TY - JOUR T1 - Associations of cannabis use, tobacco use and incident anxiety, mood, and psychotic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2023.03.17.23287299 SP - 2023.03.17.23287299 AU - Chloe Burke AU - Tom P Freeman AU - Hannah Sallis AU - Robyn E. Wootton AU - Annabel Burnley AU - Jonas Lange AU - Rachel Lees AU - Katherine Sawyer AU - Gemma Taylor Y1 - 2023/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/03/17/2023.03.17.23287299.abstract N2 - Importance Traditional observational epidemiological studies have consistently found an association between tobacco use, cannabis use and subsequent mental ill-health. However, the extent to which this association reflects an increased risk of new-onset mental ill-health is unclear and may be biased by unmeasured confounding.Objective To examine the association between cannabis use, tobacco use and risk of incident mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders, and explore risk of bias.Data Sources CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses were searched from inception until November 2022, in addition to supplementary searches.Study Selection Longitudinal studies assessing tobacco use and cannabis use and their association with incident mood, anxiety or psychotic disorders were included. Studies conducted in populations selected on health status (e.g., pregnancy) or other highly-selected characteristics (e.g., incarcerated persons) were excluded.Data Extraction and Synthesis A modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. The confounder matrix and E-Values were used to assess potential bias due to unmeasured confounding. Summary risk ratios (RR) were calculated in random-effects meta-analyses using the generic inverse variance method.Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s) Exposures were measured via self-report and defined through status (e.g., current use) or heaviness of use (e.g., cigarettes per day). Outcomes were measured through symptom-based scales, interviews, registry codes and self-reported diagnosis or treatment. Effect estimates extracted were risk of incident disorders by exposure status.Results Seventy-five out of 27789 records were included. Random effects meta-analysis demonstrated a positive association between tobacco use and mood disorder (RR:1.39, 95%CI:1.30–1.47) and psychotic disorder (RR:3.45, 95%CI:2.63-4.53), but not anxiety disorder (RR:1.21, 95%CI:0.87–1.68). Cannabis use was positively associated with psychotic disorders (RR:3.19, 95%CI:2.07-4.90), but not mood disorders (RR:1.31, 95%CI:0.92-1.86) or anxiety disorders (RR:1.10, 95%CI:0.99-1.22). Confounder matrix and E-value assessment indicated estimates were moderately biased by unmeasured confounding.Conclusions and Relevance This systematic review and meta-analysis presents evidence for a longitudinal, positive association between both substances and incident psychotic disorders and tobacco use and mood disorders. There was no evidence to support an association between cannabis use and common mental health conditions. Existing evidence across all outcomes was limited by inadequate adjustment for potential confounders. Future research should prioritise methods allowing for stronger causal inference, such as Mendelian randomization and evidence triangulation.Competing Interest StatementGT has previously received funding from Grand (Pfizer) for work not related to this project. CB, HS and RW have done paid consultancy work for Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) for work related to this project. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.Clinical Protocols https://osf.io/5t2pu/ Funding StatementThis work is primarily supported by a Society for the Study of Addiction PhD studentship awarded to CB.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data for meta-analyses are available online at https://github.com/chloeeburke/tobcanmeta. https://github.com/chloeeburke/tobcanmeta ER -