ArticleTherapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy2024
Association between cannabis use and clinical outcomes in patients with solid malignancies receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Article in Therapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cannabinoids in Cancer: Molecular Mechanisms of Tumor Cell Death and Translational Opportunities.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Review
- Cannabis in Hematology Survey Study (CHESS): A Longitudinal Investigation on Uses, Attitudes, and Outcomes of Cannabis Among Hematology Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cannabis (CAN) use has risen significantly over the last few decades. CAN has potent immunosuppressive properties, which could antagonize the effect of immunotherapy (IO). The impact of CAN use on clinical cancer outcomes remains unclear. Objectives: In this study, we evaluated the clinical effect of CAN use on clinical outcomes among patients with solid malignancies receiving IO. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients with solid malignancies receiving IO between August 2014 and August 2018. Methods: Patients were stratified based on CAN use to CAN users and CAN non-users. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Univariable and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed to compare the outcomes between the two groups, adjusting for covariates. Results: The records of 106 patients were reviewed, 28 (26%) of whom were CAN users and 78 (74%) were CAN non-users. One patient was excluded. Most CAN users consumed dronabinol (82%). The median follow-up for OS and PFS was 29.2 months. Median OS in the CAN users was 6.7 months compared to 17.3 months in the CAN non-users (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.06-2.97; Conclusion: In this single institutional experience, CAN use was associated with worse OS, PFS, and DCR among cancer patients receiving IO. Prospective trials are needed to further study this potential antagonistic interaction between CAN and IO and explore the racial disparities related to CAN exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.