Tag Archives: marijuana

Marijuana Withdrawal in Humans: Effects of Oral THC or Divalproex

Posted on by
2

   “Abstinence following daily marijuana use can produce a withdrawal syndrome characterized by negative mood (eg irritability, anxiety, misery), muscle pain, chills, and decreased food intake. Two placebo-controlled, within-subject studies investigated the effects of a cannabinoid agonist, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC: Study 1), and a mood stabilizer, divalproex (Study 2), on symptoms of marijuana withdrawal. Participants (n=7/study), who were not seeking treatment for their marijuana use, reported smoking 6–10 marijuana cigarettes/day, 6–7 days/week. Study 1 was a 15-day in-patient, 5-day outpatient, 15-day in-patient design. During the in-patient phases, participants took oral THC capsules (0, 10 mg) five times/day, 1 h prior to smoking marijuana (0.00, 3.04% THC). Active and placebo marijuana were smoked on in-patient days 1–8, while only placebo marijuana was smoked on days 9–14, that is, marijuana abstinence. Placebo THC was administered each day, except during one of the abstinence phases (days 9–14), when active THC was given. Mood, psychomotor task performance, food intake, and sleep were measured. Oral THC administered during marijuana abstinence decreased ratings of ‘anxious’, ‘miserable’, ‘trouble sleeping’, ‘chills’, and marijuana craving, and reversed large decreases in food intake as compared to placebo, while producing no intoxication. Study 2 was a 58-day, outpatient/in-patient design. Participants were maintained on each divalproex dose (0, 1500 mg/day) for 29 days each. Each maintenance condition began with a 14-day outpatient phase for medication induction or clearance and continued with a 15-day in-patient phase. Divalproex decreased marijuana craving during abstinence, yet increased ratings of ‘anxious’, ‘irritable’, ‘bad effect’, and ‘tired.’ Divalproex worsened performance on psychomotor tasks, and increased food intake regardless of marijuana condition. Thus, oral THC decreased marijuana craving and withdrawal symptoms at a dose that was subjectively indistinguishable from placebo. Divalproex worsened mood and cognitive performance during marijuana abstinence. These data suggest that oral THC, but not divalproex, may be useful in the treatment of marijuana dependence.

To conclude, there are currently no effective pharmacotherapies for cannabinoid dependence, yet the large number of nonresponders in marijuana treatment studies emphasizes the importance of increasing treatment options for marijuana dependence. We have developed a laboratory model to predict medications that may show promise clinically for the treatment of marijuana dependence. The present findings, in combination with earlier studies, suggest that nefazodone and oral THC show promise as potential treatment medications, while bupropion and divalproex do not…”

http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v29/n1/full/1300310a.html

Reinforcing properties of oral delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol, smoked marijuana, and nabilone: influence of previous marijuana use.

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract

“The reinforcing properties of delta 9THC (17.5 mg), a 1 g marijuana cigarette containing 1.83% delta 9-THC, a synthetic cannabis compound (Nabilone 2 mg orally), and their respective placebos were assessed with self-report and operant work-contingent choice procedures. Three groups of eight subjects were selected on the basis of a history of regular, intermittent, or occasional marijuana-smoking behavior. All subjects served as their own controls for each drug condition and studies were carried out under double-blind and “double-dummy” conditions in a controlled, residential research ward. Placebo responding did not vary as a function of history of marijuana use, but the past history of drug use had a significant influence on the reinforcing properties of cannabis compounds as well as the behavioral and physiological effects of these drugs. Regular marijuana users reported a significant increase in elation following marijuana smoking, but this was not associated with a significant increment in pulse rate. Intermittent and occasional marijuana smokers had significant increases in pulse rate, but no significant marijuana-induced elation. Nabilone and delta 9-THC produced a significant increase in pulse rate for all subject groups, but there was no significant increase in elation following ingestion of these compounds. Given a choice between the three drugs and three placebos, 18 of 23 subjects worked to obtain a marijuana cigarette in an operant work choice paradigm. These data indicate that smoked marijuana was significantly more reinforcing than all other cannabis compounds studied, regardless of past drug-use history.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6149589

Reinforcing and subjective effects of oral delta 9-THC and smoked marijuana in humans.

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract

“The reinforcing and subjective effects of oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and smoked marijuana were studied in two groups of regular marijuana users. One group (N = 10) was tested with smoked marijuana and the other (N = 11) with oral THC. Reinforcing effects were measured with a discrete-trial choice procedure which allowed subjects to choose between the self-administration of active drug or placebo on two independent occasions. Subjective effects and heart rate were measured before and after drug administration. Smoked active marijuana was chosen over placebo on both choice occasions by all subjects. Similarly, oral THC was chosen over placebo on both occasions by all but one subject. Both active drug treatments produced qualitatively and quantitatively similar subjective effects, and both significantly increased heart rate, although the time course of effects differed substantially between the two treatments. The results demonstrate that both smoked marijuana and oral THC can serve as positive reinforcers in human subjects under laboratory conditions. The experimental paradigm used here should prove useful for identifying factors that influence the self-administration of marijuana and other cannabinoids by humans.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1319601

Recent advantages in cannabinoid research.

Posted on by
1

Abstract

“Although the active component of cannabis Delta9-THC was isolated by our group 35 years ago, until recently its mode of action remained obscure. In the last decade it was established that Delta9-THC acts through specific receptors – CB1 and CB2 – and mimics the physiological activity of endogenous cannabinoids of two types, the best known representatives being arachidonoylethanolamide (anandamide) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). THC is officially used against vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy and for enhancing appetite, particularly in AIDS patients. Illegally, usually by smoking marijuana, it is used for ameliorating the symptoms of multiple sclerosis, against pain, and in a variety of other diseases. A synthetic cannabinoid, HU-211, is in advanced clinical tests against brain damage caused by closed head injury. It may prove to be valuable against stroke and other neurological diseases.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10575284

Marijuana as antiemetic medicine: a survey of oncologists’ experiences and attitudes.

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract

“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.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2045870

Preliminary efficacy and safety of an oromucosal standardized cannabis extract in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Posted on by
Reply

  “Despite progress in anti-emetic treatment, many patients still suffer from chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This is a pilot, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II clinical trial designed to evaluate the tolerability, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of an acute dose titration of a whole-plant cannabis-based medicine (CBM) containing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, taken in conjunction with standard therapies in the control of CINV.”

“Compared with placebo, CBM added to standard antiemetic therapy was well tolerated and provided better protection against delayed CINV. These results should be confirmed in a phase III clinical trial.”

“A systematic review of 30 clinical trials involving orally administered synthetic cannabinoids (nabilone and dronabinol) showed that they were superior to dopamine receptor antagonists in preventing CINV. Both are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in CINV refractory to conventional anti-emetic therapy, but some authors have questioned the appropriateness of orally administered cannabinoids due to the variability in their gastrointestinal absorption, low bioavailability, long half-lives and the difficulties for an adequate self titration of the dose.”

“Animal studies suggest that the combined administration of different cannabinoids may enhance some of the therapeutic effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). This might explain why some patients preferred marihuana to synthetic cannabinoids in clinical trials.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997305/

Efficacy of Crude Marijuana and Synthetic Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol as Treatment for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Systematic Literature Review.

Posted on by
2

Abstract

“Purpose/Objectives: To synthesize the research to determine whether oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and smoked marijuana are effective treatments for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and to evaluate side effects and patient preference of these treatments.Data Sources: Original research, review articles, and other published articles in CINAHL(R), MEDLINE(R), and Cochrane Library databases.Data Synthesis: Cannabinoids are effective in controlling CINV, and oral THC and smoked marijuana have similar efficacy. However, smoked marijuana may not be accessible or safe for all patients with cancer. Also, these drugs have a unique side-effect profile that may include alterations in motor control, dizziness, dysphoria, and decreased concentration.Conclusions: This synthesis shows that cannabinoids are more effective than placebo and comparable to antiemetics such as prochlorperazine and ondansetron for CINV.Implications for Nursing: Nurses should feel supported by the literature to recommend oral synthetic THC as a treatment for CINV to their patients and physician colleagues. Nurses should be cognizant of the side-effect profile for this medication and provide appropriate patient education.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19596652

Review of cannabinoids and their antiemetic effectiveness.

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract

“Marijuana has been used for over 2 centuries. Its major psychoactive constituent, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) was isolated in 1964 and first used to control nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy in the 1970s. THC has cardiovascular, pulmonary and endocrinological effects as well as actions on the central nervous system. Alterations in mood, memory, motor coordination, cognitive ability, sensorium, spatial- and self-perception are commonly experienced. The precise antiemetic mechanism is unknown. THC and nabilone act at a number of sites within the central nervous system. Cannabinoids have also been shown to inhibit prostaglandin synthesis in vitro. In controlled clinical trials, THC is superior to placebo and prochlorperazine in antiemetic effectiveness. Effectiveness of THC correlates to a ‘high’ experienced by the patient. A variety of chemotherapy regimens respond to THC including high-dose methotrexate and the doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil combination. Cisplatin is more resistant. Side effects are generally well tolerated but may limit THC use in the elderly or when high doses are administered. Nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, is also an effective antiemetic which is more active than prochlorperazine in preventing chemotherapy-induced emesis, including cisplatin-containing regimens. Side effects are similar to THC and may be dose-limiting. Levonantradol, another synthetic cannabinoid, is an effective antiemetic. It may provide more flexibility in the outpatient setting since it can be administered orally or intramuscularly. Most side effects are mild except for dysphoria which may be dose-limiting.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6301800

Cannabis and endocannabinoid modulators: Therapeutic promises and challenges

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract

  “The discovery that botanical cannabinoids such as delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol exert some of their effect through binding specific cannabinoid receptor sites has led to the discovery of an endocannabinoid signaling system, which in turn has spurred research into the mechanisms of action and addiction potential of cannabis on the one hand, while opening the possibility of developing novel therapeutic agents on the other. This paper reviews current understanding of CB1, CB2, and other possible cannabinoid receptors, their arachidonic acid derived ligands (e.g. anandamide; 2 arachidonoyl glycerol), and their possible physiological roles. CB1 is heavily represented in the central nervous system, but is found in other tissues as well; CB2 tends to be localized to immune cells. Activation of the endocannabinoid system can result in enhanced or dampened activity in various neural circuits depending on their own state of activation. This suggests that one function of the endocannabinoid system may be to maintain steady state. The therapeutic action of botanical cannabis or of synthetic molecules that are agonists, antagonists, or which may otherwise modify endocannabinoid metabolism and activity indicates they may have promise as neuroprotectants, and may be of value in the treatment of certain types of pain, epilepsy, spasticity, eating disorders, inflammation, and possibly blood pressure control.”

Summary

“The discovery of an endocannabinoid signaling system has opened new possibilities for research into understanding the mechanisms of marijuana actions, the role of the endocannabinoid system in homeostasis, and the development of treatment approaches based either on the phytocannabinoids or novel molecules. CB1 agonists may have roles in the treatment of neuropathic pain, spasticity, nausea and emesis, cachexia, and potentially neuroprotection after stroke or head injury. Agonists and antagonists of peripheral CB receptors may be useful in the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune disorders, as well as hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases. CB1 antagonists may find utility in management of obesity and drug craving. Other novel agents that may not be active at CB receptor sites, but might otherwise modify cannabinoid transport or metabolism, may also have a role in therapeutic modification of the endocannabinoid system. While the short and long term toxicities of the newer compounds are not known, one must expect that at least some of the acute effects (psychotropic effects; hypotension) may be shared by CB agonists. While there are few, long-term serious toxicities attributable to marijuana, extrapolation to newer and more potent agonists, antagonists, and cannabinoid system modulators cannot be assumed. CB1 agonists have the potential in animal models to produce drug preference and drug seeking behaviors as well as tolerance and abstinence phenomena similar to, though not generally as severe as those of other drugs of addiction. There is increasing evidence from human observations that withdrawal from the phytocannabinoids can produce an abstinence syndrome characterized primarily by irritability, sleep disturbance, mood disturbance, and appetite disturbance in chronic heavy users, therefore, such possible effects will need to be considered in the evaluation of newer shorter acting and more potent agonists.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2544377/

Compound in cannabis may help treat epilepsy, researchers say

Posted on by
Reply

“British researchers have determined that a little-studied chemical in the cannabis plant could lead to effective treatments for epilepsy, with few to no side effects.

The team at Britain’s University of Reading, working with GW Pharmaceuticals and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals, tested cannabidivarin, or CBDV, in rats and mice afflicted with six types of epilepsy and found it “strongly suppressed seizures” without causing the uncontrollable shaking and other side effects of existing anti-epilepsy drugs.

The casual use of marijuana — or cannabis — to control seizures dates back to ancient times. Its most prominent component, THC, is among those shown in animal studies to have strong anti-convulsant properties…”

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/14/news/la-sn-cannabis-cbdv-epilepsy-20120914