Meta-analysis of Medical Cannabis Outcomes and Associations with Cancer

Ryan D Castle ^1* James Marzolf ¹ Miranda Morris ¹ William C Bushell ²

• ¹ Whole Health Oncology Institute, Ewa Beach, United States
• ² Chopra Foundation, New York, United States

Background: Growing bodies of evidence suggest that cannabis may play a significant role in both oncological palliative care and as a direct anti-carcinogenic agent, but classification as a Schedule I substance has complicated research into its therapeutic potential, leaving the state of research scattered and heterogenous. This meta-analysis was conducted to determine the scientific consensus on medical cannabis's viability in cancer treatment. Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the existing literature on medical cannabis, focusing on its therapeutic potential, safety profiles, and role in cancer treatment. Methods: This study synthesized data from over 10,000 peer-reviewed research papers, encompassing 39,767 data points related to cannabis and various health outcomes. Using sentiment analysis, the study identified correlations between cannabis use and supported, not supported, and unclear sentiments across multiple categories, including cancer dynamics, health metrics, and cancer treatments. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to validate the reliability of the findings. Results: The meta-analysis revealed a significant consensus supporting the use of medical cannabis in the categories of health metrics, cancer treatments, and cancer dynamics. The aggregated correlation strength of cannabis across all cancer topics indicates that support for medical cannabis is 31.38X stronger than opposition to it. The analysis highlighted the anti-inflammatory potential of cannabis, its use in managing cancer-related symptoms such as pain, nausea, and appetite loss, and explored the consensus on its use as an anti-carcinogenic agent. Discussion: The findings indicate a strong and growing consensus within the scientific community regarding the therapeutic benefits of cannabis, particularly in the context of cancer. The consistent correlation strengths for cannabis as both a palliative adjunct and a potential anti-carcinogenic agent redefine the consensus around cannabis as a medical intervention. Conclusion: The consistency of positive sentiments across a wide range of studies suggests that cannabis should be re-evaluated within the medical community as a treatment option. The findings have implications for public health research, clinical practice, and discussions surrounding the legal status of medical cannabis. These results suggest a need for further research to explore the full therapeutic potential of cannabis and address knowledge gaps.