Category Archives: Cancer

Inhibition of cervical cancer cell proliferation by cannabidiol

Posted on by
Reply

“Seventy phytocannabinoids are now known to be synthesized by Cannabis sativa (marijuana)]. The major non-psychoactive cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) exhibits antiproliferative effects against breast, cervix, colon, glioma, leukemia, ovary, prostate, and thyroid cancer cells. In this study, we investigated the antiproliferative effect of CBD on the ME-180 cervical cancer cell line. The results of our study suggest that CBD exerts its antiproliferative effect via multiple mechanisms, and it could be a potential treatment for cervical cancer.”

https://www.thieme-connect.com/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0036-1596862

The use of cannabinoids (CBs) for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN): A retrospective review.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for J Clin Oncol.

“CIPN is a common toxicity associated with the use of chemotherapy (CT) agents such as platinums, taxanes and vinca alkaloids. Patients (pts) may suffer from pain that adversely affects their quality of life, regardless of their disease trajectory.

Preclinical research has shown CBs to be effective in preventing CIPN.

CBs can be beneficial for cancer pain, although their specific benefit in pts with CIPN remains unknown.

Treatment with CBs appears to benefit some pts with CIPN.

Further research is needed to explore the optimal use of CBs in pts with CIPN.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27962037

Tolerability of dronabinol alone, ondansetron alone and the combination of dronabinol plus ondansetron in delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for J Clin Oncol.

“Dronabinol (Marinol), the synthetic version of tetrahydrocannabinol, is used to treat nausea and vomiting following cancer chemotherapy (CINV).

It has a unique mechanism of action (cannabinoid receptor binding) compared to the more frequently used serotonin receptor antagonists. Tolerability of dronabinol versus ondansetron and the combination of dronabinol plus ondansetron was explored in subjects with delayed CINV.

Dronabinol was well tolerated and resulted in few terminations due to adverse events. The low rate of CNS-related adverse events following D treatment may make it a suitable alternative to serotonin antagonist therapy for delayed CINV.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27946950

Dronabinol treatment of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for J Clin Oncol.

“Dronabinol (MARINOL), synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol, binds to cannabinoid receptors and has antiemetic activity. To explore if this novel mechanism would be of benefit in delayed CINV, dronabinol was added to the prophylactic regimen for acute CINV and continued after chemotherapy.

Efficacy at Endpoint (LOCF) Conclusions: Dronabinol (D) was comparable to ondansetron (O) in total response and but was more effective in reducing nausea intensity and vomiting/retching. Results for the combination of DO were similar to either agent alone.

These results support conducting a larger study since D could become an attractive alternative to serotonin receptor antagonists in treating delayed CINV.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27946578

Tamoxifen Isomers and Metabolites Exhibit Distinct Affinity and Activity at Cannabinoid Receptors: Potential Scaffold for Drug Development.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for plos one

“Tamoxifen (Tam) is a selective estrogen receptor (ER) modulator (SERM) that is an essential drug to treat ER-positive breast cancer. Aside from known actions at ERs, recent studies have suggested that some SERMs like Tam also exhibit novel activity at cannabinoidsubtype 1 and 2 receptors (CB1R and CB2Rs).

Collectively, these results suggest that the SERMs Tam, 4OHT and End elicit ER-independent actions via CBRs in an isomer-specific manner.

As such, this novel structural scaffold might be used to develop therapeutically useful drugs for treatment of a variety of diseases mediated via CBRs.”

 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27936172

State of the evidence: Cannabinoids and cancer pain-A systematic review.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for journal of the american association of nurse practitioners

“Cannabinoids are widely used to alleviate intractable symptoms such as pain, nausea, and muscle spasticity. The purpose of this review was to ascertain the current state of the science regarding use of cannabinoids for cancer pain.

CONCLUSIONS:

Eight randomized control trials met the inclusion criteria for review. Most trials found analgesic effects from cannabinoids when compared to placebo, although not all associations reached statistical significance. The analgesic effects of cannabinoids were also limited by dose-dependent side effects. Side effects most commonly reported were changes in cognition, sedation, and dizziness.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:

There is evidence that cannabinoids are effective adjuvants for cancer pain not completely relieved by opioid therapy, but there is a dearth of high-quality studies to support a stronger conclusion. Cannabinoids appear to be safe in low and medium doses. Methodological limitations of the trials limited the ability to make sound conclusions. Further research is warranted before efficacy, safety, and utility of cannabinoids for cancer pain can be determined.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27863159

A Science Based Evaluation of Cannabis and Cancer

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for thebmj

“The irritant properties of all smoke will naturally tend to promote a pro-inflammatory immune response with the corresponding production of potentially carcinogenic free radicals. However, cannabis promotes immune deviation to an anti-inflammatory Th2 response via immune-system specific CB2 receptors. Thus, the natural pharmacological properties of marijuana’s cannabinoids, that are not present in tobacco smoke, would minimize potential irritant initiated carcinogenesis. In contrast, the pharmacological activities of tobacco smoke would tend to amplify its carcinogenic potential by inhibiting the death of genetically damaged cells. Together these observations support the epidemiological study of the Kaiser Foundation that did not find cannabis smoking to be associated with cancer incidence. Additionally, the demonstrated cancer killing activities of cannabinoids has been ignored. Cannabinoids have been shown to kill some leukemia and lymphoma, breast and prostate, pheochromocytoma, glioma and skin cancer cells in cell culture and in animals.” http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/29/science-based-evaluation-cannabis-and-cancer

Bioactive spirans and other constituents from the leaves of Cannabis sativa f. sativa.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for journal of asian natural products research

“In this paper, 17 compounds (1-17) were isolated from the leaves of Hemp (Cannabis sativa f. sativa). Among the isolates, two were determined to be new spirans: cannabispirketal (1), and α-cannabispiranol 4′-O-β-D-glucopyranose (2) by 1D and 2D NMR spectroscopy, LC-MS, and HRESIMS. The known compounds 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, and 16 were isolated from Hemp (C. sativa f. sativa) for the first time. Furthermore, compounds 8 and 13 were isolated from the nature for the first time. All isolated compounds were evaluated for cytotoxicity on different tissue-derived passage cancer cell lines through cell viability and apoptosis assay. Among these compounds, compounds 5, 9 and 16 exhibited a broad-spectrum antitumor effect via inhibiting cell proliferation and promoting apoptosis. These results obtained have provided valuable clues to the understanding of the cytotoxic profile for these isolated compounds from Hemp (C. sativa f. sativa).”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27848262

Quantitative analyses of synergistic responses between cannabidiol and DNA-damaging agents on the proliferation and viability of glioblastoma and neural progenitor cells in culture.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics

“Evidence suggests that the non-psychotropic cannabis-derived compound, cannabidiol (CBD), has anti-neoplastic activity in multiple types of cancers, including glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).

DNA-damaging agents remain the main standard of care treatment available for patients diagnosed with GBM.

Here we studied the anti-proliferative and cell-killing activity of CBD alone and in combination with DNA-damaging agents (temozolomide, carmustine or cisplatin) in several human GBM cell lines and in mouse primary GBM cells in cultures.

This activity was also studied in mouse neural progenitor cells (NPCs) in culture to assess for potential central nervous system (CNS) toxicity.

We found that CBD induced a dose-dependent reduction of both proliferation and viability of all cells with similar potencies, suggesting no preferential activity for cancer cells.

Hill plot analysis indicates an allosteric mechanism of action triggered by CBD in all cells.

Co-treatment regiments combining CBD and DNA-damaging agents produced synergistic anti-proliferating and cell-killing responses over a limited range of concentrations in all human GBM cell lines and mouse GBM cells as well as in mouse NPCs.

Remarkably, antagonistic responses occurred at low concentrations in select human GBM cell lines and in mouse GBM cells.

Our study suggests limited synergistic activity when combining CBD and DNA-damaging agents in treating GBM cells, along with little-to-no therapeutic window when considering NPCs.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27821713

“Definition of antineoplastic: inhibiting or preventing the growth and spread of tumors or malignant cells”  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antineoplastic

Clinical trials of medicinal cannabis for appetite-related symptoms from advanced cancer: a survey of preferences, attitudes and beliefs among patients willing to consider participation.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for internal medicine journal

“Australian clinical trials are planned to evaluate medicinal cannabis in a range of clinical contexts.

To explore the preferences, attitudes and beliefs of patients eligible and willing to consider participation in a clinical trial of medicinal cannabis for poor appetite and appetite-related symptoms from advanced cancer.

A cross-sectional anonymous survey was administered from July to December 2015 online and in eight adult outpatient palliative care and/or cancer services. Respondents were eligible if they were ≥18 years, had advanced cancer and poor appetite/taste problems/weight loss and might consider participating in a medicinal cannabis trial. Survey items focused on medicinal rather than recreational cannabis use and did not specify botanical or pharmaceutical products. Items asked about previous medicinal cannabis use and preferences for delivery route and invited comments and concerns.

RESULTS:

There were 204 survey respondents, of whom 26 (13%) reported prior medicinal cannabis use. Tablets/capsules were the preferred delivery mode (n = 144, 71%), followed by mouth spray (n = 84, 42%) and vaporiser (n = 83, 41%). Explanations for preferences (n = 134) most commonly cited convenience (n = 66; 49%). A total of 82% (n = 168) of respondents indicated that they had no trial-related concerns, but a small number volunteered concerns about adverse effects (n = 14) or wanted more information/advice (n = 8). Six respondents volunteered a belief that cannabis might cure cancer, while two wanted assurance of efficacy before participating in a trial.

CONCLUSION:

Justification of modes other than tablets/capsules and variable understanding about cannabis and trials will need addressing in trial-related information to optimise recruitment and ensure that consent is properly informed.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27530738