University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine Los Angeles, CA
V. Qu1, C. Hui2, J. Hall3, K. Taparra4, T. Kollipara2, S. G. Soltys2, B. M. Beadle2, S. Trieu5, and E. Pollom2; 1University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 3Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, 4Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA, 5Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA
Purpose/Objective(s): We surveyed patients with central nervous system (CNS) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancer regarding their attitudes toward and knowledge of the role of medical cannabis (MC) within cancer to identify opportunities for oncologists to communicate evidence-based recommendations regarding its use. We hypothesized that some patients may believe MC to be a cure for cancer. Materials/
Methods: A 25-item questionnaire assessing perceptions of and information sources for MC as well as other sociodemographic information was offered to patients seen in radiation oncology clinic between June 2022 and July 2023 who met the following inclusion criteria: were at least 18 years of age, had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of CNS or GI cancer, and were proficient in English. Patients who elected to participate in the study were emailed secure links to the survey after providing informed consent. Fisher’s exact and Mann Whitney tests were used to evaluate associations between survey responses and demographic and disease variables. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed on narrative responses by independent reviewers in search of common themes. Results: One hundred patients with either CNS or GI cancer were consented for the study, and 84 completed the survey. Of the respondents, most (83.3%) strongly agreed or agreed that MC can provide symptom relief for cancer and treatment-related symptoms while 15.5% strongly agreed or agreed that MC can cure cancer. This latter subcohort of patients was significantly more likely to identify as Hispanic/Latino (38.5% vs 9.9%, p= 0.009) and less likely to be up to date on COVID vaccinations (30.8% vs 8.5%, p= 0.044) compared to patients who were neutral, disagreed, or strongly disagreed with this statement. Education level and other characteristics were not significantly different between these patients. There were no significant differences in information sources between patients who endorsed MC as a cancer cure and those who did not. Patients who endorsed MC as a cancer cure cited both medical professionals (38.5% vs. 23.9%) and non-medical references–including internet search results (30.8% vs. 35.21%), friends and/or family (23.1% vs. 28.2%), and the cannabis industry (23.1% vs. 22.5%)–for information about MC. Thematic analysis revealed that many patients hoped to learn more about MC from their oncologists but found them to be unknowledgeable on the subject. Conclusion: While most patients consider MC to be a valuable addition to conventional therapies for managing refractory symptoms, a subset—particularly those who identified as Hispanic/Latino and were not COVID-vaccinated—believed it had potential as a standalone anti-cancer therapy. Despite patients expressing a preference for clinical recommendations from their care teams, many rely on other unregulated sources, highlighting the need for providers to bridge knowledge gaps and engage in open conversations about MC to offer evidence-based guidance.
