Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract Introduction Cannabis and tobacco couse is common and could expose users to higher levels of toxicants. No studies have examined biomarkers of toxicant exposure in cousers of cannabis and cigarettes, compared with cigarette smokers (CS). Aims and Methods Adult daily CS were recruited from 10 US sites for a study of reduced nicotine cigarettes. In this analysis of baseline data, participants were categorized as either cousers of cannabis and tobacco (cousers; N = 167; urine positive for 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ 9-tetrahydrocannnabinol and self-reported cannabis use ≥1×/week), or CS (N = 911; negative urine and no self-reported cannabis use). Participants who did not meet either definition (N = 172) were excluded. Self-reported tobacco and cannabis use and tobacco and/or combustion-related biomarkers of exposure were compared between groups. Results Compared to CS, cousers were younger (couser Mage = 38.96, SD = 13.01; CS Mage = 47.22, SD = 12.72; p < .001) and more likely to be male (cousers = 67.7%, CS = 51.9%, p < .001). There were no group differences in self-reported cigarettes/day, total nicotine equivalents, or breath carbon monoxide, but cousers had greater use of non-cigarette tobacco products. Compared to CS, cousers had higher concentrations of 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid, 2-cyanoethylmercapturic acid, S-phenylmercapturic acid, 3-hydroxy-1-methylpropylmercapturic acid (ps < .05), and phenanthrene tetraol (p < .001). No biomarkers were affected by number of cannabis use days/week or days since last cannabis use during baseline (ps > .05). Conclusions Cousers had higher concentrations of biomarkers of exposure than CS, but similar number of cigarettes per day and nicotine exposure. Additional studies are needed to determine whether cannabis and/or alternative tobacco products are driving the increased toxicant exposure. Implications Cousers of cannabis and tobacco appear to be exposed to greater levels of harmful chemicals (ie, volatile organic compounds and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), but similar levels of nicotine as CS. It is unclear if the higher levels of toxicant exposure in cousers are due to cannabis use or the increased use of alternative tobacco products compared with CS. It is important for studies examining biomarkers of exposure among CS to account for cannabis use as it may have a significant impact on outcomes. Additionally, further research is needed examining exposure to harmful chemicals among cannabis users.

Objective This study aims to compare treatment response in bipolar I or II depression and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) with and without recent alcohol and/or cannabis use disorder (ALC/CAN) to quetiapine-XR (extended release) or placebo. Methods A randomized, double-blind, 8-week study of quetiapine-XR versus placebo in patients with bipolar I or II depression and GAD with or without a recent ALC/CAN was used to compare changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology–Self-Report (QIDS-SR-16), Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder-Severity (CGI-BP-S), and Timeline Follow Back within and between groups. Results In the quetiapine-XR group, patients with a recent ALC/CAN ( n  = 22) had significant decreases in QIDS-SR-16 (−9.6 ± 1.6 vs. −3.7 ± 1.7) and CGI-BP-S (−1.6 ± 0.4 vs. −0.8 ± 0.03) than those without a recent ALC/CAN ( n  = 24). In the placebo group, both patients with a recent ALC/CAN ( n  = 23) and those without ( n  = 21) had similar reductions in these measures. The reduction of QIDS-SR-16 scores in patients with a recent ALC/CAN was also significantly different from that of their counterparts in the placebo group. Patients who received quetiapine-XR had larger decreases in the number of drinking days/week ( p  = 0.17) and number of cannabis joints/week ( p  = 0.09) compared to those who received placebo. Conclusion Quetiapine-XR was superior to placebo in reducing QIDS-SR-16 total score in patients with a recent ALC/CAN. Patients taking quetiapine-XR used less alcohol and cannabis than patients on placebo, suggesting that quetiapine-XR may be of use in patients with bipolar disorder accompanied by GAD and other comorbidities.

This longitudinal study examined the association between trajectories of cigarette smoking and unemployment across a 29-year time period from mean age 14 to mean age 43. Participants came from a community-based random sample of residents in 2 upstate New York counties. Data were collected at 7 timepoints. Using growth mixture modeling, 5 trajectory groups of cigarette smokers were identified. The trajectory groups were as follows: heavy/continuous smokers, occasional smokers, late-starting smokers, quitters/decreasers, and nonsmokers. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to study the relationship between the participant's trajectory group membership and unemployment in the fifth decade of life. The association was determined with controls for age, gender, current cigarette use, current alcohol use, current marijuana use, physical diseases, occupation, educational level, past unemployment experience, socioeconomic status measures of family of origin, depressive mood, and self-control from adolescence through the early 40s. The findings indicate that patterns of adolescent and young adult cigarette smoking have implications for later unemployment. Overall, the results showed that people who fell into the categories of heavy/continuous smokers (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.84) and occasional smokers (AOR = 4.03) were more likely to be unemployed at mean age 43 when compared with nonsmokers. There was no significant difference between the quitters/decreasers and the nonsmokers with respect to unemployment. Intervention programs designed to deal with unemployment should consider focusing on heavy/continuous and occasional cigarette smokers as risk factors for unemployment.

Objectives. We evaluated the revised Project ALERT drug prevention program across a wide variety of Midwestern schools and communities. Methods. Fifty-five South Dakota middle schools were randomly assigned to program or control conditions. Treatment group students received 11 lessons in 7th grade and 3 more in 8th grade. Program effects for 4276 8th-graders were assessed 18 months after baseline. Results. The revised Project ALERT curriculum curbed cigarette and marijuana use initiation, current and regular cigarette use, and alcohol misuse. Reductions ranged from 19% to 39%. Program effects were not significant for initial and current drinking or for current and regular marijuana use. Conclusions. School-based drug prevention programs can prevent occasional and more serious drug use, help low- to high-risk adolescents, and be effective in diverse school environments.

Risk factors for marijuana use in older adolescents and young adults have focused primarily on family environment and peer affiliation. A growing body of work has examined the relationship between environmental context and young adult substance use. This study builds on previous research linking neighborhood environment to young adult marijuana use by exploring two distinct features of neighborhoods, namely the physical (e.g., broken windows) and social environment (e.g., adults watching youth). Data were obtained from a longitudinal sample of 398 predominately African American young adults living in an urban environment. The data also included observational measures of physical and social order and disorder collected on the young adult’s residential block. Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) was utilized to test hypothesized relationships between these two features of the neighborhood environment and past year young adult marijuana use. A two-factor model of neighborhood environment with good fit indices was selected (CFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.037). There was a positive and significant direct effect from neighborhood physical disorder to marijuana use (0.219, p  < 0.05) controlling for gender, race, and free and reduced price meal (FARPM) status. The direct effect from neighborhood social environment to marijuana use was not significant. These results converge with previous research linking vacant housing with young adult marijuana use but do not provide empirical support for the neighborhood social environment as a determinant of drug taking. Better explication of the social environment is needed to understand its relationship to drug use.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effectiveness of targeted televised public service announcement campaigns in reducing marijuana use among high-sensation-seeking adolescents. METHODS: The study used a controlled interrupted time-series design in 2 matched communities. Two televised antimarijuana campaigns were conducted in 1 county and 1 campaign in the comparison community. Personal interviews were conducted with 100 randomly selected teenagers monthly in each county for 32 months. RESULTS: All 3 campaigns reversed upward developmental trends in 30-day marijuana use among high-sensation seekers (P š .002). As expected, low-sensation seekers had low use levels, and no campaign effects were evident. CONCLUSIONS: Televised campaigns with high reach and frequency that use public service announcements designed for and targeted at high-sensation-seeking adolescents can significantly reduce substance use in this high-risk population.

This study tests the impact of an in-school mediated communication campaign based on social marketing principles, in combination with a participatory, community-based media effort, on marijuana, alcohol and tobacco uptake among middle-school students. Eight media treatment and eight control communities throughout the US were randomly assigned to condition. Within both media treatment and media control communities, one school received a research-based prevention curriculum and one school did not, resulting in a crossed, split-plot design. Four waves of longitudinal data were collected over 2 years in each school and were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models to account for clustering effects. Youth in intervention communities (N = 4216) showed fewer users at final post-test for marijuana [odds ratio (OR) = 0.50, P = 0.019], alcohol (OR = 0.40, P = 0.009) and cigarettes (OR = 0.49, P = 0.039), one-tailed. Growth trajectory results were significant for marijuana (P = 0.040), marginal for alcohol (P = 0.051) and non-significant for cigarettes (P = 0.114). Results suggest that an appropriately designed in-school and community-based media effort can reduce youth substance uptake. Effectiveness does not depend on the presence of an in-school prevention curriculum.

Objectives. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental distress in US adults. Methods. Participants were 5065 adults from the Understanding America Study, a probability-based Internet panel representative of the US adult population. The main exposure was survey completion date (March 10–16, 2020). The outcome was mental distress measured via the 4-item version of the Patient Health Questionnaire. Results. Among states with 50 or more COVID-19 cases as of March 10, each additional day was significantly associated with an 11% increase in the odds of moving up a category of distress (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 1.01, 1.21; P = .02). Perceptions about the likelihood of getting infected, death from the virus, and steps taken to avoid infecting others were associated with increased mental distress in the model that included all states. Individuals with higher consumption of alcohol or cannabis or with history of depressive symptoms were at significantly higher risk for mental distress. Conclusions. These data suggest that as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, mental distress may continue to increase and should be regularly monitored. Specific populations are at high risk for mental distress, particularly those with preexisting depressive symptoms.

Recent reports show that fewer adolescents believe that regular cannabis use is harmful to health. Concomitantly, adolescents are initiating cannabis use at younger ages, and more adolescents are using cannabis on a daily basis. The purpose of the present study was to test the association between persistent cannabis use and neuropsychological decline and determine whether decline is concentrated among adolescent-onset cannabis users. Participants were members of the Dunedin Study, a prospective study of a birth cohort of 1,037 individuals followed from birth (1972/1973) to age 38 y. Cannabis use was ascertained in interviews at ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38 y. Neuropsychological testing was conducted at age 13 y, before initiation of cannabis use, and again at age 38 y, after a pattern of persistent cannabis use had developed. Persistent cannabis use was associated with neuropsychological decline broadly across domains of functioning, even after controlling for years of education. Informants also reported noticing more cognitive problems for persistent cannabis users. Impairment was concentrated among adolescent-onset cannabis users, with more persistent use associated with greater decline. Further, cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore neuropsychological functioning among adolescent-onset cannabis users. Findings are suggestive of a neurotoxic effect of cannabis on the adolescent brain and highlight the importance of prevention and policy efforts targeting adolescents.

Background One in three young people use cannabis in Canada. Cannabis use can be associated with a variety of health problems which occur primarily among intensive/frequent users. Availability and effectiveness of conventional treatment for cannabis use is limited. While Brief Interventions (BIs) have been shown to result in short-term reductions of cannabis use risks or problems, few studies have assessed their longer-term effects. The present study examined 12-month follow-up outcomes for BIs in a cohort of young Canadian high-frequency cannabis users where select short-term effects (3 months) had previously been assessed and demonstrated. Findings N = 134 frequent cannabis users were recruited from among university students in Toronto, randomized to either an oral or a written cannabis BI, or corresponding health controls, and assessed in-person at baseline, 3-months, and 12-months. N = 72 (54 %) of the original sample were retained for follow-up analyses at 12-months where reductions in ‘deep inhalation/breathholding’ (Q = 13.1; p < .05) and ‘driving after cannabis use’ (Q = 9.3; p < .05) were observed in the experimental groups. Reductions for these indicators had been shown at 3-months in the experimental groups; these reductions were maintained over the year. Other indicators assessed remained overall stable in both experimental and control groups. Conclusions The results confirm findings from select other studies indicating the potential for longer-term and sustained risk reduction effects of BIs for cannabis use. While further research is needed on the long-term effects of BIs, these may be a valuable – and efficient – intervention tool in a public health approach to high-risk cannabis use.