Cannabis smoking, tobacco cigarette smoking, and adenomyosis risk.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate cannabis smoking and tobacco cigarette smoking in relation to adenomyosis risk. DESIGN: We used data from a case-control study of adenomyosis conducted among enrollees ages 18-59 years of an integrated health care system in Washington State. The case-control study used 2 control groups given the challenge of selecting noncases when cases are diagnosed by hysterectomy. SUBJECTS: Cases (n = 386) were enrollees with incident, pathology-confirmed adenomyosis diagnosed between April 1, 2001, and March 31, 2006. The 2 control groups comprised hysterectomy controls (n = 233) with pathology-confirmed absence of adenomyosis and population controls (n = 323) with an intact uterus selected randomly from the health care system population and frequency matched to cases on age. EXPOSURE: Detailed data on cannabis and tobacco cigarette smoking history were ascertained through in-person structured interviews, allowing estimation of joint-years of cannabis smoking and pack-years of tobacco cigarette smoking. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between cannabis smoking, tobacco cigarette smoking, and adenomyosis were estimated using multivariable unconditional logistic regression. Analyses were adjusted for age, reference year, menarche age, education, and pack-years of cigarette smoking (or joint-years of cannabis smoking). RESULTS: No association was observed between cannabis smoking history and adenomyosis risk. However, we did observe the suggestion of an association between ever tobacco cigarette smoking and adenomyosis risk, comparing cases to hysterectomy controls (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9-1.9) and population controls (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.8-1.8). Our data suggested a 50% increased odds of adenomyosis with >15 pack-years of smoking (vs. never smoking), comparing cases to hysterectomy controls (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.9-2.6; Ptrend=.135). The suggestion of a 40% increased adenomyosis odds was observed with smoking >5-15 pack-years (vs. never smoking), comparing cases to population controls (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.4; Ptrend=0.136). CONCLUSION: In the first study of cannabis smoking and adenomyosis risk, no association was observed. However, our data suggested an increased odds of adenomyosis with history of tobacco cigarette smoking. Further research is warranted to replicate our results given the substantial morbidity with adenomyosis and frequency of cigarette smoking and recreational and medical cannabis use.

Prevalence of Cannabis Use and Cannabis Route of Administration among Massachusetts Adults in Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Recent prevalence estimates of cannabis use among individuals receiving medication treatment for OUD (MOUD) are lacking, and no study has characterized cannabis route of administration (cROA) in this population. These knowledge gaps are relevant because cannabis' effects and health outcomes vary by cROA and the availability and perceptions of cROA (e.g., vaping devices) are changing. METHODS: The Vaping In Buprenorphine-treated patients Evaluation (VIBE) cross-sectional survey assessed the prevalence and correlates of cannabis use and cROA among adults receiving buprenorphine MOUD from 02/20 to 07/20 at five community health centers in Massachusetts, a state with legal recreational and medical cannabis use. RESULTS: Among the 92/222 (41%) respondents reporting past 30-day cannabis use, smoking was the most common cROA (75%), followed by vaping (38%), and eating (26%). Smoking was more often used as a single cROA vs. in combination others (p = 0.01), whereas vaping, eating, and dabbing were more often used in combination with another cROA (all p < 0.05). Of the 39% of participants reporting multiple cROA, smoking and vaping (61%), and smoking and eating (50%), were the most prevalent combinations. Nonwhite race (vs. white) and current cigarette smoking (vs. no nicotine use) were associated with past 30-day cannabis use in multiple logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use among individuals receiving buprenorphine MOUD in Massachusetts in 2020 was nearly double the prevalence of cannabis use in Massachusetts' adult general population in 2019 (21%). Our data are consistent with state and national data showing smoking as the most common cROA.

The impact of state legalization on rates of marijuana use in pregnancy in a universal drug screening population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of state legalization of rate on marijuana use in pregnancy in a population with universal drug screening. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study from July 2016 to December 2018 of pregnant women who had universal drug screening of marijuana use before and after legalization of recreational marijuana in California on 1 January 2018. Maternal medical conditions and neonatal outcomes associated with usage were also evaluated. Student's t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and multiple linear regression were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Of 466 women, initial marijuana usage in pregnancy confirmed by urine drug test increased after legalization from 6 to 11% (p = .05). Factors associated with marijuana usage included younger age, white or black race, single marital status, psychiatric disorders, intimate partner violence and concomitant tobacco and alcohol use. 73% of users in this study had cessation of marijuana use with subsequent negative UDT. There was no statistical difference in rates of preterm birth, small for gestational age, NICU admission, or Apgar scores, when adjusted for other risk factors. CONCLUSION: Rates of marijuana usage in pregnant women who underwent universal drug screening increased after legalization. There were no differences in neonatal outcomes between users and non-users.

Haloperidol Use in the Emergency Department for Gastrointestinal Symptoms: Nausea, Vomiting, and Abdominal Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Haloperidol (HL) has successfully been used for nausea and abdominal pain in emergency departments (EDs). This study examines outcomes and predictive factors for clinical improvement of patients presenting to an ED with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain) who received HL. METHODS: Review of patients' records who presented to our ED between August 2016 and March 2019 with GI symptoms and received HL. International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes were used to identify patients. RESULTS: In all, 281 patients (410 encounters) presented to the ED with GI symptoms and received HL for their symptoms: 66% were women, 32% had diabetes, 68% used marijuana, and 27% used chronic opioids. Patients received HL 1.1 ± 0.3 times with dose 2.5 ± 3.0 mg, mostly intravenously (84.6%). Total ED length of stay was 7.5 ± 3.9 hours (3.2 ± 2.1 hours before HL and 4.4 ± 3.4 hours after). Approximately 4.4% of patients developed side effects to HL, including 2 patients with dystonia which improved with medication before discharge. Most patients (56.6%) were discharged home while 43.2% were admitted to hospital mostly because of refractory nausea or vomiting (70.1%). Receiving HL as the only medication in the ED led to lower hospital admission (odds ratio = 0.25, P < 0.05). Diabetes, cannabinoid use, anxiety, male sex, and longer ED stay were associated with increased hospital admissions. DISCUSSION: Most patients treated in our ED with HL for GI symptoms, particularly nausea, vomiting, and/or abdominal pain, were successfully treated and discharged home. HL use seemed relatively safe and, when used as the only medication, led to less frequent hospital admissions.

Differences between cancer patients and others who use medicinal Cannabis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients have been at the forefront of policy discussions leading to legalization of medical Cannabis (marijuana). Unfortunately, Cannabis use among those with cancer is poorly understood. METHODS: A diverse group of patients seeking certification for medical Cannabis in the state of Michigan were surveyed at the time of their presentation to medical dispensaries. The survey assessed demographics, employment/disability, pain, physical functioning, mental health, mode of Cannabis use, and frequency/amount of Cannabis use. Chi-square and t-tests were performed to compare those who did and did not endorse cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Analysis of data from 1485 adults pursuing medical Cannabis certification, including 72 (4.8%) reporting a cancer diagnosis, indicated that those with cancer were older [mean age 53.4 years (SD = 10.5) vs. 44.7 years (SD = 13.0); p<0.001] than those without cancer. They also differed regarding employment status (p<0.001; working: 20.8% vs. 46.2%; disabled: 44.4% vs. 26.5% for those with vs. those without cancer, respectively). Those with cancer used less Cannabis (p = 0.033 for quantity used) and used Cannabis less often (p = 0.032 for frequency of use); they less frequently endorsed smoking Cannabis (80% vs 91%; p = 0.015). There was a non-significant trend to increased edible use in those with cancer (57% vs. 44%; p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer who are seeking medical Cannabis are different from those seeking medical Cannabis without cancer, and they report using Cannabis differently. Further research to characterize the patterns and consequences of Cannabis use in cancer patients is needed.

High quantities: Evaluating the association between cannabis use and propofol anesthesia during endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy under propofol sedation has become a routine procedure. Given the number of Canadians undergoing an endoscopy annually, as well as the pervasive use of cannabis by many patients, understanding the effect of cannabis use on the propofol dose at endoscopy is highly relevant. We aimed to evaluate the association between cannabis exposure and the propofol dose needed to achieve adequate sedation at endoscopy. METHODS: A case-control study of individuals undergoing endoscopy was conducted at a single outpatient endoscopy clinic in London, Ontario between 2014 and 2017. Cases included all individuals with any self-reported cannabis exposure, while controls included all individuals without any self-reported history of cannabis use. Dose of propofol administered by a single anesthetist was collected on each subject as well as additional demographic and procedure-related covariates. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighteen participants were included (cases, n = 151; controls, n = 167). Cannabis exposure was associated with an increase in propofol dose (cases 0.33 mg/kg/minute ±0.24; controls, 0.18 mg/kg/minute ±0.11; p<0.0001). Cannabis exposure remained an independent predictor of propofol dose on multivariate linear regression accounting for other important covariates (p<0.0001). Daily cannabis users required a higher propofol dose than weekly or monthly users. Three procedural sedation-related complications occurred in the cannabis-exposed group, while none occurred in the unexposed group. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that cannabis use is significantly associated with the quantity of propofol needed for sedation at endoscopy. Further study is needed to better understand the molecular basis for this possible drug-drug interaction.

The positive and negative cardiovascular effects of cannabis.

INTRODUCTION: The use of cannabis and its derivatives have increased steadily over the past few decades, prompting patients and clinicians to increasingly inquire about its health effects and safety profile. However, despite promising evidence suggesting therapeutic utilization, cannabis remains a controlled substance in most countries and is largely considered to have no medical or recreational benefit; thus, a lack of observational studies and randomized control trials exist to outline positive and negative health implications. Ultimately, this leaves patients, health-care professionals, and policymakers without necessary evidence required to make informed decisions on cannabis use. AREAS COVERED: This review outlines cannabis in a clinical setting and delves into specific effects of cannabinoids on cardiovascular health and disease. It discusses positive and negative health implications associated with cannabis, mechanisms in cardiovascular disease, and reveals methods guiding cannabis use in the clinical setting. EXPERT OPINION: Advances in research are necessary to guide decisions regarding cannabinoid use. Countries that have federally legalized cannabis have a unique opportunity to study cardiovascular implications in an unbiased and comprehensive manner. Ultimately, as cannabis use will inevitably increase, researchers, clinicians, and policymakers must work together to ensure cannabis is utilized in a way that is therapeutically beneficial.

Use of cannabis and its products among patients in a tertiary epilepsy center: A cross-sectional survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the topic of using cannabis as a treatment option for epilepsy is relevant among adult patients with the disorder and assess the possible determinant attitudes for having a history of cannabis consumption or being inclined to try it for medical purposes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Willing adult (≥18 years) patients with diagnosed epilepsy participated in a cross-sectional survey study at a tertiary epilepsy center. The questions were related to cannabis use and opinions towards the safety and efficacy profile of cannabis for treating epilepsy. RESULTS: From 250 respondents, 41 (16.4%) reported prior use of cannabis or its preparations (15 [36.6%] for self-treatment). There were 81 (32.4%) participants further interested in cannabis use for treating epilepsy. In a binary regression model (Nagelkerke R2¯â€¯= 0.331), the opinion that cannabis is safer because of its natural origin (ß = 0.749, p = 0.027) and the premise of understanding its legal status (ß = 0.418, p = 0.024) positively predicted which participants have reported cannabis use. These patients were also more likely to consult internet sources (p = 0.004) and agree that cannabis as an epilepsy treatment option is effective (U = 2231.5, p < 0.001), safe (U = 1822.0, p < 0.001) and has no side effects (U = 2470.5, p = 0.004). Patients who had not tried cannabis were more likely to envision the products as potentially addictive (p = 0.012) and presumably be deterred from using them due to beliefs in harmful effects (ß = -0.632, p = 0.025). In general, nonusers were not inclined to try cannabis for treating epilepsy (Md = 2, range 1 to 7). However, those interested in the possibility of using cannabis to treat epilepsy would be more willing to try the respective preparations (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among adult patients with epilepsy, we report no particularly high rate of cannabis use or interest in applying cannabis for medical purposes. In order to clarify the scientific and legal status of the preparations, treating neurologists should consult prior users and patients interested in the possibility of trying cannabis as an epilepsy remedy.

A systematic review of technology-based psychotherapeutic interventions for decreasing cannabis use in patients with psychosis.

Persistent use of cannabis in persons with psychosis is associated with poor symptomatic and functional outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Face-to-face psychological interventions (e.g., Cognitive Behavioral Therapy- [CBT], Motivation Enhancement Therapy- [MET]) are widely used in treating problematic cannabis use. We aimed to comprehensively review the efficacy of technology-based psychological interventions (TBPIs) in decreasing cannabis use, the design of TBPIs, and TBPI-related preferences in individuals with psychosis. For the systematic review, we searched six major databases from their inception to November 27, 2019. We included empirical articles of quantitative and qualitative methodologies related to TBPIs in individuals with psychosis and cannabis misuse and used narrative synthesis to report results. Only eight articles were found showing that technology-based motivational and psycho-education interventions and cognitive enhancement therapy were minimally efficient in achieving cannabis abstinence or decreasing frequency of use. Qualitative exploratory methods and participatory action research were used to elicit patient and clinician preferences and TBPIs were tailored accordingly to improve cannabis use related outcomes. Research on TBPIs in individuals with psychosis and cannabis misuse is in its early phases. A significant research effort is needed for the development of adapted interventions for CUD to capitalize on the potential of web-based applications.

Current cannabis use and smoking cessation among treatment seeking combustible smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Combustible tobacco smoking and cannabis use frequently occur together, and the use of both substances is associated with overall greater severity of tobacco and cannabis related problems. Observational work has found that cannabis use is associated with tobacco cessation failure, but research directly testing the longitudinal associations of cannabis use on tobacco cessation during smoking cessation treatment is lacking. The current study examined the impact of current cannabis use on combustible tobacco cessation outcomes. METHODS: 207 daily combustible tobacco smokers (Mage = 38.24 years, SD = 14.84, 48.1 % male) were enrolled in a randomized controlled smoking cessation trial. Survival analyses and multi-level modeling were used to assess lapse and relapse behavior through 12-week follow up. The current study is a secondary data analysis. RESULTS: Results of the current study suggest that cannabis use is associated with faster time to lapse (OR = 0.644, se = .188, p = .019), but not relapse (OR = -0.218, se = .403, p = .525), compared to combustible tobacco-only smokers. Additionally, cannabis use was associated with lower likelihood of achieving any 7-day point prevalence abstinence during the 12 week follow up (b = 0.93, se = 0 0.24, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides novel evidence that cannabis use may be related to combustible tobacco use in terms of faster time to lapse and lower likelihood of any 7-day point prevalence abstinence following smoking cessation treatment. Developing integrated cannabis-tobacco cessation treatments is an important next step in research focused on tobacco-cannabis use.

Cannabis and Alcohol Co-Use in a Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapy Trial for Adolescents and Emerging Adults.

INTRODUCTION: The co-use of cannabis and alcohol among tobacco-using youth is common. Alcohol co-use is associated with worse tobacco cessation outcomes, but results are mixed regarding the impact of cannabis on tobacco outcomes and if co-use leads to increased use of non-treated substances. This secondary analysis from a youth smoking cessation trial aimed to (1) evaluate the impact of cannabis or alcohol co-use on smoking cessation, (2) examine changes in co-use during the trial, and (3) explore secondary effects of varenicline on co-use. METHODS: The parent study was a 12-week, randomized clinical trial of varenicline for smoking cessation among youth (ages 14-21, N = 157; Mage = 19, 40% female; 76% White). Daily cigarette, cannabis, and alcohol use data were collected via daily diaries during treatment and Timeline Follow-back for 14 weeks post-treatment. RESULTS: Baseline cannabis co-users (68%) had double the odds of continued cigarette smoking throughout the trial compared with noncannabis users, which was pronounced in males and frequent cannabis users. Continued smoking during treatment was associated with higher probability of concurrent cannabis use. Baseline alcohol co-users (80%) did not have worse smoking outcomes compared with nonalcohol users, but continued smoking was associated with higher probability of concurrent drinking. Varenicline did not affect co-use. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent with prior literature, results showed that alcohol co-users did not differ in smoking cessation, whereas cannabis co-users had poorer cessation outcomes. Youth tobacco treatment would benefit from added focus on substance co-use, particularly cannabis, but may need to be tailored appropriately to promote cessation. IMPLICATIONS: Among youth cigarette smokers enrolled in a pharmacotherapy evaluation clinical trial, alcohol and/or cannabis co-use was prevalent. The co-use of cannabis affected smoking cessation outcomes, but more so for males and frequent cannabis users, whereas alcohol co-use did not affect smoking cessation. Reductions in smoking were accompanied by concurrent reductions in alcohol or cannabis use. Substance co-use does not appear to affect all youth smokers in the same manner and treatment strategies may need to be tailored appropriately for those with lower odds of smoking cessation.

Assessing the impacts of daily Cannabis versus alcohol and methamphetamines on young Australians in youth AOD treatment.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance by Australian young people, including those engaged with youth alcohol and other drug (AOD) systems. While recreational cannabis use in young people may be a developmental activity for some, for others, this usage becomes regular and be associated with poorer long term outcomes. This study reports on the rates of cannabis use and co-existing psychosocial complexity factors in the Youth Needs Census (2013 and 2016) where workers report on all clients in the youth AOD system, a cohort considered highly vulnerable. METHODS: Data was examined for two rounds of data collection for the Youth Needs Census, including 823 youth AOD service engaged young people in 2016 and 1000 AOD service engaged young people in 2013, to identify usage rates, psychosocial outcomes, and changes over time. RESULTS: Daily use of cannabis alone significantly exceeded daily usage rates for methamphetamines, alcohol, and cannabis used alongside other substances. Daily cannabis use was significantly associated with mental health problems, employment problems, education problems, family problems, and housing problems. Daily cannabis use was associated with most psychosocial complexity factors to the same extent as daily methamphetamine use and daily alcohol use, with daily cannabis users only showing lower incidence of the drug-related harm measure. Notably, daily cannabis use also increased from 2013 (47.5%) to 2016 (54.2%). CONCLUSIONS: It is imperative that the number of individuals using cannabis is considered alongside the severity of harm when assessing the social impact of this substance. Within cannabis users engaged with the youth AOD system, who often have high levels of psychosocial complexity, cannabis is used daily by a large proportion of these youths and may play a role in negatively impacting their lives.

Frequency of cannabis and illicit opioid use among people who use drugs and report chronic pain: A longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ecological research suggests that increased access to cannabis may facilitate reductions in opioid use and harms, and medical cannabis patients describe the substitution of opioids with cannabis for pain management. However, there is a lack of research using individual-level data to explore this question. We aimed to investigate the longitudinal association between frequency of cannabis use and illicit opioid use among people who use drugs (PWUD) experiencing chronic pain. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study included data from people in 2 prospective cohorts of PWUD in Vancouver, Canada, who reported major or persistent pain from June 1, 2014, to December 1, 2017 (n = 1,152). We used descriptive statistics to examine reasons for cannabis use and a multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects model to estimate the relationship between daily (once or more per day) cannabis use and daily illicit opioid use. There were 424 (36.8%) women in the study, and the median age at baseline was 49.3 years (IQR 42.3-54.9). In total, 455 (40%) reported daily illicit opioid use, and 410 (36%) reported daily cannabis use during at least one 6-month follow-up period. The most commonly reported therapeutic reasons for cannabis use were pain (36%), sleep (35%), stress (31%), and nausea (30%). After adjusting for demographic characteristics, substance use, and health-related factors, daily cannabis use was associated with significantly lower odds of daily illicit opioid use (adjusted odds ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.74, p < 0.001). Limitations of the study included self-reported measures of substance use and chronic pain, and a lack of data for cannabis preparations, dosages, and modes of administration. CONCLUSIONS: We observed an independent negative association between frequent cannabis use and frequent illicit opioid use among PWUD with chronic pain. These findings provide longitudinal observational evidence that cannabis may serve as an adjunct to or substitute for illicit opioid use among PWUD with chronic pain.

Cannabis Concentrate Use in Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis concentrates, which are cannabis plant extracts that contain high concentrations of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannbinol (THC), have become increasingly popular among adults in the United States. However, no studies have reported on the prevalence or correlates of cannabis concentrate use in adolescents, who, as a group, are thought to be particularly vulnerable to the harms of THC. METHODS: Participants are a racially and ethnically diverse group of 47 142 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-grade students recruited from 245 schools across Arizona in 2018. Participants reported on their lifetime and past-month marijuana and cannabis concentrate use, other substance use, and risk and protective factors for substance use problems spanning multiple life domains (ie, individual, peer, family, school, and community). RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of all 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-graders reported lifetime cannabis use, and 24% reported lifetime concentrate use. Seventy-two percent of all lifetime cannabis users had used concentrates. Relative to adolescent cannabis users who had not used concentrates, adolescent concentrate users were more likely to use other substances and to experience more risk factors, and fewer protective factors, for substance use problems across numerous life domains. CONCLUSIONS: Most adolescent cannabis users have used concentrates. Based on their risk and protective factor profile, adolescent concentrate users are at higher risk for substance use problems than adolescent cannabis users who do not use concentrates. Findings raise concerns about high-risk adolescents' exposure to high-THC cannabis.

Antipsychotic treatment failure in patients with psychosis and co-morbid cannabis use: A systematic review.

Whilst the effects of cannabis preceding psychosis onset are well established, an effect post-onset is less clear. Emerging evidence suggests that cannabis use is associated with increased relapse outcomes possibly because of determinants, antipsychotic treatment failure and medication adherence, that are not mutually exclusive. Due to the paucity of literature on antipsychotic treatment failure an association with cannabis remains conjectural. This review sought to summarise current evidence regarding the effect of cannabis use on antipsychotic treatment failure among users and non-users with psychosis. Ovid databases (Embase, Journals@Ovid Full Text, OvidMEDLINE® In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations and PsycINFO) were searched to identify relevant articles. Seven articles met eligibility criteria. Cannabis use was associated with the following deleterious outcomes increased: odds of non-remission, prescription of unique antipsychotic medications, cumulative prescription of Clozapine and poor treatment trajectories. One study reported similar life-time, but lower past-year, rates of cannabis use in those prescribed Clozapine. Another study reported differences between groups for chlorpromazine equivalent doses for long-term Olanzapine prescription. Improved methodologies are warranted due to a lack of well-designed prospective studies and heterogeneity of key variables. There remains, despite research paucity, the need to encourage early cannabis cessation and higher-quality research to inform clinical practice.

Examination of Recreational and Spiritual Peyote Use Among American Indian Youth.

OBJECTIVE: Some American Indians legally use hallucinogenic substances as part of religious and spiritual ceremonies. Research to date has either failed to differentiate spiritual versus recreational use or has categorized hallucinogen use in an "other drug" or "illegal drug" category. This approach could contribute to ineffectual models of prevention and treatment intervention and limit understanding of hallucinogen use in American Indian cultures. METHOD: This study is a secondary data analysis of an ongoing epidemiologic and etiologic investigation of substance use among American Indian youth (N = 3,861). Two Firth logistic regression models were run with (a) spiritual peyote use and (b) recreational peyote use as the dependent variables, and grade, sex, 30-day alcohol use, 30-day marijuana use, religiosity, religious affiliation, and cultural identity as predictors, as well as a grade by sex interaction term. RESULTS: Grade, sex, religious affiliation, and the interaction term did not predict either recreational or spiritual peyote use. Thirty-day alcohol and marijuana use predicted both spiritual and recreational peyote use, but the effects were stronger for predicting recreational use. Religiosity and cultural identity predicted spiritual but not recreational use, such that American Indian youth who identified as more religious and identified more strongly with their culture were more likely to report using peyote for spiritual purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that current self-reported use of alcohol and/or marijuana by American Indian youth indicates an increased likelihood of using peyote. In addition, use of Firth logistic regression models proved feasible for analyzing rare events like peyote use.

Cannabis use correlates with aggressive behavior and long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatment in Asian patients with schizophrenia.

Background: Although cannabis use has been linked with schizophrenia in a dose-response pattern, to our knowledge, the relationship between cannabis and schizophrenia has rarely been reported in Asian population. Aim: We compared the clinical characteristics and psychotropic prescription patterns between cannabis users and non-users among Asian patients with schizophrenia. Moreover, we aimed to identify the independent correlates of cannabis use in these subjects. Methods: We performed the analysis of the data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antipsychotics (REAP-AP), a collaborative consortium survey used to collate the prescription patterns for antipsychotic and other psychotropic medications in patients with schizophrenia in Asia. We included 132 schizophrenia patients in the group of lifetime cannabis use and 1756 in the group that had never used cannabis. A binary logistic model was fitted to detect the clinical correlates of lifetime cannabis use. Results: Adjusting for the effects of age, sex, geographical region, income group, duration of untreated psychosis, and Charlson comordity index level, a binary logistic regression model revealed that lifetime cannabis use was independently associated with aggressive behavior [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.582, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.006-2.490, p = .047] and with long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatment (aOR = 1.796, 95% CI = 1.444-2.820, p = .001). Conclusion: Our findings indicate a close link between lifetime cannabis use and aggressive behavior. The use of long-acting, injectable antipsychotics preferentially treats the aggressive behavior cannabis users among patients with schizophrenia in Asia, especially, the South or Southeast Asia.

Correlates of lifetime cannabis use and cannabis use severity in a Canadian university sample.

This study aimed to broaden previous investigations of correlates of lifetime cannabis use and problematic cannabis use among post-secondary students by examining the novel and contemporary issues of medicinal use and deep inhalation practices. The sample included 2212 undergraduate and graduate post-secondary students from Alberta, Canada, who completed the University of Calgary's Campus Experience with Cannabis Survey (average age 23.2, SD = 5.2). Nine variables were entered into the binary logistic regression to examine their differentiation of lifetime users from non-users. A multiple regression model was completed with past six-month users (n = 697), where the continuous dependent variable was cannabis use severity as measured by total scores on the Cannabis Use Disorder Identification Test-Revised. Twenty independent variables were entered simultaneously. Varsity athlete status, family mental illness, severity of alcohol use, greater support for legalization and lower perceived risk associated with regular cannabis use, differentiated lifetime users from non-users. Higher rates of religiosity and living with parents or relatives were associated with lower-lifetime rates. Male gender, earlier age of first cannabis use, cannabis use motives (including coping, enhancement and expansion), past six-month medicinal use and increased frequency of deep inhalation during consumption, were found to be significant correlates of severity. Different factors seem to predict lifetime cannabis use versus severity, and these differences may help inform the development and delivery of prevention efforts. Given that medicinal use and male gender were the largest correlates of severity, populations representing these groups may benefit most from targeted education and prevention.

Illegal cannabis use is common among Danes with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Use of cannabis to alleviate multiple sclerosis (MS)-related symptoms is increasing. Due to strict regulations, only a minority of MS patients receive cannabis-based prescription drugs. The extent of recreational and medical cannabis use among Danes with MS is unknown. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of illegal and legal use of cannabis in MS patients, as well as reasons for use and perceived adverse effects. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was sent to all 3606 patients at the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Center, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic factors, clinical characteristics and medical or recreational cannabis use. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 2244/3606 (62%), of which 2009 questionnaires from patients with MS or clinical isolated syndrome (CIS) were valid for analysis. Forty-nine percent (980/2009) had used cannabis at least once. Cannabis was used within the past year (current user) by 21%, and only 21% of those received prescribed cannabis-based medicine. Recreational use was reported by 17%. The primary reasons for use were to alleviate pain (61%), spasticity (52%) and sleep disturbances (46%). The most common adverse effects were drowsiness (30%), feeling quiet/subdued (23%) and dizziness (13%). Almost half (44%) of the non-cannabis users would consider use of cannabis to alleviate MS symptoms if the drug was legalized. CONCLUSION: This study shows that illegal cannabis use is common among Danes with MS as only 21% of the current cannabis users received prescribed cannabis-based medicine. Current cannabis users reported high efficacy in relieving pain, spasticity and sleep disturbances. In addition, only mild to moderate severity of adverse effects were reported. To the best of our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive survey of cannabis use among MS patients.