rethinkTHC Search
Menu
Study breakdown

Black Cancer Patients Were Actually More Comfortable Discussing Cannabis With Doctors Than Expected

Cross SectionalModerate evidence
The takeaway

In a state without legal cannabis, a survey of 1,003 cancer survivors found no racial disparities in cannabis use or discussions with providers — and Black patients who used cannabis reported the highest comfort levels discussing it, contrary to researchers' expectations.

Oncologists, cancer care teams, health equity researchers, and patients navigating cannabis discussions with their providers.

What the researchers found

No racial differences in cannabis use rates or provider discussions. Black cancer patients who used cannabis reported the greatest comfort discussing it with providers AND the greatest perceived improvement in comfort if cannabis were legalized. Patients who used cannabis were generally more comfortable discussing it than non-users.

Why it matters

The assumption that Black patients in prohibition states would be less comfortable discussing cannabis — due to disproportionate legal consequences — was not supported. This suggests clinicians should proactively discuss cannabis with all cancer patients regardless of race, even in states without legal access.

The numbers in context

1,003 cancer survivors. Mean age 62.36. 13% Black/African-American. 41% male. No racial differences in cannabis use rates. No racial differences in provider discussion rates. Black cannabis users had highest comfort levels discussing with providers.

How the study worked

Cross-sectional survey of 1,003 cancer survivors (mean age 62.36, 13% Black/African-American, 41% male) in a state without a legal cannabis marketplace. Weight-adjusted regressions examined racial differences in comfort and discussion of cannabis with providers.

What this study cannot tell us

Cross-sectional single-state survey. Self-selected participants may be more open about cannabis. Only 13% Black representation. Comfort discussing does not mean discussion actually occurred. State-specific legal context limits generalizability.

How to read the evidence

Large cross-sectional survey with appropriate statistical methods, but single state and self-selected sample may limit generalizability.

When this study was published

Published 2025.

The bigger picture

Legalization status may matter less for patient-provider communication than assumed. If patients are already comfortable discussing cannabis regardless of legal context and race, the barrier may lie more with providers' willingness to ask than patients' willingness to share.

Questions still open

  • Are providers the actual barrier to cannabis discussions, not patients? Would proactive provider screening for cannabis use improve cancer symptom management? Do these findings hold in states with different legal contexts?

Common questions

Should cancer patients tell their doctor about cannabis use?
Yes — this study found patients who used cannabis were comfortable discussing it, and providers need this information to manage potential drug interactions with cancer treatments. Most patients who use cannabis are willing to discuss it when asked.
Would legalization make patients more open about cannabis?
Black patients in this study perceived the greatest improvement in comfort if cannabis were legalized, suggesting legal reform could further reduce any remaining barriers to open communication.

Read the original research

Evaluating racial disparities in cancer patient-provider communication about cannabis in a state without a legal cannabis marketplace.

Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 33(2), 78

Citation

Wedel, Amelia V; Walters, Kyle J; Tomko, Rachel L; Rojewski, Alana M; McClure, Erin A. (2025). Evaluating racial disparities in cancer patient-provider communication about cannabis in a state without a legal cannabis marketplace.. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 33(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-09131-9

Explore the wider topic