Cited by 663Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesPain Management and Opioid Use

Practical considerations in medical cannabis administration and dosing

MacCallum, Caroline A., Russo, Ethan B.·2018·European Journal of Internal Medicine

Abstract

Cannabis has been employed medicinally throughout history, but its recent legal prohibition, biochemical complexity and variability, quality control issues, previous dearth of appropriately powered randomised controlled trials, and lack of pertinent education have conspired to leave clinicians in the dark as to how to advise patients pursuing such treatment. With the advent of pharmaceutical cannabis-based medicines (Sativex/nabiximols and Epidiolex), and liberalisation of access in certain nations, this ignorance of cannabis pharmacology and therapeutics has become untenable. In this article, the authors endeavour to present concise data on cannabis pharmacology related to tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) et al., methods of administration (smoking, vaporisation, oral), and dosing recommendations. Adverse events of cannabis medicine pertain primarily to THC, whose total daily dose-equivalent should generally be limited to 30mg/day or less, preferably in conjunction with CBD, to avoid psychoactive sequelae and development of tolerance. CBD, in contrast to THC, is less potent, and may require much higher doses for its adjunctive benefits on pain, inflammation, and attenuation of THC-associated anxiety and tachycardia. Dose initiation should commence at modest levels, and titration of any cannabis preparation should be undertaken slowly over a period of as much as two weeks. Suggestions are offered on cannabis-drug interactions, patient monitoring, and standards of care, while special cases for cannabis therapeutics are addressed: epilepsy, cancer palliation and primary treatment, chronic pain, use in the elderly, Parkinson disease, paediatrics, with concomitant opioids, and in relation to driving and hazardous activities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejim.2018.01.004

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacCallum, C. A., & Russo, E. B.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
  • MacCallum, Caroline A.
  • Russo, Ethan B.
Venue
European Journal of Internal Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
49
Pages
12-19
ISSN
0953-6205 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2781755317
Cited by
663
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 78 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 21
FWCI
8.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
medical cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol, Sativex, Epidiolex, cannabis pharmacology, oral administration, dose titration, adverse events, drug interactions, epilepsy, chronic pain, Parkinson's disease, elderly patients
MeSH terms
Cannabidiol, Cannabis, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Administration Schedule, Drug Combinations, Humans, Inflammation, Pain, Dronabinol, Medical Marijuana

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review