The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A pilot clinical study of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme
Open accessAbstract
Delta(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth and angiogenesis in animal models, so their potential application as antitumoral drugs has been suggested. However, the antitumoral effect of cannabinoids has never been tested in humans. Here we report the first clinical study aimed at assessing cannabinoid antitumoral action, specifically a pilot phase I trial in which nine patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme were administered THC intratumoraly. The patients had previously failed standard therapy (surgery and radiotherapy) and had clear evidence of tumour progression. The primary end point of the study was to determine the safety of intracranial THC administration. We also evaluated THC action on the length of survival and various tumour-cell parameters. A dose escalation regimen for THC administration was assessed. Cannabinoid delivery was safe and could be achieved without overt psychoactive effects. Median survival of the cohort from the beginning of cannabinoid administration was 24 weeks (95% confidence interval: 15-33). Delta(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibited tumour-cell proliferation in vitro and decreased tumour-cell Ki67 immunostaining when administered to two patients. The fair safety profile of THC, together with its possible antiproliferative action on tumour cells reported here and in other studies, may set the basis for future trials aimed at evaluating the potential antitumoral activity of cannabinoids.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The molecular logic of endocannabinoid signalling
Piomelli, D. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1247 · Cited by 1,957
Cited by
Practical considerations in medical cannabis administration and dosing
MacCallum, C. A., & Russo, E. B. (2018) · European Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2018.01.004 · Cited by 663
MAPK/JNK signalling: a potential autophagy regulation pathway
Zhou, Y.-Y., Li, Y., Jiang, W.-Q., & Zhou, L.-F. (2015) · Bioscience Reports · doi:10.1042/bsr20140141 · Cited by 444
Programming of neural cells by (endo)cannabinoids: from physiological rules to emerging therapies
Maccarrone, M., Guzmán, M., Mackie, K., Doherty, P., & Harkany, T. (2014) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3846 · Cited by 298
Self-citationAbrams, D. I. (2018) · European Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2018.01.003 · Cited by 296
The multidrug transporter ABCG2 (BCRP) is inhibited by plant‐derived cannabinoids
Holland, M. L., Lau, D. T. T., Allen, J. D., & Arnold, J. C. (2007) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707467 · Cited by 150
Metadata
- Authors
- Guzmán, M., Duarte, M. J., Blázquez, C., Ravina, J., Rosa, M. C., Galve-Roperh, I., Sánchez, C., Velasco, G., & González-Feria, L.
- Venue
- British Journal of Cancer
- Published
- 2006-06-27
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 197-203
- ISSN
- 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-1827
- OpenAlex
- W2155473143
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A pilot clinical study of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603236
- The paper
- Guzmán, M., Duarte, M. J., Blázquez, C., Ravina, J., Rosa, M. C., Galve-Roperh, I., Sánchez, C., Velasco, G., & González-Feria, L. (2006). A pilot clinical study of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603236
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.