Adi Aran1, Moria Harel2, Hanoch Cassuto2, Lola Polyansky2, Aviad Schnapp2, Nadia Wattad2, Dorit Shmueli3, Daphna Golan4, F Xavier Castellanos5. 1. Neuropediatric Unit, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, 12 Bayit Street, 91031, Jerusalem, Israel. aaran@szmc.org.il. 2. Neuropediatric Unit, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, 12 Bayit Street, 91031, Jerusalem, Israel. 3. Child Development Centers, Clalit Health Services, Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel. 4. Child Development Centers, Maccabi Health Services, Jerusalem, Israel. 5. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endocannabinoid dysfunction in animal models of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and accumulating, albeit anecdotal, evidence for efficacy in humans motivated this placebo-controlled double-blind comparison of two oral cannabinoid solutions in 150 participants (age 5-21 years) with ASD. METHODS: We tested (1) BOL-DP-O-01-W, a whole-plant cannabis extract containing cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol at a 20:1 ratio and (2) BOL-DP-O-01, purified cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol at the same ratio. Participants (N = 150) received either placebo or cannabinoids for 12-weeks (testing efficacy) followed by a 4-week washout and predetermined cross-over for another 12 weeks to further assess tolerability. Registered primary efficacy outcome measures were improvement in behavioral problems (differences between whole-plant extract and placebo) on the Home Situation Questionnaire-ASD (HSQ-ASD) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale with disruptive behavior anchor points (CGI-I). Secondary measures were Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-2) and Autism Parenting Stress Index (APSI). RESULTS: Changes in Total Scores of HSQ-ASD (primary-outcome) and APSI (secondary-outcome) did not differ among groups. Disruptive behavior on the CGI-I (co-primary outcome) was either much or very much improved in 49% on whole-plant extract (n = 45) versus 21% on placebo (n = 47; p = 0.005). Median SRS Total Score (secondary-outcome) improved by 14.9 on whole-plant extract (n = 34) versus 3.6 points after placebo (n = 36); p = 0.009). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. Common adverse events included somnolence and decreased appetite, reported for 28% and 25% on whole-plant extract, respectively (n = 95); 23% and 21% on pure-cannabinoids (n = 93), and 8% and 15% on placebo (n = 94). Limitations Lack of pharmacokinetic data and a wide range of ages and functional levels among participants warrant caution when interpreting the results. CONCLUSIONS: This interventional study provides evidence that BOL-DP-O-01-W and BOL-DP-O-01, administrated for 3 months, are well tolerated. Evidence for efficacy of these interventions are mixed and insufficient. Further testing of cannabinoids in ASD is recommended. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02956226. Registered 06 November 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02956226.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Endocannabinoid dysfunction in animal models of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and accumulating, albeit anecdotal, evidence for efficacy in humans motivated this placebo-controlled double-blind comparison of two oral cannabinoid solutions in 150 participants (age 5-21 years) with ASD. METHODS: We tested (1) BOL-DP-O-01-W, a whole-plant cannabis extract containing cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol at a 20:1 ratio and (2) BOL-DP-O-01, purified cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol at the same ratio. Participants (N = 150) received either placebo or cannabinoids for 12-weeks (testing efficacy) followed by a 4-week washout and predetermined cross-over for another 12 weeks to further assess tolerability. Registered primary efficacy outcome measures were improvement in behavioral problems (differences between whole-plant extract and placebo) on the Home Situation Questionnaire-ASD (HSQ-ASD) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale with disruptive behavior anchor points (CGI-I). Secondary measures were Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-2) and Autism Parenting Stress Index (APSI). RESULTS: Changes in Total Scores of HSQ-ASD (primary-outcome) and APSI (secondary-outcome) did not differ among groups. Disruptive behavior on the CGI-I (co-primary outcome) was either much or very much improved in 49% on whole-plant extract (n = 45) versus 21% on placebo (n = 47; p = 0.005). Median SRS Total Score (secondary-outcome) improved by 14.9 on whole-plant extract (n = 34) versus 3.6 points after placebo (n = 36); p = 0.009). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. Common adverse events included somnolence and decreased appetite, reported for 28% and 25% on whole-plant extract, respectively (n = 95); 23% and 21% on pure-cannabinoids (n = 93), and 8% and 15% on placebo (n = 94). Limitations Lack of pharmacokinetic data and a wide range of ages and functional levels among participants warrant caution when interpreting the results. CONCLUSIONS: This interventional study provides evidence that BOL-DP-O-01-W and BOL-DP-O-01, administrated for 3 months, are well tolerated. Evidence for efficacy of these interventions are mixed and insufficient. Further testing of cannabinoids in ASD is recommended. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02956226. Registered 06 November 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02956226.
Authors: Orrin Devinsky; Maria Roberta Cilio; Helen Cross; Javier Fernandez-Ruiz; Jacqueline French; Charlotte Hill; Russell Katz; Vincenzo Di Marzo; Didier Jutras-Aswad; William George Notcutt; Jose Martinez-Orgado; Philip J Robson; Brian G Rohrback; Elizabeth Thiele; Benjamin Whalley; Daniel Friedman Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Hanna J Szkudlarek; Sagar J Desai; Justine Renard; Brian Pereira; Christopher Norris; Christina E L Jobson; Nagalingam Rajakumar; Brian L Allman; Steven R Laviolette Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Douglas L Boggs; Jacques D Nguyen; Daralyn Morgenson; Michael A Taffe; Mohini Ranganathan Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2017-09-06 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Alline C Campos; Manoela V Fogaça; Franciele F Scarante; Sâmia R L Joca; Amanda J Sales; Felipe V Gomes; Andreza B Sonego; Naielly S Rodrigues; Ismael Galve-Roperh; Francisco S Guimarães Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Philip McGuire; Philip Robson; Wieslaw Jerzy Cubala; Daniel Vasile; Paul Dugald Morrison; Rachel Barron; Adam Taylor; Stephen Wright Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Marco Colizzi; Riccardo Bortoletto; Rosalia Costa; Sagnik Bhattacharyya; Matteo Balestrieri Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Stephen Schultz; Georgianna G Gould; Nicola Antonucci; Anna Lisa Brigida; Dario Siniscalco Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 4.411