Skip to main content
Download PDF

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

BMC Cancer volume 22, Article number: 319 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

Some patients diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis to self-manage undesirable symptoms, including nausea and pain. To improve patient safety and oncological care quality, the routes of administration for use of medical cannabis, patients’ reasons, and prescribed indications must be better understood.

Methods

Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, a scoping review was conducted to map the current evidence regarding the use of medical cannabis in oncological settings based on the experiences of patients diagnosed with cancer and their healthcare providers. A search strategy was developed with a scientific librarian which included five databases (CINAHL, Web of Science, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO) and two grey literature sources (Google Scholar and ProQuest). The inclusion criteria were: 1) population: adults aged 18 and over diagnosed with cancer; 2) phenomena of interest: reasons for cannabis use and/or the prescribed indications for medical cannabis; 3) context: oncological setting. French- or English-language primary empirical studies, knowledge syntheses, and grey literature published between 2000 and 2021 were included. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and subjected to a thematic analysis. A narrative description approach was used to synthesize and present the findings.

Results

We identified 5,283 publications, of which 163 met the eligibility criteria. Two main reasons for medical cannabis use emerged from the thematic analysis: limiting the impacts of cancer and its side effects; and staying connected to others. Our results also indicated that medical cannabis is mostly used for three approved indications: to manage refractory nausea and vomiting, to complement pain management, and to improve appetite and food intake. We highlighted 11 routes of administration for medical cannabis, with oils and oral solutions the most frequently reported.

Conclusion

Future studies should consider the multiple routes of administration for medical cannabis, such as inhalation and edibles. Our review highlights that learning opportunities would support the development of healthcare providers’ knowledge and skills in assessing the needs and preferences of patients diagnosed with cancer who use medical cannabis.

Peer Review reports

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 [1,2,3]. Cannabis use is becoming increasingly popular for the management of cancer-related symptoms, with some patients incorporating it as a regular self-management behaviour [4,5,6]. 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 [9,10,11]. It may also mitigate chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting [12,13,14], 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 [16,17,18,19].

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 [21,22,23,24]. 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 [25,26,27,28]. 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, 31,32,33].

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:

  1. 1)

    Why do people diagnosed with cancer use medical cannabis?

  2. 2)

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

  3. 3)

    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
figure 1

Prisma flowchart

Full size image

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 [43,44,45].

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 [46,47,48] examined a single type of cancer. A few studies (n = 11) did not specify participants’ type of cancer [49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59]. 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
Full size table

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
Full size table

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, 17,18,19, 30, 42, 46,47,48,49, 52,53,54, 57,58,59,60,61,62, 65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102]. In addition, 22/62 studies [7, 8, 48,49,50, 52, 58,59,60, 62, 65, 66, 69, 73, 77, 86, 88, 102,103,104,105,106] and 10/101 knowledge syntheses [17, 30, 79, 80, 85, 96, 100, 107,108,109] 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
Full size table

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, 43,44,45, 113]. Pain relief was the second most commonly mentioned reason (n = 120; 73.6%), since many systematic reviews are on this topic [11, 36, 114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121].

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, 48,49,50, 52, 58,59,60, 62, 65, 66, 69, 77, 79, 80, 85, 86, 88, 96, 100, 102,103,104,105,106,107,108] 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 [133,134,135] 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
Full size table

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.

Availability of data and materials

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

Abbreviations

CINAHL:

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

HIV:

Human immunodeficiency virus

MeSH:

Medical Subject Headings

PRISMA-ScR:

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

References

  1. Whiting PF, Wolff RF, Deshpande S, Di Nisio M, Duffy S, Hernandez AV, et al. Cannabinoids for Medical Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2015;313(24):2456–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zolotov Y, Eshet L, Morag O. Preliminary Assessment of Medical Cannabis Consumption by Cancer Survivors. Complement Ther Med. 2021;57:102592.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Saadeh CE, Rustem DR. Medical Marijuana Use in a Community Cancer Center. Journal of Oncology Practice. 2018;14(9):e566–78.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brigden M, England D. Medical marijuana and community oncology practice: the good, the bad, and the potentially ugly. Oncology Exchange. 2018;17(3):10–6.

    Google Scholar 

  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, et al. Rates of cannabis use in patients with cancer. Curr Oncol. 2018;25(3):219–25.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Pergam SA, Woodfield MC, Lee CM, Cheng G-S, Baker KK, Marquis SR, et al. Cannabis Use Among Patients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in a State With Legalized Medicinal and Recreational Use. Cancer. 2017;123(22):4488–97.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. 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):E755–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):225–34.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Allan G, Finley C, Ton J, Perry D, Ramji J, Crawford K, et al. Systematic review of systematic reviews for medical cannabinoids: Pain, nausea and vomiting, spasticity, and harms. Can Fam Physician. 2018;64(2):e78–94.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Schussel V, Kenzo L, Santos A, Bueno J, Yoshimura E, Latorraca Oliveira Cruz C, et al. Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy Overview of systematic reviews. Phytotherapy Research. 2018;32:567–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Brown D, Watson M, Schloss J. Pharmacological evidence of medicinal cannabis in oncology: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27(9):3195–207.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sawtelle L, Holle LM. Use of Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Patients With Cancer. Ann Pharmacother. 2021;57(7):870–90.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Martinasek MP, McGrogan JB, Maysonet A. A Systematic Review of the Respiratory Effects of Inhalational Marijuana. Respir Care. 2016;61(11):1543–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):E339–46.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):1262–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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):557–67.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  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):585–95.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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):E1–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  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):172–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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).

  35. Chapman EJ, Edwards Z, Boland JW, Maddocks M, Fettes L, Malia C, et al. Practice review: Evidence-based and effective management of pain in patients with advanced cancer. Palliat Med. 2020;34(4):444–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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;11:837–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169:467–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  41. Loiselle CG, Howell D, Nicoll I, Fitch M. Toward the development of a comprehensive cancer experience measurement framework. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27:2579–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bertrand A, Boyle H, Moreaux J, Guillot L, Chvetzoff G, Charbonnel J-F, et al. 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):353–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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, et al. Antiemetics: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(28):3240–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Peñas De las R, Blasco A, De Castro J, Escobar Y, García-Campelo R, Gúrpide A, et al. SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2016). Clinical and Translational Oncology. 2016;18:1237–42.

    Google Scholar 

  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):3517–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):1202–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Turcott JG, del Rocío Guillen Núñez M, Flores-Estrada D, Oñate-Ocaña LF, Zatarain-Barrón ZL, Barrón F, et al. 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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):e338–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Fallon MT, Lux EA, McQuade R, Rossetti S, Sanchez R, Sun W, et al. 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):119–33.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Good P, Haywood A, Gogna G, Martin J, Yates P, Greer R, et al. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  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):589–93.

    Google Scholar 

  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):1196–201.

    Google Scholar 

  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):119–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Mersiades AJ, Tognela A, Haber PS, Stockler M, Lintzeris N, Simes J, et al. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Singh V, Zarrabi AJ, Curseen KA, Sniecinski R, Welsh JW, McKenzie-Brown AM, et al. 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):531–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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):549–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Wilson MM, Masterson E, Broglio K. Cannabis Use among Patients in a Rural Academic Palliative Care Clinic. J Palliat Med. 2019;22(10):1224–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Zarrabi AJ, Welsh JW, Sniecinski R, Curseen K, Gillespie T, Baer W, et al. Perception of Benefits and Harms of Medical Cannabis among Seriously Ill Patients in an Outpatient Palliative Care Practice. J Palliat Med. 2020;23(4):558–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Drosdowsky A, Blaschke S, Koproski T, Fullerton S, Thackerar A, Ellen S, et al. Cancer patients’ use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis. Aust Health Rev. 2020;44(4):650–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Luckett T, Phillips J, Allsop D, Lee J, Solowij N, Martin J, et al. 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):1269–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Tanco K, Dumlao D, Kreis R, Nguyen K, Dibaj S, Liu D, et al. 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):1213–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Yeshurun M, Shpilberg O, Herscovici CLS, Dreyer J, Peck A, et al. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Lintzeris N, Mills L, Suraev A, Bravo M, Arkell T, Arnold JC, et al. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  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):91–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Birdsall SM, Birdsall TC, Tims LA. The Use of Medical Marijuana in Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2016;18(40):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Braun IM, Nayak MM, Revette A, Wright AA, Chai PR, Yusufov M, et al. Cancer Patients’ Experiences With Medicinal Cannabis-Related Care. Cancer. 2020;127(1):67–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):1090–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Byars T, Theisen E, Bolton DL. Using Cannabis to Treat Cancer-Related Pain. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2019;35(3):300–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):4810–26.

    Google Scholar 

  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):850–3.

    Google Scholar 

  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):650–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Hall W, Christie M, Currow D. Cannabinoids and cancer: causation, remediation, and palliation. Lancet Oncology. 2005;6(1):35–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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;33:424–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):e425–32.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Huskey A. Cannabinoids in cancer pain management. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2006;20(3):43–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Keller R. Medical Cannabis in Cancer Care. Radiat Ther. 2020;29(1):55–71.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Kleckner AS, Kleckner IR, Kamen CS, Tejani MA, Janelsins MC, Morrow GR, et al. Opportunities for cannabis in supportive care in cancer. Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology. 2019;11:1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  81. LeClair JN, Chamberlin KW, Clement J, Holle LM. Documentation of medical marijuana use in cancer patients. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020;26(5):1117–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Likar R, Nahler G. The use of cannabis in supportive care and treatment of brain tumor. Neuro-Oncology Practice. 2017;4(3):151–60.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Lossignol D. Cannabinoids: a new approach for pain control? Curr Opin Oncol. 2019;31(4):275–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Panozzo S, Le B, Collins A, Weil J, Whyte J, Barton M, et al. Who is asking about medicinal cannabis in palliative care? Intern Med J. 2020;50(2):243–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):638–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Pawasarat IM, Schultz EM, Frisby JC, Mehta S, Angelo MA, Hardy SS, et al. The Efficacy of Medical Marijuana in the Treatment of Cancer-Related Pain. J Palliat Med. 2020;23(6):809–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Podda M, Pagani Bagliacca E, Sironi G, Veneroni L, Silva M, Angi M, et al. Cannabinoids use in adolescents and young adults with cancer: a single-center survey. Tumori Journal. 2020;106(4):281–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

  89. Robson P. Therapeutic aspects of cannabis and cannabinoids. Br J Psychiatry. 2001;178(2):107–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):342–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  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):285–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):223–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):114–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Wang J, Wang Y, Tong M, Pan H, Li D. New Prospect for Cancer Cachexia: Medical Cannabinoid. J Cancer. 2019;10(3):716–20.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Welliver M. Cannabinoid agonists for nausea and vomiting. Gastroenterol Nurs. 2016;39(2):137–8.

    Google Scholar 

  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. Cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids for cancer patients: Multiple palliative indications together with promising laboratory antineoplastic effects. In: Preedy VR, editor. Handbook of cannabis and related pathologies: Biology, pharmacology, diagnosis, and treatment. San Diego, CA, US: Elsevier Academic Press; 2017. p. 859–68.

    Google Scholar 

  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):E400–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Donovan KA, Oberoi-Jassal R, Chang YD, Rajasekhara S, Haas MF, Randich AL, et al. Cannabis Use in Young Adult Cancer Patients. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2020;9(1):30–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Bar-Lev Schleider L, Mechoulam R, Lederman V, Hilou M, Lencovsky O, Betzalel O, et al. 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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Brisbois TD, de Hock IH, Watanabe SM, Mirhosseini M, Lamoureux DC, Chasen M, et al. 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):2086–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):167–79.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Strasser F, Luftner D, Possinger K, Ernst G, Ruhstaller T, Meissner W, et al. 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):3394–400.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. JL Kramer 2015 Medical marijuana for cancer. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 65 2 109 22

  108. Maida V, Daeninck PJ. A user’s guide to cannabinoid therapies in oncology. Curr Oncol. 2016;23(6):398–406.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):1223–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Milam J, Slaughter R, Meeske K, Ritt-Olson A, Sherman-Bien S, Freyer DR, et al. Substance use among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2017;25(11):1357–62.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Poghosyan H, Poghosyan A. Marijuana use among cancer survivors: Quantifying prevalence and identifying predictors. Addictive Behaviors. 2021;112:106634.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):431–43.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

  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.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Mucke M, Weier M, Carter C, Copeland J, Degenhardt L, Cuhls H, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids in palliative medicine. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2018;9:220–34.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  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):409–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Tateo S. State of the evidence: Cannabinoids and cancer pain-A systematic review. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2017;29(2):94–103.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):424–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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;83:154–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Costiniuk CT, Saneei Z, Salahuddin S, Cox J, Routy J-P, Rueda S, et al. Cannabis Consumption in People Living with HIV: Reasons for Use, Secondary Effects, and Opportunities for Health Education. Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research. 2019;4(3):204–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Bruce D, Bouris AM, Bowers S, Blocker O, Young Lee S, Glidden MF, et al. Medical, therapeutic, and recreational use of cannabis among young men who have sex with men living with HIV. Addiction Research & Theory. 2020;28(3):250–9.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Zaki P, Blake A, Wolt A, Chan S, Liying Z, Wan A, et al. The use of medical cannabis in cancer patients. Journal of Pain Management. 2017;10(4):353–62.

    Google Scholar 

  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):1017–22.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Donovan KA, Chang YD, Oberoi-Jassal R, Rajasekhara S, Smith J, Haas M, et al. Relationship of Cannabis Use to Patient-Reported Symptoms in Cancer Patients Seeking Supportive/Palliative Care. J Palliat Med. 2019;22(10):1191–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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):207–18.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Webster EM, Yadav GS, Gysler S, McNamara B, Black J, Tymon-Rosario J, et al. Prescribed medical cannabis in women with gynecologic malignancies: A single-institution survey-based study. Gynecologic Oncology Reports. 2020;34:100667.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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;49:12–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Braun IM, Wright A, Peteet J, Meyer FL, Yuppa DP, Bolcic-Jankovic D, et al. Medical Oncologists’ Beliefs, Practices, and Knowledge Regarding Marijuana Used Therapeutically: A Nationally Representative Survey Study. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(19):1957–62.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Sannes TS, Nayak MM, Tung S, et al. United States oncologists’ clinical preferences regarding modes of medicinal cannabis use. Cancer Commun. 2021;41(6):528–31.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Nursing, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Billy Vinette, José Côté, Ali El-Akhras, Hazar Mrad, Gabrielle Chicoine & Karine Bilodeau

  2. Research Chair in Innovative Nursing Practices, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Billy Vinette, José Côté & Gabrielle Chicoine

  3. Quebec Network On Nursing Intervention Research, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Billy Vinette, José Côté, Gabrielle Chicoine & Karine Bilodeau

  4. Center for Innovation in Nursing Education, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Billy Vinette, Gabrielle Chicoine & Karine Bilodeau

  5. Research center of the Montreal University Hospital Center, Montreal, QC, Canada

    José Côté, Gabrielle Chicoine & Karine Bilodeau

  6. Research Center of the Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé Et de Services Sociaux de L’Est-de-L’Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Karine Bilodeau

Authors
  1. Billy Vinette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. José Côté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali El-Akhras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hazar Mrad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gabrielle Chicoine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karine Bilodeau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

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.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Billy Vinette.

Ethics 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.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vinette, B., Côté, J., El-Akhras, A. et al. Routes of administration, reasons for use, and approved indications of medical cannabis in oncology: a scoping review. BMC Cancer 22, 319 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09378-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09378-7

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Cannabidiol
  • Cannabis
  • Medical marijuana
  • Nabilone
  • Oncology

BMC Cancer

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us