and 800 mg CBD (n = 23). A 200 mg group was eliminated from the trial because it was an inefficacious dose at interim analysis (n = 12) and was not analysed here. For the primary cognitive outcome, there was no effect of CBD compared to placebo, evidenced by a lack of dose-by-time interaction at 400 mg (0.46, 95%CIs: - 1.41, 2.54) and 800 mg (0.89, 95%CIs: - 0.99, 2.81). There was no effect of CBD compared to placebo on secondary cognitive outcomes, except backwards digit span which increased following 800 mg CBD (0.30, 95%CIs: 0.02, 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical trial for cannabis use disorder, CBD did not influence delayed verbal memory. CBD did not have broad cognitive effects but 800 mg daily treatment may improve working memory manipulation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02044809) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000,361-36).

Stimulating meditation: a pre-registered randomised controlled experiment combining a single dose of the cognitive enhancer, modafinil, with brief mindfulness training.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-meditation has a variety of benefits on well-being. However, individuals with primary attentional impairments (e.g. attention deficit disorder) or attentional symptoms secondary to anxiety, depression or addiction, may be less likely to benefit, and require additional mindfulness-augmenting strategies. AIMS: To determine whether a single dose of the cognitive enhancer, modafinil, acutely increases subjective and behavioural indices of mindfulness, and augments brief mindfulness training. METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2 (drug: placebo, modafinil) × 2 (strategy: mindfulness, relaxation control) experiment was conducted. Seventy-nine meditation-naïve participants were assigned to: placebo-relaxation, placebo-mindfulness, modafinil-relaxation or modafinil-mindfulness. Pre-drug, post-drug and post-strategy state mindfulness, affect and autonomic activity, along with post-strategy sustained attention and mind-wandering were assessed within a single lab session. After the session, participants were instructed to practice their assigned behavioural strategy daily for one week, with no further drug administration, after which, follow-up measures were taken. RESULTS: As predicted, modafinil acutely increased state mindfulness and improved sustained attention. Differential acute strategy effects were found following mindfulness on autonomic activity but not state mindfulness. There were no strategy or drug effects on mind-wandering. However, exploratory analyses indicated that participants receiving modafinil engaged in more strategy practice across strategy conditions during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Modafinil acutely mimicked the effects of brief mindfulness training on state mindfulness but did not enhance the effects of this training. Limitations of the current study, and recommendations for future research examining modafinil as an adjunct to mindfulness- (or relaxation-) based treatments are discussed.

Cannabidiol for the treatment of cannabis use disorder: a phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive Bayesian trial.

Background A substantial and unmet clinical need exists for pharmacological treatment of cannabis use disorders. Cannabidiol could offer a novel treatment, but it is unclear which doses might be efficacious or safe. Therefore, we aimed to identify efficacious doses and eliminate inefficacious doses in a phase 2a trial using an adaptive Bayesian design. METHODS: We did a phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive Bayesian trial at the Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (University College London, London, UK). We used an adaptive Bayesian dose-finding design to identify efficacious or inefficacious doses at a-priori interim and final analysis stages. Participants meeting cannabis use disorder criteria from DSM-5 were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) in the first stage of the trial to 4-week treatment with three different doses of oral cannabidiol (200 mg, 400 mg, or 800 mg) or with matched placebo during a cessation attempt by use of a double-blinded block randomisation sequence. All participants received a brief psychological intervention of motivational interviewing. For the second stage of the trial, new participants were randomly assigned to placebo or doses deemed efficacious in the interim analysis. The primary objective was to identify the most efficacious dose of cannabidiol for reducing cannabis use. The primary endpoints were lower urinary 11-nor-9-carboxy-δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH):creatinine ratio, increased days per week with abstinence from cannabis during treatment, or both, evidenced by posterior probabilities that cannabidiol is better than placebo exceeding 0·9. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02044809) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000361-36). FINDINGS: Between May 28, 2014, and Aug 12, 2015 (first stage), 48 participants were randomly assigned to placebo (n=12) and to cannabidiol 200 mg (n=12), 400 mg (n=12), and 800 mg (n=12). At interim analysis, cannabidiol 200 mg was eliminated from the trial as an inefficacious dose. Between May 24, 2016, and Jan 12, 2017 (second stage), randomisation continued and an additional 34 participants were allocated (1:1:1) to cannabidiol 400 mg (n=12), cannabidiol 800 mg (n=11), and placebo (n=11). At final analysis, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg exceeded primary endpoint criteria (0·9) for both primary outcomes. For urinary THC-COOH:creatinine ratio, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9995 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9965 for cannabidiol 800 mg. For days with abstinence from cannabis, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9966 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9247 for cannabidiol 800 mg. Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 400 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -94·21 ng/mL (95% interval estimate -161·83 to -35·56) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·48 days per week (0·15 to 0·82). Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 800 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -72·02 ng/mL (-135·47 to -19·52) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·27 days per week (-0·09 to 0·64). Cannabidiol was well tolerated, with no severe adverse events recorded, and 77 (94%) of 82 participants completed treatment. INTERPRETATION: In the first randomised clinical trial of cannabidiol for cannabis use disorder, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg were safe and more efficacious than placebo at reducing cannabis use. FUNDING: Medical Research Council.

Treatment Implications Associated with Cannabis and Tobacco Co-Use.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: The goal of this article is to summarize the treatment-focused literature on cannabis and tobacco co-use and the treatment implications of co-use. This review will focus on: 1) the impact of co-use on cessation outcomes, 2) compensatory use/substitution of the non-treated substance among co-users, and 3) treatment interventions to address co-use. This article will highlight the limitations to co-use captured in the literature and offer considerations and directives for co-use research and treatment moving forward. RECENT FINDINGS: The degree to which co-use affects cessation for a single, targeted substance remains in question, as the literature is largely mixed. Cannabis treatment trials are better equipped to answer these questions given that they do not typically exclude tobacco users. While the relationship between tobacco use and poorer cannabis outcomes appears to have some evidence, the reverse relationship (cannabis use affecting tobacco outcomes) is not consistently supported. SUMMARY: The co-use of cannabis and tobacco and its impact on single substance cessation and/or compensatory substance use during cessation is generally overlooked in treatment trials, while interventions to address both substances are rare. Capturing co-use adds burden for researchers, clinicians, and participants, but is warranted given the prevalence of co-use and a rapidly changing cannabis and tobacco regulatory environment, which may further complicate co-occurring substance use. Co-users are a heterogeneous population; trials focused on co-users, in addition to better data capture and consistent terminology, will aid in an understanding of nuanced patterns of co-use critical to inform treatment interventions.

Cannabis Dampens the Effects of Music in Brain Regions Sensitive to Reward and Emotion.

Background: Despite the current shift towards permissive cannabis policies, few studies have investigated the pleasurable effects users seek. Here, we investigate the effects of cannabis on listening to music, a rewarding activity that frequently occurs in the context of recreational cannabis use. We additionally tested how these effects are influenced by cannabidiol, which may offset cannabis-related harms. Methods: Across 3 sessions, 16 cannabis users inhaled cannabis with cannabidiol, cannabis without cannabidiol, and placebo. We compared their response to music relative to control excerpts of scrambled sound during functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging within regions identified in a meta-analysis of music-evoked reward and emotion. All results were False Discovery Rate corrected (P<.05). Results: Compared with placebo, cannabis without cannabidiol dampened response to music in bilateral auditory cortex (right: P=.005, left: P=.008), right hippocampus/parahippocampal gyrus (P=.025), right amygdala (P=.025), and right ventral striatum (P=.033). Across all sessions, the effects of music in this ventral striatal region correlated with pleasure ratings (P=.002) and increased functional connectivity with auditory cortex (right: P< .001, left: P< .001), supporting its involvement in music reward. Functional connectivity between right ventral striatum and auditory cortex was increased by cannabidiol (right: P=.003, left: P=.030), and cannabis with cannabidiol did not differ from placebo on any functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging measures. Both types of cannabis increased ratings of wanting to listen to music (P<.002) and enhanced sound perception (P<.001). Conclusions: Cannabis dampens the effects of music in brain regions sensitive to reward and emotion. These effects were offset by a key cannabis constituent, cannabidol.