Article

Cannabinoid–Opioid Interaction in Chronic Pain

Division of Hematology-Oncology, San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics (Impact Factor: 7.39). 11/2011; 90(6):844-51. DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2011.188
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Cannabinoids and opioids share several pharmacologic properties and may act synergistically. The potential pharmacokinetics and the safety of the combination in humans are unknown. We therefore undertook a study to answer these questions. Twenty-one individuals with chronic pain, on a regimen of twice-daily doses of sustained-release morphine or oxycodone were enrolled in the study and admitted for a 5-day inpatient stay. Participants were asked to inhale vaporized cannabis in the evening of day 1, three times a day on days 2-4, and in the morning of day 5. Blood sampling was performed at 12-h intervals on days 1 and 5. The extent of chronic pain was also assessed daily. Pharmacokinetic investigations revealed no significant change in the area under the plasma concentration-time curves for either morphine or oxycodone after exposure to cannabis. Pain was significantly decreased (average 27%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9, 46) after the addition of vaporized cannabis. We therefore concluded that vaporized cannabis augments the analgesic effects of opioids without significantly altering plasma opioid levels. The combination may allow for opioid treatment at lower doses with fewer side effects.

1 Follower
 · 
108 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Answer questions and earn CME/CNEMarijuana has been used for centuries, and interest in its medicinal properties has been increasing in recent years. Investigations into these medicinal properties has led to the development of cannabinoid pharmaceuticals such as dronabinol, nabilone, and nabiximols. Dronabinol is best studied in the treatment of nausea secondary to cancer chemotherapy and anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with acquired immune deficiency syndrome, and is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for those indications. Nabilone has been best studied for the treatment of nausea secondary to cancer chemotherapy. There are also limited studies of these drugs for other conditions. Nabiximols is only available in the United States through clinical trials, but is used in Canada and the United Kingdom for the treatment of spasticity secondary to multiple sclerosis and pain. Studies of marijuana have concentrated on nausea, appetite, and pain. This article will review the literature regarding the medical use of marijuana and these cannabinoid pharmaceuticals (with emphasis on indications relevant to oncology), as well as available information regarding adverse effects of marijuana use. CA Cancer J Clin 2015. © 2014 American Cancer Society.
    CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 12/2014; 65(2). DOI:10.3322/caac.21260 · 162.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a chronic pelvic pain condition largely refractory to treatment. Cannabis (marijuana) use has been reported for a wide variety of chronic pain conditions, but no study has examined prevalence of cannabis use, symptom benefit or side effects, or frequency in CP/CPPS. Participants were recruited from an outpatient CP/CPPS urology clinic (n = 98) and online through the Prostatitis Foundation website (n = 244). Participants completed questionnaires (demographics, CP/CPPS, depression, cannabis). The clinic sample included Canadian patients and the online sample included primarily American patients. Due to differences, groups were examined separately. Almost 50% of respondents reported using cannabis (clinic n = 49; online n = 89). Of the cannabis users, 36.8% of clinic and 75% of online respondents reported that it improved their symptoms. Most of the respondents (from the clinic and online groups) reported that cannabis improved their mood, pain, muscle spasms, and sleep. However, they did not note any improvements for weakness, fatigue, numbness, ambulation, and urination. Overall, the effectiveness of cannabis for CP/CPPS was "somewhat/very effective" (57% clinic; 63% online). There were no differences between side effects or choice of consumption and most reported using cannabis rarely. These are the first estimates in men suffering from CP/CPPS and suggest that while cannabis use is prevalent, its medical use and benefit are unknown. This is an understudied area and the benefit or hazard for cannabis use awaits further study.
    11/2014; 8(11-12):E901-5. DOI:10.5489/cuaj.2268
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Little is understood regarding medicinal marijuana dispensary users. We sought to characterize socio-demographics and reasons for medicinal marijuana use among medical cannabis dispensary patients in Rhode Island. Participants (n=200) were recruited from one of two Compassion Centers in Rhode Island and asked to participate in a short survey, which included assessment of pain interference using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). The majority of participants were male (73%), Caucasian (80%), college educated (68%), and had health insurance (89%). The most common reason for medicinal marijuana use was determined to be chronic pain management. Participants were more likely to have BPI pain interference scores of > 5 if they were older (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78) or reported using cannabis as a substitute for prescription medications (OR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.23-4.95), and were less likely to have interference scores of >5 if they had higher income levels (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.40-0.70) or reported having ever received treatment for an alcohol use disorder. One-fifth of participants had a history of a drug or alcohol use disorder. Most participants report that medicinal cannabis improves their pain symptomology, and are interested in alternative treatment options to opioid-based treatment regimens.
    Journal of psychoactive drugs 01/2015; 47(1):18-23. DOI:10.1080/02791072.2014.999901 · 1.10 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
3 Downloads
Available from