Abstract
M.Tech. (Homoeopathy)
Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers in the world, especially among women. Breast cancers range in severity and type. Current allopathic treatments for breast cancer include chemotherapy, radiation therapy, targeted therapy, hormone therapy and surgery. All these treatments come with unwanted side effects with varying degrees of severity. Cannabis has become a popular treatment among breast cancer sufferers despite it being illegal in most of the world. Cannabidiol (CBD) is one of the major cannabinoids found in the Cannabis sativa L. plant and has various therapeutic applications. CBD exhibits no psychoactive effects and minimal side-effects, thus encouraging scientists to research its therapeutic potential. CBD acts on various pathways within the body, some of which have been shown to have anti-tumour and anti-metastatic effects. These anti-tumour effects have been documented in pre-clinical studies on breast cancer cells.
The aim of the systematic review was to investigate and provide a summary and analysis of research that has been conducted on the effects of cannabidiol on breast cancer in pre-clinical studies.
A search was conducted in nine databases for pre-clinical studies that have examined the effect of CBD on breast cancer. The search terms used included: “Cannabidiol,” “CBD,” “Cannabis,” “breast cancer,” “carcinoma,” “carcinoma in situ,” “hemp oil,” and “tumour.” These were used in multiple combinations with Boolean operators. Thirteen studies were found to have met the inclusion criteria. The full texts were then read and assessed using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Six studies met the inclusion criteria; these included three in vitro studies and 3 mixed studies. The in vitro components of the studies were assessed for quality via the modified CONSORT checklist, and the in vivo (animal) component was assessed via the ARRIVE guidelines. A systematic literature review will differentiate poor quality studies from high quality studies, thus offering high quality data. This further adds to evidence-based medicine, which assists in evidence-based practice
The modified CONSORT checklist uses 15 items to assess the methodological quality and technique of the in vitro aspects of the studies. Two studies scored eight out of the 15 items, three of the studies scored seven out the 15 items, and one study scored six out of 15 items. All the studies scored ‘No’ to items 6-9 regarding randomisation, thus decreasing the scores of the studies...