“Introduction: Patients and healthcare practitioners are increasingly interested in using cannabis and cannabinoids to address unmet clinical needs. Although we have clinical evidence on the medical use of cannabinoids, a significant portion of the data is not based on randomized clinical trials, which are considered the gold standard in clinical research. We have reviewed the registered clinical trials on cannabis and cannabinoids for therapeutic or drug development purposes to underline the past and current attempts to generate robust clinical evidence and identify existing knowledge gaps.

Methods: We reviewed four clinical trial registries (International Clinical Trials Registry Program [ICTRP], ClinicalTrials.gov, European Clinical Trial Registry [EUCTR], Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry [ANZCTR]) to identify clinical trials on cannabinoids (phyto- or synthetic) or cannabis-based medications between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2021. All interventional clinical trials on cannabinoids and other compounds interacting with the endocannabinoid system, regardless of the investigated medical condition, assessed health outcomes, or choice of comparator, were included, provided they had a therapeutic or drug development purpose. Data on the primary sponsor, type of sponsor, date of registration, recruitment status, number of participants, study design, the phase of the study, country, medical conditions, investigated cannabinoids, and the route of administration were extracted. The therapeutic area and class of cannabinoids were identified based on the details of each trial.

Results: We included 834 out of 2966 reviewed clinical trials. The number of registered clinical trials has constantly increased from 30 in 2013 to 103 in 2021. More than 40% of registered clinical trials in 2021 were phase II and phase III clinical trials. The mean number of trial enrollments for completed, ongoing, and terminated studies were 128, 156, and 542, respectively. Clinical research on Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and the oral routes of administration dominate the field. Approximately two-thirds of clinical trials were conducted in five therapeutic areas (i.e., ‘Chronic pain,’ ‘Mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders,’ ‘Nervous system diseases,’ ‘Endocrine, nutritional or metabolic diseases,’ and ‘Neoplasms’). Pharmaceutical companies sponsored 39% of all clinical trials. However, trial sponsorships vary noticeably in different jurisdictions, likely due to, in part, different regulatory frameworks.

Conclusion: Our review highlights the diversification of clinical trials on cannabinoid-based medications in the past 21 years. This review underlines the increased interest in conducting clinical studies on new cannabinoid administration methods such as topical applications and on the investigation of emerging phyto- and synthetic cannabinoids. Moreover, more clinical trials have been designed to explore the potential therapeutic benefits of cannabinoids in areas such as mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders and skin diseases. There is a need for granular analyses of clinical trials on more commonly studied therapeutic areas such as chronic pain, nervous system diseases, and mental and behavioral disorders to generate more actionable information and insight for all stakeholders.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36357543/

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40290-022-00447-7

“Background: Interest in industrial hemp is increasing steadily, as can be seen by the growing number of countries that have either decriminalized industrial hemp or are contemplating its decriminalization. In line with this trend, Ghana recently decriminalized the cultivation of industrial hemp (the cannabis variety with low Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and high cannabidiol (CBD) content), resulting in the need for research into its benefits to Ghanaians. This article examines cannabis (including industrial hemp) production, facilities for industrial hemp exploitation, and the potential benefits of industrial hemp in Ghana.

Main body: Indigenous cannabis strains in Ghana have high THC to CBD ratios suggesting the need for the government to purchase foreign hemp seeds, considering that the alternative will require significant research into decreasing the THC to CBD ratio of indigenous cannabis strains. Furthermore, there are several facilities within the country that could be leveraged for the production of medicinal hemp-based drugs, as well as the existence of a number of possible regulatory bodies in the country, suggesting the need for less capital. Research has also shown the potential for treatment of some medical conditions prevalent among Ghanaians using medicinal hemp-based products. These reasons suggest that the most feasible option may be for the government to invest in medicinal hemp.

Conclusion: Considering the challenges associated with the development of other hemp-based products, the availability of resources in the country for exploitation of medicinal hemp, and the potential benefits of hemp-based drugs to Ghanaians, investing in medicinal hemp may be the best option for the government of Ghana.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36329502/

“Considering the challenges associated with the development of other hemp-based products, the availability of resources in the country for exploitation of medicinal hemp, and the potential benefits of hemp-based drugs to Ghanaians, investing in medicinal hemp may be the best option for the government of Ghana.”

https://jcannabisresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42238-022-00167-4

“Cannabis sativa is widely used as a folk medicine in many parts of the globe and has been reported to be a treasure trove of phytoconstituents, including cannabinoids, terpenoids, and flavonoids.

Accumulating evidence from various pre-clinical and clinical studies revealed the therapeutic potential of these constituents in various pathological conditions, including chronic pain, inflammation, neurological disorders, and cancer.

However, the psychoactive effect and addiction potential associated with cannabis use limited its clinical application. In the past two decades, extensive research on cannabis has led to the resurgence of interest in the clinical application of its constituents, particularly cannabinoids.

This review summarizes the therapeutic effect and molecular mechanism of various phytoconstituents of cannabis. Furthermore, recently developed nanoformulations of cannabis constituents have also been reviewed. Since cannabis is often associated with illicit use, regulatory aspects are of vital importance and this review therefore also documented the regulatory aspects of cannabis use along with clinical data and commercial products of cannabis.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36281862/

https://www.eurekaselect.com/article/127142

“The e-cigarette or vaping product-use-associated lung injury (EVALI) epidemic was primarily associated with the use of e-cigarettes containing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)- the principal psychoactive substance in cannabis, and vitamin-E-acetate- an additive sometimes used in informally sourced THC-containing e-liquids. EVALI case burden varied across states, but it is unclear whether this was associated with state-level cannabis vaping prevalence. We, therefore, used linear regression models to assess the cross-sectional association between state-level cannabis vaping prevalence (obtained from the 2019 behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System) and EVALI case burden (obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) adjusted for state cannabis policies. Cannabis vaping prevalence ranged from 1.14%(95%CI, 0.61%-2.12%) in Wyoming to 3.11%(95%CI, 2.16%-4.44%) in New Hampshire. EVALI cases per million population ranged from 1.90(0.38-3.42) in Oklahoma to 59.10(19.70-96.53) in North Dakota.

There was no significant positive association but an inverse association between state cannabis vaping prevalence and EVALI case burden (Coefficient, -18.6; 95%CI, -37.5-0.4; p-value, 0.05).

Thus, state-level cannabis vaping prevalence was not positively associated with EVALI prevalence, suggesting that there may not be a simple direct link between state cannabis vaping prevalence and EVALI cases, but rather the relationship is likely more nuanced and possibly reflective of access to informal sources of THC-containing e-cigarettes.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36251673/

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276187