ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023
Pharmacokinetics of Cannabidiol: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In this review, we provide an updated assessment of available evidence on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of cannabidiol (CBD) and explore the impact of different factors on PK outcomes. Materials and Methods: This systematic review and meta-regression analysis was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42021269857). We systematically searched Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, and Web of Science Core Collection up to November 19, 2022. Trials of CBD in healthy adults were included if they reported at least one of the PK parameters of interest, including Tmax, Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-inf, and T Results: A total of 112 trial arms from 39 studies were included; 26 trial arms had a "Good" quality, 70 "Fair," and 16 "Poor." Eight arms used inhalation CBD, 29 oromucosal, 73 oral, and 2 intravenous. CBD formulations could be categorized to nanotech (n=14), oil-based (n=21), alcohol-based (n=10), water-based (n=12), Sativex (n=17), and Epidiolex (n=22). For single-dose studies, CBD doses ranged between 2-100mg in inhalation, 5-50mg in oromucosal, and 0.42-6000mg in oral administration. Sixty-six trial arms had only male participants or a higher number of males than females. The duration of the PK session was between 4h-164h. A higher CBD dose was associated with higher Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf. Compared to oral administration, oromucosal administration was associated with lower Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf. Fed status was associated with higher Cmax and AUC0-t when compared to the fasting status. A higher ratio of female participants was associated with lower Tmax in oral administration and higher Cmax. Conclusion: As expected, CBD dose, route of administration, and diet were major determinants of CBD pharmacokinetics with oral routes providing higher bioavailability and nanotechnology formulations a faster onset. Though CBD appeared to have a faster onset and longer duration in females, more studies are required to delineate the role of biological sex. Factors that influence CBD PK have implications for medication development and appropriate dosing in clinical practice.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.