Full length articleSubjective and physiological effects, and expired carbon monoxide concentrations in frequent and occasional cannabis smokers following smoked, vaporized, and oral cannabis administration
Introduction
While smoking is the most common cannabis administration route, vaporization and consumption of cannabis edibles are common. In a survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years who had ever consumed cannabis, 29.8% reported consuming cannabis via “edibles or drinks”, and 9.9% by “vaporizer or other electronic device” (Schauer et al., 2016). Additionally, 22.4% and 18.8% reported ever utilizing 2 and ≥3 ways to administer cannabis, respectively, indicating the importance of characterizing cannabis’ effects after multiple administration routes.
Desired subjective effects are achieved after consumption of cannabis-containing foodstuffs. After five experienced cannabis smokers (all with 10 years use history) ingested brownies containing the equivalent of zero, one (∼22.4 mg THC), and two (∼44.8 mg THC) 2.8% THC cigarettes, significantly greater ratings on Feel Drug and Liking scales after the two-cigarette dose were observed compared to the one-cigarette dose (Cone et al., 1988); onset of effects was slow and variable, with peak responses occurring 2.5–3.5 post-dose.
Comparisons of subjective and physiological effects following smoked and oral cannabis were previously conducted. Following THC administrations via intravenous (5 mg THC injected over 2 min), smoked (19 mg THC), and oral (20 mg THC) routes, similar ratings of “high” were observed following all administrations, despite lower plasma THC concentrations after oral dosing, in participants with varied cannabis use histories (Ohlsson et al., 1980). In another investigation, active smoked (18.4–32.4 mg THC) cannabis or oral encapsulated (2.5–10 mg) THC produced significant increases in overall drug effect, peak high, and drug liking compared to placebo in participants that self-administered cannabis 1–3x/week (Chait and Zacny, 1992); ratings between smoked and oral routes were similar, but were not directly compared. Smoked and oral cannabis each significantly increased heart rate compared to placebo, with mean increases 18 and 8–9 bpm, respectively, relative to placebo (Chait and Zacny, 1992). Similarly, active oral and smoked cannabis (8.4–16.9 mg THC for both) produced significant increases in ratings for drug “feel”, “high”, and “want” compared to placebos, but effects following smoking were larger in participants that administered cannabis or hashish at least once in the prior 2 months (Wachtel et al., 2002); however, as with the previous study, ratings after oral and smoked routes were not directly compared. Another study administered either oral (20 mg THC 4x/daily) or smoked THC (3.1% THC, cigarette weights not provided) four times daily for 3 consecutive days to participants that averaged smoking 6.3 ± 5.6 cannabis cigarettes/day and ratings for “high”, “mellow”, and “good drug effect” following smoking were significantly greater than after oral administration (Hart et al., 2002); the authors concluded, though, that although subjective effects were slightly more pronounced after smoking for some measures, smoked and oral routes produced similar effects.
Smoked cannabis exposes users to harmful combustion by-products, including carbon monoxide (CO) (Hazekamp et al., 2006). CO is not released during edible consumption. However, the low bioavailability and slow, erratic absorption produced by oral cannabis (Ohlsson et al., 1980) suggests an alternative administration route could be useful for medicinal purposes. One such alternate route is vaporization. In a pilot study comparing smoked and vaporized cannabis in participants that smoked 3–10 cannabis cigarettes in the prior 30 days, plasma THC area under the curve (AUC) up to 6 h post-dose and ratings of “high” were not significantly different between smoking and vaporization at any dose, while exhaled CO concentrations were significantly greater following smoking at all cannabis potencies (Abrams et al., 2007).
The effectiveness of vaporized low (2.9% THC) and high (6.7% THC) cannabis doses in producing increased subjective ratings was demonstrated in occasional-to-moderate cannabis smokers (Hartman et al., 2016); blood THC concentrations were significantly associated with participants’ ratings of “anxious”, “good drug effect”, “high”, “restless”, “stimulated”, and “stoned”, with subjective effects persisting for 3.3–4.3 h post-dose. We also previously characterized cannabinoid blood pharmacokinetics following smoked, vaporized, and oral cannabis administrations (Newmeyer et al., 2016); frequent smokers’ maximum THC concentrations (Cmax) were significantly greater after smoking compared to vaporization, whereas occasional smokers’ THC Cmax were not different between the inhaled routes. In all participants, inhaled cannabis produced significantly greater THC Cmax than oral cannabis. Additionally, frequent smokers’ observed and baseline-adjusted THC Cmax after smoking and vaporization were significantly greater than THC Cmax in occasional smokers.
There are few studies directly comparing subjective and physiological effects, and expired CO concentrations following multiple cannabis administration routes, and none investigated differences between frequent and occasional cannabis smokers. We present a novel, placebo-controlled investigation in which subjective and objective effects were evaluated following controlled smoked, vaporized, and oral cannabis administrations to frequent and occasional cannabis smokers with a within-subject study design.
Section snippets
Participants
Adults 18–50 years old provided written, informed consent to participate in this National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Institutional Review Board-, Food and Drug Administration-, and Drug Enforcement Administration-approved study (Newmeyer et al., 2016, Swortwood et al., 2016). Inclusion criteria were average self-reported cannabis intake frequency ≥2x/month but <3x/week (occasional smokers), or ≥5x/week (frequent smokers) for the previous three months, and a positive urine cannabinoid screen
Participants
Table 1 summarizes 11 frequent and 9 occasional cannabis smokers’ demographic information (ages 19–46 y, 75% male, 75% African American). Participant K was originally recruited as an occasional cannabis smoker, but reclassified as a frequent smoker because baseline and post-dose THC and metabolite concentrations were consistent with published frequent smoker data (Desrosiers et al., 2014, Schwope et al., 2011); all other participants’ cannabinoid pharmacokinetics were consistent with
Discussion
We sought to characterize and compare subjective and objective effects after smoked, vaporized, and oral cannabis in frequent and occasional cannabis smokers. Comparisons of subjective effects following controlled smoked and oral (Chait and Zacny, 1992, Hart et al., 2002, Ohlsson et al., 1980, Wachtel et al., 2002) or smoked and vaporized (Abrams et al., 2007) cannabis were previously performed. The only difference between smoking and vaporization observed here was in frequent smokers’ ratings
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Role of funding source
This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health. The funding source had no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication.
Contributors
Dr. Huestis (principal investigator) was responsible for all aspects of the study and designed the protocol with Dr. Swortwood and Mr. Newmeyer. Dr. Swortwood and Mr. Newmeyer were responsible for data collection and review of study methods. Dr. Abulseoud was responsible for reviewing participant eligibility, and ensuring their safety during the study. Mr. Newmeyer was responsible for data analysis and drafting the manuscript. All authors contributed to and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Dr. Sandrine Pirard for her contribution to study design, and the contributions of Ms. Megan Hall and the clinical staffs of the Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, and the Clinical Research Unit, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center. MNN acknowledges the Graduate Partnership Program, NIH.
References (34)
- et al.
Hair analysis for Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A—new insights into the mechanism of drug incorporation of cannabinoids into hair
Forensic Sci. Int.
(2010) - et al.
Carbon monoxide and smoking behavior
Addict. Behav.
(1979) - et al.
Evaluation of a vaporizing device (Volcano®) for the pulmonary administration of tetrahydrocannabinol
J. Pharm. Sci.
(2006) - et al.
Simultaneous identification of 2-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol, tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabinol and cannabidiol in oral fluid
J. Chromatogr. B
(2007) - et al.
Determination of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A (Δ9-THCA-A) in whole blood and plasma by LC–MS/MS and application in authentic samples from drivers suspected of driving under the influence of cannabis
Forensic Sci. Int.
(2014) - et al.
Toking, vaping, and eating for health or fun: marijuana use patterns in adults, U.S., 2014
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2016) - et al.
Vaporization as a smokeless cannabis delivery system: a pilot study
Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
(2007) - et al.
Kinetic study of smoking marijuana
J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm.
(1982) - et al.
Reinforcing and subjective effects of oral Δ9-THC and smoked marijuana in humans
Psychopharmacology (Berl.)
(1992) - et al.
Marijuana effect and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol plasma level
Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
(1984)
Relationship between plasma delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol concentration and pharmacologic effects in man
Psychopharmacology (Berl.)
Relating blood concentrations of tetrahydrocannabinol and metabolites to pharmacologic effects and time of marijuana usage
Ther. Drug Monit.
Marijuana-laced brownies: behavioral effects, physiologic effects, and urinalysis in humans following ingestion
J. Anal. Toxicol.
Phase I and II cannabinoid disposition in blood and plasma of occasional and frequent smokers following controlled smoked cannabis
Clin. Chem.
Smoked cannabis' psychomotor and neurocognitive effects in occasional and frequent smokers
J. Anal. Toxicol.
Isolation of Δ9-THCA-A from hemp and analytical aspects concerning the determination of Δ9-THC in cannabis products
Forensic Sci. Int.
Tolerance to effects of high-dose oral Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and plasma cannabinoid concentrations in male daily cannabis smokers
J. Anal. Toxicol.
Cited by (61)
Parallel trajectories of vaping and smoking cannabis and their associations with mental and physical well-being among young adults
2023, Drug and Alcohol DependenceSeparate and combined effects of alcohol and cannabis on mood, subjective experience, cognition and psychomotor performance: A randomized trial
2022, Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological PsychiatryModes of cannabis administration in the year prior to conception among patients in Northern California
2022, Addictive Behaviors ReportsCitation Excerpt :The likelihood of quitting cannabis use before pregnancy and the potential adverse health effects to infants exposed to cannabis in utero might vary depending on maternal mode or combinations of modes of cannabis administration (Barrington-Trimis et al., 2020; Borodovsky et al., 2016; Newmeyer et al., 2017; Young-Wolff et al., 2020). For example, smoked cannabis and use of concentrates among adolescents have been associated with a higher risk of continued use relative to other modes (Barrington-Trimis et al., 2020), and smoked cannabis may carry the greatest risks due to exposure to carbon monoxide (CO) and other harmful by-products of combustion (Newmeyer et al., 2017). Yet, little is known about the prevalence or correlates of different modes of cannabis administration during or before pregnancy.
Lower-Risk Cannabis Use Guidelines (LRCUG) for reducing health harms from non-medical cannabis use: A comprehensive evidence and recommendations update
2022, International Journal of Drug PolicyDoes how you use matter? The link between mode of use and cannabis-related risk
2021, Addictive Behaviors