Explore the vast range of titles available.

RationaleCannabidiol (CBD) products lacking regulatory approval are being used to self-treat a myriad of conditions and for their unsubstantiated health benefits. The scientific evidence supporting these claims largely arises not from controlled clinical trials, but from the recognition that CBD has numerous biological targets. Yet, CBD is commonly consumed and often in over-the-counter products that are unapproved and of unknown composition. Epidiolex® is the only product that has undergone rigorous pharmacokinetic assessment and testing in clinical trials; it was approved as a non-scheduled drug by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of intractable childhood-onset seizures. However, studies investigating CBD for other medical conditions are limited in number and often lack the scientific rigor, controls, or sample sizes required to draw clinically meaningful conclusions. Although Epidiolex® is safe for human consumption, recent changes in regulation of commercially available CBD products have resulted in limited quality control and products marketed with unknown CBD bioavailability. Even scientifically rigorous studies have used different sources of CBD and different suspension vehicles for administration, making it difficult to compare results among studies and resolve mixed outcomes.ObjectivesThis paper reviews the molecular targets, pharmacokinetics, and safety and abuse liability of CBD; additionally, the extant evidence on its potential therapeutic effects for neurological disorders, pain, inflammation, conditions related to immune function, psychiatric disorders, and substance use are described.

BackgroundThe main psychoactive component of cannabis, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), can impair driving performance. Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-intoxicating cannabis component, is thought to mitigate certain adverse effects of THC. It is possible then that cannabis containing equivalent CBD and THC will differentially affect driving and cognition relative to THC-dominant cannabis.AimsThe present study investigated and compared the effects of THC-dominant and THC/CBD equivalent cannabis on simulated driving and cognitive performance.MethodsIn a randomized, double-blind, within-subjects crossover design, healthy volunteers (n = 14) with a history of light cannabis use attended three outpatient experimental test sessions in which simulated driving and cognitive performance were assessed at two timepoints (20–60 min and 200–240 min) following vaporization of 125 mg THC-dominant (11% THC; < 1% CBD), THC/CBD equivalent (11% THC, 11% CBD), or placebo (< 1% THC/CBD) cannabis.Results/outcomesBoth active cannabis types increased lane weaving during a car-following task but had little effect on other driving performance measures. Active cannabis types impaired performance on the Digit Symbol Substitution Task (DSST), Divided Attention Task (DAT) and Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task (PASAT) with impairment on the latter two tasks worse with THC/CBD equivalent cannabis. Subjective drug effects (e.g., “stoned”) and confidence in driving ability did not vary with CBD content. Peak plasma THC concentrations were higher following THC/CBD equivalent cannabis relative to THC-dominant cannabis, suggesting a possible pharmacokinetic interaction.Conclusions/interpretationCannabis containing equivalent concentrations of CBD and THC appears no less impairing than THC-dominant cannabis, and in some circumstances, CBD may actually exacerbate THC-induced impairment.

Among children and young adults with the Dravet syndrome, a developmental disorder that is associated with treatment-resistant seizures, cannabidiol reduced the frequency of convulsive seizures but caused sleepiness and elevated liver enzymes in some patients. Seizures are difficult to control in the Dravet syndrome, a rare genetic form of epileptic encephalopathy primarily due to loss-of-function mutations in the SCN1A gene. Interest in cannabidiol for the treatment of epilepsy was generated by media reports of efficacy in children with the Dravet syndrome. 1 Four small trials of cannabidiol had yielded mixed results. 2 – 5 A series of in vitro and in vivo preclinical models of seizure showed that cannabidiol had activity against convulsive seizures. 6 Subsequently, the safety and effectiveness of a standardized oral solution of cannabidiol was tested in an open-label trial involving 214 children and young adults . . .

Background A formal single ascending and multiple dose pharmacokinetic (PK) trial of cannabidiol (CBD) oral solution was required to determine the safety and tolerability of CBD, the maximum tolerated dose, and to examine the effect of food on CBD PK parameters. Objective This trial assessed the safety, tolerability and PK of CBD oral solution in healthy adult volunteers, as well as the effect of food on CBD PK parameters. Methods The study consisted of three arms: single ascending dose (1500, 3000, 4500 or 6000 mg CBD [ n =  6 per group]/placebo [ n =  8; 2 per CBD dose group]), multiple dose (750 or 1500 mg CBD [ n =  9 per group]/placebo [ n =  6; 3 per CBD dose group] twice daily), and food effect (1500 mg CBD single dose [ n =  12]). All subjects completed all trial arms and were analyzed as planned. Results CBD was generally well tolerated. Diarrhea, nausea, headache, and somnolence were the most common adverse events (AEs) across all trial arms, with an increased incidence of some gastrointestinal and nervous system disorder AEs (most notably diarrhea and headache) apparent in subjects taking CBD compared with placebo. All AEs were of mild or moderate severity; none were severe or serious. There were no deaths or discontinuations in the trial. After single oral doses, CBD appeared rapidly in plasma; time to maximum plasma concentration ( t max ) was approximately 4–5 h. The major circulating metabolite was 7-carboxy-CBD, then parent CBD, 7-hydroxy-CBD (active metabolite), and 6-hydroxy-CBD (a relatively minor metabolite). Plasma exposure to CBD [maximum plasma concentration ( C max ) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time t (AUC t )] increased in a less than dose-proportional manner ( C max slope 0.73; AUC t slope 0.64). Oral clearance of CBD was high (1111–1909 L/h) and apparent volume of distribution was large (20,963–42,849 L). CBD reached steady state after approximately 2 days, with moderate accumulation (1.8- to 2.6-fold) after 750 and 1500 mg CBD twice daily. After 7 days, a twofold increase in CBD dose resulted in 1.6- and 1.9-fold increases in geometric mean C max and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over a dosing interval (AUC τ ), respectively. CBD elimination was multiphasic; the terminal elimination half-life was approximately 60 h after 750 and 1500 mg CBD twice daily; and effective half-life estimates ranged from 10 to 17 h. C max was 541.2 ng/mL and AUC τ was 3236 ng·h/mL after 1500 mg CBD twice daily. A high-fat meal increased CBD plasma exposure ( C max and AUC t ) by 4.85- and 4.2-fold, respectively; there was no effect of food on t max or terminal half-life. Conclusion CBD was generally well tolerated. Most AEs were mild in severity; none were severe or serious. The safety and PK profile support twice-daily administration of CBD.

Cannabidiol (CBD) is being investigated as a treatment for several medical disorders but there is uncertainty about its safety. We conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis of the adverse effects of CBD across all medical indications. Double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials lasting ≥7 days were included. Twelve trials contributed data from 803 participants to the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, CBD was associated with an increased likelihood of withdrawal for any reason (OR 2.61, 95% CI: 1.38–4.96) or due to adverse events (OR 2.65, 95% CI: 1.04–6.80), any serious adverse event (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.18–4.48), serious adverse events related to abnormal liver function tests (OR 11.19, 95% CI: 2.09–60.02) or pneumonia (OR 5.37, 95% CI: 1.17–24.65), any adverse event (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.03–2.33), adverse events due to decreased appetite (OR 3.56, 95% CI: 1.94–6.53), diarrhoea (OR 2.61, 95% CI: 1.46–4.67), somnolence (OR 2.23, 95% CI: 1.07–4.64) and sedation (OR 4.21, 95% CI: 1.18–15.01). Associations with abnormal liver function tests, somnolence, sedation and pneumonia were limited to childhood epilepsy studies, where CBD may have interacted with other medications such as clobazam and/or sodium valproate. After excluding studies in childhood epilepsy, the only adverse outcome associated with CBD treatment was diarrhoea (OR 5.03, 95% CI: 1.44–17.61). In summary, the available data from clinical trials suggest that CBD is well tolerated and has relatively few serious adverse effects, however interactions with other medications should be monitored carefully. Additional safety data from clinical trials outside of childhood epilepsy syndromes and from studies of over-the-counter CBD products are needed to assess whether the conclusions drawn from clinical trials can be applied more broadly.

Almost a third of patients with epilepsy have a treatment-resistant form, which is associated with severe morbidity and increased mortality. Cannabis-based treatments for epilepsy have generated much interest, but scientific data are scarce. We aimed to establish whether addition of cannabidiol to existing anti-epileptic regimens would be safe, tolerated, and efficacious in children and young adults with treatment-resistant epilepsy. In this open-label trial, patients (aged 1–30 years) with severe, intractable, childhood-onset, treatment-resistant epilepsy, who were receiving stable doses of antiepileptic drugs before study entry, were enrolled in an expanded-access programme at 11 epilepsy centres across the USA. Patients were given oral cannabidiol at 2–5 mg/kg per day, up-titrated until intolerance or to a maximum dose of 25 mg/kg or 50 mg/kg per day (dependent on study site). The primary objective was to establish the safety and tolerability of cannabidiol and the primary efficacy endpoint was median percentage change in the mean monthly frequency of motor seizures at 12 weeks. The efficacy analysis was by modified intention to treat. Comparisons of the percentage change in frequency of motor seizures were done with a Mann-Whitney U test. Between Jan 15, 2014, and Jan 15, 2015, 214 patients were enrolled; 162 (76%) patients who had at least 12 weeks of follow-up after the first dose of cannabidiol were included in the safety and tolerability analysis, and 137 (64%) patients were included in the efficacy analysis. In the safety group, 33 (20%) patients had Dravet syndrome and 31 (19%) patients had Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. The remaining patients had intractable epilepsies of different causes and type. Adverse events were reported in 128 (79%) of the 162 patients within the safety group. Adverse events reported in more than 10% of patients were somnolence (n=41 [25%]), decreased appetite (n=31 [19%]), diarrhoea (n=31 [19%]), fatigue (n=21 [13%]), and convulsion (n=18 [11%]). Five (3%) patients discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Serious adverse events were reported in 48 (30%) patients, including one death—a sudden unexpected death in epilepsy regarded as unrelated to study drug. 20 (12%) patients had severe adverse events possibly related to cannabidiol use, the most common of which was status epilepticus (n=9 [6%]). The median monthly frequency of motor seizures was 30·0 (IQR 11·0–96·0) at baseline and 15·8 (5·6–57·6) over the 12 week treatment period. The median reduction in monthly motor seizures was 36·5% (IQR 0–64·7). Our findings suggest that cannabidiol might reduce seizure frequency and might have an adequate safety profile in children and young adults with highly treatment-resistant epilepsy. Randomised controlled trials are warranted to characterise the safety profile and true efficacy of this compound. GW Pharmaceuticals, Epilepsy Therapy Project of the Epilepsy Foundation, Finding A Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures.

This randomized trial showed that two different doses of oral cannabidiol resulted in greater reductions in drop-seizure and total-seizure frequencies than placebo among patients with the Lennox–Gastaut syndrome, a severe developmental epileptic encephalopathy.

Cannabidiol (CBD) is one of the cannabinoids with non-psychotropic action, extracted from Cannabis sativa. CBD is a terpenophenol and it has received a great scientific interest thanks to its medical applications. This compound showed efficacy as anti-seizure, antipsychotic, neuroprotective, antidepressant and anxiolytic. The neuroprotective activity appears linked to its excellent anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the use of CBD, in addition to common anti-epileptic drugs, in the severe treatment-resistant epilepsy through an overview of recent literature and clinical trials aimed to study the effects of the CBD treatment in different forms of epilepsy. The results of scientific studies obtained so far the use of CBD in clinical applications could represent hope for patients who are resistant to all conventional anti-epileptic drugs.

Background Approximately one-third of patients with epilepsy presents seizures despite adequate treatment. Hence, there is the need to search for new therapeutic options. Cannabidiol (CBD) is a major chemical component of the resin of Cannabis sativa plant, most commonly known as marijuana. The anti-seizure properties of CBD do not relate to the direct action on cannabinoid receptors, but are mediated by a multitude of mechanisms that include the agonist and antagonist effects on ionic channels, neurotransmitter transporters, and multiple 7-transmembrane receptors. In contrast to tetra-hydrocannabinol, CBD lacks psychoactive properties, does not produce euphoric or intrusive side effects, and is largely devoid of abuse liability. Objective The aim of the study was to estimate the efficacy and safety of CBD as adjunctive treatment in patients with epilepsy using meta-analytical techniques. Methods Randomized, placebo-controlled, single- or double-blinded add-on trials of oral CBD in patients with uncontrolled epilepsy were identified. Main outcomes included the percentage change and the proportion of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in monthly seizure frequency during the treatment period and the incidence of treatment withdrawal and adverse events (AEs). Results Four trials involving 550 patients with Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) and Dravet syndrome (DS) were included. The pooled average difference in change in seizure frequency during the treatment period resulted 19.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.1–31.0; p  = 0.001] percentage points between the CBD 10 mg and placebo groups and 19.9 (95% CI 11.8–28.1; p  < 0.001) percentage points between the CBD 20 mg and placebo arms, in favor of CBD. The reduction in all-types seizure frequency by at least 50% occurred in 37.2% of the patients in the CBD 20 mg group and 21.2% of the placebo-treated participants [risk ratio (RR) 1.76, 95% CI 1.07–2.88; p  = 0.025]. Across the trials, drug withdrawal for any reason occurred in 11.1% and 2.6% of participants receiving CBD and placebo, respectively (RR 3.54, 95% CI 1.55–8.12; p  = 0.003) [Chi squared = 2.53, degrees of freedom ( df ) = 3, p  = 0.506; I 2  = 0.0%]. The RRs to discontinue treatment were 1.45 (95% CI 0.28–7.41; p  = 0.657) and 4.20 (95% CI 1.82–9.68; p  = 0.001) for CBD at the doses of 10 and 20 mg/kg/day, respectively, in comparison to placebo. Treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 8.9% and 1.8% of patients in the active and control arms, respectively (RR 5.59, 95% CI 1.87–16.73; p  = 0.002). The corresponding RRs for CBD at the doses of 10 and 20 mg/kg/day were 1.66 (95% CI 0.22–12.86; p  = 0.626) and 6.89 (95% CI 2.28–20.80; p  = 0.001). AEs occurred in 87.9% and 72.2% of patients treated with CBD and placebo (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.11–1.33; p  < 0.001). AEs significantly associated with CBD were somnolence, decreased appetite, diarrhea, and increased serum aminotransferases. Conclusions Adjunctive CBD in patients with LGS or DS experiencing seizures uncontrolled by concomitant anti-epileptic treatment regimens is associated with a greater reduction in seizure frequency and a higher rate of AEs than placebo.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may lead to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) which, in turn, may be associated with multiple organ dysfunction. In this review, we present advantages and disadvantages of cannabidiol (CBD), a non-intoxicating phytocannabinoid from the cannabis plant, as a potential agent for the treatment of COVID-19. CBD has been shown to downregulate proteins responsible for viral entry and to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication. Preclinical studies have demonstrated its effectiveness against diseases of the respiratory system as well as its cardioprotective, nephroprotective, hepatoprotective, neuroprotective and anti-convulsant properties, that is, effects that may be beneficial for COVID-19. Only the latter two properties have been demonstrated in clinical studies, which also revealed anxiolytic and antinociceptive effects of CBD (given alone or together with Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), which may be important for an adjuvant treatment to improve the quality of life in patients with COVID-19 and to limit post-traumatic stress symptoms. However, one should be aware of side effects of CBD (which are rarely serious), drug interactions (also extending to drugs acting against COVID-19) and the proper route of its administration (vaping may be dangerous). Clearly, further clinical studies are necessary to prove the suitability of CBD for the treatment of COVID-19.