- Email: [email protected]
Cannabis use data collected via social media: A methodological comparison
e24
Abstracts / Drug and Alcohol Dependence 171 (2017) e2–e226
describe the demographics of women in FQHCs that self-identify as having a substance use disorder (SUD) with an emphasis on SV. Methods: Adult women in the waiting rooms of four FQHCs who self-reported risky drug use on the screening instrument WHO ASSIST (score 4–26) who participated in the “Quit Using Drugs Intervention Trial (QUIT)” were included in this study. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to estimate prevalence of SV among women in FQHCs with SUD and assess whether associations exist between history of SV and both emotional and physical health. Results: Of the 124 women included, 61 (49%) reported history of SV, 51 (41%) reported SV prior to 18, and 43 (35%) reported SV after age 18. Finally, 33 of 124 (27%) experienced repetitive SV. Victims of repeat SV had increased odds of feeling limited in their accomplishments (OR 5.7) and unable to work because of their emotions (OR 3.8). Still, they were less likely than other participants to feel limited in their ability to work or function because of their physical health (OR 0.57). Conclusions: These data suggest that 49% of patients with SUDs in FQHCs experience SV and 27% may suffer repetitive SV. These estimated levels of SV are far greater than estimates in the general population. Such traumas may be emotionally debilitating in otherwise physically healthy women. Given general underreporting of SV, providers caring for patients with SUDs in FQHCs should remain vigilant in regards to SV history and consider screening for SV or referring for evaluation in patients with anxiety, depression, and SUDs refractory to standard interventions and pharmacotherapy. Financial support: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) “Preventing Drug Use in Low Income Clinic Populations.” R01 DA022445-01. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.079 Assessing the abuse potential of botanical substances Katherine Bonson ∗ , Alan Trachtenberg, Michael Klein Controlled Substance Staff, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, United States Aims: The FDA’s Botanical Drug Development (2015) describes the pathway for a drug of botanical origins to be tested for safety and efficacy so that it may become a marketed drug product. As with any drug under development, botanical drugs must comply with all regulations of the FD&CA. Thus, when a botanical drug has CNS activity, it will need to undergo an abuse potential assessment by the Controlled Substance Staff at FDA, as described in the FDA’s Assessment of the Abuse Potential of Drugs (2010). A CSS evaluation also occurs when the DEA is considering whether to place a newly emerging street drug of botanical origins under the control of the Controlled Substances Act. Currently, only five plants or their constituent parts are scheduled under the CSA: Cannabis spp. (marijuana, Sch. I hallucinogen), Tabernanthe iboga (ibogaine, Sch. I hallucinogen), Lophophora williamsii (peyote cactus; Sch. I hallucinogen); Opium poppy and poppy straw (from Papaver somniferum, Sch. II opiate), and Coca leaves (only this plant part from Erythroxylum coca, Sch. II stimulant). In contrast, scheduled substances such as psilocybin and psilocyn (Sch. I hallucinogen), cocaine (Sch. II stimulant), cathinone (Sch. I stimulant), and cathine (Sch. IV stimulant) are derived from botanical sources that are not themselves scheduled. This presentation will detail the challenges involved in evaluating botanicals for abuse potential. These include whether it is necessary to evaluate the entire plant structure, how chemicals extracted from a plant may be tested in animal abuse-related studies, how to
select an appropriate positive control, how to manage the presence of other constituents of the botanical substance, and how to test the botanical drug in a human abuse potential study. Conclusions: A botanical drug with CNS activity must undergo an abuse potential assessment to fully evaluate its safety. Although there are challenges for these novel drug products, an appropriate assessment of these drugs is possible using the principles of regulatory science. Financial support: FDA. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.080 Cannabis use data collected via social media: A methodological comparison Jacob Borodovsky ∗ , Dustin C. Lee, Benjamin Sage Crosier, Alan J. Budney Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States Aims: Social media provides an expedient and low cost method for substance use data collection, yet evaluation of its validity and generalizability is lacking. This study compared cannabis use data collected via Facebook (FB) with data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Methods: Cannabis use data from a sample (N = 2932) of lifetime cannabis users who responded to FB ads to take a cannabis use survey were compared with 2013 NSDUH data from lifetime cannabis users (N = 22177). After stratifying by age group (18–25) and (26+) to account for oversampling, past month cannabis use, frequency of use, age of cannabis initiation, lifetime tobacco use, race, gender, and education were compared. Results: Among lifetime cannabis users, past month use was more common among FB than NSDUH respondents (18–25: 88% vs 35%; 26+: 76% vs 14%), and age of initiation was younger (18–25: 15.0 vs 16.2; 26+: 16.1 vs 17.9). Among past month users, daily use was more common among FB respondents (18–25: 49% vs 21%; 26+: 48% vs 23%), and age of initiation was younger in the 18–25 group (15.0 vs 15.4). Lifetime tobacco use was less common among FB respondents (18–25: 79% vs 87%; 26+: 84% vs 94%). African Americans were under represented (18–25: 7% vs 16%; 26+: 8% vs 17%), and males were over-represented (18–25: 85% vs 59%; 26+: 83% vs 60%) in the FB data. FB users in the 18–25 group were less educated, (68% vs 56%, HS degree or lower). Conclusions: The FB survey yielded a sample of heavier cannabis users with different demographics than the NSDUH. The FB sampling strategy might account for the cannabis use discrepancies. FB has targeting mechanisms that can yield samples with specific demographic patterns. Altering target parameters to match the demographics of comparator surveys such as the NSDUH might provide a better test of the validity of social media survey methods. Financial support: T32DA037202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.081
Abstracts / Drug and Alcohol Dependence 171 (2017) e2–e226
describe the demographics of women in FQHCs that self-identify as having a substance use disorder (SUD) with an emphasis on SV. Methods: Adult women in the waiting rooms of four FQHCs who self-reported risky drug use on the screening instrument WHO ASSIST (score 4–26) who participated in the “Quit Using Drugs Intervention Trial (QUIT)” were included in this study. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to estimate prevalence of SV among women in FQHCs with SUD and assess whether associations exist between history of SV and both emotional and physical health. Results: Of the 124 women included, 61 (49%) reported history of SV, 51 (41%) reported SV prior to 18, and 43 (35%) reported SV after age 18. Finally, 33 of 124 (27%) experienced repetitive SV. Victims of repeat SV had increased odds of feeling limited in their accomplishments (OR 5.7) and unable to work because of their emotions (OR 3.8). Still, they were less likely than other participants to feel limited in their ability to work or function because of their physical health (OR 0.57). Conclusions: These data suggest that 49% of patients with SUDs in FQHCs experience SV and 27% may suffer repetitive SV. These estimated levels of SV are far greater than estimates in the general population. Such traumas may be emotionally debilitating in otherwise physically healthy women. Given general underreporting of SV, providers caring for patients with SUDs in FQHCs should remain vigilant in regards to SV history and consider screening for SV or referring for evaluation in patients with anxiety, depression, and SUDs refractory to standard interventions and pharmacotherapy. Financial support: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) “Preventing Drug Use in Low Income Clinic Populations.” R01 DA022445-01. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.079 Assessing the abuse potential of botanical substances Katherine Bonson ∗ , Alan Trachtenberg, Michael Klein Controlled Substance Staff, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, United States Aims: The FDA’s Botanical Drug Development (2015) describes the pathway for a drug of botanical origins to be tested for safety and efficacy so that it may become a marketed drug product. As with any drug under development, botanical drugs must comply with all regulations of the FD&CA. Thus, when a botanical drug has CNS activity, it will need to undergo an abuse potential assessment by the Controlled Substance Staff at FDA, as described in the FDA’s Assessment of the Abuse Potential of Drugs (2010). A CSS evaluation also occurs when the DEA is considering whether to place a newly emerging street drug of botanical origins under the control of the Controlled Substances Act. Currently, only five plants or their constituent parts are scheduled under the CSA: Cannabis spp. (marijuana, Sch. I hallucinogen), Tabernanthe iboga (ibogaine, Sch. I hallucinogen), Lophophora williamsii (peyote cactus; Sch. I hallucinogen); Opium poppy and poppy straw (from Papaver somniferum, Sch. II opiate), and Coca leaves (only this plant part from Erythroxylum coca, Sch. II stimulant). In contrast, scheduled substances such as psilocybin and psilocyn (Sch. I hallucinogen), cocaine (Sch. II stimulant), cathinone (Sch. I stimulant), and cathine (Sch. IV stimulant) are derived from botanical sources that are not themselves scheduled. This presentation will detail the challenges involved in evaluating botanicals for abuse potential. These include whether it is necessary to evaluate the entire plant structure, how chemicals extracted from a plant may be tested in animal abuse-related studies, how to
select an appropriate positive control, how to manage the presence of other constituents of the botanical substance, and how to test the botanical drug in a human abuse potential study. Conclusions: A botanical drug with CNS activity must undergo an abuse potential assessment to fully evaluate its safety. Although there are challenges for these novel drug products, an appropriate assessment of these drugs is possible using the principles of regulatory science. Financial support: FDA. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.080 Cannabis use data collected via social media: A methodological comparison Jacob Borodovsky ∗ , Dustin C. Lee, Benjamin Sage Crosier, Alan J. Budney Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States Aims: Social media provides an expedient and low cost method for substance use data collection, yet evaluation of its validity and generalizability is lacking. This study compared cannabis use data collected via Facebook (FB) with data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Methods: Cannabis use data from a sample (N = 2932) of lifetime cannabis users who responded to FB ads to take a cannabis use survey were compared with 2013 NSDUH data from lifetime cannabis users (N = 22177). After stratifying by age group (18–25) and (26+) to account for oversampling, past month cannabis use, frequency of use, age of cannabis initiation, lifetime tobacco use, race, gender, and education were compared. Results: Among lifetime cannabis users, past month use was more common among FB than NSDUH respondents (18–25: 88% vs 35%; 26+: 76% vs 14%), and age of initiation was younger (18–25: 15.0 vs 16.2; 26+: 16.1 vs 17.9). Among past month users, daily use was more common among FB respondents (18–25: 49% vs 21%; 26+: 48% vs 23%), and age of initiation was younger in the 18–25 group (15.0 vs 15.4). Lifetime tobacco use was less common among FB respondents (18–25: 79% vs 87%; 26+: 84% vs 94%). African Americans were under represented (18–25: 7% vs 16%; 26+: 8% vs 17%), and males were over-represented (18–25: 85% vs 59%; 26+: 83% vs 60%) in the FB data. FB users in the 18–25 group were less educated, (68% vs 56%, HS degree or lower). Conclusions: The FB survey yielded a sample of heavier cannabis users with different demographics than the NSDUH. The FB sampling strategy might account for the cannabis use discrepancies. FB has targeting mechanisms that can yield samples with specific demographic patterns. Altering target parameters to match the demographics of comparator surveys such as the NSDUH might provide a better test of the validity of social media survey methods. Financial support: T32DA037202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.081