A recent systematic review, published in Frontiers in Oncology, has provided an undeniable scientific backing for the extraordinary capabilities of medical cannabis. It does so much more than just relieve cancer’s devastating symptoms—it helps attack the disease directly. This effort, the biggest of its kind, thoroughly sifted through more than 10,000 studies related to the use of cannabis and its effects on cancer.
Ryan Castle, the lead author and research director at the Whole Health Oncology Institute, said they were heartened by the findings. He’s convinced that the findings have potential for serious change. He pointed out that the results show a positive signal that cannabis can be an important treatment option for cancer patients.
Castle’s team used state-of-the-art artificial intelligence techniques. Specifically, they used natural language processing and sentiment analysis to sort through a huge wave of research. This new approach made it possible for them to pull out pervasive trends and findings related to cancer treatment via cannabis.
From the study’s perspective, that was an important finding because it showed, holistically, that cannabis can really help manage cancer pain, anxiety, and many other symptoms. Castle noted, “We wanted to analyze not just a handful, but nearly every major medical cannabis study to find the actual points of scientific agreement.”
A recent small pilot trial found that patients who were treated with a cannabis-based medication in concert with their more traditional chemotherapy fared better in terms of survival rates. This finding further illustrates the need for good symptom management. These findings contribute to the growing body of evidence suggesting that medical cannabis can have beneficial effects for cancer patients.
The study hasn’t exactly been without criticism. Donald Abrams, oncologist and professor emeritus of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, criticized the study for serious shortcomings. He took issue with the fact that most of the patients included in the studies had tobacco and alcohol use—risk factors for a wide range of other cancers. Abrams remarked, “As those patients are so often using tobacco and alcohol, known risk factors for those cancers,” indicating that this could skew the results.
Despite his skepticism regarding the study’s implications, Abrams acknowledged that cannabis has proven useful for managing symptoms such as appetite loss, nausea, pain, and anxiety in cancer patients. He added that while cannabis may alleviate symptoms, “as yet those findings have not translated into clinical benefit in people.”
Even with the increased willingness to study it, the complicated legal status of cannabis in the United States still stymies additional research. The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) classifies cannabis as a Schedule I narcotic, which hinders extensive clinical trials involving human subjects. Castle says that this meta-analysis should give the DEA pause to reconsider its heavy-handed classification policies. We’re not saying that the standards for approval of new cancer treatments should be lowered. We are contending that medical cannabis is equal to or better than those standards.
Cancer Playbook provided funding to conduct this study. All of this data is used through their partnership with the Whole Health Oncology Institute, where they deep-dive and share data on patient-reported outcomes. Through this partnership, we hope to deepen our understanding of how medical cannabis can be safely and effectively incorporated into cancer treatment protocols.
Furthermore, in an initial clinical trial of 119 cancer patients, synthetically manufactured CBD was found to aid in the shrinking of tumor size. It enhanced the spread of tumor cells, too. These discoveries are yet another reminder of just how powerful cannabis can be in the world of oncology.
Castle reflected on the surprising consensus found within their research, stating, “That’s a shocking degree of consensus in public health research, and certainly more than we were anticipating for a topic as controversial as medical cannabis.” He stressed the need for strong, replicable methodology to remove bias and guarantee strong findings.