BACKGROUND: Adolescents may respond differently to cannabis than adults, yet no previous functional magnetic resonance imaging study has examined acute cannabis effects in this age group. In this study, we investigated the neural correlates of reward anticipation after acute exposure to cannabis in adolescents and adults. METHODS: This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover experiment. Forty-seven adolescents (n = 24, 12 females, ages 16-17 years) and adults (n = 23, 11 females, ages 26-29 years) matched on cannabis use frequency (0.5-3 days/week) completed the Monetary Incentive Delay task during functional magnetic resonance imaging after inhaling cannabis with 0.107 mg/kg D9-tetrahydrocannabinol ("THC") (8 mg THC for a 75-kg person) or with THC plus 0.320 mg/kg cannabidiol ("THC+CBD") (24 mg CBD for a 75-kg person), or placebo cannabis. We investigated reward anticipation activity with whole-brain analyses and region of interest analyses in the right and left ventral striatum, right and left anterior cingulate cortex, and right insula.RESULTS: THC reduced anticipation activity compared with placebo in the right (p = .005, d = 0.49) and left (p = .003, d = 0.50) ventral striatum and the right insula (p = .01, d = 0.42). THC+CBD reduced activity compared with placebo in the right ventral striatum (p = .01, d = 0.41) and right insula (p = .002, d = 0.49). There were no differences between "THC" and "THC+CBD" conditions and no significant drug by age group interaction effect, supported by Bayesian analyses. There were no significant effects in the whole-brain analyses.CONCLUSIONS: In weekly cannabis users, cannabis suppresses the brain's anticipatory reward response to money, and CBD does not modulate this effect. Furthermore, the adolescent reward circuitry is not differentially sensitive to acute effects of cannabis on reward anticipation.

Rationale Attentional bias to drug-related stimuli is hypothesised to contribute towards addiction. However, the acute effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on attentional bias to cannabis cues, the differential response in adults and adolescents, and the moderating effect of cannabidiol (CBD) are unknown. Objectives Our study investigated (1) the acute effects of vaporised cannabis on attentional bias to cannabis-related images in adults and adolescents and (2) the moderating influences of age and CBD. Methods We conducted a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study where three weight-adjusted vaporised cannabis preparations: ‘THC’ (8 mg THC for a 75-kg person), ‘THC + CBD’ (8 mg THC and 24 mg CBD for a 75-kg person) and PLA (matched placebo). Cannabis was administered on 3 separate days to 48 participants, who used cannabis 0.5–3 days/week: 24 adolescents (12 females, aged 16–17) and 24 adults (12 females, aged 26–29). Participants completed a visual probe task with cannabis cues. Our primary outcome was attentional bias to cannabis stimuli, measured using the differential reaction time to a cannabis vs. neutral probe, on 200-ms trials. Results In contrast to hypotheses, attention was directed away from cannabis cues on placebo, and there was a main effect of the drug ( F (2,92) = 3.865, p = 0.024, η 2 p = 0.077), indicating THC administration eliminated this bias. There was no significant impact of CBD nor an age-by-drug interaction. Conclusions Acute THC intoxication eliminated attentional bias away from cannabis cues. There was no evidence of differential response in adolescents compared to adults and no evidence that a moderate vaporised dose of CBD altered the impact of cannabis on attentional bias. Trial registration This study was listed with the US National Library of Medicine and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, URL: Do Adolescents and Adults Differ in Their Acute Response to Cannabis?—Full Text View—ClinicalTrials.gov , registration number: NCT04851392.

Abstract Background and Aims Long‐term harms of cannabis may be exacerbated in adolescence, but little is known about the acute effects of cannabis in adolescents. We aimed to (i) compare the acute effects of cannabis in adolescent and adult cannabis users and (ii) determine if cannabidiol (CBD) acutely modulates the effects of delta‐9‐tetrahydocannabinol (THC). Design Randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, crossover experiment. The experiment was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04851392). Setting Laboratory in London, United Kingdom. Participants Twenty‐four adolescents (12 women, 16‐ to 17‐year‐olds) and 24 adults (12 women, 26‐ to 29‐year‐olds) who used cannabis 0.5–3 days/week and were matched on cannabis use frequency (mean = 1.5 days/week). Intervention We administered three weight‐adjusted vaporised cannabis flower preparations: ‘THC’ (8 mg THC for 75 kg person); ‘THC + CBD’ (8 mg THC and 24 mg CBD for 75 kg person); and ‘PLA’ (matched placebo). Measurements Primary outcomes were (i) subjective ‘feel drug effect’; (ii) verbal episodic memory (delayed prose recall); and (iii) psychotomimetic effect (Psychotomimetic States Inventory). Findings Compared with ‘PLA’, ‘THC’ and ‘THC + CBD’ significantly (P < 0.001) increased ‘feel drug effect’ (mean difference [MD] = 6.3, 95% CI = 5.3–7.2; MD = 6.8, 95% CI = 6.0–7.7), impaired verbal episodic memory (MD = –2.7, 95% CI = −4.1 to −1.4; MD = −2.9, 95% CI = −4.1 to −1.7) and increased psychotomimetic effects (MD = 7.8, 95% CI = 2.8–12.7; MD = 10.8, 95% CI = 6.2–15.4). There was no evidence that adolescents differed from adults in their responses to cannabis (interaction P ≥ 0.4). Bayesian analyses supported equivalent effects of cannabis in adolescents and adults (Bayes factor [BF01] >3). There was no evidence that CBD significantly modulated the acute effects of THC. Conclusions Adolescent cannabis users are neither more resilient nor more vulnerable than adult cannabis users to the acute psychotomimetic, verbal memory‐impairing or subjective effects of cannabis. Furthermore, in adolescents and adults, vaporised cannabidiol does not mitigate the acute harms caused by delta‐9‐tetrahydocannabinol.