Routes of administration, reasons for use, and approved indications of medical cannabis in oncology: a scoping review.

Текст сохранён. Часть иллюстраций пока доступна только в первоисточнике; загрузка будет проверена повторно.

Introduction

Cannabis is one of the most widely used recreational drugs in the world [ 1 ]. It has been documented that some people diagnosed with cancer use cannabis to alleviate some of their symptoms, including pain, nausea, vomiting, stress, and lack of appetite [ 1 – 3 ]. Cannabis use is becoming increasingly popular for the management of cancer-related symptoms, with some patients incorporating it as a regular self-management behaviour [ 4 – 6 ]. Several surveys report cannabis use as ranging from 13 to 24% in this population [ 4 , 7 , 8 ].

Cannabis use for the management of cancer-related symptoms may have numerous benefits, including improved quality of life and potentially better adherence to chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatments [ 6 ]. Cannabis has chemical properties that may help reduce or control various adverse symptoms, such as cancer-associated pain [ 9 – 11 ]. It may also mitigate chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting [ 12 – 14 ], as well as sleep disorders [ 1 ]. Cancer patients sometimes use medical cannabis as complementary pain relief [ 15 ].

Although cannabis is traditionally been associated with inhalation, routes of administration have diversified in recent years, in conjunction with the legalization of cannabis in various North American jurisdictions [ 16 ]. Thus, medical cannabis is no longer administered via a single route, but instead is found in many forms, including tablets (i.e. Nabilone), sprays (i.e. Nabiximol), creams, edible products, or oils [ 16 – 19 ].

However, cannabis can cause various side effects, including respiratory problems (e.g. coughing) [ 20 ]; for people with predispositions, its use can also be associated with certain mental health problems, such as depression, mania, and psychosis [ 21 – 24 ]. Some authors also point out that regular cannabis use may affect cognitive functions (e.g. decreased attention and reflexes) and induce structural, functional, and chemical changes in the brain in people with predispositions [ 25 – 28 ]. To ensure safe use of medical cannabis by people diagnosed with cancer, oncology care providers must have the knowledge, skills, and open-mindedness to discuss patients’ needs and preferred routes of administration [ 29 , 30 ]. However, many healthcare providers report not feeling adequately equipped to discuss the various aspects of medical cannabis use, such as patients’ reasons for use, the approved indications, and the possible routes of administration [ 29 , 31 – 33 ].

A preliminary search of the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) showed no review of the literature has yet mapped the reasons for the use of medical cannabis, the indications for the prescription of cannabis, and the routes of administration based on the experiences of patients diagnosed with cancer and of their healthcare providers. The knowledge syntheses found in our search often present the efficacy of cannabis in managing the various symptoms cancer patients experience, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting [ 12 , 34 ], cancer pain [ 35 , 36 ], or cancer cachexia [ 37 ]. We retrieved only two knowledge syntheses on the use of cannabis and its administration in oncology [ 18 , 19 ]; however, neither included qualitative evidence from primary empirical studies, surveys, or grey literature. By deepening our understanding of optimal approaches for supporting patients’ decision-making around medical cannabis use and for providing high-quality care to people diagnosed with cancer, a synthesis of qualitative evidence from patient and/or provider experiences is expected to add to the current state of knowledge. Furthermore, as some authors point out [ 19 ], it would be appropriate for oncology care providers to become more familiar with the routes of administration, dosage, and potential risks of medical cannabis, and to make recommendations in consequence.

In light of our findings, the reasons for medical cannabis use by people diagnosed with cancer should be highlighted, since they may differ from approved-medical indications. This scoping review aims to map the current literature on the use of medical cannabis in oncological settings based on the experiences of patients diagnosed with cancer and their healthcare providers.

Methods

This review was developed and conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute [ 38 ] framework for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist (PRISMA-ScR) [ 39 ]. The following five steps were conducted: 1) elaboration of the research question; 2) identification of relevant studies; 3) selection of appropriate studies; 4) data analysis; and 5) data presentation.

Step 1: Elaboration of the research question

The overarching aim of this scoping review was to answer the following question: What do we know about the use of medical cannabis in oncology? The following three sub-questions were also formulated: Why do people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis? What are the approved indications for the prescription of medical cannabis in oncology? By what routes of administration do people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis?

Step 2: Identification of relevant studies

The literature search was conducted in collaboration with a librarian who is an expert in the health sciences. To meet the aim of this scoping review, the literature included had to: 1) target adults over 18 years of age diagnosed with cancer (participants); 2) discuss the reasons for using medical cannabis or the approved indications for cannabis (concept); 3) take place within an oncology care setting, such as an outpatient clinic, a care unit, or a radiation oncology unit (context). The types of evidence sources selected were primary studies (e.g. randomized controlled trial, qualitative design) and knowledge syntheses (e.g. systematic review, meta-analysis, literature review, clinical guidelines) as they provide evidence of cannabis use via empirical and experiential data.

The search strategy developed included five scientific databases, namely CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science (Clarivate), Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PsycINFO (Ovid), and two grey literature sources (Google Scholar and ProQuest). These databases were selected because they include extensive scientific literature targeting health sciences and oncology. The search strategy was initially performed in CINAHL (see Additional File 1) and then adapted to the other databases. The search was conducted on May 13, 2020, and updated on July 7, 2021.

These concepts were operationalized into keywords and MeSH related to: 1) people diagnosed with cancer (e.g. oncology patients, cancer patients, patients with tumours); 2) various cannabis-related terms (e.g. hashish, marijuana, weed), and 3) routes of administration (e.g. routes of administration, method of use, pill).

Step 3: Selection of appropriate studies

All references were uploaded in Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia) to facilitate the identification of relevant studies. The screening of titles and abstracts and the full-text reviews were conducted by two independent reviewers (BV and AEA), respecting the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria specified that studies must: 1) have been published between 2000 and 2021; 2) be written in French or English (to increase review feasibility); 3) have focused on adults over 18 years of age diagnosed with cancer; 4) discuss the reasons for use of medical cannabis or approved indications for cannabis; 5) have taken place in an oncology setting, such as an outpatient clinic, care unit, or radiation oncology unit; and 6) be a primary research study or knowledge synthesis. Non-human (i.e., laboratory or animal) studies using cannabis to treat cancer were excluded, due to the complexity of the antineoplastic treatments and receptors involved. The reference lists of the selected articles were consulted. Finally, we did not contact the selected articles’ authors since all were readily accessible to the first author.

Data were extracted using a data extraction form inspired by the Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction template [ 38 ]. A preliminary version of the data extraction form was pilot tested by three independent reviewers (BV, AEA, HM) who extracted the data from five studies. The form was then modified according to the reviewers’ comments. Data were extracted and compared by two independent reviewers (BV with AEA or HM or AMF) using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, United States) to facilitate data management. Any disagreements between reviewers were resolved through discussion or by a third reviewer (KB) in the case of a persistent disagreement.

The following data were extracted: Article characteristics (first author’s name, year of publication, country of origin) Study methods (aim, study design, sample size, and setting) Population (cancer type, sex, and age of participants) Reasons for medical cannabis use by people diagnosed with cancer Approved indications for the prescription of medical cannabis in oncology Routes of administration (e.g. pill, inhalation)

Step 4: Data analysis

A thematic analysis [ 40 ] was undertaken to analyze and synthesize the data collected. This approach includes three main procedures: 1) data condensation; 2) data display; and 3) drawing and verifying conclusions. Text segments on the reasons for the use of medical cannabis and on approved medicinal indications were exported from primary studies and knowledge syntheses to Word (Microsoft, Redmond, United States) and a descriptive coding was then used to create themes and subthemes. The first coding cycle was inspired by the domains of the Comprehensive Cancer Experience Measurement Framework [ 41 ]. This framework provides a better understanding of the perspective of patients diagnosed with cancer throughout their survivorship (i.e., from diagnosis to death) [ 41 ]. Next, a qualitative analysis expert who did not participate in the analysis (KB) validated the themes and subthemes. The same process was performed for the routes of administration used for medical cannabis.

Step 5: Data presentation

The first author (BV) assigned subthemes to the data extracted from the selected articles and presented them in tabular form. Frequencies were calculated to highlight the most frequently mentioned subthemes. Finally, the characteristics of the studies were grouped into tables.

Results

Characteristics of included studies

A total of 5,283 articles were imported into Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia) and 791 duplicates were removed. The titles and abstracts of 4,492 articles were evaluated for eligibility and then the full text of 228 articles was read, leading to the inclusion of 148 articles. Subsequently, the references of all selected articles were searched to obtain 15 additional references, resulting in a total of 163 papers (62 qualitative and quantitative studies, and 101 knowledge syntheses). All of the selected articles were written in English, except one study [ 42 ]. A PRISMA flow chart is shown in Fig. 1 . A list of selected articles shows this in detail (see Additional File 2). Fig. 1 Prisma flowchart

Knowledge syntheses ( n = 101) were varied and included literature reviews ( n = 61), systematic reviews ( n = 13), systematic reviews and meta-analysis ( n = 6), guidelines ( n = 3), meta-analysis ( n = 3), scoping reviews ( n = 3), comprehensive reviews ( n = 2), overviews of systematic reviews ( n = 2), systematic reviews of systematic reviews ( n = 2), critical reviews ( n = 1), integrated reviews ( n = 1), a meta-analysis and meta-regression ( n = 1), a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis ( n = 1), a rapid review ( n = 1) and a selective review ( n = 1). Only three guidelines were identified, and these dealt with the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting [ 43 – 45 ].

The characteristics of the selected primary studies ( n = 62) are presented in Table 1 . No studies have been identified regarding the experiences of healthcare providers. Surveys were the most frequent type of study (37.1%, n = 23/62) followed by randomized controlled trials (21%, n = 13/62). A large proportion of the primary studies identified were conducted in the United States (43.5%, n = 27/62); this was followed by Canada (14.8%, n = 9/62) and Australia (14.8%, n = 9/62). A total of 18,684 different participants were identified in the selected primary studies. The most common cancer diagnoses were gastrointestinal ( n = 2,288), breast ( n = 2,236), genitourinary ( n = 1,835), and hematologic ( n = 1,655). Most primary studies ( n = 48) included a wide variety of cancer types (range 2 − 25). Only three studies [ 46 – 48 ] examined a single type of cancer. A few studies ( n = 11) did not specify participants’ type of cancer [ 49 – 59 ]. Almost half of the cancer diagnoses (42.5%, n = 7,949/18,684) were not reported in the primary studies. The sex of participants was balanced (female 49.1% and male 48.0%) and sex was not stated in only 2.9% of data. Table 1 Characteristics of included primary studies Design ( n = 62) N (%) Survey 23 (37.1) Randomized controlled trial 13 (21.0) Observational study 9 (14.5) Pilot study 5 (8.1) Qualitative study 3 (4.8) Phenomenology 2 (3.2) Case report 2 (3.2) Protocol for a randomized controlled trial 2 (3.2) Pre experimental study 1 (1.6) Quality improvement study 1 (1.6) Descriptive study 1 (1.6) Countries ( n = 62) N (%) United States 27 (43.5) Canada 9 (14.5) Australia 9 (14.5) Israel 8 (12.9) United Kingdom 3 (4.8) Denmark 1 (1.6) France 1 (1.6) Germany 1 (1.6) Italy 1 (1.6) Mexico 1 (1.6) Spain 1 (1.6) Type of cancer ( n = 18,684) N (%) Gastrointestinal (including colorectal, intestinal, liver, oesophageal, oral, pancreas, rectal, stomach) 2288 (12.2) Breast 2236 (12.0) Genitourinary (including bladder, cervical, ovarian, peritoneal, prostate, renal, testicular, vaginal) 1835 (9.8) Hematologic (including leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, myelodysplastic syndrome) 1655 (8.9) Lung 1615 (8.6) Skin (including melanoma) 292 (1.6) Neurological (including brain, central nervous system, neuroendocrine) 291 (1.6) Head and neck 287 (1.5) Sarcoma 160 (0.9) Hepatobiliary 36 (0.2) Kidney 16 (0.1) Musculoskeletal 13 (0.1) Thyroid 11 (0.1) Not reported 7,949 (42.5) Sex of participants ( n = 20,069) *include protocols N (%) Female 9857 (49.1) Male 9627 (48.0) Not reported 585 (2.9)

Results for review question #1

Analysis of the results highlighted that the use of medical cannabis by people diagnosed with cancer can be influenced by beliefs, be it their own, their loved ones’ or those of the healthcare providers with whom they are in contact. Indeed, some use medical cannabis because they consider there to be enough evidence of the effectiveness of such substances [ 60 ], because they have heard others report benefits [ 61 ], or feel cannabis can mitigate certain symptoms [ 62 ].

Two themes—limiting the impacts of cancer and its side effects, and staying connected to others—were identified and separated into 11 reasons for use of medical cannabis by people diagnosed with cancer (see Table 2 and Additional File 3). The different reasons identified are presented according to the frequency they are mentioned in the selected literature ( n = 163). Table 2 Reasons of use Themes Reasons for use by people with cancer Frequency n (%) Approved indications Examples Limiting the impacts of cancer and its side effects Managing refractory nausea and vomiting 130/163 (79.8%) √ •Reduce the frequency and severity of nausea •Treat anticipatory nausea and vomiting •Use with highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy •Manage nausea associated with radiotherapy •Limit delayed emesis Complementary use to assist in pain management 120/163 (73.6%) √ •Relieve cancer-associated pain •Treat neuropathic pain •Adjuvant for cancer pain not completely relieved by opioid therapy •Use when refractory to opioids and conventional pain management techniques •Enhance the anti-nociceptive effect of morphine Improving appetite and food intake 88/163 (54%) √ •Increase food enjoyment •Weight gain/stabilization •Limit anorexia and cachexia syndrome •Improve taste and smell Helping to manage emotions 59/163 (36.2%) •Reduce stress •Improve mood •Treat anxiety •Use to cope emotionally •Allow relief of psychological symptoms Promoting sleep and reducing insomnia 56/163 (34.4%) •Improve sleep quality •Facilitate sleep •Reinforce sleep habit •Reduce sleep disruptions Easily perform activities of daily living and domestic activities 23/163 (14.1%) •Boost energy and reduce fatigue •Facilitate daytime activities •Improve concentration and memory •Increase activity tolerance Alleviating musculoskeletal symptoms 10/163 (6.1%) •Combat muscle tension •Reduce spasticity •Treat arthritis •Decrease spasm and tremors •Control trismus Managing respiratory symptoms 3/163 (1.8%) •Reduce dyspnea, shortness of breath and coughs Staying connected to others Recreational use 11/163 (6.7%) •Enjoyment Improving sexual function and libido 5/163 (3.1%) •Increase frequency of sexual intercourses Stimulating social interactions 3/163 (1.8%) •Enhance social interactions •Feel part of a group

Almost all the selected studies and reviews ( n = 160/163; 98.2%) associated cancer patients’ use of medical cannabis with physical health (i.e., managing refractory nausea and vomiting, complementing pain management, promoting sleep, and reducing insomnia, improving appetite and food intake, alleviating musculoskeletal symptoms, managing respiratory symptoms, and improving sexual function and libido). Indeed, only three studies were not associated with this physical health domain [ 51 , 63 , 64 ]. More than one third of the studies and reviews ( n = 59/163; 36.2%) were related to emotional health (managing emotions) [ 2 , 4 , 8 , 17 – 19 , 30 , 42 , 46 – 49 , 52 – 54 , 57 – 62 , 65 – 102 ]. In addition, 22/62 studies [ 7 , 8 , 48 – 50 , 52 , 58 – 60 , 62 , 65 , 66 , 69 , 73 , 77 , 86 , 88 , 102 – 106 ] and 10/101 knowledge syntheses [ 17 , 30 , 79 , 80 , 85 , 96 , 100 , 107 – 109 ] stated reasons for the use of medical cannabis related to overall quality of life (facilitating daily living and domestic activities, recreational use). Lastly, only three studies [ 30 , 48 , 87 ] stated social health reasons (stimulating social interactions).

Results for review question #2

Our findings highlighted three approved indications for the prescription of medical cannabis in oncology (see Table 2 ): 1) managing refractory nausea and vomiting, 2) complementary use to assist in pain management; and 3) improving appetite and food intake. However, the data analysis did not identify specific healthcare provider experiences of the reasons for their patients’ use of medical cannabis, as none of the reviewed articles addressed this element.

Results for review question #3

Our findings suggest that people diagnosed with cancer opt for various routes of administration when using medical cannabis (see Table 3 ). Table 3 Routes of administration Authors (year) / Routes of administration Oils and oral solutions Edible Capsule Tablet Oromucosal spray Smoked Vaporised Suppository Topical Intramuscular Others Abrams (2018) X X X X X X Allan et al. (2018) X X X Amato et al. (2016) X X X X X Anderson et al. (2019) X X X X X X X Badowski (2017) X X X X X X X Badowski & Yanful (2018) X X Bar-Lev Schleider et al. (2018) X X X Bar-Sela et al. (2013) X X X X X Bar-Sela, Tauber, et al. (2019) X X X X X Bar-Sela, Zalman, et al. (2019) X X X X Barakji et al. (2019) X X X X X X X Bertrand et al. (2016) X Birdsall et al. (2016) X X X X Blake et al. (2017) X X X Blanton et al. (2019) X X X X Braun et al. (2020) X X X X X X Brisbois et al. (2011) X X Brown et al. (2019) X X X X X Buchwald et al. (2020) Unclear Buhmeyer (2017) X X X X X X X Byars et al. (2019) X X X X X X X Campbell et al. (2001) X X X Carr et al. (2019) X X Chapman et al. (2020) X Cheng et al. (2012) X X X Chow et al. (2020) X X Clark (2018) X X X X X X X Côté et al. (2016) X Cotter (2009) X X X Darkovska-Serafimovska et al. (2018) X X X X Davis (2008) X X X Davis (2016) X X X X X De las Peñas et al. (2016) X X DiVall & Cersosimo (2007) X X X Donovan et al. (2019) X X X X Donovan et al. (2020) Unclear Donovan et al. (2021) X X Drosdowsky et al. (2020) X X X X Duran et al. (2010) X X X X X X Dzierzanowski (2019) X X X X X X X X Elliott et al. (2016) X X X X Fallon et al. (2017) X Fraguas-Sánchez & Torres-Suárez (2018) X X X X X Garcia & Shamliyan (2018) X X Good et al. (2019) X Good et al. (2020) X Gouveia et al. (2019) X Green & De-Vries (2010) X X X X X Grimison et al. (2021) X X X Hall et al. (2005) X X X X X X Häuser et al. (2018) X X X X X X Häuser et al. (2017) X X X Hauser et al. (2019) X X X Hawley & Gobbo (2019) X X X X X X X X X Hesketh et al. (2017) X X Highet et al. (2020) X X X X X X X Hollister (2001) X X X Huskey (2006) X X X X X Jatoi et al. (2002) X X Jensen et al. (2015) X X X X Johannigman & Eschiti (2013) X X X Johnson et al. (2010) X Johnson et al. (2013) X Karim et al. (2020) Unclear Keller (2020) X X X X X X X X X Kim et al. (2019) X X X X Kleckner et al. (2019) X X X X X X Kramer (2015) X X X X X X Landa et al. (2018) X X X X X X X X LeClair et al. (2020) X X X X X X X X Lichtman et al. (2018) X Likar & Nahler (2017) X X X X X X Lintzeris et al. (2020) X X X X X X X Lossignol (2019) X X X Luckett et al. (2016) X X X X X X X X X X Lynch et al. (2014) X MacCallum & Russo (2018) X X X X X X X X Machado Rocha et al. (2008) X X X X Maida (2008) X Maida & Daeninck (2016) X X X X X X X X Maida et al. (2008) X Makary et al. (2019) X X X X X X Martell et al. (2018) X X X X May & Glode (2016) X X X X X X X Meiri et al. (2007) X X Meng et al. (2020) X X X X X X Mersiades et al. (2020) X X X X Morales et al. (2017) X X X Mortimer et al. (2019) X X X X X X Mucke et al. (2018) X X X Musty & Rossi (2001) X X X National Academies of Sciences (2017) X X X X X X X X National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2020) X X Navari (2009) X X Navari (2012) X X Panozzo et al. (2020) X X Parmar et al. (2016) X X X X X X Pawasarat et al. (2020) X X X Peat (2010) X X X X Peng et al. (2016) X X X X Perez (2006) X X X Pergolizzi Jr. et al. (2017) X X X X X Pergam et al. (2017) X X X X X Podda et al. (2020) Unclear Portenoy et al. (2012) X Potts et al. (2020) Unclear Rabgay et al. (2020) X X X X X X Reblin et al. (2019) X X Robson (2001) X X X X X X Robson (2013) X Romero-Sandoval et al. (2017) X X X X X Rosewall et al. (2020) X X X X X X Russo et al. (2007) X Russo (2008) X X X X X Saadeh & Rustem (2018) X X X X X X X Santana et al. (2015) X X Sawtelle & Holle (2021) X X X X X X X X X X Schussel et al. (2018) X X X Sharkey et al. (2014) X X X X Shin et al. (2019) X Singh et al. (2019) X X X X Smith et al. (2015) X X X Steele et al. (2019) X X X X Strasser et al. (2006) X X X Sutton & Daeninck (2006) X X X X Tafelski et al. (2016) X X X Taha et al. (2019) X X Tallant (2020) X X X Tanco et al. (2019) X X Tateo (2017) X X X X Tečić Vuger et al. (2016) X X X X Thielmann & Daeninck (2013) X X X X X X Todaro (2012) X X X X X X Tramér et al. (2001) X X X X Trentham (2017) X X X X X X X X X X Turcott et al. (2018) X X Turgeman & Bar-Seta (2017) X X X X Turgeman & Bar-Sela (2019) X X X X X Uberall (2020) X X X X X van den Beuken-van Everdingen et al. (2016) X Victorson et al. (2019) X X X Villanueva (2019) X X X Waissengrin et al. (2015) X X X Walsh et al. (2003) X X X X X Wang et al. (2019a) X X Wang et al. (2019b) X X Ware et al. (2008) X X X Welliver (2016) X X X Whitcomb et al. (2020) X X Whiting et al. (2015) X X X X X X X Wilkie et al. (2016) X X X X X Wilner & Arnold (2011) X X X X X Wilson et al. (2019) Unclear Wilson et al. (2021) X X X X Yanes et al. (2019) X X X Yeshurun et al. (2015) X Zaki et al. (2017) X X X Zalman & Bar-Sela (2017) X X X X X Zarrabi et al. (2020) X X X X X X Zimmerman & Yarnell (2019) X X X X Zolotov et al. (2021) X X X Zhou et al. (2021) X X Zylla et al. (2021) X X X X X X

We identified 11 routes of administration, presented according to the frequency reported in the selected literature ( n = 163), namely: 1) oils and oral solutions ( n = 133/163, 81.6%); 2) capsules ( n = 128/163, 78.5%); 3) smoked ( n = 97/163, 59.5%); 4) oromucosal spray ( n = 85/163, 52.1%); 5) edible ( n = 45/163, 27.6%); 6) vaporized (vaping) ( n = 50/163, 30.7%); 7) topical application ( n = 29/132, 17.8%); 8) intramuscular ( n = 28/163, 17.2%); 9) tablets ( n = 18/163, 11%); 10) suppository ( n = 17/163, 10.4%); and 11) other ( n = 4/163, 2.5%). Six studies did not specify the routes of administration used [ 58 , 70 , 87 , 88 , 102 , 109 ], while two studies [ 61 , 77 ] reported the use a percutaneous endoscopic gastrotomy (other).

Some of the identified routes of administration take the form of prescribed medical treatments, such as Nabilone (capsules), Dronabinol (capsules or oil), Namisol™ (tablets), Nabiximols (spray), and Levonantradol (intramuscular). Some cancer patients use cannabis leaves or buds to make other routes of administration (e.g. oils or oral solutions, edibles, suppositories, topical), or they purchase products using various routes of administration (e.g. oil or oral solution, capsule, vape oil or dry cannabis), whether legally, through licensed suppliers, or illegally.

Discussion

The purpose of this review was to map the current literature on the use of medical cannabis in oncological settings based on the experiences of patients diagnosed with cancer and their healthcare providers. To our knowledge, it is the first knowledge synthesis to focus on patients diagnosed with cancer experiences of using medical cannabis. Its findings bring further understanding of the reasons patients diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis and the routes of administration they prefer.

Interestingly, primary studies found a similar proportion of male and female cannabis users: 48% and 49.1%, respectively. However, several studies point out that cannabis use is generally more widespread among male than female diagnosed with cancer [ 102 , 111 , 112 ]. Although this neither validates nor invalidates the presence of gender differences in the rate of cannabis use, it sheds a very useful light onto patients diagnosed with cancer participation in studies on cannabis use.

The next sections will discuss our results regarding the sub-questions of this knowledge synthesis.

Why do people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis?

Unsurprisingly, almost all the examined studies and reviews (98.2%) mention a reason related to physical health. The most frequently cited are associated with relieving refractory nausea and vomiting ( n = 130; 79.8%), a finding that can be explained by the large number of knowledge syntheses and guidelines that support the use of medical cannabis in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting [ 1 , 12 , 34 , 43 – 45 , 113 ]. Pain relief was the second most commonly mentioned reason ( n = 120; 73.6%), since many systematic reviews are on this topic [ 11 , 36 , 114 – 121 ].

Although people diagnosed with cancer may use medical cannabis primarily for therapeutic reasons, our results highlight that use can also be a way to stay connected with others. Indeed, it would seem that people diagnosed with cancer sometimes use cannabis to maintain or forge social relationships. These results echo those of various authors who point out that college students sometimes use cannabis to trigger social interactions with others [ 122 ]. Since, as Phillips points out (122, p.158), “marijuana use is a social activity,” it is not unreasonable to think that people diagnosed with cancer would also use it for a similar purpose.

In addition, 11 of the 62 selected primary studies [ 7 , 8 , 60 , 62 , 69 , 73 , 77 , 85 , 88 , 108 , 109 ] emphasize that people diagnosed with cancer may also use cannabis for recreational purposes. Such results are novel in that they provide insight into an area as of yet unexplored in the scientific literature; ours differ from the results of studies of other populations (i.e. people with HIV and their families [ 123 , 124 ]) showing that recreation is frequently cited as a reason for cannabis use. These differences may be explained by the intensity of symptoms experienced or by the effectiveness of cannabis in relieving symptoms specific to cancer or its treatment (e.g. pain, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, cachexia).

Interestingly, 32 studies [ 7 , 8 , 17 , 30 , 48 – 50 , 52 , 58 – 60 , 62 , 65 , 66 , 69 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 85 , 86 , 88 , 96 , 100 , 102 – 108 ] indicate that use of medical cannabis was linked to at least one overall quality-of-life reason. Some authors [ 6 , 17 , 51 , 59 , 125 , 126 ] even suggest that cannabis use may influence quality of life of people diagnosed with cancer because of cannabis’ multidimensional effect. Furthermore, other studies [ 48 , 127 ] have found medical cannabis to significantly improve the quality of life of people diagnosed with cancer. We did not explore this aspect, as the aim of our knowledge synthesis was to map the current literature regarding the use of medical cannabis based on patients’ and healthcare providers’ experiences.

What are the approved indications for the prescription of medical cannabis in oncology?

Surprisingly, the perspective of healthcare providers did not emerge in the data analysis although some keywords and MeSH were identified to highlight scientific literature targeting healthcare professionals (e.g., oncologic nursing, oncologic care). Most of the reasons associated with the use of medical cannabis (e.g. promoting sleep and reducing insomnia, alleviating musculoskeletal symptoms, and helping to manage emotions) were not related to an approved indication recognized by organizations like the National Health Service or Health Canada (e.g. for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, or cancer-induced pain). These findings are consistent with various studies pointing out that people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis to relieve a wide range of symptoms, not just chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, or cancer-induce pain [ 1 , 17 , 58 , 59 , 77 , 128 ]. Furthermore, several primary studies and knowledge syntheses show favourable results regarding the use of medical cannabis to increase appetite and aid weight gain in people diagnosed with cancer [ 37 , 48 , 67 , 117 ]. Many surveys also suggest that people diagnosed with cancer perceive cannabis use as improving sleep or reducing insomnia [ 2 , 59 , 67 , 87 , 126 , 129 , 130 ]. Further scientific research is needed on certain therapeutic indications, such as for cancer cachexia, insomnia, emotion, and stress management, that are not currently recognized by various regulatory agencies (e.g. National Health Service).

By what routes of administration do people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis?

Our scoping review highlights that certain routes of administration for use of medical cannabis used in oncology are frequently mentioned in the selected articles. Oils and oral solutions (e.g. homemade oils or Dronabiol oral solution), capsules (e.g. homemade capsules, Dronabinol, and Nabilone), oromucosal sprays (e.g. Nabiximols), and smoked cannabis were cited in more than 50% of the studies and reviews. This may be explained by the broad range of products (such as oral solutions and oromucosal sprays) available in many countries, such as Australia, for purchase with a prescription [ 61 , 64 ]; Canada also permits authorized retailers to sell cannabis [ 131 ]. Moreover, the results of a secondary data analysis [ 53 ] indicate that oral solutions (55.2%), oromucosal sprays (27.5%), and capsules (17.3%) are the routes of administration most-frequently purchased in a New York City dispensary. This difference could be explained by the fact that dispensaries offer only certain routes of administration, such as oral solutions, oromucosal sprays and capsules, i.e. those products authorized by the local legislation governing the purchase and sale of cannabis.

Many of the routes of administration identified in our knowledge synthesis are also found in a scoping review [ 16 ], although these authors do not exclusively focus on patients diagnosed with cancer who use cannabis (e.g. smoked, vaporized, edible). However, our results differ in that oils and oral solutions (e.g. Dronabinol oral solution) were mentioned in 133/163 of the studies reviewed. In addition, these authors group several routes of administration into the category “other” (e.g. suppositories, topical, tinctures, sprays). Our results indicate that suppositories were mentioned in 17 studies, topical administration came up in 29 studies, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy was noted in two surveys [ 61 , 77 ]. Moreover, as various surveys suggest, topical products may be used by 5 - 26% of people diagnosed with cancer, while suppository use may vary between 2 and 8% [ 49 , 61 , 77 ]. Our results show that further attention should be paid to certain routes of administration (notably suppositories and topical administration) since these seem to be used by people diagnosed with cancer.

Finally, no primary study or knowledge synthesis has explored the specific reasons for suppository or topical use of medical cannabis products in patients diagnosed with cancer. This demonstrates that these routes of administration are still poorly understood and little explored by researchers. Yet, people diagnosed with cancer may be tempted to use a cannabis suppository for its rapid onset of action (± 15 min) [ 19 ]. Indeed, many authors point out that the effects of medical cannabis vary by route of administration (e.g. onset of action, desired benefits, and potential side effects) [ 18 , 19 , 132 ]. Their results suggest that people diagnosed with cancer and the healthcare providers working with this clientele could be better informed on the different aspects of cannabis use.

Future research and practice recommendations

During data extraction, we found 11 primary studies that did not specify their participants’ type of cancer. In addition, the wide variety of cancers in the studies we selected for review (range 2 - 25) made it impossible to associate specific reasons with the prescription or use of medical cannabis.

As many reasons motivate the use of medical cannabis, studies examining different types of cancer (e.g. leukemia, breast, prostate), the treatments administered (e.g. highly emetogenic chemotherapy, pills, immunotherapy), and the disease trajectories (e.g. at diagnosis, during treatment, and post-treatment) would all seem to be worth more examination. Furthermore, such data should be systematically included in upcoming studies. Future primary studies should also explore the relationships between the wide range of routes of administration and the reasons for using medical cannabis. In doing so healthcare providers would be better informed about the routes of administration that are already is use by people diagnosed with cancer but that have not been well explored in the scientific literature. In addition, it would be interesting to conduct future studies to understand healthcare providers’ perspectives on their patients’ use of medical cannabis, as none of the selected studies and very few articles [ 133 – 135 ] examined this aspect.

Our scoping review indicates that people diagnosed with cancer use many routes of administration for medical cannabis. Thus, it would seem important to develop training activities (i.e. modules, webinars) and educational materials (i.e. checklists, posters) to help oncology care providers become knowledgeable about the routes of administration and the reasons for use of medical cannabis in people diagnosed with cancer. Such training would promote safer and more adequate follow-up for people diagnosed with cancer who use medical cannabis to self-manage their symptoms. The summary of routes of administration and definitions provide below (see Table 4 ) could be used to support healthcare providers’ clinical practice. Table 4 Key findings to guide healthcare professionals Routes of administration Definitions Examples Questions regarding cannabis use Oils and oral solutions Solution (e.g., oil) containing synthetic or homemadse component of cannabis, generally administered with a liquid dropper •Dronabinol oral solution (Syndros™, Benuvia Therapeutics Inc., Chandler, United States) •How would you describe the effects of this treatment on your symptoms? Capsule Soft gelatine capsules containing synthetic components of cannabis •Dronabinol capsule (Marinol™, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Georgia, United States) •Nabilone (Cesamet™, Valeant Canada Ltd., Laval, Canada) •Cannabics™ (Cannabics Pharmaceuticals Inc., Maryland, United States) •What benefits do you experience when taking a capsule containing cannabis (eg, Dronabinol)? •What side effects do you think are associated with taking cannabis capsules (eg, Nabilone)? Tablet Solid dosage form containing synthetic components of cannabis •Namisol™ (Echo Pharmaceuticals, The Netherlands) •Does the dose of Namisol™ provide adequate relief from your symptoms? •What could your interprofessional team do to help you manage your symptoms with Namisol™? Edibles Food products or liquid infused with cannabis extract •Brownies, lozenges, cookies, candies, gummies, chocolate bars, cakes, tinctures (cannabis-infused alcohol) and beverages •Have you produced or used edibles containing cannabis to relieve your cancer symptoms? •What were your reasons for choosing to ingest cannabis edibles? Oromucosal spray Administration with a sprayer under the tongue, inside the cheek or within the mouth of a cannabis extract •Nabiximols (Sativex™, GW Pharmaceuticals, Carlsbad, United States) •Does the frequency and dose of spray you receive each day seem adequate? •How does the oromucosal spray modify your symptoms? Smoked Inhalation of fresh or dried cannabis leaves, fresh or dried cannabis leaves with tobacco, resin, or hashish •Bong •Cigarette (‘joint’) •Pipe •Hookah •What are your reasons for using cannabis by inhalation? •What compromise would you be willing to make to avoid using cannabis by inhalation? Vaporized (‘vaping’) Use of distillate or oil with a vape pen or heating cannabis with a vaporizer •Not applicable •What are the reasons that would lead you to use another route of administration than the vaporizer? Suppository Rectal administration of a tablet or a capsule containing cannabis oil •Not applicable •What are your reasons for using cannabis-containing suppositories? •How would you like to receive your cannabis to avoid using a suppository? Topical Application of a lotion, a cream, an ointment, a transdermal patch, or a gel on a body part •Not applicable •What are your reasons for using creams/lotions/ointments containing cannabis? •What are the advantages and disadvantages of using creams/lotions/ointments containing cannabis? Intramuscular Administration of synthetic components of cannabis •Levonantradol •What route of administration would you like to use to receive your cannabis dose? Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy Administration of a concentrated hash oil, hemp oil or cannabis oil inserted in a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy •Not applicable •What were the reasons for your administration of cannabis derivatives through your gastrostomy? •By which route of administration, other than your gastrostomy, would you like to receive your cannabis?

Strengths and limitations

Our knowledge synthesis followed the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute [ 38 ] for the development of a scoping review. To ensure the reproducibility of the study, its results were presented according to the PRISMA-ScR checklist [ 39 ]. We conducted an exhaustive literature search with a librarian, who is an expert in health-science databases. To ensure methodological rigour, many steps (e.g. screening and data extraction) were performed independently by two reviewers, and a third independent author adjudicated any disagreements. The addition of the Comprehensive Cancer Experience Measurement Framework [ 41 ] was useful to better understand the reasons associated with the use of medical cannabis by people diagnosed with cancer.

The quality of the selected literature was not assessed, as the purpose of this article was to map what is known about the use of medical cannabis in oncology, regardless of its quality. As pointed out by the Joanna Briggs Institute [ 38 ], some scoping reviews do not evaluate the quality of articles.

To increase our review’s feasibility, to reflect a more contemporary approach to cannabis use (i.e., harm reduction), and to highlight the shift in mindset that has come with new medical cannabis (e.g. Nabilone, Dronabinol, Nabiximols), the articles were limited to adult cancer patients and to studies published between 2000 and 2021. It is possible that including articles published before 2000 or targeting pediatrics could influence the results presented by this scoping review.

Conclusion

Our review mapped the current literature on the use of medical cannabis in oncology, mainly from the perspective of cancer patients. This scoping review is the first knowledge synthesis to explore the reasons for the use of medical cannabis, the approved indications for oncology patients, and the routes of administration that people diagnosed with cancer use for medical cannabis.

This review found that several routes of administration other than pills, smoked cannabis, and oral solutions, and that people with cancer use medical cannabis for many reasons. These include therapeutic purposes (to complement pain management, to promote sleep and reduce insomnia, to improve appetite and food intake, etc.) and three medically approved indications for the prescription of cannabis in oncology. The reasons patients use medical cannabis were not limited to therapeutic indications currently recognized by different regulatory agencies (such as Health Canada), underscoring the need for further scientific research into the effects of medical cannabis use. Lastly, the results of our scoping review provide food for thought on the routes of administration people diagnosed with cancer use but that have gone largely unexplored by scientific studies.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Additional file 1. Additional file 2. Additional file 3.

Abbreviations

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

Human immunodeficiency virus

Medical Subject Headings

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Anne Bourbonnais, RN, PhD, Professor at the University of Montreal, and Dr. Maria-Pilar Ramírez García, RN, PhD, Professor at the University Montreal for their contribution in commenting on this article. We would also like to thank Mr. Rafael Rangel Braga, M.S.I., librarian at the University of Montreal for providing us with his expertise in developing the search strategy as well as Mrs. Anna-Maréva Ferville, RN, BSN, for her dedicated time and support during data extraction.

Authors’ contributions

BV: Conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing – original draft, visualization. JC: Conceptualization, formal analysis, writing – review, supervision. AEA: Investigation, writing – review and editing. HM: Investigation, writing – review and editing. GC: Conceptualization, writing – review and editing. KB: Conceptualization, formal analysis, writing – review and editing, supervision.

Funding

This scoping review was developed and conducted as part of the doctoral studies of the first author and for which he receives scholarships from the following: the Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur-Université (QC, Canada), the Quebec Network on Nursing Intervention Research (QC, Canada) and the Research Chair in Innovative Nursing Practices (QC, Canada). The first author has also received financial support from the philanthropic donors of the University of Montreal Faculty of Nursing (QC, Canada) in developing and publishing this article.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

Declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1. Whiting PF Wolff RF Deshpande S Di Nisio M Duffy S Hernandez AV Cannabinoids for Medical Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis JAMA 2015 313 24 2456 2473 26103030 10.1001/jama.2015.6358

2. Zolotov Y Eshet L Morag O Preliminary Assessment of Medical Cannabis Consumption by Cancer Survivors Complement Ther Med 2021 57 102592 10.1016/j.ctim.2020.102592 33197667

3. McLennan A Kerba M Subnis U Campbell T Carlson LE Health care provider preferences for, and barriers to, cannabis use in cancer care Curr Oncol 2020 27 2 e199 205 32489269 10.3747/co.27.5615 PMC7253742

4. Saadeh CE Rustem DR Medical Marijuana Use in a Community Cancer Center Journal of Oncology Practice 2018 14 9 e566 e578 30205775 10.1200/JOP.18.00057

5. Brigden M England D Medical marijuana and community oncology practice: the good, the bad, and the potentially ugly Oncology Exchange 2018 17 3 10 16

6. Daeninck PJ, Maida V. The clinical use of cannabinoid therapies in oncology patients. In: Wedman-St.Louis B, editor. Cannabis : a clinician's guide: Taylor & Francis Group; 2018.

7. Martell K Fairchild A LeGerrier B Sinha R Baker S Liu H Rates of cannabis use in patients with cancer Curr Oncol 2018 25 3 219 225 29962840 10.3747/co.25.3983 PMC6023560

8. Pergam SA Woodfield MC Lee CM Cheng G-S Baker KK Marquis SR Cannabis Use Among Patients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in a State With Legalized Medicinal and Recreational Use Cancer 2017 123 22 4488 4497 28944449 10.1002/cncr.30879 PMC5698756

9. Shin S, Mitchell C, Mannion K, Smolyn J, Meghani SH. An Integrated Review of Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adult Oncologic Pain Management. Pain Management Nursing. 2018. 10.1016/j.pmn.2018.09.006 30527857

10. Aviram J Samuelly-Leichtag G Efficacy of Cannabis-Based Medicines for Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta- Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Pain Physician 2017 20 6 E755 E796 28934780

11. Rabgay K Waranuch N Chaiyakunapruk N Swawangjt R Ingkaninan K Dilokthornsakul P The effects of cannabis, cannabinoids, and their administration routes on pain control efficacy and safety: A systematic review and network meta-analysis J Am Pharm Assoc 2020 60 1 225 234 10.1016/j.japh.2019.07.015 31495691

12. Allan G Finley C Ton J Perry D Ramji J Crawford K Systematic review of systematic reviews for medical cannabinoids: Pain, nausea and vomiting, spasticity, and harms Can Fam Physician 2018 64 2 e78 e94 29449262 PMC5964405

13. Schussel V Kenzo L Santos A Bueno J Yoshimura E Latorraca Oliveira Cruz C Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy Overview of systematic reviews Phytotherapy Research 2018 32 567 76 29168289 10.1002/ptr.5975

14. Tafelski S Haüser W Schäfer M Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabinoids for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting—a systematic review of systematic reviews Der Schmerz 2016 30 1 14 24 26787227 10.1007/s00482-015-0092-3

15. Vyas MB Lebaron VT Gilson AM The use of cannabis in response to the opioid crisis: A review of the literature Nurs Outlook 2018 66 1 56 65 28993073 10.1016/j.outlook.2017.08.012

16. Russell C Rueda S Room R Tyndall M Fischer B Routes of administration for cannabis use – basic prevalence and related health outcomes: A scoping review and synthesis International Journal of Drug Policy 2018 52 87 96 29277082 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.11.008

17. Steele G Arneson T Zylla D A Comprehensive Review of Cannabis in Patients with Cancer: Availability in the USA, General Efficacy, and Safety Curr Oncol Rep 2019 21 10 1 12 10.1007/s11912-019-0757-7 30707319

18. Brown D Watson M Schloss J Pharmacological evidence of medicinal cannabis in oncology: a systematic review Support Care Cancer 2019 27 9 3195 3207 31062109 10.1007/s00520-019-04774-5

19. Sawtelle L Holle LM Use of Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Patients With Cancer Ann Pharmacother 2021 57 7 870 890 10.1177/1060028020965224 33070617

20. Martinasek MP McGrogan JB Maysonet A A Systematic Review of the Respiratory Effects of Inhalational Marijuana Respir Care 2016 61 11 1543 1551 27507173 10.4187/respcare.04846

21. Memedovich KA Dowsett LE Spackman E Noseworthy T Clement F The adverse health effects and harms related to marijuana use: an overview review CMAJ Open 2018 6 3 E339 E346 30115639 10.9778/cmajo.20180023 PMC6182105

22. Gibbs M Winsper C Marwaha S Gilbert E Broome M Singh SP Cannabis use and mania symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis J Affect Disord 2015 171 39 47 25285897 10.1016/j.jad.2014.09.016

23. Lev-Ran S Roerecke M Le Foll B George TP McKenzie K Rehm J The association between cannabis use and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies Psychol Med 2014 44 4 797 810 23795762 10.1017/S0033291713001438

24. Marconi A Di Forti M Lewis CM Murray RM Vassos E Meta-analysis of the Association Between the Level of Cannabis Use and Risk of Psychosis Schizophr Bull 2016 42 5 1262 1269 26884547 10.1093/schbul/sbw003 PMC4988731

25. Broyd SJ van Hell HH Beale C Yücel M Solowij N Acute and Chronic Effects of Cannabinoids on Human Cognition—A Systematic Review Biol Psychiat 2016 79 7 557 567 26858214 10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.12.002

26. Cohen K Weinstein A The Effects of Cannabinoids on Executive Functions: Evidence from Cannabis and Synthetic Cannabinoids—A Systematic Review Brain Sci 2018 8 40 1 19 10.3390/brainsci8030040 PMC5870358 29495540

27. Nader DA Sanchez ZM Effects of regular cannabis use on neurocognition, brain structure, and function: a systematic review of findings in adults 2017 44 1 1 15 10.1080/00952990.2017.1306746 28498718

28. Scott JC Slomiak ST Jones JD Rosen AF Moore TM Gur RC Association of Cannabis With Cognitive Functioning in Adolescents and Young Adults A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis JAMA Psychiat 2018 75 6 585 595 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0335 PMC6137521 29710074

29. Balneaves LG Alraja A Ziemianski D McCuaig F Ware M A National Needs Assessment of Canadian Nurse Practitioners Regarding Cannabis for Therapeutic Purposes Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 2018 3 1 66 73 29588917 10.1089/can.2018.0002 PMC5868330

30. Clark CS Medical Cannabis: The oncology nurse’s role in patient education about the effects of marijuana on cancer palliation Clin J Oncol Nurs 2018 22 1 E1 E6 29350699 10.1188/18.CJON.E1-E6

31. Gardiner KM Singleton JA Sheridan J Kyle GJ Nissen LM Health professional beliefs, knowledge, and concerns surrounding medicinal cannabis - A systematic review PLoS One 2019 14 5 e0216556 31059531 10.1371/journal.pone.0216556 PMC6502454

32 Corroon J Sexton M Bradley R Indications and administration practices amongst medical cannabis healthcare providers: a cross-sectional survey BMC Family Practice 2019 20 1 12 31837706 10.1186/s12875-019-1059-8 PMC6911295

33. Kaplan L Klein T Wilson MG Graves J Knowledge, Practices, and Attitudes of Washington State Health Care Professionals Regarding Medical Cannabis Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 2020 5 2 172 182 32656349 10.1089/can.2019.0051 PMC7347070

34. Smith LA, Azariah F, Lavender VT, Stoner NS, Beltiol S. Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting in adults with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015(11). 10.1002/14651858.CD009464.pub2 PMC6931414 26561338

35. Chapman EJ Edwards Z Boland JW Maddocks M Fettes L Malia C Practice review: Evidence-based and effective management of pain in patients with advanced cancer Palliat Med 2020 34 4 444 453 31980005 10.1177/0269216319896955

36. Darkovska-Serafimovska M Serafimovska T Arsova-Sarafinovska Z Stefanoski S Keskovski Z Balkanov T Pharmacotherapeutic considerations for use of cannabinoids to relieve pain in patients with malignant diseases J Pain Res 2018 11 837 842 29719417 10.2147/JPR.S160556 PMC5922297

37. Wang J, Wang Y, Tong M, Pan H, Li D. Medical Cannabinoids for Cancer Cachexia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BioMed Research International. 2019.

38. Joanna Briggs Institute. Chapter 11: Scoping reviews 2020 [Available from: https://wiki.jbi.global/display/MANUAL/Chapter+11%3A+Scoping+reviews .

39. Tricco AC Lillie E Zrin W O'Brien KK Colquhoun H Levac D PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation Ann Intern Med 2018 169 467 473 30178033 10.7326/M18-0850

40. Miles MB Huberman AM Saldaña J Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook 2014 3 Thousand Oaks, Californie SAGE Publications Inc.

41. Loiselle CG Howell D Nicoll I Fitch M Toward the development of a comprehensive cancer experience measurement framework Support Care Cancer 2019 27 2579 2589 30446857 10.1007/s00520-018-4529-y

42. Bertrand A Boyle H Moreaux J Guillot L Chvetzoff G Charbonnel J-F Does consumption of tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis in adolescents and young adults with cancer affect the use of analgesics during hospitalizations? Arch Pediatr 2016 23 4 353 359 26968307 10.1016/j.arcped.2015.12.022

43. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Antiemesis - Version 1.2021 2021 [Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/antiemesis.pdf .

44. Hesketh PJ Kris MG Basch E Bohlke K Barbour SY Clark-Snow RA Antiemetics: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update J Clin Oncol 2017 35 28 3240 3261 28759346 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.4789

45. Peñas De las R Blasco A De Castro J Escobar Y García-Campelo R Gúrpide A SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2016) Clinical and Translational Oncology 2016 18 1237 42 27896642 10.1007/s12094-016-1583-0 PMC5138256

46. Elliott DA Nabavizadeh N Romer JL Chen Y Holland JM Medical marijuana use in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy Support Care Cancer 2016 24 8 3517 3524 27005465 10.1007/s00520-016-3180-8

47. Reblin M Sahebjam S Peeri NC Martinez YC Thompson Z Egan KM Medical Cannabis Use in Glioma Patients Treated at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in Florida Journal of Palliative Medicine 2019 22 10 1202 1207 31081711 10.1089/jpm.2018.0528 PMC7364313

48. Turcott JG del Rocío Guillen Núñez M Flores-Estrada D Oñate-Ocaña LF Zatarain-Barrón ZL Barrón F The effect of nabilone on appetite, nutritional status, and quality of life in lung cancer patients a randomized, double-blind clinical trial Supportive Care in Cancer 2018 26 9 3029 38 29550881 10.1007/s00520-018-4154-9

49. Anderson SP Zylla DM McGriff DM Arneson TJ Impact of Medical Cannabis on Patient-Reported Symptoms for Patients With Cancer Enrolled in Minnesota's Medical Cannabis Program Journal of Oncology Practice 2019 15 4 e338 e345 30860938 10.1200/JOP.18.00562

50. Fallon MT Lux EA McQuade R Rossetti S Sanchez R Sun W Sativex oromucosal spray as adjunctive therapy in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy: two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies Br J Pain 2017 11 3 119 133 28785408 10.1177/2049463717710042 PMC5521351

51. Good P Haywood A Gogna G Martin J Yates P Greer R Oral medicinal cannabinoids to relieve symptom burden in the palliative care of patients with advanced cancer: a doubleblind, placebo controlled, randomised clinical trial of efficacy and safety of cannabidiol (CBD) BMC Palliative Care 2019 187 1 1 7 10.1186/s12904-019-0494-6 PMC6898965 31810437

52. Highet BH Lesser ER Johnson PW Kaur JS Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol Use in an Outpatient Palliative Medicine Population Am J Hosp Palliat Med 2020 37 8 589 593 10.1177/1049909119900378 31986898

53. Kim A Kaufmann CN Ko R Li Z Han BH Patterns of Medical Cannabis Use among Cancer Patients from a Medical Cannabis Dispensary in New York State J Palliat Care 2019 22 10 1196 1201 10.1089/jpm.2018.0529 PMC6776253 30909786

54. Maida V Ennis M Irani S Corbo M Dolzhykov M Adjunctive nabilone in cancer pain and symptom management: a prospective observational study using propensity scoring Journal of Supportive Oncology 2008 6 3 119 124 18402303

55. Mersiades AJ Tognela A Haber PS Stockler M Lintzeris N Simes J Oral cannabinoid-rich THC/CBD cannabis extract for secondary prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a study protocol for a pilot and definitive randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial (CannabisCINV) BMJ Open 2020 8 9 e020745 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020745 PMC6144412 30209152

56. Singh V Zarrabi AJ Curseen KA Sniecinski R Welsh JW McKenzie-Brown AM Concerns of Patients With Cancer on Accessing Cannabis Products in a State With Restrictive Medical Marijuana Laws: A Survey Study Journal of Oncology Practice 2019 15 10 531 538 31442099 10.1200/JOP.19.00184 PMC7846065

57. Taha T Meiri D Talhamy S Wollner M Peer A Bar-Sela G Cannabis Impacts Tumor Response Rate to Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced Malignancies Oncologist 2019 24 4 549 554 30670598 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0383 PMC6459234

58. Wilson MM Masterson E Broglio K Cannabis Use among Patients in a Rural Academic Palliative Care Clinic J Palliat Med 2019 22 10 1224 1226 30994387 10.1089/jpm.2018.0534

59. Zarrabi AJ Welsh JW Sniecinski R Curseen K Gillespie T Baer W Perception of Benefits and Harms of Medical Cannabis among Seriously Ill Patients in an Outpatient Palliative Care Practice J Palliat Med 2020 23 4 558 562 31539298 10.1089/jpm.2019.0211

60. Drosdowsky A Blaschke S Koproski T Fullerton S Thackerar A Ellen S Cancer patients’ use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis Aust Health Rev 2020 44 4 650 655 31959279 10.1071/AH19066

61. Luckett T Phillips J Allsop D Lee J Solowij N Martin J Clinical trials of medicinal cannabis for appetite-related symptoms from advanced cancer: a survey of preferences, attitudes and beliefs among patients willing to consider participation Intern Med J 2016 46 11 1269 1275 27530738 10.1111/imj.13224

62. Tanco K Dumlao D Kreis R Nguyen K Dibaj S Liu D Attitudes and Beliefs About Medical Usefulness and Legalization of Marijuana among Cancer Patients in a Legalized and a Nonlegalized State J Palliat Med 2019 22 10 1213 1220 31386595 10.1089/jpm.2019.0218 PMC7364300

63. Yeshurun M Shpilberg O Herscovici CLS Dreyer J Peck A Cannabidiol for the Prevention of Graft-versus-Host-Disease after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Results of a Phase II Study Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 2015 21 10 1770 5 26033282 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.05.018

64. Lintzeris N Mills L Suraev A Bravo M Arkell T Arnold JC Medical cannabis use in the Australian community following introduction of legal access: the 2018–2019 Online Cross- Sectional Cannabis as Medicine Survey (CAMS-18) Harm Reduction Journal 2020 17 37 1 12 32513180 10.1186/s12954-020-00377-0 PMC7278204

65. Bar-Sela G Tauber D Mitnik I Sheinman-Yuffe H Bishara-Frolova T Aharon-Peretz J Cannabis-related cognitive impairment: a prospective evaluation of possible influences on patients with cancer during chemotherapy treatment as a pilot study Anticancer Drugs 2019 30 1 91 97 30540595 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000685

66. Bar-Sela G Vorobeichik M Drawsheh S Omer A Goldberg V Muller E The Medical Necessity for Medicinal Cannabis: Prospective, Observational Study Evaluating the Treatment in Cancer Patients on Supportive or Palliative Care Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2013 2013 1 8 10.1155/2013/510392 PMC3730175 23956774

67. Bar-Sela G Zalman D Semenysty V Ballan E The Effects of Dosage-Controlled Cannabis Capsules on Cancer-Related Cachexia and Anorexia Syndrome in Advanced Cancer Patients: Pilot Study Integr Cancer Ther 2019 18 1 8 10.1177/1534735419881498 PMC6785913 31595793

68. Birdsall SM Birdsall TC Tims LA The Use of Medical Marijuana in Cancer Curr Oncol Rep 2016 18 40 1 9 27215434 10.1007/s11912-016-0530-0

69. Braun IM Nayak MM Revette A Wright AA Chai PR Yusufov M Cancer Patients’ Experiences With Medicinal Cannabis-Related Care Cancer 2020 127 1 67 73 32986266 10.1002/cncr.33202 PMC7736188

70. Buchwald D Brønnum D Melgaard D Leutscher PDC Living with a Hope of Survival Is Challenged by a Lack of Clinical Evidence: An Interview Study among Cancer Patients Using Cannabis-Based Medicine J Palliat Med 2020 23 8 1090 1093 31710262 10.1089/jpm.2019.0298

71. Byars T Theisen E Bolton DL Using Cannabis to Treat Cancer-Related Pain Semin Oncol Nurs 2019 35 3 300 309 31053395 10.1016/j.soncn.2019.04.012

72. Cheng K-C Li Y-X Cheng J-T The Use of Herbal Medicine in Cancer-related Anorexia/Cachexia Treatment Around the World Curr Pharm Des 2012 18 31 4810 4826 10.2174/138161212803216979 22632862

73. Donovan KA Portman DG Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Cannabis Use in Cancer Patients Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine 2021 38 7 850 853 10.1177/1049909121999784 33657874

74. Good PD Greer RM Huggett GE Hardy JR An Open-Label Pilot Study Testing the Feasibility of Assessing Total Symptom Burden in Trials of Cannabinoid Medications in Palliative Care J Palliat Med 2020 23 5 650 655 31800354 10.1089/jpm.2019.0540 PMC7232640

75. Hall W Christie M Currow D Cannabinoids and cancer: causation, remediation, and palliation Lancet Oncology 2005 6 1 35 42 15629274 10.1016/S1470-2045(04)01711-5

76. Haüser W Welsch P Klose P Radbruch L Fitzcharles MA Efficacy, tolerability and safety of cannabis-based medicines for cancer pain A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Der Schmerz 2019 33 424 436 31073761 10.1007/s00482-019-0373-3

77. Hawley P Gobbo M Cannabis use in cancer: a survey of the current state at BC Cancer before recreational legalization in Canada Curr Oncol 2019 26 4 e425 e432 31548810 10.3747/co.26.4743 PMC6726263

78. Huskey A Cannabinoids in cancer pain management J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother 2006 20 3 43 46 16931481

79. Keller R Medical Cannabis in Cancer Care Radiat Ther 2020 29 1 55 71

80. Kleckner AS Kleckner IR Kamen CS Tejani MA Janelsins MC Morrow GR Opportunities for cannabis in supportive care in cancer Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology 2019 11 1 29 10.1177/1758835919866362 PMC6676264 31413731

81. LeClair JN Chamberlin KW Clement J Holle LM Documentation of medical marijuana use in cancer patients J Oncol Pharm Pract 2020 26 5 1117 1127 31707922 10.1177/1078155219883912

82. Likar R Nahler G The use of cannabis in supportive care and treatment of brain tumor Neuro-Oncology Practice 2017 4 3 151 160 31385997 10.1093/nop/npw027 PMC6655483

83. Lossignol D Cannabinoids: a new approach for pain control? Curr Opin Oncol 2019 31 4 275 279 30789867 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000523

84. Panozzo S Le B Collins A Weil J Whyte J Barton M Who is asking about medicinal cannabis in palliative care? Intern Med J 2020 50 2 243 246 32037714 10.1111/imj.14732

85. Parmar JR Forrest BD Freeman RA Medical marijuana patient counseling points for health care professionals based on trends in the medical uses, efficacy, and adverse effects of cannabis-based pharmaceutical drugs Res Social Adm Pharm 2016 12 4 638 654 26443472 10.1016/j.sapharm.2015.09.002

86. Pawasarat IM Schultz EM Frisby JC Mehta S Angelo MA Hardy SS The Efficacy of Medical Marijuana in the Treatment of Cancer-Related Pain J Palliat Med 2020 23 6 809 816 32101075 10.1089/jpm.2019.0374

87. Podda M Pagani Bagliacca E Sironi G Veneroni L Silva M Angi M Cannabinoids use in adolescents and young adults with cancer: a single-center survey Tumori Journal 2020 106 4 281 285 32178596 10.1177/0300891620912022

88. Potts JM, Getachew B, Vu M, Nehl E, Yeager KA, Leach CR, et al. Use and Perceptions of Opioids Versus Marijuana among Cancer Survivors. Journal of Cancer Education. 2020. 10.1007/s13187-020-01791-5 PMC7736169 32533537

89. Robson P Therapeutic aspects of cannabis and cannabinoids Br J Psychiatry 2001 178 2 107 115 11157423 10.1192/bjp.178.2.107

90. Rosewall T Feuz C Bayley A Cannabis and Radiation Therapy: A Scoping Review of Human Clinical Trials Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 2020 51 2 342 349 32249134 10.1016/j.jmir.2020.01.007

91. Trentham K Medical Cannabis: Considerations for Dietitians Working in Oncology Oncology Nutrition Connection 2017 20 2 34 43

92. Turgeman I Bar-Sela G Cannabis for cancer–illusion or the tip of an iceberg: a review of the evidence for the use of Cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids in oncology Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2019 28 3 285 296 30572744 10.1080/13543784.2019.1561859

93. Victorson D McMahon M Horowitz B Glickson S Parker B Mendoza-Temple L Exploring cancer survivors' attitudes, perceptions, and concerns about using medical cannabis for symptom and side effect management: A qualitative focus group study Complement Ther Med 2019 47 102204 31779995 10.1016/j.ctim.2019.102204

94. Waissengrin B Urban D Leshem Y Garty M Wolf I Patterns of Use of Medical Cannabis Among Israeli Cancer Patients: A Single Institution Experience J Pain Symptom Manage 2015 49 2 223 230 24937161 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.05.018

95. Walsh C Currin-McCulloch J Simon P Zebrack B Jones BA Shifting Needs and Preferences: Supporting Young Adult Cancer Patients During the Transition from Active Treatment to Survivorship Care J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 2019 8 2 114 121 30312117 10.1089/jayao.2018.0083

96. Wang J Wang Y Tong M Pan H Li D New Prospect for Cancer Cachexia: Medical Cannabinoid J Cancer 2019 10 3 716 720 30719170 10.7150/jca.28246 PMC6360413

97. Ware MA Daeninck P Maida V A review of nabilone in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting Ther Clin Risk Manag 2008 4 1 99 107 18728826 10.2147/tcrm.s1132 PMC2503671

98. Welliver M Cannabinoid agonists for nausea and vomiting Gastroenterol Nurs 2016 39 2 137 138 27070800 10.1097/SGA.0000000000000236

99. Wilson A, Davis C. Attitudes of Cancer Patients to Medicinal Cannabis Use: A Qualitative Study. Australian Social Work. 2021.

100. Zalman D Bar-Sela G Preedy VR Cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids for cancer patients: Multiple palliative indications together with promising laboratory antineoplastic effects Handbook of cannabis and related pathologies: Biology, pharmacology, diagnosis, and treatment 2017 San Diego, CA, US Elsevier Academic Press 859 868

101. Zhou G Stoltzfus JC Houldin AD Parks SM Swan BA Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Behaviors of Oncology Advanced Practice Nurses Regarding Advanced Care Planning for Patients With Cancer Oncol Nurs Forum 2010 37 6 E400 E410 21059573 10.1188/10.ONF.E400-E410

102. Donovan KA Oberoi-Jassal R Chang YD Rajasekhara S Haas MF Randich AL Cannabis Use in Young Adult Cancer Patients J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 2020 9 1 30 35 31436482 10.1089/jayao.2019.0039

103. Bar-Lev Schleider L Mechoulam R Lederman V Hilou M Lencovsky O Betzalel O Prospective analysis of safety and efficacy of medical cannabis in large unselected population of patients with cancer Eur J Intern Med 2018 49 37 43 29482741 10.1016/j.ejim.2018.01.023

104. Brisbois TD de Hock IH Watanabe SM Mirhosseini M Lamoureux DC Chasen M Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol may palliate altered chemosensory perception in cancer patients: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial Ann Oncol 2011 22 9 2086 2093 21343383 10.1093/annonc/mdq727

105. Johnson JR Burnell-Nugent M Lossignol D Ganae-Motan ED Potts R Fallon MT Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of THC:CBD extract and THC extract in patients with intractable cancer-related pain J Pain Symptom Manage 2010 39 2 167 179 19896326 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.06.008

106. Strasser F Luftner D Possinger K Ernst G Ruhstaller T Meissner W Comparison of orally administered cannabis extract and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in treating patients with cancer-related anorexia-cachexia syndrome: a multicenter, phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial from the Cannabis-In-Cachexia-Study-Group J Clin Oncol 2006 24 21 3394 3400 16849753 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.1847

107. JL Kramer 2015 Medical marijuana for cancer. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 65 2 109 22 10.3322/caac.21260 25503438

108. Maida V Daeninck PJ A user's guide to cannabinoid therapies in oncology Curr Oncol 2016 23 6 398 406 28050136 10.3747/co.23.3487 PMC5176373

109. Meng H Dai T Hanlon JG Downar J Alibhai SM Clarke H Cannabis and cannabinoids in cancer pain management Current Opinion in Supportive Palliative Care 2020 14 2 87 93 32332209 10.1097/SPC.0000000000000493

110. Karim S Cheung WY Bu J Jess E Kerba M Medical Cannabis Authorization in Patients With Cancer in the Prelegalization Era: A Population-Based Study J Pain Symptom Manage 2020 59 6 1223 1231 31887404 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.12.367

111. Milam J Slaughter R Meeske K Ritt-Olson A Sherman-Bien S Freyer DR Substance use among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors Psychooncology 2017 25 11 1357 1362 10.1002/pon.3958 PMC4935633 26315824

112 Poghosyan H Poghosyan A Marijuana use among cancer survivors: Quantifying prevalence and identifying predictors Addictive Behaviors 2021 112 106634 32920457 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106634

113. Machado Rocha FC Stéfano SC De Cassia HR Rosa Oliveira LMQ Da Silveira DX Therapeutic use of Cannabis sativa on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis Eur J Cancer Care 2008 17 5 431 443 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.00917.x 18625004

114. Amato L, Davoli M, Minozzi S, Mitrova Z, Parmelli E, Saulle R, et al. Systematic review of safeness and therapeutic efficacy of cannabis in patients with multiple sclerosis, neuropathic pain, and in oncological patients treated with chemotherapy 2016 [Available from: https://www.who.int/medicines/access/controlled-substances/Systematic_reviews_on_therapeutic_efficacy_and_safety.pdf?ua=1 . 10.19191/EP17.5-6.AD01.069 29119763

115. Campbell FA Tramer MR Carroll D Reynolds DJM Moore RA McQuay HJ Are cannabinoids an effective and safe treatment option in the management of pain? A qualitative systematic review BMJ 2001 323 1 6 11440935 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.13 PMC34324

116 Gouveia DN Guimarães AG Santos WBDR Quintans-Júnior LJ Natural products as a perspective for cancer pain management: A systematic review Phytomedicine 2019 58 152766 31005719 10.1016/j.phymed.2018.11.026

117. Mucke M Weier M Carter C Copeland J Degenhardt L Cuhls H Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids in palliative medicine J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2018 9 220 234 29400010 10.1002/jcsm.12273 PMC5879974

118. Tallant J Cannabinoids for the treatment of cancer-related pain: a systematic review Cancer Nursing Practice 2020 19 2 37 42

119. van den Beuken-van Everdingen MHJ de Graeff A Jongen JLM Dijkstra D Mostovaya I Vissers KC Pharmacological Treatment of Pain in Cancer Patients: The Role of Adjuvant Analgesics, a Systematic Review Pain Pract 2017 17 3 409 419 27207115 10.1111/papr.12459

120. Tateo S State of the evidence: Cannabinoids and cancer pain-A systematic review J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 2017 29 2 94 103 27863159 10.1002/2327-6924.12422

121. Häuser W Welsch P Klose P Radbruch L Fitzcharles M-A Efficacy, tolerability and safety of cannabis-based medicines for cancer pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Schmerz 2019 33 5 424 436 31073761 10.1007/s00482-019-0373-3

122. Phillips KT Phillips MM Lalonde TL Prince MA Does social context matter? An ecological momentary assessment study of marijuana use among college students Addict Behav 2018 83 154 159 29329753 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.01.004

123. Costiniuk CT Saneei Z Salahuddin S Cox J Routy J-P Rueda S Cannabis Consumption in People Living with HIV: Reasons for Use, Secondary Effects, and Opportunities for Health Education Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 2019 4 3 204 213 31579835 10.1089/can.2018.0068 PMC6757238

124. Bruce D Bouris AM Bowers S Blocker O Young Lee S Glidden MF Medical, therapeutic, and recreational use of cannabis among young men who have sex with men living with HIV Addiction Research & Theory 2020 28 3 250 259 32952491 10.1080/16066359.2019.1629427 PMC7500448

125. Davis MP Oral nabilone capsules in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and pain Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2008 17 1 85 95 18095921 10.1517/13543784.17.1.85

126. Zaki P Blake A Wolt A Chan S Liying Z Wan A The use of medical cannabis in cancer patients Journal of Pain Management 2017 10 4 353 362

127. Zhang H Xie M Archibald SD Jackson BS Gupta MK Association of marijuana use with psychosocial and quality of life outcomes among patients with head and neck cancer JAMA Otolaryngology-head & Neck Surgery 2018 144 11 1017 1022 30073295 10.1001/jamaoto.2018.0486 PMC6248184

128. Donovan KA Chang YD Oberoi-Jassal R Rajasekhara S Smith J Haas M Relationship of Cannabis Use to Patient-Reported Symptoms in Cancer Patients Seeking Supportive/Palliative Care J Palliat Med 2019 22 10 1191 1195 30794025 10.1089/jpm.2018.0533

129. Johnson JR Lossignol D Burnell-Nugent M Fallon MT An Open-Label Extension Study to Investigate the Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of THC/CBD Oromucosal Spray and Oromucosal THC Spray in Patients With Terminal Cancer-Related Pain Refractory to Strong Opioid Analgesics J Pain Symptom Manage 2013 46 2 207 218 23141881 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.07.014

130 Webster EM Yadav GS Gysler S McNamara B Black J Tymon-Rosario J Prescribed medical cannabis in women with gynecologic malignancies: A single-institution survey-based study Gynecologic Oncology Reports 2020 34 100667 33204797 10.1016/j.gore.2020.100667 PMC7653050

131. Government of Canada. Cannabis Act (S.C. 2018, c. 16) 2020 [Available from: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-24.5/ .

132. MacCallum CA Russo EB Practical considerations in medical cannabis administration and dosing Eur J Intern Med 2018 49 12 19 29307505 10.1016/j.ejim.2018.01.004

133. Braun IM Wright A Peteet J Meyer FL Yuppa DP Bolcic-Jankovic D Medical Oncologists’ Beliefs, Practices, and Knowledge Regarding Marijuana Used Therapeutically: A Nationally Representative Survey Study J Clin Oncol 2018 36 19 1957 1962 29746226 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.1221 PMC6553839

134. Sannes TS Nayak MM Tung S United States oncologists' clinical preferences regarding modes of medicinal cannabis use Cancer Commun 2021 41 6 528 531 10.1002/cac2.12160 PMC8211351 33955716

135 Corroon J Sexton M Bradley R Indications and administration practices amongst medical cannabis healthcare providers: a cross-sectional survey BMC Family Practice 2019 20 174 1 12 31837706 10.1186/s12875-019-1059-8 PMC6911295