2009
DOI: 10.1177/0269881109105900
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nabilone produces marked impairments to cognitive function and changes in subjective state in healthy volunteers

Abstract: This was a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover study of the acute cognitive and subjective effects of nabilone 1-3 mg in healthy male volunteers. The Cognitive Drug Research computerised system (CDR system) was used to assess changes in attention, working and episodic memory. In addition, a number of self-ratings were conducted including those of mood, alertness and perceived drug effects. Impairments to attention, working and episodic memory and self-ratings of alertness were evident. Volu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
31
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
2
31
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Evidence of behavioral effects in healthy volunteers was very limited, with conflicting effects on derived memory parameters in the 100 mg cohorts, and weak endorsement of sedative‐like effects by women of nonchild‐bearing potential receiving 100 mg. Modulation of neuronal activity by the endocannabinoid system may be strongly activity‐dependent,15 and effects may differ in pathological states in which increased excitation of neuronal circuitry might occur. In contrast, single clinical doses of the cannabinoid agonist nabilone (which would be less dependent on activity state for effects) are associated with notable impairment on cognitive performance and strong endorsement of several of the ARCI‐53 scales in healthy volunteers 16. Older volunteers and women of nonchild‐bearing potential were included to provide information on safety and tolerability prior to conducting proof‐of‐concept studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Evidence of behavioral effects in healthy volunteers was very limited, with conflicting effects on derived memory parameters in the 100 mg cohorts, and weak endorsement of sedative‐like effects by women of nonchild‐bearing potential receiving 100 mg. Modulation of neuronal activity by the endocannabinoid system may be strongly activity‐dependent,15 and effects may differ in pathological states in which increased excitation of neuronal circuitry might occur. In contrast, single clinical doses of the cannabinoid agonist nabilone (which would be less dependent on activity state for effects) are associated with notable impairment on cognitive performance and strong endorsement of several of the ARCI‐53 scales in healthy volunteers 16. Older volunteers and women of nonchild‐bearing potential were included to provide information on safety and tolerability prior to conducting proof‐of‐concept studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whether working memory is impaired by cannabis is less clear, possibly because of the wide range of different working memory tasks employed. Acute administration of THC, dronabinol, or nabilone affected working memory inconsistently across Sternberg, delayed matching to sample, spatial or numeric working memory, n-back, digit recall, and digit span tasks (36)(37)(38)(39)(40)42,43,(68)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(74)(75)(76)(77)(78). Similarly, chronic cannabis use was shown to impair working memory in young adults on immediate recall (79), verbal reasoning (80), and verbal n-back (81) working memory tasks, but not on spatial working memory (48,82) or digit span (52,53), whereas spatial working memory was impaired in adolescent users (46), suggestive of differential effects in the developing brain.…”
Section: Acute and Chronic Effects Of Cannabinoids On Cognitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are many studies which could be considered as providing a background to the present findings, since they have shown that basic cognitive variables (attention and memory) can predict performance (Echevarry, Godoy & Olaz, 2007;Wesnes et al, 2009;Wesnes, Pincock, Richardson, Helm & Halis, 2003;Wesnes, Ward, McGinty & Petrini, 2000). However, there is very little research relating psychological and psychophysiological stress to school performance (Lupien & Maheu, 2007;Sandberg, 2007;Steptoe, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Participants" basic cognitive function (attention and memory) was evaluated by means of the Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) battery (Wesnes, Pincock, Richardson, Helm & Halis, 2003;Wesnes, Ward, McGinty & Petrini, 2000), a specialized system that provides a computerized assessment of cognitive function (Haskell, Kennedy, Wesnes & Scholey, 2005;Kennedy, Haskell, Wesnes & Scholey, 2004;Wesnes et al, 2000). This battery has previously been used in research with children and has shown excellent reliability (Wesnes et al, 2003) when measuring variables such as attention and episodic working memory (Wesnes et al, 2009). The version of the CDR battery used here consists of 11 tasks administered in the following order: word presentation, immediate word recall, picture presentation, simple reaction time, digit vigilance, choice reaction time, spatial working memory, numerical working memory, delayed word recall, word recognition and picture recognition (Wesnes, Ward, McGinty & Petrini, 2000).…”
Section: Psychological Assessment Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation