Psychosocial and Pharmacological Interventions for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sabioni P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6527000 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Psychosocial and Pharmacological Interventions for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder.
Sabioni Pamela P Le Foll Bernard B
Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) 20190410 2
(Reprinted with permission from Sabioni P and Le Foll B. Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of cannabis use disorder [version 1; referees: 3 approved]. F1000Research 2018, 7(F1000 Faculty Rev):173 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11191.1)). ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Cannabis use has been continuously increasing, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) has become a public health issue. Some psychosocial interventions have demonstrated the ability to reduce cannabis use; however, there are no pharmacotherapies approved for the treatment of CUD. Some drugs have shown limited positive effects on use and withdrawal symptoms, but no controlled studies have been able to show strong and persistent effects on clinically meaningful outcomes. The aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence from the available literature regarding the effectiveness of psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD among adults (that is, 18 years old or older). An analysis of the evidence shows that the current best psychosocial intervention to reduce cannabis use is the combination of motivational enhancement therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy, preferably accompanied by a contingency management approach. In regard to pharmacological interventions, there are mostly unclear findings. Some drugs, such as CB1 agonists, gabapentin, and N-acetylcysteine, have been shown to produce improvements in some symptoms of CUD in single studies, but these have not been replicated. Other classes of medications, including antidepressants and antipsychotics, have been unsuccessful in producing such effects. There is an imminent need for more clinical trials to develop more effective treatments for CUD.
| S-EPMC5811668 | biostudies-other
Project description:Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is prevalent and demand for treatment is increasing, yet few individuals engage in formal treatment and the efficacy of established interventions for CUD is modest. Existing clinical trials evaluating psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD have incorporated a wide variety of measures for assessing cannabis use outcomes, including abstinence, self-reported frequency and quantity used, withdrawal, use/dependence severity, and other psychosocial outcomes. The heterogeneity of measures and outcomes has limited quantitative analyses of the comparative effectiveness of existing interventions. The purpose of this systematic review is to: 1) identify and characterize approaches for measuring cannabis use in existing CUD intervention trials, including abstinence, frequency and quantity of use, and 2) summarize measures used to assess treatment efficacy in other outcome domains (e.g., cannabis use severity, psychosocial functioning, cannabis withdrawal), and provide a platform for future research to evaluate which outcome measures are most likely to reflect treatment efficacy and clinically significant improvement in other outcome domains.
| S-EPMC7038155 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cannabis use disorder (CUD) commonly occurs and carries a notable economic and functional burden at both individual and societal levels. While there are no clearly efficacious medication treatments for CUD, 20 years of committed and high-quality research in the human laboratory and clinical settings have resulted in medications with demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of cannabis withdrawal, the ability to reduce cannabis use, and results that point to promising future work. The current state of pharmacology research for CUD highlights the need to consider particular characteristics of patients, such as gender, impulsivity, and severity of cannabis use, when selecting a medication in the off-label treatment of CUD or cannabis withdrawal. As a field, the body of work also exposes some areas in need of improvement in study design, selection of outcome measures, interpretation of results, and the overall process of evaluating candidate medications. Coming to a consensus as a field and addressing these gaps in future research will likely lend itself to further advances in improving the lives of patients with CUD.
| S-EPMC5719115 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAbstinence remains a standard outcome for potential treatment interventions for Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD). However, there needs to be validation of non-abstinent outcomes. This study explores reductions in self-reported days of use as another viable outcome measure using data from three completed randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for CUD.MethodsThe three trials tested the effect of quetiapine (QTP, n = 113); dronabinol (DRO, n = 156); and lofexidine + dronabinol (LFD, n = 122). Self-reported cannabis use was categorized into three use-groups/week: heavy (5-7 days/week), moderate (2-4 days/week) and light use (0-1 days/week). Multinomial logistic regressions analyzed the treatment by time effect on the likelihood of light and moderate use compared to heavy use in each study.ResultsAcross the three trials, there was no significant overall time-by-treatment interaction (QTP: p = .06; DRO: p = .15; LFD: p = .21). However, the odds of moderate compared to heavy use were significantly higher in treatment than in placebo groups starting around the midpoint of each trial. No treatment differences were found between the odds of light compared to heavy use.ConclusionsWhile study-end abstinence rates have been a standard treatment outcome for CUD trials, reduction from heavy to moderate use has not been standardly assessed. During the last several weeks of each trial, those on active medication were more likely to move from heavy to moderate use, which suggests that certain medications may be more impactful than previously assessed. Future studies should determine if this pattern is associated with less CUD severity and/or improved quality of life.
| S-EPMC8282674 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveCannabis use in people with early phase psychosis (EPP) can have a significant impact on long-term outcomes. The purpose of this investigation was to describe current cannabis use treatment practices in English-speaking early intervention services (EISs) in Canada and determine if their services are informed by available evidence.MethodThirty-five Canadian English-speaking EISs for psychosis were approached to complete a survey through email, facsimile, or online in order to collect information regarding their current cannabis use treatment practices.ResultsData were acquired from 27 of the 35 (78%) programs approached. Only 12% of EISs offered formal services that targeted cannabis use, whereas the majority (63%) of EISs offered informal services for all substance use, not specifically cannabis. In programs with informal services, individual patient psychoeducation (86%) was slightly more common than individual motivational interviewing (MI) (76%) followed by group patient psychoeducation (52%) and information handouts (52%). Thirty-seven percent of EISs offered formal services for substance use, and compared to programs with informal services, more MI, cognitive-behavioural therapy, and family services were offered, with individual treatment modalities more common than groups. No EISs used contingency management, even though it has some preliminary evidence in chronic populations. Evidence-based service implementation barriers included appropriate training and administrative support.ConclusionsWhile most English-speaking Canadian EIS programs offer individual MI and psychoeducation, which is in line with the available literature, there is room for improvement in cannabis treatment services based on current evidence for both people with EPP and their families.
| S-EPMC4872239 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tobacco smoking among those seeking treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is common and is a negative predictor of cannabis outcomes. Quitting tobacco may be beneficial for those seeking to quit cannabis use. This initial proof of concept, controlled trial was designed to compare a simultaneous versus sequential tobacco intervention among those seeking treatment for CUD. Sixty-seven adults received either a simultaneous (SIM) or sequential (SEQ) approach to tobacco cessation in the context of outpatient treatment for CUD. A tobacco intervention (TI) that combined web-based counseling with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was provided during weeks 1-12 for SIM and was delayed until weeks 13-24 for SEQ. During weeks 1-12, no between-condition significant differences were observed on treatment participation or cannabis use outcomes. The majority of SIM participants initiated TI counseling (62%), 50% made at least one quit attempt and 41% initiated NRT. Interestingly, 39% in SEQ made tobacco quit attempts and 18% initiated NRT on their own before the TI was offered to them. However, only 30% of those in SEQ continued treatment during weeks 13-24, which compromised between-condition comparisons following the TI, but illustrated a potential clinical concern with delaying the TI. Tobacco cessation outcomes generally were poor and did not differ between conditions. This initial controlled trial suggests that addressing tobacco use during CUD treatment is acceptable and generates action towards tobacco cessation. Additional trials testing more intensive TI models may be necessary to identify more efficacious interventions for co-use of cannabis and tobacco.
| S-EPMC6366318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) use is a global concern due to increased usage and the harm to physical, mental, and social well-being. The objective of this overview of systematic reviews is to summarise trial results of psychosocial interventions and describe their efficacy and safety. Methods: We searched seven bibliographic databases to November 2020 for systematic reviews examining ATS misuse treatment by psychosocial interventions. Given the apparent incompleteness of the included reviews, we undertook a supplemental meta-analysis of all eligible primary studies. Results: We included 11 systematic reviews of moderate to high quality and 39 primary studies which assessed the outcomes of psychosocial interventions on people who use ATS. The key findings include: (1) There were conflicting results about the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions among reviews, which may confuse decision-makers in selecting treatment. (2) In the supplemental meta-analysis, relative to usual care (only counselling or self-help materials), membership of a psychological intervention group was associated with an important reduction in drug usage [risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.85]. Patients in psychological interventions used injectables substantially less [odds ratio (OR) 0.35, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.49]. The risk of unsafe sex in the psychosocial intervention group was lower than in the control group (RR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.71). The combination of therapies reduced 1.51 day using drugs in the preceding 30 days (95% CI: -2.36 to -0.67) compared to cognitive behavioural therapy intervention alone. (3) Compared to usual care, cognitive behavioural therapy was less likely to be retained at follow-up (RR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82 to 0.97; high-quality evidence). However, the additional of contingency management strategy can make an important improvement upon retention (RR 1.42, 95%CI: 1.25 to 1.62). Authors' Conclusions: Integrated models are more effective than a single-treatment strategy. Comprehensive and sustained psychosocial interventions can help to reduce use of ATS and other drugs, risk behaviours and mental disorders, and significantly improve treatment adherence.
| S-EPMC8245759 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHistorically, cannabis researchers have assumed a single mode and product of cannabis (e.g., smoking plant). However, patterns of use, products (e.g., concentrates, edibles), and modes (e.g. blunts, vaporizers) are diversifying. This study sought to: 1) classify cannabis users into groups based on their use of the full range of cannabis products, and 2) examine user group differences on demographics, cannabis consequences and cannabis use disorder (CUD) symptomatology.MethodsIn a sample of college students (data collected in Fall 2017), who used cannabis in the past year (N = 1390), latent class analysis (LCA) was used to characterize cannabis users. We then added demographic characteristics, cannabis consequences, and CUD symptomatology scores separately to LCA models to examine class differences.ResultsFive unique classes emerged: high-frequency all-product users, high-frequency plant/moderate-frequency edible and concentrate users, low-frequency plant users, moderate-frequency plant and edible users, and low-frequency edible users. Demographic characteristics, cannabis consequences, and CUD symptomatology differed across classes characterized by frequency as well as product.ConclusionsResults reflect the increasing variety of cannabis products, modes, and use patterns among college students. In this sample, frequency of use remains a strong predictor of cannabis-related consequences, in addition to type of product. As variation in cannabis use patterns continue to evolve, it is essential for researchers to conduct comprehensive assessments.
| S-EPMC7104573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:For nearly a century, Cannabis has been stigmatized and criminalized across the globe, but in recent years, there has been a growing interest in Cannabis due to the therapeutic potential of phytocannabinoids. With this emerging interest in Cannabis, concerns have arisen about the possible contaminations of hemp with pesticides, heavy metals, microbial pathogens, and carcinogenic compounds during the cultivation, manufacturing, and packaging processes. This is of particular concern for those turning to Cannabis for medicinal purposes, especially those with compromised immune systems. This review aims to provide types of contaminants and examples of Cannabis contamination using case studies that elucidate the medical consequences consumers risk when using adulterated Cannabis products. Thus, it is imperative to develop universal standards for cultivation and testing of products to protect those who consume Cannabis.
| S-EPMC7516211 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInformation on cost-effectiveness of interventions to treat schizophrenia can assist health policy decision making, particularly given the lack of health resources in developing countries like Thailand. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment package, including drug and non-drug interventions, for schizophrenia in Thailand.MethodsA Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of typical antipsychotics, generic risperidone, olanzapine, clozapine and family interventions. Health outcomes were measured in disability adjusted life years. We evaluated intervention benefit by estimating a change in disease severity, taking into account potential side effects. Intervention costs included outpatient treatment costs, hospitalization costs as well as time and travel costs of patients and families. Uncertainty was evaluated using Monte Carlo simulation. A sensitivity analysis of the expected range cost of generic risperidone was undertaken.ResultsGeneric risperidone is more cost-effective than typicals if it can be produced for less than 10 baht per 2 mg tablet. Risperidone was the cheapest treatment with higher drug costs offset by lower hospital costs in comparison to typicals. The most cost-effective combination of treatments was a combination of risperidone (dominant intervention). Adding family intervention has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,900 baht/DALY with a 100% probability of a result less than a threshold for very cost-effective interventions of one times GDP or 110,000 baht per DALY. Treating the most severe one third of patients with clozapine instead of risperidone had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 320,000 baht/DALY with just over 50% probability of a result below three times GDP per capita.ConclusionsThere are good economic arguments to recommend generic risperidone as first line treatment in combination with family intervention. As the uncertainty interval indicates the addition of clozapine may be dominated and there are serious side effects, treating severe patients with clozapine is advisable only for patients who do not respond to risperidone and only in the presence of a stricter side effect monitoring system than currently exists.
| S-EPMC3120770 | biostudies-literature