Cannabis and cannabinoid research · 2026
Pharmacokinetic Differences Between Fast-Acting, Standard, and Placebo Cannabis Edibles.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Conner Bradley T, Smith Emma E, DiCecco Samuel M, Sturgess Kira L, Karoly Hollis C, Dooley Gregory, Akagi Natalie, Villanueva Charles, Hennesy Michael
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Edibles have become the second-most used cannabis product in legal U.S. states, wherein 64% of cannabis consumers reported using edibles within the past year. Among expansions to the legal cannabis industry are the newly marketed "fast-acting" edible compounds, which may address many of the issues associated with edible use related to overdose and dose management. The study hypotheses were that fast-acting edibles would reach peak concentration significantly faster than standard edibles and placebo edibles.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty participants completed three arms within-subjects designed study to test hypotheses. The three arms were ingestion of a (1) fast-acting edible, (2) a standard edible, and (3) a Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) terpene-derived placebo edible that was indistinguishable from the two THC-containing edibles. Blood plasma was analyzed for the presence of THC and THC analytes. The pharmacokinetic parameters tested were time to max concentration (Tmax), maximum concentration (Cmax), terminal half-life (t1/2), and area under the curve (AUC).
RESULTS: Results supported study hypotheses in that Tmax was significantly faster for the fast-acting edible, observed 30 min post-ingestion and, on average, 30 min earlier than the Tmax for the standard edible. There were no significant differences between the fast-acting and standard edibles on Cmax, t1/2, and AUC; however, both the fast-acting and standard edibles were significantly different compared with the placebo across all pharmacokinetic parameters.
DISCUSSION: The results indicate that the microencapsulation technology used to create the fast-acting edible enabled analyte concentrations to peak significantly faster compared to the standard and placebo edibles.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty participants completed three arms within-subjects designed study to test hypotheses. The three arms were ingestion of a (1) fast-acting edible, (2) a standard edible, and (3) a Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) terpene-derived placebo edible that was indistinguishable from the two THC-containing edibles. Blood plasma was analyzed for the presence of THC and THC analytes. The pharmacokinetic parameters tested were time to max concentration (Tmax), maximum concentration (Cmax), terminal half-life (t1/2), and area under the curve (AUC).
RESULTS: Results supported study hypotheses in that Tmax was significantly faster for the fast-acting edible, observed 30 min post-ingestion and, on average, 30 min earlier than the Tmax for the standard edible. There were no significant differences between the fast-acting and standard edibles on Cmax, t1/2, and AUC; however, both the fast-acting and standard edibles were significantly different compared with the placebo across all pharmacokinetic parameters.
DISCUSSION: The results indicate that the microencapsulation technology used to create the fast-acting edible enabled analyte concentrations to peak significantly faster compared to the standard and placebo edibles.