Search

There has been renewed interest in the use of 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA) and serotonergic psychedelics in the treatment of multiple psychiatric disorders. Many of these compounds are known to produce prosocial effects, but how these effects relate to therapeutic efficacy and the extent to which prosocial effects are unique to a particular drug class is unknown. In this article, we present a narrative overview and compare evidence for the prosocial effects of MDMA and serotonergic psychedelics to elucidate shared mechanisms that may underlie the therapeutic process. We discuss 4 categories of prosocial effects: altered self-image, responses to social reward, responses to negative social input, and social neuroplasticity. While both categories of drugs alter self-perception, MDMA may do so in a way that is less related to the experience of mystical-type states than serotonergic psychedelics. In the case of social reward, evidence supports the ability of MDMA to enhance responses and suggests that serotonergic psychedelics may also do so, but more research is needed in this area. Both drug classes consistently dampen reactivity to negative social stimuli. Finally, preclinical evidence supports the ability of both drug classes to induce social neuroplasticity, promoting adaptive rewiring of neural circuits, which may be helpful in trauma processing. While both MDMA and serotonergic psychedelics produce prosocial effects, they differ in the mechanisms through which they do this. These differences affect the types of psychosocial interventions that may work best with each compound.

The acute psychoactive, autonomic, and endocrine effects of the new psychoactive substance (NPS) 5,6‐methylenedioxy‐2‐aminoindane (MDAI; 3.0 mg/kg, range 180–228 mg) were investigated in six healthy volunteers (four males, two females) in a non‐blinded fashion without placebo. Subjective, cardiovascular, and endocrine responses were compared with two different doses of 3,4‐methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) (75 mg and 125 mg) described in previously published placebo‐controlled studies, which used identical outcome measures including Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), the Adjective Mood Rating Scale (AMRS), and the 5 Dimensions of Altered States of Consciousness (5D‐ASC) scale. MDAI was well tolerated and produced subjective effects comparable with those of 125 mg MDMA. MDAI increased blood pressure similar to 125 mg MDMA but did not increase heart rate or body temperature. MDAI increased cortisol and prolactin levels and could be detected in serum about 20 min post ingestion and remained detectable at least for 4 days. In urine, MDAI was detectable over a period of at least 6 days. Further clinical investigations are warranted to assess whether MDAI could serve as drug with medicinal properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate if clinical features associated with acute cannabis intoxication in patients presenting to Emergency Departments for medical assistance differ according to patient age and sex. We analysed presentations in the Euro-DEN Plus dataset from 2014 to 2019 in which cannabis was the only drug involved (except for alcohol), and age, sex and alcohol co-ingestion had been recorded. Age was considered as categorical (five groups; <20, 20–29, 30–39, 40–49 and ≥50 years), and sex as binary variable (male/female). We evaluated 12 key clinical features recorded during emergency department (ED) care. Risks of presenting with each of these clinical features according to patient age and sex were calculated by logistic regression models, and adjusted for sex, age and alcohol co-ingestion. 4,268 of 43,633 Euro-DEN presentations (9.8%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria (median age: 26 years (IQR = 20–34), 70% male, 52% co-ingested alcohol). The frequency of clinical features was: anxiety 28%, vomiting 24%, agitation 23%, palpitations 14%, reduced consciousness 13%, acute psychosis 9%, hallucinations 9%, chest pain 7%, headache 6%, hypotension 4%, hypertension 3% and seizures 2%. Patients younger than 20 years more frequently had vomiting (34.7% of cases), reduced consciousness (21.5%), and headache (10.8%); and less frequently acute psychosis (5.5%). Patients older than 49 years more often had hypotension (6.5%) and less frequently vomiting (20%), anxiety (14%), agitation (14%) and reduced consciousness (10%). Males more frequently presented with hypertension (3.7 vs. 1.5%; OR = 2.311, 95%CI = 1.299–3.816), psychosis (10.4 vs 6.3%; 1.948, 1.432–2.430), chest pain (8.1 vs 4.5%; 1.838, 1.390–2.430) and seizures (2.5 vs 1.4%; 1.805, 1.065–3.060), and less frequently with vomiting (21.8 vs 28.2%; 0.793, 0.677–0.930), anxiety (25.4 vs 32.3%; 0.655, 0.561–0.766) and hypotension (2.9 vs 5.8%; 0.485, 0.350–0.671). The prevalence of some clinical features typically associated with acute cannabis intoxication differed according to age and sex. The causes for these differences should be further investigated in order to better understand the pathophysiology of cannabis-related acute toxicity, and they may be relevant particularly for developing prevention campaigns and for treatment in specific sex and/or age groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Methods Results Conclusions Psychedelics, including mescaline, may serve as novel treatments for depression and anxiety. However, data is scarce on the safety of mescaline.The present pooled analysis included two double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled studies with a total of 48 participants and 96 mescaline administrations. Single oral‐dose administrations (n = 16/dose) of mescaline at doses of 100–800 mg were used. Acute subjective and autonomic effects and acute and subacute adverse effects were recorded. Liver and kidney function, blood cell counts, and “flashbacks” were documented at the end of the studies.Positive subjective effects dose‐dependently increased and were higher than negative subjective effects for all mescaline doses. Autonomic effects increased moderately. Systolic blood pressure remained < 180 mmHg in all participants. Of all mescaline administrations, diastolic blood pressure > 100 mmHg was measured in 6%, heart rate > 100 beats/min was measured in 3% and body temperature > 38 °C was measured in 5%. The total number of acute adverse effects was 51, 12, 179, 143, 165 and 180 at 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 and 800 mg doses of mescaline, respectively. Nausea was dose‐limiting. Kidney and liver function and blood cell counts remained normal. “Flashbacks” were reported after 2% of all mescaline administrations.These findings suggest that the administration of single mescaline doses up to 800 mg are safe in a controlled clinical setting with regard to acute psychological and physical harm in healthy participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychedelic-assisted therapy refers to a group of therapeutic practices involving psychedelics taken under therapeutic supervision from physicians, psychologists, and others. It has been hypothesised that psychedelic-assisted therapy may reduce symptoms of anxiety, depression, and existential distress in patients facing life-threatening diseases (e.g. cancer). However, these substances are illegal in most countries and have been associated with potential risks., Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of psychedelic-assisted therapy compared to placebo or active comparators (e.g. antidepressants) for treatment of anxiety, depression, and existential distress in people with life-threatening diseases., Search Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registers on 30 March 2024. In addition, we undertook reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We used no language or date restrictions., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with no restrictions regarding comorbidity, sex, or ethnicity. Interventions comprised a substance-induced psychedelic experience preceded by preparatory therapeutic sessions and followed by integrative therapeutic sessions., Data Collection and Analysis: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane., Main Results: We included six studies in the review, which evaluated two different interventions: psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics (psilocybin ('magic mushrooms') and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)), and psychedelic-assisted therapy with 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or 'Ecstasy'). The studies randomised 149 participants with life-threatening diseases and analysed data for 140 of them. The age range of participants was 36 to 64 years. The studies lasted between 6 and 12 months, and were conducted in outpatient settings in the USA and in Switzerland. Drug companies were not involved in study funding, but funding was provided by organisations that promote psychedelic-assisted therapy. Primary outcomes (at 1 to 12 weeks) Anxiety Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may result in a reduction in anxiety when compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic): State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Trait, scale 20 to 80) mean difference (MD) -8.41, 95% CI -12.92 to -3.89; STAI-State (scale 20 to 80) MD -9.04, 95% CI -13.87 to -4.21; 5 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence. The effect of psychedelic-assisted therapy using MDMA on anxiety, compared to placebo, is very uncertain: STAI-T MD -14.70, 95% CI -29.45 to 0.05; STAI-S MD -16.10, 95% CI -33.03 to 0.83; 1 study, 18 participants; very low certainty evidence. Depression Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may result in a reduction in depression when compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic): Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, scale 0 to 63) MD -4.92, 95% CI -8.97 to -0.87; 4 studies, 112 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.43, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.06; 5 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence. The effect of psychedelic-assisted therapy using MDMA on depression, compared to placebo, is very uncertain: BDI-II (scale: 0 to 63) MD -6.30, 95% CI -16.93 to 4.33; 1 study, 18 participants; very low certainty evidence. Existential distress Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic) may result in a reduction in demoralisation, one of the most common measures of existential distress, but the evidence is very uncertain (Demoralisation Scale, 1 study, 28 participants): post treatment scores, placebo group 39.6 (SEM 3.4), psilocybin group 18.8 (3.6), P ≤ 0.01). Evidence from other measures of existential distress was mixed. Existential distress was not measured in people receiving psychedelic-assisted therapy with MDMA. Secondary outcomes (at 1 to 12 weeks) Quality of life When classical psychedelics were used, one study had inconclusive results and two reported improved quality of life, but the evidence is very uncertain. MDMA did not improve quality of life measures, but the evidence is also very uncertain. Spirituality Participants receiving psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics rated their experience as being spiritually significant (2 studies), but the evidence is very uncertain. Spirituality was not assessed in participants receiving MDMA. Adverse events No treatment-related serious adverse events or adverse events grade 3/4 were reported. Common minor to moderate adverse events for classical psychedelics were elevated blood pressure, nausea, anxiety, emotional distress, and psychotic-like symptoms (e.g. pseudo-hallucination where the participant is aware they are hallucinating); for MDMA, common minor to moderate adverse events were anxiety, dry mouth, jaw clenching, and headaches. Symptoms subsided when drug effects wore off or up to one week later. Certainty of the evidence Although all six studies had intended to blind participants, personnel, and assessors, blinding could not be achieved as this is very difficult in studies investigating psychedelics. Using GRADE criteria, we judged the certainty of evidence to be low to very low, mainly due to high risk of bias and imprecision (small sample size)., Authors' Conclusions: Implications for practice Psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may be effective for treating anxiety, depression, and possibly existential distress, in people facing a life-threatening disease. Psychedelic-assisted therapy seemed to be well tolerated, with no treatment-emergent serious adverse events reported in the studies included in this review. However, the certainty of evidence is low to very low, which means that we cannot be sure about these results, and they might be changed by future research. At the time of this review (2024), psychedelic drugs are illegal in many countries. Implications for research The risk of bias due to 'unblinding' (participants being aware of which intervention they are receiving) could be reduced by measuring expectation bias, checking blinding has been maintained before cross-over, and using active placebos. More studies with larger sample sizes are needed to reduce imprecision. As the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) currently classifies psychedelics as Schedule I substances (i.e. having no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse), research involving these drugs is restricted, but is steadily increasing., (Copyright © 2024 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Introduction: Cannabis is the most common recreational drug worldwide and synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists are currently the largest group of new psychoactive substances. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical features and outcomes of lone acute cannabis toxicity with lone acute synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist toxicity in a large series of presentations to European emergency departments between 2013-2020., Methods: Self-reported drug exposure, clinical, and outcome data were extracted from the European Drug Emergencies Network Plus which is a surveillance network that records data on drug-related emergency department presentations to 36 centres in 24 European countries. Cannabis exposure was considered the control in all analyses. To compare the lone cannabis and lone synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist groups, univariate analysis using chi squared testing was used for categorical variables and non-parametric Mann-Whitney U- testing for continuous variables. Statistical significance was defined as a P value of <0.05., Results: Between 2013-2020 there were 54,314 drug related presentations of which 2,657 were lone cannabis exposures and 503 lone synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist exposures. Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist presentations had statistically significantly higher rates of drowsiness, coma, agitation, seizures and bradycardia at the time of presentation. Cannabis presentations were significantly more likely to have palpitations, chest pain, hypertension, tachycardia, anxiety, vomiting and headache., Discussion: Emergency department presentations involving lone synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist exposures were more likely to have neuropsychiatric features and be admitted to a psychiatric ward, and lone cannabis exposures were more likely to have cardiovascular features. Previous studies have shown variability in the acute toxicity of synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists compared with cannabis but there is little comparative data available on lone exposures. There is limited direct comparison in the current literature between lone synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist and lone cannabis exposure, with only two previous poison centre series and two clinical series. Whilst this study is limited by self-report being used to identify the drug(s) involved in the presentations, previous studies have demonstrated that self-report is reliable in emergency department presentations with acute drug toxicity., Conclusion: This study directly compares presentations with acute drug toxicity related to the lone use of cannabis or synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists. It supports previous findings of increased neuropsychiatric toxicity from synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists compared to cannabis and provides further data on cardiovascular toxicity in lone cannabis use.