ABSTRACT
Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) may significantly impact the well-being of patients and their families. The therapeutic use of cannabis for ASD has gained interest due to its promising results and low side effects, but a consensus on treatment guidelines is lacking. In this study, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 20 patients with autistic symptoms who were treated with full-spectrum cannabis extracts (FCEs) in a response-based, individually-tailored dosage regimen. The daily dosage and relative proportions of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) were adjusted based on treatment results following periodic clinical evaluation. Most patients (80%) were treated for a minimum of 6 months. We have used a novel, detailed online patient- or caregiver-reported outcome survey that inquired about core and comorbid symptoms, and quality of life. We also reviewed patients' clinical files, and no individual condition within the autistic spectrum was excluded. This real-life approach enabled us to gain a clearer appraisal of the ample scope of benefits that FCEs can provide for ASD patients and their families. Eighteen patients started with a CBD-rich FCE titrating protocol, and in three of them, the CBD-rich (CBD-dominant) FCE was gradually complemented with low doses of a THC-rich (THC-dominant) FCE based on observed effects. Two other patients have used throughout treatment a blend of two FCEs, one CBD-rich and the other THC-rich. The outcomes were mainly positive for most symptoms, and only one patient from each of the two above-mentioned situations displayed important side effects one who has used only CBD-rich FCE throughout the treatment, and another who has used a blend of CBD-Rich and THC-rich FCEs. Therefore, after FCE treatment, 18 out of 20 patients showed improvement in most core and comorbid symptoms of autism, and in quality of life for patients and their families. For them, side effects were mild and infrequent. Additionally, we show, for the first time, that allotriophagy (Pica) can be treated by FCEs. Other medications were reduced or completely discontinued in most cases. Based on our findings, we propose guidelines for individually tailored dosage regimens that may be adapted to locally available qualified FCEs and guide further clinical trials.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Language production is a finely regulated process, with many aspects which still elude comprehension. From a motor perspective, speech involves over a hundred different muscles functioning in coordination. As science and technology evolve, new approaches are used to study speech production and treat its disorders, and there is growing interest in the use of non-invasive modulation by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Methods: Here we analyzed data obtained from Scopus (Elsevier) using VOSViewer to provide an overview of bibliographic mapping of citation, co-occurrence of keywords, co-citation and bibliographic coupling of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) use in speech research. Results: In total, 253 documents were found, being 55% from only three countries (USA, Germany and Italy), with emerging economies such as Brazil and China becoming relevant in this topic recently. Most documents were published in this last decade, with 2022 being the most productive yet, showing brain stimulation has untapped potential for the speech research field. Discussion: Keyword analysis indicates a move away from basic research on the motor control in healthy speech, toward clinical applications such as stuttering and aphasia treatment. We also observe a recent trend in cerebellar modulation for clinical treatment. Finally, we discuss how NIBS have established over the years and gained prominence as tools in speech therapy and research, and highlight potential methodological possibilities for future research.
