背景:由于2018年底美国工业大麻生产合法化,含有大麻衍生的Δ8-四氢大麻酚(Δ8-THC)的产品越来越受欢迎。小,然而,已知Δ8-THC的潜在损害以及对道路和工作场所安全的相关影响,而Δ8-THC的测试还不常见。本研究探讨了与最近使用Δ8-THC相关的损害模式和大麻素动力学。
方法:大麻衍生的Δ8-THC浓缩物通过蒸发随意给予三名23-25岁的男性经常使用大麻的人。除了使用10分量表对减值进行自我评估外,评估每位受试者的水平凝视眼震(HGN),作为评估汽化前后损害的物理手段。为了检查大麻素动力学模式,在汽化前至汽化后180min收集呼出气和毛细血管血样,并使用经验证的方法通过液相色谱高分辨率质谱法分析大麻素含量.然后将损伤和大麻素动力学结果与在先前的研究中随意吸食了Δ9-THC大麻香烟后从相同的三个受试者获得的类似结果进行比较,以确定是否存在任何相似性。
结果:蒸发Δ8-THC后的损害模式与吸食大麻后观察到的相似,自我评估的损害在使用后的第一个小时内达到峰值,然后在使用后3小时下降到零。同样,仅在蒸发后观察到HGN,蒸发后3小时,HGN的证据已经消散。蒸发Δ8-THC后观察到的大麻素动力学模式(蒸发后20分钟时的短Δ8-THC半衰期为5.2至11.2分钟,存在关键的大麻素大麻色素,大麻酚,和四氢大麻酚,并且在汽化后的第一个小时内呼吸/血液Δ8-THC比率>2)也类似于在先前研究中相同受试者吸食大麻后的第一个小时内观察到的Δ9-THC和相同的关键大麻素。
结论:大麻衍生的Δ8-THC和Δ9-THC显示出相似的损害特征,这表明最近使用Δ8-THC产品可能与大麻产品具有相同的风险。标准测试方法需要将这种新兴的,大麻衍生的大麻素。
BACKGROUND: As a result of the legalization of U.S. industrial hemp production in late 2018, products containing hemp-derived Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ8-THC) are increasing in popularity. Little, however, is known regarding Δ8-THC\'s
impairment potential and the associated impacts on roadway and workplace safety, and testing for Δ8-THC is not yet common. The present study explored
impairment patterns and cannabinoid kinetics associated with recent use of Δ8-THC.
METHODS: Hemp-derived Δ8-THC concentrate was administered by vaporization ad libitum to three male frequent cannabis users aged 23-25 years. In addition to self-assessments of
impairment using a 10-point scale, horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) was evaluated in each subject as a physical means of assessing
impairment before and after vaporization. To examine cannabinoid kinetic patterns, exhaled breath and capillary blood samples were collected prior to vaporization up to 180 min post-vaporization and analyzed by liquid chromatography high-resolution mass spectrometry for cannabinoid content using validated methods. The
impairment and cannabinoid kinetic results were then compared to analogous results obtained from the same three subjects after they had smoked a ∆9-THC cannabis cigarette ad libitum in a previous study to determine whether any similarities existed.
RESULTS: Patterns of impairment after vaporizing Δ8-THC were similar to those observed after smoking cannabis, with self-assessed impairment peaking within the first hour after use, and then declining to zero by 3 h post-use. Likewise, HGN was observed only after vaporizing, and by 3 h post-vaporization, evidence of HGN had dissipated. Cannabinoid kinetic patterns observed after vaporizing Δ8-THC (short ∆8-THC half-lives of 5.2 to 11.2 min at 20 min post-vaporization, presence of key cannabinoids cannabichromene, cannabigerol, and tetrahydrocannabivarin, and breath/blood Δ8-THC ratios > 2 within the first hour post-vaporization) were also analogous to those observed for ∆9-THC and the same key cannabinoids within the first hour after the same subjects had smoked cannabis in the previous study.
CONCLUSIONS: Hemp-derived Δ8-THC and Δ9-THC from cannabis display similar impairment profiles, suggesting that recent use of Δ8-THC products may carry the same risks as cannabis products. Standard testing methods need to incorporate this emerging, hemp-derived cannabinoid.