Category Archives: Uncategorized

Accumulation of bioactive metabolites in cultivated medical Cannabis.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for plos one

“There has been an increased use of medical Cannabis in the United States of America as more states legalize its use. Complete chemical analyses of this material can vary considerably between producers and is often not fully provided to consumers. As phytochemists in a state with legal medical Cannabis we sought to characterize the accumulation of phytochemicals in material grown by licensed commercial producers.

We report the development of a simple extraction and analysis method, amenable to use by commercial laboratories for the detection and quantification of both cannabinoids and terpenoids. Through analysis of developing flowers on plants, we can identify sources of variability of floral metabolites due to flower maturity and position on the plant. The terpenoid composition varied by accession and was used to cluster cannabis strains into specific types.

Inclusion of terpenoids with cannabinoids in the analysis of medical cannabis should be encouraged, as both of these classes of compounds could play a role in the beneficial medical effects of different cannabis strains.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30036388
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201119

Cannabinoid type 2 receptors mediate a cell type-specific self-inhibition in cortical neurons.

Posted on by
Reply

 Neuropharmacology

“Endogenous cannabinoids are diffusible lipid ligands of the main cannabinoid receptors type 1 and 2 (CB1R and CB2R). In the central nervous system endocannabinoids are produced in an activity-dependent manner and have been identified as retrograde modulators of synaptic transmission.

Additionally, some neurons display a cell-autonomous slow self-inhibition (SSI) mediated by endocannabinoids. In these neurons, repetitive action potential firing triggers the production of endocannabinoids, which induce a long-lasting hyperpolarization of the membrane potential, rendering the cells less excitable. Different endocannabinoid receptors and effector mechanisms have been described underlying SSI in different cell types and brain areas.

Here, we investigate SSI in neurons of layer 2/3 in the somatosensory cortex. High-frequency bursts of action potentials induced SSI in pyramidal cells (PC) and regular spiking non-pyramidal cells (RSNPC), but not in fast-spiking interneurons (FS). In RSNPCs the hyperpolarization was accompanied by a change in input resistance due to the activation of G protein-coupled inward-rectifying K+ (GIRK) channels. A CB2R-specific agonist induced the long-lasting hyperpolarization, whereas preincubation with a CB2R-specific inverse agonist suppressed SSI. Additionally, using cannabinoid receptor knockout mice, we found that SSI was still intact in CB1R-deficient but abolished in CB2R-deficient mice.

Taken together, we describe an additional SSI mechanism in which the activity-induced release of endocannabinoids activates GIRK channels via CB2Rs. These findings expand our knowledge about cell type-specific differential neuronal cannabinoid receptor signaling and suggest CB2R-selective compounds as potential therapeutic approaches.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30025920

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390818303885?via%3Dihub

Cannabidiol does not display drug abuse potential in mice behavior.

Posted on by
Reply

Image result for aps acta pharmacologica

“Recent evidence suggests that cannabidiol (CBD) may be useful for the treatment of different neuropsychiatric disorders.

However, some controversy regarding its profile as a drug of abuse hampers the further development of basic and clinical studies.

In this study, the behavioral profile of CBD as a potential drug of abuse was evaluated in C57BL/6J mice.

Taken together, these results show that CBD lacks activity as a drug of abuse and should stimulate the development of the basic and clinical studies needed to elucidate its potential therapeutic use for the treatment of neuropsychiatric and drug use disorders.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30022153
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41401-018-0032-8

A Cross-Sectional Study of Cannabidiol Users.

Posted on by
Reply

Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research cover image

“Introduction: Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that cannabidiol (CBD) found in Cannabis spp. has broad therapeutic value. CBD products can currently be purchased online, over the counter and at Cannabis-specific dispensaries throughout most of the country, despite the fact that CBD is generally deemed a Schedule I controlled substance by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and renounced as a dietary supplement ingredient by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Consumer demand for CBD is high and growing, but few studies have examined the reasons for increasing CBD use.

Results: Almost 62% of CBD users reported using CBD to treat a medical condition. The top three medical conditions were pain, anxiety, and depression. Almost 36% of respondents reported that CBD treats their medical condition(s) “very well by itself,” while only 4.3% reported “not very well.” One out of every three users reported a nonserious adverse effect. The odds of using CBD to treat a medical condition were 1.44 (95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.79) times greater among nonregular users of Cannabis than among regular users.

Conclusion: Consumers are using CBD as a specific therapy for multiple diverse medical conditions-particularly pain, anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders. These data provide a compelling rationale for further research to better understand the therapeutic potential of CBD.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30014038
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/can.2018.0006

Marijuana use and short-term outcomes in patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction.

Posted on by
Reply

 Image result for plos one

“Marijuana use is increasing worldwide, and it is ever more likely that patients presenting with acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) will be marijuana users. However, little is known about the impact of marijuana use on short-term outcomes following AMI.

Accordingly, we compared in-hospital outcomes of AMI patients with reported marijuana use to those with no reported marijuana use. We hypothesized that marijuana use would be associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes in AMI patients.

Interestingly, marijuana-using patients were significantly less likely to die, experience shock, or require an IABP  post AMI than patients with no reported marijuana use.

These results suggest that, contrary to our hypothesis, marijuana use was not associated with increased risk of adverse short-term outcomes following AMI.

Furthermore, marijuana use was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality post-AMI.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29995914

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199705

“Myocardial Infarction (Heart Attack)”  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMHT0021982/

Development of a Cannabinoid-Based Photoaffinity Probe to Determine the Δ8/9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Protein Interaction Landscape in Neuroblastoma Cells.

Posted on by
Reply

Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research cover image

“Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the principle psychoactive ingredient in Cannabis, is widely used for its therapeutic effects in a large variety of diseases, but it also has numerous neurological side effects. The cannabinoid receptors (CBRs) are responsible to a large extent for these, but not all biological responses are mediated via the CBRs.

Objectives: The identification of additional target proteins of THC to enable a better understanding of the (adverse) physiological effects of THC.

Methods: In this study, a chemical proteomics approach using a two-step photoaffinity probe is applied to identify potential proteins that may interact with THC.

Results: Photoaffinity probe 1, containing a diazirine as a photocrosslinker, and a terminal alkyne as a ligation handle, was synthesized in 14 steps. It demonstrated high affinity for both CBRs. Subsequently, two-step photoaffinity labeling in neuroblastoma cells led to identification of four potential novel protein targets of THC. The identification of these putative protein hits is a first step towards a better understanding of the protein interaction profile of THC, which could ultimately lead to the development of novel therapeutics based on THC.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29992186

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/can.2018.0003

Medical Cannabis Legalization and Opioid Prescriptions: Evidence on US Medicaid Enrollees during 1993-2014.

Posted on by
Reply

Addiction banner

“While the US has been experiencing an opioid epidemic, 29 states and Washington DC have legalized cannabis for medical use. This study examined whether statewide medical cannabis legalization was associated with reduction in opioids received by Medicaid enrollees.

FINDINGS:

For Schedule III opioid prescriptions, medical cannabis legalization was associated with a 29.6% (p=0.03) reduction in number of prescriptions, 29.9% (p=0.02) reduction in dosage, and 28.8% (p=0.04) reduction in related Medicaid spending. No evidence was found to support the associations between medical cannabis legalization and Schedule II opioid prescriptions. Permitting medical cannabis dispensaries was not associated with Schedule II or Schedule III opioid prescriptions after controlling for medical cannabis legalization. It was estimated that, if all the states had legalized medical cannabis by 2014, Medicaid annual spending on opioid prescriptions would be reduced by 17.8 million dollars.

CONCLUSION:

Statewide medical cannabis legalization appears to have been associated with reductions in both prescriptions and dosages of Schedule III (but not Schedule II) opioids received by Medicaid enrollees in the US.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29989239

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/add.14382

In Vitro Model of Neuroinflammation: Efficacy of Cannabigerol, a Non-Psychoactive Cannabinoid.

Posted on by
Reply

ijms-logo

“Inflammation and oxidative stress play main roles in neurodegeneration. Interestingly, different natural compounds may be able to exert neuroprotective actions against inflammation and oxidative stress, protecting from neuronal cell loss.

Among these natural sources, Cannabis sativa represents a reservoir of compounds exerting beneficial properties, including cannabigerol (CBG), whose antioxidant properties have already been demonstrated in macrophages.

Here, we aimed to evaluate the ability of CBG to protect NSC-34 motor neurons against the toxicity induced from the medium of LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages.

All together, these results indicated the neuroprotective effects of CBG, that may be a potential treatment against neuroinflammation and oxidative stress.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29986533

http://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/19/7/1992

Allosteric and orthosteric pharmacology of cannabidiol and cannabidiol-dimethylheptyl at the type 1 and type 2 cannabinoid receptors.

Posted on by
Reply

British Journal of Pharmacology banner

“We sought to understand why (-)-cannabidiol (CBD) and (-)-cannabidiol-dimethylheptyl (CBD-DMH) exhibit distinct pharmacology, despite near identical structures.

KEY RESULTS:

At CB1R, CBD was a negative allosteric modulator (NAM) and CBD-DMH was a mixed agonist/positive allosteric modulator. CBD and Org27569 shared multiple interacting residues in the antagonist-bound model of CB1R (5TGZ), but shared a binding site with CP55,940 in the agonist-bound model of CB1R (5XRA). The binding site for CBD-DMH in the CB1R models overlapped with CP55,940 and Org27569. At CB2R, CBD was a partial agonist, and CBD-DMH was a positive allosteric modulator of cAMP modulation, but a NAM of βarrestin1 recruitment. CBD, CP55,940, and SR144528 shared a binding site in the CB2R models that was separate from CBD-DMH.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS:

The pharmacological activity of CBD and CBD-DMH in HEK293A cells and their modelled binding sites at CB1R and CB2R may explain their in vivo effects and illuminates the difficulties associated with the development of allosteric modulators for CB1R and CB2R.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29981240

https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bph.14440

Evidence for the use of “medical marijuana” in psychiatric and neurologic disorders.

Posted on by
Reply

College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists

“Cannabis is listed as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, meaning the US federal government defines it as an illegal drug that has high potential for abuse and no established medical use; however, half of the states in the nation have enacted “medical marijuana” (MM) laws. Clinicians must be aware of the evidence for and against the use of MM in their patients who may consider using this substance.

RESULTS:

Publications were identified that included patients with dementia, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson disease, Huntington disease, schizophrenia, social anxiety disorder, depression, tobacco use disorder, and neuropathic pain.

DISCUSSION:

There is great variety concerning which medical conditions are approved for treatment with MM for either palliative or therapeutic benefit, depending on the state law. It is important to keep an evidence-based approach in mind, even with substances considered to be illegal under US federal law. Clinicians must weigh risks and benefits of the use of MM in their patients and should ensure that patients have tried other treatment modalities with higher levels of evidence for use when available and appropriate.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29955495

““Medical marijuana” encompasses everything from whole-plant cannabis to synthetic cannabinoids available for commercial use approved by regulatory agencies. In determining whether MM is of clinical utility to our patients, it is important to keep in mind chemical constituents, dose, delivery, and indication. Selection of the patient appropriate for MM must be carefully considered because clinical guidelines and treatment options with stronger levels of evidence should be exhausted first in most cases. There seems to be strongest evidence for the use of MM in patients with MS and in patients with neuropathic pain; moderate evidence exists to support further research in social anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, PD, and tobacco use disorder; evidence is limited for use in patients with dementia, Huntington disease, depression, and anorexia.”

http://mhc.cpnp.org/doi/10.9740/mhc.2017.01.029?code=cpnp-site