The management of nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy is an important part of care for cancer patients whenever it occurs.
Although patients usually receive antiemetics, drugs that help control nausea and vomiting, there is no single best approach to
reducing these symptoms in all patients.

Marijuana cigarettes have been used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and research has shown that THC is more quickly absorbed from marijuana smoke than from an oral preparation. However, any antiemetic effects of smoking marijuana may not be
consistent because of varying potency, depending on the source of the marijuana contained in the cigarette.

A random-sample, anonymous survey of the members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) was conducted in spring 1990
measuring the attitudes and experiences of American oncologists concerning the antiemetic use of marijuana in cancer chemotherapy patients.
The survey was mailed to about one third (N = 2,430) of all United States-based ASCO members and yielded a response rate of 43% (1,035).

More, than 44% of the respondents report recommending the (illegal) use of marijuana for the control of emesis to at least one cancer
chemotherapy patient.

Almost one half (48%) would prescribe marijuana to some of their patients if it were legal.

As a group, respondents considered smoked marijuana to be somewhat more effective than the legally available oral synthetic dronabinol [THC] Marinol; Unimed, Somerville, NJ) and roughly as safe. Of the respondents who expressed an opinion, a majority (54%) thought marijuana should be available by prescription.
These results bear on the question of whether marijuana has a "currently accepted medical use," at issue in an ongoing administrative and legal dispute concerning whether marijuana in smoked form should be available by prescription along with synthetic THC in oral form.
This survey demonstrates that oncologists' experience with the medical use of marijuana is more extensive,
and their opinions of it are more favorable, than the regulatory authorities appear to have believed.