(1) Background: With the massive demand for the use and commercialization of medicinal cannabidiol (CBD) products, new randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are being published worldwide, with a constant need for safety and efficacy evaluation. (2) Methods: We performed an update on a systematic review published in 2020 that focused on analyzing the serious adverse effects (SAEs) of CBD in RCTs and its possible association with drug interactions. We also updated the report of the most prevalent CBD adverse effects (AEs). We systematically searched EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science without language restriction for RCTs that reported adverse effects after repeated oral CBD administration for at least one week in healthy volunteers or clinical samples published from January 2019 to May 2022. The included studies were assessed for methodological quality by the Quality Assessment of Controlled Intervention Studies tool. The present review is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42022334399. (3) Results: Twelve studies involving 745 randomized subjects analyzed were included (range 1.1–56.8 y). A total of 454 participants used CBD in the trials. The most common AEs of CBD were mild or moderate and included gastrointestinal symptoms (59.5%), somnolence (16.7%), loss of appetite (16.5%), and hypertransaminasemia (ALT/AST) (12.8%). Serious adverse effects include mainly hypertransaminasemia with serum levels elevations greater than three times the upper limit of the normal (6.4%), seizures (1.3%), and rash (1.1%). All SAEs reported in the studies were observed on CBD as an add-on therapy to anticonvulsant medications, including clobazam and valproate. (4) Conclusion: Recent RCTs involving oral CBD administration for at least a week suggest that CBD has a good safety and tolerability profile, confirming previous data. However, it can potentially interact with other drugs and its use should be monitored, especially at the beginning of treatment.

Background: Emerging evidence supports cannabidiol (CBD) as a promising therapeutic compound for various health conditions, despite its approval as a medication (product for medical purposes) remaining restricted to a limited range of clinical indications. Simultaneously, the regulation of cannabis-derived products for medicinal and recreational use has expanded their global market availability to meet local community demands. This scenario presents a complex challenge for clinicians, researchers, and industry, as the global appeal of therapeutic uses of CBD is growing more rapidly than the scientific evidence supporting its safety and effectiveness. Outcomes: A narrative review was conducted to discuss the best evidence regarding the pharmacological profile of CBD, its efficacy, and safety within the context of regulation and perspectives on the development of new cannabinoid-based drugs. Key articles addressing the various facets of this issue were selected for comprehensive analysis. Conclusions: Clinicians and researchers may face unique challenges in understanding the pharmacological profile of CBD and the prospects for developing its clinical indications, given the heterogeneity of clinical terminologies and the quality and composition of cannabis-based medical products available on the market. More basic and clinical research that complies with regulatory agencies’ testing guidelines, such as good manufacturing practices (GMPs), good laboratory practices (GLPs), and good clinical practices (GCPs), is needed to obtain approval for CBD or any other cannabinoid as a therapeutic for broader clinical indications.

Background: The concept of an “entourage” effect in the cannabis and cannabinoids' field was first introduced in the late 1990s, during a period when most research on medical cannabinoids focused on the effects of isolated cannabinoids, such as cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Over the past decade, however, with the increased understanding of the endocannabinoid system, the discovery of other phytocannabinoids and their potential therapeutic uses, the term has gained widespread use in scientific reviews and marketing campaigns. Objective: Critically review the application of the term “entourage effect (EE)” in the literature and its endorsement by certain sectors of the cannabis market. Also, explore the perspectives for further interpretation and elaboration of the term based on current evidence, aiming to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the concept and its implications for cannabinoid-based medicine. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the current state of knowledge regarding the entourage effect. Relevant studies and scientific reviews were analyzed to assess the evidence of clinical efficacy and safety, as well as the regulation of cannabinoid-containing product production. Results: The EE is now recognized as a synergistic phenomenon in which multiple components of cannabis interact to modulate the therapeutic actions of the plant. However, the literature provides limited evidence to support it as a stable and predictable phenomenon. Hence, there is also limited evidence to support clinical efficacy, safety, and appropriate regulation for cannabinoid-containing products based on a “entourage” hypothesis. Conclusion: The EE has significant implications for the medical use of cannabinoid-containing products and their prescription. Nevertheless, a critical evaluation of the term's application is necessary. Further research and evidence are needed to establish the clinical efficacy, safety, and regulatory framework for these products. It's crucial that regulators, the pharmaceutical industry, the media, and health care providers exercise caution and avoid prematurely promoting the entourage effect hypothesis as a scientific proven phenomenon for cannabinoids and other cannabis-derived compound combinations.

Objective: To assess whether the effects of oral administration of 300 mg of Cannabidiol (CBD) for 28 days on mental health are maintained for a period after the medication discontinuation.Methods: This is a 3-month follow-up observational and clinical trial study. The data were obtained from two studies performed simultaneously by the same team in the same period and region with Brazilian frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scales to assess emotional symptoms were applied weekly, in the first month, and at weeks eight and 12.Results: The primary outcome was that, compared to the control group, a significant reduction in General Anxiety Disorder-7 Questionnaire (GAD-7) from baseline values was observed in the CBD group on weeks two, four, and eight (Within-Subjects Contrasts, time-group interactions: F_1-125 = 7.67; p = 0.006; η_p² = 0.06; F_1-125 = 6.58; p = 0.01; η_p² = 0.05; F_1-125 = 4.28; p = 0.04; η_p² = 0.03, respectively) after the end of the treatment.Conclusions: The anxiolytic effects of CBD in frontline health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic were maintained up to 1 month after the treatment discontinuation, suggesting a persistent decrease in anxiety in this group in the real world. Future double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials are needed to confirm the present findings and weigh the benefits of CBD therapy against potential undesired or adverse effects.

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a non-psychotomimetic constituent of the Cannabis plant, with potential therapeutic properties for many physical and neuropsychiatric conditions. Isolated CBD has been suggested to have favorable safety and tolerability. Although CBD-related rash is described, few case reports are well documented in the literature, and usually, CBD was used concomitantly with other medications. Thus, we report four women who presented a skin rash after ongoing CBD use. Other causes of these skin rashes were ruled out after conducting an extensive viral and serological detection panel, and three patients had their lesions biopsied. Two patients were re-exposed to the vehicle (MCT) without developing a new skin rash. Therefore, clinicians must be aware of this potential adverse effect of CBD use.