View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Cannabidiol does not attenuate acute delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol‐induced attentional bias in healthy volunteers: A randomised, double‐blind, cross‐over study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Cannabidiol does not attenuate acute delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol‐induced attentional bias in healthy volunteers: A randomised, double‐blind, cross‐over study.
Authors: Oliver, Dominic, Englund, Amir, Chesney, Edward, Chester, Lucy, Wilson, Jack, Sovi, Simina, Wigroth, Stina, Hodsoll, John, Strang, John, Murray, Robin M., Freeman, Tom P., Fusar‐Poli, Paolo, McGuire, Philip
Source: Addiction. Feb2024, Vol. 119 Issue 2, p322-333. 12p.
Subjects: Cannabidiol, Substance abuse, Cannabis (Genus), Confidence intervals, Hydrocarbons, Randomized controlled trials, Blind experiment, Descriptive statistics, Research funding, Data analysis software, Odds ratio, Attentional bias
Abstract: Aims: To test how attentional bias and explicit liking are influenced by delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and whether these effects are moderated by cannabidiol (CBD). Design: Double‐blind, randomised, within‐subjects cross‐over study. Setting NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility at King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Participants/Cases: Forty‐six infrequent cannabis users (cannabis use <1 per week). Intervention(s): Across four sessions, participants inhaled vaporised cannabis containing 10 mg of THC and either 0 mg (0:1 CBD:THC), 10 mg (1:1), 20 mg (2:1) or 30 mg (3:1) of CBD, administered in a randomised order and counter‐balanced across participants (a total of 24 order groups). Measurements Participants completed two tasks: (1) Attentional Bias (AB), comparing reaction times toward visual probes presented behind 28 target stimuli (cannabis/food) compared with probes behind corresponding non‐target (neutral) stimuli. Participants responding more quickly to probes behind target than non‐target stimuli would indicate greater attentional bias to cannabis/food; (2) Picture Rating (PR), where all AB stimuli were rated on a 7‐point pleasantness scale, measuring explicit liking. Findings During the AB task, participants were more biased toward cannabis stimuli in the 0:1 condition compared with baseline (mean difference = 12.2, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] = 1.20–23.3, d = 0.41, P = 0.03). No other significant AB or PR differences were found between cannabis and food stimuli between baseline and 0:1 condition (P > 0.05). No significant CBD effect was found on AB or PR task performance at any dose (P > 0.05). There was additionally no cumulative effect of THC exposure on AB or PR outcomes (P > 0.05). Conclusions: A double‐blind, randomised, cross‐over study among infrequent cannabis users found that inhaled delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol increased attentional bias toward cannabis in the absence of explicit liking, a marker of liability toward cannabis use disorder. At the concentrations normally found in legal and illegal cannabis, cannabidiol had no influence on this effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Addiction is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 174713395
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Cannabidiol does not attenuate acute delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol‐induced attentional bias in healthy volunteers: A randomised, double‐blind, cross‐over study.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Oliver%2C+Dominic%22&quot;&gt;Oliver, Dominic&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Englund%2C+Amir%22&quot;&gt;Englund, Amir&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Chesney%2C+Edward%22&quot;&gt;Chesney, Edward&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Chester%2C+Lucy%22&quot;&gt;Chester, Lucy&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Wilson%2C+Jack%22&quot;&gt;Wilson, Jack&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Sovi%2C+Simina%22&quot;&gt;Sovi, Simina&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Wigroth%2C+Stina%22&quot;&gt;Wigroth, Stina&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Hodsoll%2C+John%22&quot;&gt;Hodsoll, John&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Strang%2C+John%22&quot;&gt;Strang, John&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Murray%2C+Robin+M%2E%22&quot;&gt;Murray, Robin M.&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Freeman%2C+Tom+P%2E%22&quot;&gt;Freeman, Tom P.&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Fusar‐Poli%2C+Paolo%22&quot;&gt;Fusar‐Poli, Paolo&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22McGuire%2C+Philip%22&quot;&gt;McGuire, Philip&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;JN&quot; term=&quot;%22Addiction%22&quot;&gt;Addiction&lt;/searchLink&gt;. Feb2024, Vol. 119 Issue 2, p322-333. 12p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Cannabidiol%22&quot;&gt;Cannabidiol&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Substance+abuse%22&quot;&gt;Substance abuse&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Cannabis+%28Genus%29%22&quot;&gt;Cannabis (Genus)&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Confidence+intervals%22&quot;&gt;Confidence intervals&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Hydrocarbons%22&quot;&gt;Hydrocarbons&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Randomized+controlled+trials%22&quot;&gt;Randomized controlled trials&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Blind+experiment%22&quot;&gt;Blind experiment&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Descriptive+statistics%22&quot;&gt;Descriptive statistics&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Research+funding%22&quot;&gt;Research funding&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Data+analysis+software%22&quot;&gt;Data analysis software&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Odds+ratio%22&quot;&gt;Odds ratio&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Attentional+bias%22&quot;&gt;Attentional bias&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Aims: To test how attentional bias and explicit liking are influenced by delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and whether these effects are moderated by cannabidiol (CBD). Design: Double‐blind, randomised, within‐subjects cross‐over study. Setting NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility at King&#39;s College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Participants/Cases: Forty‐six infrequent cannabis users (cannabis use &lt;1 per week). Intervention(s): Across four sessions, participants inhaled vaporised cannabis containing 10 mg of THC and either 0 mg (0:1 CBD:THC), 10 mg (1:1), 20 mg (2:1) or 30 mg (3:1) of CBD, administered in a randomised order and counter‐balanced across participants (a total of 24 order groups). Measurements Participants completed two tasks: (1) Attentional Bias (AB), comparing reaction times toward visual probes presented behind 28 target stimuli (cannabis/food) compared with probes behind corresponding non‐target (neutral) stimuli. Participants responding more quickly to probes behind target than non‐target stimuli would indicate greater attentional bias to cannabis/food; (2) Picture Rating (PR), where all AB stimuli were rated on a 7‐point pleasantness scale, measuring explicit liking. Findings During the AB task, participants were more biased toward cannabis stimuli in the 0:1 condition compared with baseline (mean difference = 12.2, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] = 1.20–23.3, d = 0.41, P = 0.03). No other significant AB or PR differences were found between cannabis and food stimuli between baseline and 0:1 condition (P &gt; 0.05). No significant CBD effect was found on AB or PR task performance at any dose (P &gt; 0.05). There was additionally no cumulative effect of THC exposure on AB or PR outcomes (P &gt; 0.05). Conclusions: A double‐blind, randomised, cross‐over study among infrequent cannabis users found that inhaled delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol increased attentional bias toward cannabis in the absence of explicit liking, a marker of liability toward cannabis use disorder. At the concentrations normally found in legal and illegal cannabis, cannabidiol had no influence on this effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: &lt;i&gt;Copyright of Addiction is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder&#39;s express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.&lt;/i&gt; (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=174713395
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/add.16353
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 322
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Cannabidiol
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Substance abuse
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cannabis (Genus)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Confidence intervals
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hydrocarbons
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Randomized controlled trials
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Blind experiment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Descriptive statistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research funding
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Data analysis software
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Odds ratio
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attentional bias
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Cannabidiol does not attenuate acute delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol‐induced attentional bias in healthy volunteers: A randomised, double‐blind, cross‐over study.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Oliver, Dominic
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Englund, Amir
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chesney, Edward
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chester, Lucy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wilson, Jack
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sovi, Simina
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wigroth, Stina
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hodsoll, John
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Strang, John
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Murray, Robin M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Freeman, Tom P.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fusar‐Poli, Paolo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McGuire, Philip
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Text: Feb2024
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 09652140
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 119
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Addiction
              Type: main
ResultId 1