Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Immunotherapy and Cannabis: A Harmful Drug Interaction or Reefer Madness?
Piper, Brian J; Tian, Maria; Saini, Pragosh; Higazy, Ahmad; Graham, Jason; Carbe, Christian J; Bordonaro, Michael.
Afiliação
  • Piper BJ; Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA 18509, USA.
  • Tian M; Center for Pharmacy Innovation & Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17821, USA.
  • Saini P; Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA 18509, USA.
  • Higazy A; Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA 18509, USA.
  • Graham J; Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA 18509, USA.
  • Carbe CJ; Department of Mathematics, University of Scranton, Scranton, PA 18510, USA.
  • Bordonaro M; Department of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA 18509, USA.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(7)2024 Mar 22.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38610922
ABSTRACT
A retrospective (N = 140) and a prospective (N = 102) observational Israeli study by Bar-Sela and colleagues about cannabis potentially adversely impacting the response to immunotherapy have together been cited 202 times, including by clinical practice guidelines. There have also been concerns on PubPeer outlining irregularities and unverifiable information in their statistics and numerous errors in calculating percentages. This reanalysis attempted to verify the data analysis while including non-parametric statistics. The corrected prospective report contained 22 p-values, but only one (4.5%) could be verified despite the authors being transparent about the N and statistics employed. Cannabis users were significantly (p < 0.0025) younger than non-users, but this was not reported in the retrospective report. There were also errors in percentage calculations (e.g., 13/34 reported as 22.0% instead of 38.2%). Overall, these observational investigations, and especially the prospective, appear to contain gross inaccuracies which could impact the statistical decisions (i.e., significant findings reported as non-significant or vice-versa). Although it is mechanistically plausible that cannabis could have immunosuppressive effects which inhibit the response to immunotherapy, these two reports should be viewed cautiously. Larger prospective studies of this purported drug interaction that account for potential confounds (e.g., greater nicotine smoking among cannabis users) may be warranted.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos