Absence of Evidence for Sustained Effects of Daily Cannabidiol Administration on Anandamide Plasma Concentration in Individuals with Cocaine Use Disorder: Exploratory Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cannabidiol (CBD) has been proposed to have a therapeutic potential over a wide range of neuropsychiatric disorders, including substance use disorders. Pre-clinical evidence suggests that CBD can increase anandamide (AEA) plasma concentration, possibly mediating some of its therapeutic properties. Whether CBD exerts such an effect on AEA in individuals with cocaine use disorder (CUD) remains unknown. Aims: To explore the sustained effects of daily CBD administration on AEA plasma concentrations compared with placebo in CUD. Methods: We used data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating CBD’s efficacy in CUD. Seventy-eight individuals were randomized to receive a daily oral dose of 800 mg CBD ( n = 40) or a placebo ( n = 38). Participants stayed in an inpatient detoxification setting for 10 days, after which they were followed in an outpatient setting for 12 weeks. AEA plasma concentration was measured at baseline and at 23-h post CBD ingestion on day 8 and week 4. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess CBD’s effects on AEA, and sensitivity analyses were computed using Bayesian linear regressions. Results: Sixty-four participants were included in the analysis. Similar mean AEA plasma concentrations in both treatment groups ( p = 0.357) were observed. At day 8, mean AEA plasma concentrations (± standard deviation) were 0.26 (± 0.07) ng/mL in the CBD group and 0.29 (± 0.08) ng/mL in the placebo group ( p = 0.832; Bayes factor [BF] = 0.190). At week 4, they were 0.27 (± 0.09) ng/mL in the CBD group and 0.30 (± 0.09) ng/mL in the placebo group ( p = 0.181; BF = 0.194). Conclusion: While not excluding any potential acute and short-term effect, daily CBD administration did not exert a sustained impact on AEA plasma concentrations in individuals with CUD compared with placebo. Registration: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02559167).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".