ArticleJournal of analytical toxicology2026
The acute and chronic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral cannabidiol with and without low doses of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
Article in Journal of analytical toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cannabidiol at the crossroads: panacea, placebo, or problem?Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hemp products [cannabis with ≤0.3% Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC)] are federally legal, but few controlled experiments have explored drug test results, pharmacokinetics, or pharmacodynamics. Healthy adults (n = 60) self-administered 1.5 mL medium-chain triglyceride (MCT) oil containing 100 mg cannabidiol (CBD) and either 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 2.8, or 3.7 mg Δ9-THC (n = 10 per group). The study included an 8-hour acute dose laboratory session (Phase 1), a 14-day outpatient drug exposure period with twice daily dosing (Phase 2) and a 7-day washout period (Phase 3). Measures including urine, blood, subjective drug effects, and cognitive and psychomotor performance were assessed repeatedly throughout the experiment. At least one participant receiving Δ9-THC doses of 1.0 mg or greater had at least 1 positive urine drug test (Δ9-THC-COOH immunoassay screen ≥50 ng/mL and LC-MS/MS confirmation ≥15 ng/mL) during Phase 1 and the number of positive urine samples increased with Δ9-THC dose. Positive urine drug tests were observed during the Phase 2 outpatient drug exposure period from at least one participant in each dose condition that contained any amount of Δ9-THC. One urine specimen in the CBD only dose condition tested positive during Phase 2. Two positive urine samples were observed after the 1-week washout (Day 21). Blood concentrations of Δ9-THC were very low in all dose conditions, and there were no significant differences between the CBD only dose group and Δ9-THC-containing dose groups on any pharmacodynamic outcome. Individuals subject to drug testing should recognize that hemp products contain detectable amounts of Δ9-THC. Conventional drug testing cannot reliably distinguish between illicit cannabis and legal hemp-derived product use, and a positive urine Δ9-THC test may result from low doses that do not produce intoxication or impairment.
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.