4.7 Article

Cancer patients' experiences with medicinal cannabis-related care

Journal

CANCER
Volume 127, Issue 1, Pages 67-73

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33202

Keywords

cannabis; complementary therapies; health communication; marijuana use; medical oncology

Categories

Funding

  1. Hans and Mavis Lopater Foundation
  2. National Institutes of Health [K23DA044847, R01DA047236]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Patients with cancer using medical cannabis often lack medical oversight, with certifications typically issued after brief consultations with unfamiliar professionals. Patients frequently rely on personal experimentation and nonmedical sources for information about medical cannabis.
Background Little is known about medical cannabis (MC)-related care for patients with cancer using MC. Methods Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in a convenience sample of individuals (n = 24) with physician-confirmed oncologic diagnoses and state/district authorization to use MC (Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and Washington, DC) from April 2017 to March 2019. Standard qualitative techniques were used to assess the degree of MC-related health care oversight, MC practices, and key information sources. Results Among 24 participants (median age, 57 years; range, 30-71 years; 16 women [67%]), MC certifications were typically issued by a professional new to a patient's care after a brief, perfunctory consultation. Patients disclosed MCuse to their established medical teams but received little medical advice about whether and how to use MC. Patients with cancer used MC products as multipurpose symptom management and as cancer-directed therapy, sometimes in lieu of standard-of-care treatments. Personal experimentation, including methodical self-monitoring, was an important source of MC know-how. Absent formal advice from medical professionals, patients relied on nonmedical sources for MC information. Conclusions Patients with cancer used MC with minimal medical oversight. Most received MC certifications through brief meetings with unfamiliar professionals. Participants desired but were often unable to access high-quality clinical information about MC from their established medical teams. Because many patients are committed to using MC, a product sustained by a growing industry, medical providers should familiarize themselves with the existing data for MM and its limitations to address a poorly met clinical need.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available