Cannabidiol Does Not Dampen Responses to Emotional Stimuli in Healthy Adults.

“Introduction: Cannabidiol (CBD) is a nonpsychoactive constituent of whole plant cannabis that has been reported to reduce anxiety-like behaviors in both pre-clinical and human laboratory studies. Yet, no controlled clinical studies have demonstrated its ability to reduce negative mood or dampen responses to negative emotional stimuli in humans. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of CBD on responses to negative emotional stimuli, as a model for its potential anxiety-reducing effects.

Discussion: CBD did not dampen responses to negative emotional stimuli and did not affect feelings of social rejection. The high dose of CBD (900 mg) marginally reduced attentional bias toward happy and sad facial expressions, and produced a slight increase in late-session heart rate. CBD did not produce detectable subjective effects or alterations in mood or anxiety.

Conclusion: These findings indicate that CBD has minimal behavioral and subjective effects in healthy volunteers, even when they are presented with emotional stimuli. Further research into the behavioral and neural mechanisms of CBD and other phytocannabinoids is needed to ascertain the clinical function of this drug.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861510

Affinity and Efficacy Studies of Tetrahydrocannabinolic Acid A at Cannabinoid Receptor Types One and Two.

“Introduction: Cannabis biosynthesizes Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA-A), which decarboxylates into Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). There is growing interest in the therapeutic use of THCA-A, but its clinical application may be hampered by instability. THCA-A lacks cannabimimetic effects; we hypothesize that it has little binding affinity at cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1).

Results: The THCA-A reagent contained 2% THC. THCA-A displayed small but measurable binding at both hCB1 and hCB2, equating to approximate Ki values of 3.1μM and 12.5μM, respectively. THC showed 62-fold greater affinity at hCB1 and 125-fold greater affinity at hCB2. In efficacy tests, THCA-A (10μM) slightly inhibited forskolin-stimulated cAMP at hCB1, suggestive of weak agonist activity, and no measurable efficacy at hCB2.

Discussion: The presence of THC in our THCA-A certified standard agrees with decarboxylation kinetics (literature reviewed herein), which indicate contamination with THC is nearly unavoidable. THCA-A binding at 10μM approximated THC binding at 200nM. We therefore suspect some of our THCA-A binding curve was artifact-from its inevitable decarboxylation into THC-and the binding affinity of THCA-A is even weaker than our estimated values. We conclude that THCA-A has little affinity or efficacy at CB1 or CB2.

Cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 Receptor Signaling and Bias.

“An agonist that acts through a single receptor can activate numerous signaling pathways. Recent studies have suggested that different ligands can differentially activate these pathways by stabilizing a limited range of receptor conformations, which in turn preferentially drive different downstream signaling cascades. This concept, termed “biased signaling” represents an exciting therapeutic opportunity to target specific pathways that elicit only desired effects, while avoiding undesired effects mediated by different signaling cascades. The cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 each activate multiple pathways, and evidence is emerging for bias within these pathways. This review will summarize the current evidence for biased signaling through cannabinoid receptor subtypes CB1 and CB2.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861504

Decarboxylation Study of Acidic Cannabinoids: A Novel Approach Using Ultra-High-Performance Supercritical Fluid Chromatography/Photodiode Array-Mass Spectrometry.

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. publishers

“Decarboxylation is an important step for efficient production of the major active components in cannabis, for example, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and cannabigerol (CBG). These cannabinoids do not occur in significant concentrations in cannabis but can be formed by decarboxylation of their corresponding acids, the predominant cannabinoids in the plant. Study of the kinetics of decarboxylation is of importance for phytocannabinoid isolation and dosage formulation for medical use. Efficient analytical methods are essential for simultaneous detection of both neutral and acidic cannabinoidsMethods:C. sativaextracts were used for the studies. Decarboxylation conditions were examined at 80°C, 95°C, 110°C, 130°C, and 145°C for different times up to 60 min in a vacuum oven. An ultra-high performance supercritical fluid chromatography/photodiode array-mass spectrometry (UHPSFC/PDA-MS) method was used for the analysis of acidic and neutral cannabinoids before and after decarboxylation. Results: Decarboxylation at different temperatures displayed an exponential relationship between concentration and time indicating a first-order or pseudo-first-order reaction. The rate constants for Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid-A (THCA-A) were twice those of the cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) and cannabigerolic acid (CBGA). Decarboxylation of THCA-A was forthright with no side reactions or by-products. Decarboxylation of CBDA and CBGA was not as straightforward due to the unexplained loss of reactants or products. Conclusion: The reported UHPSFC/PDA-MS method provided consistent and sensitive analysis of phytocannabinoids and their decarboxylation products and degradants. The rate of change of acidic cannabinoid concentrations over time allowed for determination of rate constants. Variations of rate constants with temperature yielded values for reaction energy.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861498

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/can.2016.0020

The Name of Cannabis: A Short Guide for Nonbotanists.

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. publishers

“The genus Cannabis (Family Cannabaceae) is probably indigenous to wet habitats of Asiatic continent. The long coexistence between mankind and Cannabis led to an early domestication of the plant, which soon showed an amazing spectrum of possible utilizations, as a source of textile fibers, as well as narcotic and psychoactive compounds. Nowadays, the specie(s) belonging to the genus Cannabis are represented by myriads of cultivated varieties, often with unstable taxonomic foundations. The nomenclature of Cannabis has been the object of numerous nomenclatural treatments. Linnaeus in Species Plantarum (1753) described a single species of hemp, Cannabis sativa, whereas Lamarck (1785) proposed two species of CannabisC. sativa, the species largely cultivated in Western Continent, and Cannabis indica, a wild species growing in India and neighboring countries. The dilemma about the existence of the species C. indica considered distinct from C. sativa continues up to present days. Due to their prevalent economic interest, the nomenclatural treatment is particularly important as far as it concerns the cultivated varieties of Cannabis. In this context, we propose to avoid the distinction between sativa and indica, suggesting a bimodal approach: when a cultivar has been correctly established. It could be advisable to apply a nomenclature system based on the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP): it is not necessary to use the species epithets, sativa or indica, and a combination of the genus name and a cultivar epithet in any language and bounded by single quotation marks define an exclusive name for each Cannabis cultivar. In contrast, Cannabis varieties named with vernacular names by medical patients and recreational users, and lacking an adequate description as required by ICNCP, should be named as Cannabis strain, followed by their popularized name and without single quotation marks, having in mind that their names have no taxonomical validity.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861494

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/can.2016.0027

Even High Doses of Oral Cannabidol Do Not Cause THC-Like Effects in Humans

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. publishers

“Cannabidiol (CBD) is a cannabinoid of the cannabis plant devoid of intoxicating effects. It may be of therapeutic value in a large number of diseases, including epilepsy, anxiety disorders, depression, schizophrenic psychosis, inflammatory diseases, dystonia, nausea, and vomiting without causing relevant or severe side effects.

No biosynthetic enzyme or pathway exists in the human body to convert CBD to THC.

This short communication examines the question whether the experimental data presented in a study by Merrick et al. are of clinical relevance. These authors found that cannabidiol (CBD), a major cannabinoid of the cannabis plant devoid of psychotropic effects and of great interest for therapeutic use in several medical conditions, may be converted in gastric fluid into the psychoactive cannabinoids delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC to a relevant degree. They concluded that “the acidic environment during normal gastrointestinal transit can expose orally CBD-treated patients to levels of THC and other psychoactive cannabinoids that may exceed the threshold for a positive physiological response.” They issued a warning concerning oral use of CBD and recommend the development of other delivery methods.

However, the available clinical data do not support this conclusion and recommendation, since even high doses of oral CBD do not cause psychological, psychomotor, cognitive, or physical effects that are characteristic for THC or cannabis rich in THC. On the contrary, in the past decades and by several groups, high doses of oral CBD were consistently shown to cause opposite effects to those of THC in clinical studies. In addition, administration of CBD did not result in detectable THC blood concentrations.

Thus, there is no reason to avoid oral use of CBD, which has been demonstrated to be a safe means of administration of CBD, even at very high doses.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861499

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/can.2016.0036

“A Conversion of Oral Cannabidiol to Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Seems Not to Occur in Humans.”  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28861507

Cannabinoid Receptor 2 Modulates Neutrophil Recruitment in a Murine Model of Endotoxemia.

 

Image result for hindawi

“The endocannabinoid system consists of endogenous lipid mediators and cannabinoid receptors (CB) 1 and 2. It has previously been demonstrated that activation of the leukocyte-expressed CB2 has anti-inflammatory effects in vivo. Here, we report its role under baseline conditions and in a model of low-dose endotoxemia by comparing CB2 knockout to littermate control mice. CB2-deficient mice displayed significantly more neutrophils and fewer monocytes in the bone marrow under steady state. In initial validation experiments, administration of 1 mg/kg LPS to male C57BL/6J mice was shown to transiently upregulate systemic proinflammatory mediators (peaked at 2 hours) and mobilise bone marrow neutrophils and monocytes into circulation. In CB2 knockout mice, the level of the metalloproteinase MMP-9 was significantly elevated by 2 hours and we also observed augmented recruitment of neutrophils to the spleen in addition to increased levels of Ccl2Ccl3Cxcl10, and Il6. Collectively, our data show that the absence of CB2 receptor increases the levels of innate immune cell populations in the bone marrow under steady state. Furthermore, during an acute systemic inflammatory insult, we observe a highly reproducible and site-specific increase in neutrophil recruitment and proinflammatory chemokine expression in the spleen of CB2 knockout mice.”  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28852269

“In summary, we found that the lack of this GPCR leads to enhanced retention of neutrophils and increased release of monocytes in the bone marrow under steady state. We highlight a critical role for CB2 in regulating neutrophil infiltration to the spleen during acute systemic inflammation. A potential mechanism for this effect is the increased secretion of MMP-9 and Ccl3/Cxcl10 expression in the spleens of CB2 knockout mice. Taken together, we propose a novel role for CB2 in suppressing neutrophil migration to lymphoid organs under inflammatory conditions which we believe warrants further investigation.” https://www.hindawi.com/journals/mi/2017/4315412/

Interaction between Cannabinoid Type 1 and Type 2 Receptors in the Modulation of Subventricular Zone and Dentate Gyrus Neurogenesis.

 

Image result for frontiers in pharmacology

“Neurogenesis in the adult mammalian brain occurs mainly in two neurogenic niches, the subventricular zone (SVZ) and the subgranular zone (SGZ) of the dentate gyrus (DG). Cannabinoid type 1 and 2 receptors (CB1R and CB2R) have been shown to differently modulate neurogenesis. However, low attention has been given to the interaction between CB1R and CB2R in modulating postnatal neurogenesis (proliferation, neuronal differentiation and maturation).

We focused on a putative crosstalk between CB1R and CB2R to modulate neurogenesis and cultured SVZ and DG stem/progenitor cells from early postnatal (P1-3) Sprague-Dawley rats. Data showed that the non-selective cannabinoid receptor agonist WIN55,212-2 promotes DG cell proliferation (measured by BrdU staining), an effect blocked by either CB1R or CB2R selective antagonists. Experiments with selective agonists showed that facilitation of DG cell proliferation requires co-activation of both CB1R and CB2R. Cell proliferation in the SVZ was not affected by the non-selective receptor agonist, but it was enhanced by CB1R selective activation. However, either CB1R or CB2R selective antagonists abolished the effect of the CB1R agonist in SVZ cell proliferation. Neuronal differentiation (measured by immunocytochemistry against neuronal markers of different stages and calcium imaging) was facilitated by WIN55,212-2 at both SVZ and DG. This effect was mimicked by either CB1R or CB2R selective agonists and blocked by either CB1R or CB2R selective antagonists, cross-antagonism being evident.

In summary, our findings indicate a tight interaction between CB1R and CB2R to modulate neurogenesis in the two major neurogenic niches, thus contributing to further unraveling the mechanisms behind the action of endocannabinoids in the brain.”

Cannabis use is associated with a substantial reduction in premature deaths in the United States.

“Adverse effects of moderate Cannabis use on physical health are subtle and rarely fatal, while Cannabis use is associated with decreased rates of obesity, diabetes mellitus, mortality from traumatic brain injury, use of alcohol and prescription drugs, driving fatalities, and opioid overdose deaths.
These data suggest that Cannabis use may decrease premature deaths.
To date, no studies have attempted to estimate impacts of Cannabis use on premature death that include both adverse and beneficial effects on physical health. Marijuana use is estimated to reduce premature deaths from diabetes mellitus, cancer, and traumatic brain injury by 989 to 2,511 deaths for each 1% of the population using Cannabis. The analysis predicts an estimated 23,500 to 47,500 deaths prevented annually if medical marijuana were legal nationwide. A number of other potential causes of reduced mortality due to Cannabis use were revealed, but were excluded from the analysis because quantitative data were lacking. These estimates thus substantially underestimate the actual impact of Cannabis use on premature death.
Overall, prohibition is estimated to lead to similar numbers of premature deaths as drunk driving, homicide, or fatal opioid overdose. Cannabis use prevents thousands of premature deaths each year, and Cannabis prohibition is revealed as a major cause of premature death in the U.S.”

Characterization of Structurally Novel G Protein Biased CB1 Agonists: Implications for Drug Development.

Cover image

“The human cannabinoid subtype 1 receptor (hCB1R) is highly expressed in the CNS and serves as a therapeutic target for endogenous ligands as well as plant-derived and synthetic cannabinoids. Unfortunately, acute use of hCB1R agonists produces unwanted psychotropic effects and chronic administration results in development of tolerance and dependence, limiting the potential clinical use of these ligands. Studies in β-arrestin knockout mice suggest that interaction of certain GPCRs, including μ-, δ-, κ-opioid and hCB1Rs, with β-arrestins might be responsible for several adverse effects produced by agonists acting at these receptors. Indeed, agonists that bias opioid receptor activation toward G-protein, relative to β-arrestin signaling, produce less severe adverse effects. These observations indicate that therapeutic utility of agonists acting at hCB1Rs might be improved by development of G-protein biased hCB1R agonists. Our laboratory recently reported a novel class of indole quinulidinone (IQD) compounds that bind cannabinoid receptors with relatively high affinity and act with varying efficacy. The purpose of this study was to determine whether agonists in this novel cannabinoid class exhibit ligand bias at hCB1 receptors. Our studies found that a novel IQD-derived hCB1receptor agonist PNR-4-20 elicits robust G protein-dependent signaling, with transduction ratios similar to the non-biased hCB1R agonist CP-55,940. In marked contrast to CP-55,940, PNR-4-20 produces little to no β-arrestin 2 recruitment. Quantitative calculation of bias factors indicates that PNR-4-20 exhibits from 5.4-fold to 29.5-fold bias for G protein, relative to β-arrestin 2 signaling (when compared to G protein activation or inhibition of forskolin-stimulated cAMP accumulation, respectively). Importantly, as expected due to reduced β-arrestin 2 recruitment, chronic exposure of cells to PNR-4-20 results in significantly less desensitization and down-regulation of hCB1Rs compared to similar treatment with CP-55,940. PNR-4-20 (i.p.) is active in the cannabinoid tetrad in mice and chronic treatment results in development of less persistent tolerance and no significant withdrawal signs when compared to animals repeatedly exposed to the non-biased full agoinst JWH-018 or Δ9-THC. Finally, studies of a structurally similar analog PNR- 4-02 show that it is also a G protein biased hCB1R agonist. It is predicted that cannabinoid agonists that bias hCB1R activation toward G protein, relative to β-arrestin 2 signaling, will produce fewer and less severe adverse effects both acutely and chronically.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28838808

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043661816314244