We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to evaluate the subjective abuse potential and cognitive effects of nabiximols oromucosal spray in subjects with a history of recreational cannabis use.
Human Psychopharmacology 2011 April
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the abuse potential and cognitive effects of nabiximols (Sativex, GW Pharma Ltd. Salisbury, UK), an oromucosal spray primarily containing delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD).
METHODS: This was a single‐dose, randomized, double‐blind, crossover study comparing nabiximols (4, 8, and 16 consecutive sprays: 10.8, 21.6, and 43.2 mg THC, respectively) with dronabinol 20 and 40 mg (synthetic THC: Marinol, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Brussels, Belgium) and matching placebos in 23 recreational cannabis users. Subjective and cognitive/psychomotor measures were administered over 24 h post‐dose.
RESULTS: Dronabinol was significantly different from placebo on abuse potential measures, thereby confirming study validity. Nabiximols 10.8 mg was not significantly different from placebo on primary measures but was different on some secondary measures. Nabiximols 21.6 mg was significantly greater than placebo on some primary/secondary measures, whereas nabiximols 43.2 mg showed significant effects on most measures. Nabiximols 10.8 mg was significantly lower than dronabinol doses on most measures ( p < 0.05). Dronabinol 20 mg effects were numerically higher than nabiximols 21.6 mg but were statistically significant only for some measures. Dronabinol 40 mg and nabiximols 43.2 mg were generally not statistically different.
CONCLUSIONS: Both dronabinol and nabiximols had significant abuse potential compared with placebo at higher doses. Nabiximols showed similar or slightly less abuse potential compared with dronabinol. Therefore, the abuse potential of nabiximols should be no higher than that of dronabinol.
METHODS: This was a single‐dose, randomized, double‐blind, crossover study comparing nabiximols (4, 8, and 16 consecutive sprays: 10.8, 21.6, and 43.2 mg THC, respectively) with dronabinol 20 and 40 mg (synthetic THC: Marinol, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Brussels, Belgium) and matching placebos in 23 recreational cannabis users. Subjective and cognitive/psychomotor measures were administered over 24 h post‐dose.
RESULTS: Dronabinol was significantly different from placebo on abuse potential measures, thereby confirming study validity. Nabiximols 10.8 mg was not significantly different from placebo on primary measures but was different on some secondary measures. Nabiximols 21.6 mg was significantly greater than placebo on some primary/secondary measures, whereas nabiximols 43.2 mg showed significant effects on most measures. Nabiximols 10.8 mg was significantly lower than dronabinol doses on most measures ( p < 0.05). Dronabinol 20 mg effects were numerically higher than nabiximols 21.6 mg but were statistically significant only for some measures. Dronabinol 40 mg and nabiximols 43.2 mg were generally not statistically different.
CONCLUSIONS: Both dronabinol and nabiximols had significant abuse potential compared with placebo at higher doses. Nabiximols showed similar or slightly less abuse potential compared with dronabinol. Therefore, the abuse potential of nabiximols should be no higher than that of dronabinol.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app