MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385623369 · doi:10.1101/2023.08.04.23293647

A Multi-Centre, Tolerability Study of a Cannabidiol-enriched Cannabis Herbal Extract for Chronic Headaches in Adolescents: the CAN-CHA Protocol

2023· preprint· en· W4385623369 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Manik Chhabra, Evan Lewis, Robert Balshaw, Breanne Stewart, Zina Zaslawski, Trinity Lowthian, Zahra Alidina, Melila Chesick‐Gordis, Wenli Xie, Britt I. Drögemöller, Galen E.B. Wright, Kathryn A. Birnie, Katelynn E. Boerner, Vivian W. L. Tsang, Samantha Irwin, Daniela Pohl, Alexander G. Weil, Erick Sell, Erika Penz, Amy Robson- MacKay, Sophia Mbabaali, Stephanie Blackman, Shanlea Gordon, Jane Alcorn, Richard J. Huntsman, Tim F. Oberlander, G. Allen Finley, Lauren E. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité de MontréalDalhousie UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto Liver CentreChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of CalgaryBC Children's HospitalGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare InnovationUniversity of AlbertaOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenSick Kids Foundation
KeywordsTolerabilityCannabidiolMedicineHeadachesCannabisChronic painDosingMigraineAdverse effectChronic MigraineRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Cannabis products have been used in the management of headaches in adults and may play a role in pediatric chronic pain. Canadian pediatricians report increasing use of cannabis for the management of chronic headaches, despite no well-controlled studies to inform its dosing, safety, and effectiveness. The aim of our clinical trial is to determine the dosing and safety of a Cannabidiol (CBD)-enriched Cannabis Herbal Extract (CHE) for the treatment of chronic headaches in adolescents. Methods and analysis Youth, parents and an expert steering committee co-designed this tolerability study. Twenty adolescents (aged 14 to 17 years), with a chronic migraine diagnosis for more than 6 months that has not responded to other therapies, will be enrolled into an open label, dose escalation study across three Canadian sites. Study participants will receive escalating doses of a CBD-enriched CHE (MPL-001 with a THC:CBD of 1:25), starting at 0.2-0.4 mg/kg of CBD per day escalating monthly up to 0.8-1.0 mg/kg of CBD per day. The primary objective of this study is to determine the safety and tolerability of CBD-enriched CHE in adolescents with chronic migraine. Secondary objectives of this study will inform the development of subsequent randomized controlled trials and include investigating the relationship between the dose escalation and change in the frequency of headache, impact and intensity of pain, changes in sleep, mood, function, and quality of life. Exploratory outcomes include investigating steady-state trough plasma levels of bioactive cannabinoids and investigating how pharmacogenetic profiles affect cannabinoid metabolism among adolescents receiving CBD-enriched CHE. Discussion This protocol was co-designed with youth and describes a tolerability clinical trial of CBD-enriched CHE in adolescents with chronic headaches that have not responded to conventional therapies. This study is the first clinical trial on cannabis products in adolescents with chronic headaches and will inform the development of future comparative effectiveness clinical trials. Trial registration: CAN-CHA trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with a number of register NCT05337033 .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→