Tory R Spindle1, Edward J Cone2, Elia Goffi2, Elise M Weerts2, John M Mitchell3, Ruth E Winecker3, George E Bigelow2, Ronald R Flegel4, Ryan Vandrey2. 1. Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD, 21224, USA. Electronic address: tspindle@jhmi.edu. 2. Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD, 21224, USA. 3. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, 3040 East Cornwallis Rd., NC, 27709, USA. 4. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Division of Workplace Programs (DWP), 5600Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, 20857, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use and availability of oral and inhalable products containing cannabidiol (CBD) as the principal constituent has increased with expanded cannabis/hemp legalization. However, few controlled clinical laboratory studies have evaluated the pharmacodynamic effects of oral or vaporized CBD or CBD-dominant cannabis. METHODS: Eighteen healthy adults (9 men; 9 women) completed four, double-blind, double-dummy, drug administration sessions. Sessions were separated by ≥1 week and included self-administration of 100 mg oral CBD, 100 mg vaporized CBD, vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis (100 mg CBD; 3.7 mg THC), and placebo. Study outcomes included: subjective drug effects, vital signs, cognitive/psychomotor performance, and whole blood THC and CBD concentrations. RESULTS: Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis increased ratings on several subjective items (e.g., Like Drug Effect) relative to placebo. Subjective effects did not differ between oral CBD and placebo and were generally higher for CBD-dominant cannabis compared to vaporized CBD. CBD did not increase ratings for several items typically associated with acute cannabis/THC exposure (e.g., Paranoid). Women reported qualitatively higher ratings for Pleasant Drug Effect than men after vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis use. CBD-dominant cannabis increased heart rate compared to placebo. Cognitive/psychomotor impairment was not observed in any drug condition. CONCLUSIONS: Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis produced discriminable subjective drug effects, which were sometimes stronger in women, but did not produce cognitive/psychomotor impairment. Subjective effects of oral CBD did not differ from placebo. Future research should further elucidate the subjective effects of various types of CBD products (e.g., inhaled, oral, topical), which appear to be distinct from THC-dominant products.
INTRODUCTION: The use and availability of oral and inhalable products containing cannabidiol (CBD) as the principal constituent has increased with expanded cannabis/hemp legalization. However, few controlled clinical laboratory studies have evaluated the pharmacodynamic effects of oral or vaporized CBD or CBD-dominant cannabis. METHODS: Eighteen healthy adults (9 men; 9 women) completed four, double-blind, double-dummy, drug administration sessions. Sessions were separated by ≥1 week and included self-administration of 100 mg oral CBD, 100 mg vaporized CBD, vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis (100 mg CBD; 3.7 mg THC), and placebo. Study outcomes included: subjective drug effects, vital signs, cognitive/psychomotor performance, and whole blood THC and CBD concentrations. RESULTS: Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis increased ratings on several subjective items (e.g., Like Drug Effect) relative to placebo. Subjective effects did not differ between oral CBD and placebo and were generally higher for CBD-dominant cannabis compared to vaporized CBD. CBD did not increase ratings for several items typically associated with acute cannabis/THC exposure (e.g., Paranoid). Women reported qualitatively higher ratings for Pleasant Drug Effect than men after vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis use. CBD-dominant cannabis increased heart rate compared to placebo. Cognitive/psychomotor impairment was not observed in any drug condition. CONCLUSIONS: Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis produced discriminable subjective drug effects, which were sometimes stronger in women, but did not produce cognitive/psychomotor impairment. Subjective effects of oral CBD did not differ from placebo. Future research should further elucidate the subjective effects of various types of CBD products (e.g., inhaled, oral, topical), which appear to be distinct from THC-dominant products.
Authors: Marcel O Bonn-Miller; Mallory J E Loflin; Brian F Thomas; Jahan P Marcu; Travis Hyke; Ryan Vandrey Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Tory R Spindle; Edward J Cone; David Kuntz; John M Mitchell; George E Bigelow; Ronald Flegel; Ryan Vandrey Journal: J Anal Toxicol Date: 2020-03-07 Impact factor: 3.220
Authors: Chandni Hindocha; Tom P Freeman; Grainne Schafer; Chelsea Gardener; Ravi K Das; Celia J A Morgan; H Valerie Curran Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Thomas R Arkell; Nicholas Lintzeris; Richard C Kevin; Johannes G Ramaekers; Ryan Vandrey; Christopher Irwin; Paul S Haber; Iain S McGregor Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Tory R Spindle; Edward J Cone; Nicolas J Schlienz; John M Mitchell; George E Bigelow; Ronald Flegel; Eugene Hayes; Ryan Vandrey Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-11-02
Authors: Thomas R Arkell; Frederick Vinckenbosch; Richard C Kevin; Eef L Theunissen; Iain S McGregor; Johannes G Ramaekers Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Caroline A MacCallum; Lindsay A Lo; Carly A Pistawka; April Christiansen; Michael Boivin; Melissa Snider-Adler Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-24 Impact factor: 5.435
Authors: Sarah L Withey; Brian D Kangas; Sophia Charles; Andrew B Gumbert; Jessica E Eisold; Susan R George; Jack Bergman; Bertha K Madras Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Catherine F Moore; Catherine M Davis; Eric L Harvey; Michael A Taffe; Elise M Weerts Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 3.533
Authors: Anna E Kirkland; Matthew C Fadus; Staci A Gruber; Kevin M Gray; Timothy E Wilens; Lindsay M Squeglia Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Dennis J Sholler; Tory R Spindle; Edward J Cone; Elia Goffi; David Kuntz; John M Mitchell; Ruth E Winecker; George E Bigelow; Ronald R Flegel; Ryan Vandrey Journal: J Anal Toxicol Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 3.220