↓ Skip to main content

Novel Pharmacologic Approaches to Treating Cannabis Use Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Current Addiction Reports, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
Novel Pharmacologic Approaches to Treating Cannabis Use Disorder
Published in
Current Addiction Reports, March 2014
DOI 10.1007/s40429-014-0011-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca E. Balter, Ziva D. Cooper, Margaret Haney

Abstract

With large and increasing numbers of people using cannabis, the development of cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a growing public health concern. Despite the success of evidence-based psychosocial therapies, low rates of initial abstinence and high rates of relapse during and following treatment for CUD suggest a need for adjunct pharmacotherapies. Here we review the literature on medication development for the treatment of CUD, with a particular focus on studies published within the last three years (2010-2013). Studies in both the human laboratory and in the clinic have tested medications with a wide variety of mechanisms. In the laboratory, the following medication strategies have been shown to decrease cannabis withdrawal and self-administration following a period of abstinence (a model of relapse): the cannabinoid receptor agonist, nabilone, and the adrenergic agonist, lofexidine, alone and in combination with dronabinol (synthetic THC), supporting clinical testing of these medication strategies. Antidepressant, anxiolytic and antipsychotic drugs targeting monoamines (norepinephrine, dopamine, and serotonin) have generally failed to decrease withdrawal symptoms or laboratory measures of relapse. In terms of clinical trials, dronabinol and multiple antidepressants (fluoxetine, venlafaxine and buspirone) have failed to decrease cannabis use. Preliminary results from controlled clinical trials with gabapentin and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) support further research on these medication strategies. Data from open label and laboratory studies suggest lithium and oxytocin also warrant further testing. Overall, it is likely that different medications will be needed to target distinct aspects of problematic cannabis use: craving, ongoing use, withdrawal and relapse. Continued research is needed in preclinical, laboratory and clinical settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 97 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 17%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Other 14 14%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 31%
Psychology 12 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Neuroscience 5 5%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2014.
All research outputs
#14,652,282
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Current Addiction Reports
#200
of 320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,419
of 222,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Addiction Reports
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 222,151 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.