Aerosolized THC for medical use: assessing the potential of vaping technology as a drug delivery device

Cannabinoid-based therapies, particularly those using Δ 9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), have demonstrated clinical benefit in the treatment of chronic pain and neurological disorders. However, current methods of administration suffer from inconsistent bioavailability and limited control of onset of action. Inhaled administration via the lungs offers rapid systemic absorption and could improve therapeutic outcomes. This study evaluates the in vitro performance of two vaping technologies for the delivery of THC aerosols intended for medical use: a CE-marked medical device (BIKY Breathe) and a commercial vape pen. Four THC formulations (20 and 40 mg/mL in 1,3-propanediol; neat cannabis distillate and terpene-supplemented THC distillates) were tested. The aerosol mass per puff was measured using a validated puffing protocol. Respirable dose was determined using a Glass Twin Impinger and aerosol particle size distribution was assessed using a Next Generation Impactor. In addition, the fine particle fraction (FPF) was calculated from the impactor data. All formulations produced aerosols with a submicroscopic mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD: 0.89–0.99 μm) consistent with deep lung deposition. The FPF ranged from 99.17% to 100%, confirming that most of the aerosol mass was lower than 5μm . The BIKY Breathe device produced a consistent aerosol mass (∼6 mg/puff) with low variability, and respirable THC doses of 50 or 95 μg/puff, depending on the initial concentration used. In contrast, the vape pen produced higher respirable THC doses (1.7–2.0 mg/puff), but with greater variability between puffs. Both devices showed similar THC delivery efficiency (∼45–54%), indicating effective aerosolization regardless of concentration. This study shows that vaping devices can produce fine aerosol particles with a good transfer efficiency of THC. While vape pens deliver larger doses of THC, the CE-marked BIKY Breathe offers better dose reproducibility and may be more suitable for controlled clinical applications. The exclusive in vitro nature of this study represents a limitation. However, it provides an essential first step for designing in vivo pharmacokinetic and clinical investigations. These results support the development of regulated vaping technologies as viable inhalation platforms for medical THC by inhalation.