Pharmacotherapies for cannabis use disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract Background With the increase in cannabis use rates, cannabis use disorder is being reported as one of the most common drug use disorders globally. Cannabis use has several known physical, psychological, and social adverse events, such as altered judgement, poor educational outcomes, and respiratory symptoms. The propensity for taking cannabis and the development of a cannabis use disorder may be genetically influenced for some individuals. Heritability estimates suggest a genetic basis for cannabis use, and several genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified possible regions of association, albeit with inconsistent findings. This systematic review aims to summarize the findings from GWASs investigating cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. Methods This systematic review incorporates articles that have performed a GWAS investigating cannabis use or cannabis use disorder. MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, GWAS Catalog, GWAS Central, and NIH Database of Genotype and Phenotype were searched using a comprehensive search strategy. All studies were screened in duplicate, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the quality of genetic association studies (Q-Genie) tool. All studies underwent qualitative synthesis; however, quantitative analysis was not feasible. Results Our search identified 5984 articles. Six studies met our eligibility criteria and were included in this review. All six studies reported results that met our significance threshold of p ≤ 1.0 × 10–7. In total 96 genetic variants were identified. While meta-analysis was not possible, this review identified the following genes, ANKFN1, INTS7, PI4K2B, CSMD1, CST7, ACSS1, and SCN9A, to be associated with cannabis use. These regions were previously reported in different mental health conditions, however not in relation to cannabis use. Conclusion This systematic review summarized GWAS findings within the field of cannabis research. While a meta-analysis was not possible, the summary of findings serves to inform future candidate gene studies and replication efforts. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO CRD42020176016.

Download Full-text

The Prevalence of Cannabis Use Disorder Comorbidity in Individuals With Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Canadian Journal of Addiction ◽

10.1097/cxa.0000000000000123 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (3) ◽

pp. 22-38

Author(s):

Anees Bahji ◽

Marlon Danilewitz ◽

Gustavo Vazquez ◽

Scott Patten

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bipolar Disorder ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cannabis Use ◽

Cannabis Use Disorder

Download Full-text

Motivational Interviewing for Cannabis Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

European Addiction Research ◽

10.1159/000515667 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-15

Author(s):

Cristina Calomarde-Gómez ◽

Bel Jiménez-Fernández ◽

Mercedes Balcells-Oliveró ◽

Antoni Gual ◽

Hugo López-Pelayo

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Motivational Interviewing ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Cannabis Use ◽

Control Group ◽

Prior History ◽

Cannabis Use Disorder ◽

Open Label ◽

Meta Analyses

Background: Cannabis is one of the most used drugs worldwide. There is no gold standard treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Motivational interviewing (MI) has shown efficacy in some substance use disorders. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness of MI in CUD. Methods: Randomized controlled trials or open-label studies published until September 2019 from 3 different databases (Pubmed, Scopus, and PsycINFO) were included, following the PRISMA guidelines and a predetermined set of criteria for article selection. Meta-analyses were conducted. The end point was determined as month 3, and 4 outcomes were analysed (abstinence rates, reduction in frequency of use, reduction in quantity of use, and reduction in cannabis use disorder symptoms) in 2 populations (adolescents and adults). Results: Forty studies were identified, of which 24 were performed in adults and 16 in adolescents. MI showed efficacy in achieving abstinence in both adults (odds ratio [OR] = 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.40–6.16, p < 0.0001) and adolescents (OR = 2.02, 95% CI 1.42–2.89, p < 0.0001). MI showed efficacy in reducing frequency and quantity of use in adults but not in adolescents. Those adults who were in the MI group consumed less joints per day than those in the control group (mean difference = −0.69 joints per day, 95% CI −0.84 to −0.53, p < 0.001), and they consumed on less days per month (mean difference = −3.9 days per month, 95% CI −7.47 to −0.34, p = 0.0317) than those in the control group. Conclusions: MI is an effective intervention to reduce cannabis use and achieve abstinence, especially among adults and patients with no prior history of psychotic disorder. Further investigation is needed to assess the effect on CUD symptoms. MI should be included in guidelines for treating cannabis use disorder as one of the essential psychological interventions.

Download Full-text