International research demands more scientific rigor in the use of medical cannabis

The growth of medical cannabis use for different clinical conditions has not been accompanied, in the same proportion, by robust scientific evidence. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reinforces that there is consistent evidence only for a restricted number of indications, while most uses are supported by limited or inconclusive data. 

According to the review, which analyzed thousands of studies published over the last decade, the quality of available evidence is still considered insufficient to support broad clinical recommendations, especially in cases such as chronic pain, anxiety, and insomnia.

Despite the research findings, the evidence from many clinical cases shows that cannabis has achieved satisfactory results.  In an interview for the section "Transformed Lives" on Sechat, Daiany Dias reported a good response to the use of medical cannabis, highlighting the positive impact on coping with the effects of chemotherapy and on the quality of rest. 

"During the chemo sessions, I really thought I was going to die because it's a very strong sensation, it feels like your heart is going to stop. In the following days, I had vomiting, discomfort, sweated a lot, a horrible feeling. And then cannabis helped me with that, to overcome this post-chemotherapy, as well as allowing me to sleep better".

Where science points to clear benefits

According to the study, prescribed cannabinoid medications have shown more consistent results in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, stimulating appetite in HIV/AIDS patients, and treating rare pediatric epilepsies, such as Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut syndromes. Outside of these contexts, the observed benefits were classified as modest or inconsistent when compared to established therapies.

Medical guidance, risks, and realistic expectations

For rheumatologist and clinician Dr. Tiago Campanholi, the data reinforces the need for transparency in the physician-patient relationship. 

According to him, prescribers should acknowledge the fragility of current scientific evidence and inform that about 30% of patients may experience adverse effects, including cognitive changes, psychiatric effects, cardiovascular effects, and the risk of dependence.

“The use of medical cannabis should be treated as an adjunctive therapeutic resource, not as a miraculous solution. It is essential to avoid promises, clarify that results vary, and that the goal is to improve signs and symptoms, without completely replacing conventional treatments,” he explains.

The specialist also emphasizes the importance of detailed clinical evaluation, continuous monitoring, and frequent monitoring, with dose adjustments and analysis of possible drug interactions. In addition, he advocates for integrating cannabis with other therapeutic approaches, such as physiotherapy, psychotherapy, and traditional pharmacotherapy.

"All clinical decisions should be individualized, documented, and aligned with CFM and Anvisa standards, ensuring safety, ethics, and clear information for the patient," he concludes.