Monthly Archives: October 2012

Clinical endocannabinoid deficiency (CECD): can this concept explain therapeutic benefits of cannabis in migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome and other treatment-resistant conditions?

Posted on by

Abstract

“OBJECTIVES:

This study examines the concept of clinical endocannabinoid deficiency (CECD), and the prospect that it could underlie the pathophysiology of migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, and other functional conditions alleviated by clinical cannabis.

METHODS:

Available literature was reviewed, and literature searches pursued via the National Library of Medicine database and other resources.

RESULTS:

Migraine has numerous relationships to endocannabinoid function. Anandamide (AEA) potentiates 5-HT1A and inhibits 5-HT2A receptors supporting therapeutic efficacy in acute and preventive migraine treatment. Cannabinoids also demonstrate dopamine-blocking and anti-inflammatory effects. AEA is tonically active in the periaqueductal gray matter, a migraine generator. THC modulates glutamatergic neurotransmission via NMDA receptors. Fibromyalgia is now conceived as a central sensitization state with secondary hyperalgesia. Cannabinoids have similarly demonstrated the ability to block spinal, peripheral and gastrointestinal mechanisms that promote pain in headache, fibromyalgia, IBS and related disorders. The past and potential clinical utility of cannabis-based medicines in their treatment is discussed, as are further suggestions for experimental investigation of CECD via CSF examination and neuro-imaging.

CONCLUSION:

Migraine, fibromyalgia, IBS and related conditions display common clinical, biochemical and pathophysiological patterns that suggest an underlying clinical endocannabinoid deficiency that may be suitably treated with cannabinoid medicines.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18404144

The endocannabinoid system and migraine.

Posted on by

Abstract

“The recently discovered endocannabinoid system (ECS), which includes endocannabinoids and the proteins that metabolize and bind them, has been implicated in multiple regulatory functions both in health and disease. Several studies have suggested that ECS is centrally and peripherally involved in the processing of pain signals. This finding is corroborated by the evidence that endocannabinoids inhibit, through a cannabinoid type-1 receptor (CB1R)-dependent retrograde mechanism, the release of neurotransmitters controlling nociceptive inputs and that the levels of these lipids are high in those regions (such as sensory terminals, skin, dorsal root ganglia) known to be involved in transmission and modulation of pain signals. In this review we shall describe experimental and clinical data that, intriguingly, demonstrate the link between endocannabinoids and migraine, a neurovascular disorder characterized by recurrent episodic headaches and caused by abnormal processing of sensory information due to peripheral and/or central sensitization. Although the exact ECS-dependent mechanisms underlying migraine are not fully understood, the available results strongly suggest that activation of ECS could represent a promising therapeutical tool for reducing both the physiological and inflammatory components of pain that are likely involved in migraine attacks.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20353780

Endocannabinoids in Chronic Migraine: CSF Findings Suggest a System Failure

Posted on by

Abstract

“Based on experimental evidence of the antinociceptive action of endocannabinoids and their role in the modulation of trigeminovascular system activation, we hypothesized that the endocannabinoid system may be dysfunctional in chronic migraine (CM). We examined whether the concentrations of N-arachidonoylethanolamide (anandamide, AEA), palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) in the CSF of patients with CM and with probable CM and probable analgesic-overuse headache (PCM+PAOH) are altered compared with control subjects. The above endocannabinoids were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), and quantified by isotope dilution gas-chromatography/mass-spectrometry. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) levels were also determined by RIA method and the end products of nitric oxide (NO), the nitrites, by HPLC. CSF concentrations of AEA were significantly lower and those of PEA slightly but significantly higher both in patients with CM and PCM+PAOH than in nonmigraineur controls (p<0.01 and p<0.02, respectively). A negative correlation was found between AEA and CGRP levels in CM and PCM+PAOH patients (r=0.59, p<0.01 and r=-0.65, p<0.007; respectively). A similar trend was observed between this endocannabinoid and nitrite levels. Reduced levels of AEA in the CSF of CM and PCM+PAOH patients may reflect an impairment of the endocannabinoid system in these patients, which may contribute to chronic head pain and seem to be related to increased CGRP and NO production. These findings support the potential role of the cannabinoid (CB)1 receptor as a possible therapeutic target in CM.

A clinical endocannabinoid deficiency (CECD) has been hypothesized to underlie the pathophysiology of migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and other functional conditions alleviated by clinical cannabis but no clear evidence to support this deficiency has been reported until now in this regard (Russo, 2004).”

http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v32/n6/full/1301246a.html

Interictal type 1 cannabinoid receptor binding is increased in female migraine patients.

Posted on by

“BACKGROUND:

It has been suggested that endocannabinoid deficiency may play a role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Nonetheless, biochemical studies substantiating this idea remain scarce and are faced with methodological shortcomings partly because of the difficulty to perform measurements of endocannabinoids within the central nervous system itself.

CONCLUSION:

The increased interictal CB1R binding, especially in brain regions that exert top-down influences to modulate pain, supports the idea that endocannibinoid deficiency is present in female patients suffering from episodic migraine.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22077199

 

The periaqueductal gray contributes to bidirectional enhancement of antinociception between morphine and cannabinoids.

Posted on by

“Co-administration of opioids and cannabinoids can enhance pain relief even when administered on different days. Repeated systemic administration of morphine has been shown to enhance the antinociceptive effect of tetrahydrocannbinol (THC) administered 12hours later, and repeated microinjection of the cannabinoid receptor agonist HU-210 into the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray (PAG) has been shown to enhance the antinociceptive effect of morphine administered one day later. The primary objective of the present study was to test the hypotheses that this cannabinoid/opioid interaction is bidirectional. Experiment 1 showed that microinjection of morphine into the ventrolateral PAG of male Sprague-Dawley rats twice daily for 2days enhanced the antinociceptive effect of HU-210 measured one day later. In Experiment 2, twice daily systemic injections of THC enhanced the antinociceptive effect of morphine administered one day later. These results complement the previously mentioned studies by showing that morphine and cannabinoid interactions are bidirectional and that the ventrolateral PAG plays an important role in this effect. In contrast to the PAG, repeated administration of HU-210 or the cannabinoid receptor agonist, WIN 55,212-2, into the RVM had a neurotoxic effect. Rats became ill following repeated cannabinoid administration whether given alone or with morphine. Presumably, this neurotoxic effect was caused by the high cannabinoid concentration following RVM microinjection because rats did not become ill following repeated systemic THC administration. These findings indicate that alternating opioid and cannabinoid treatment could produce a longer lasting and more potent analgesia than either compound given alone.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23063785

Hallucinogens and cannabinoids for headache.

Posted on by

“Most hallucinogens and cannabinoids fall into Federal Controlled Substances schedule 1, meaning they cannot be prescribed by practitioners, allegedly have no accepted medical use, and have a high abuse potential. The legal and regulatory status has inhibited clinical research on these substances such that there are no blinded studies from which to assess true efficacy. Despite such classification, hallucinogens and cannabinoids are used by patients with headache on occasion.

 Cannabinoids in particular have a long history of use for headache and migraine before prohibition and are still used by patients as a migraine abortive.

 Hallucinogens are being increasing used by cluster headache patients outside of physician recommendation mainly to abort a cluster period and to maintain quiescence for which there is considerable anecdotal success.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23030539

Cannabinoid Receptor Subtypes 1 and 2 Mediate Long-Lasting Neuroprotection and Improve Motor Behaviour Deficits After Transient Focal Cerebral Ischemia.

Posted on by

“The endocannabinoid system is crucially involved in the regulation of brain activity and inflammation. We have investigated the localization of cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors in adult rat brains before and after focal cerebral ischemia due to endothelin-induced transient occlusion of the middle cerebral artery (eMCAO). Using immunohistochemistry, both receptor subtypes were identified in cortical neurons. After eMCAO, neuronal cell death was accompanied by reduced neuronal CB1 and CB2 receptor-linked immunofluorescence. In parallel, CB1 receptor was found in activated microglia/macrophages 3 days post eMCAO and in astroglia cells at day 3 and 7. CB2 receptor labeling was identified in activated microglia/macrophages or astroglia 3 days and 7 days post ischemia, respectively. In addition, immune competent CD45-positive cells were characterized by pronounced CB2 receptor staining 3 and 7 days post eMCAO. KN38-72717, a potent and selective CB1 and CB2 receptor agonist, revealed a significant, dose-dependent and long-lasting reduction of cortical lesions sizes due to eMCAO, when applied consecutively before, during and after eMCAO. In addition, severe motor deficits of animals suffering from eMCAO were significantly improved by KN38-7271. KN38-7271 remained effective, even if its application was delayed up to 6 h post eMCAO. Finally, we show that the endocannabinoid system assembles a comprehensive machinery to defend the brain against the devastating consequences of cerebral ischemia. In summary, this study underlines the therapeutic potential of CB1 and/or CB2 receptor agonists against neurodegenerative diseases or injuries involving acute or chronic imbalances of cerebral blood flow and energy consumption.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23069763

Receptor-dependent and Receptor-independent Endocannabinoid Signaling: A Therapeutic Target for Regulation of Cancer Growth.

Posted on by

Cover image

“The endocannabinoid system comprises the G-protein coupled CB1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1R) and CB2 cannabinoid receptor (CB2R), their endogenous ligands (endocannabinoids), and the enzymes responsible for their synthesis and catabolism. Recent works have revealed several important interactions between the endocannabinoid system and cancer. Moreover, it is now well established that synthetic small molecule cannabinoid receptor agonist acting on either CB1R or CB2R or both exert anti-cancer effects on a variety of tumor cells. Recent results from many laboratories reported that the expression of CB1R and CB2R in prostate cancer, breast cancer, and many other cancer cells are higher than corresponding non-malignant tissues. The mechanisms by which cannabinoids acting on CB1R or CB2R exert their effects on cancer cells are quite diverse and complex. Further, several studies demonstrated that some of the anti-proliferative and apoptotic effects of cannabinoids are mediated by receptor-independent mechanisms. In this minreview we provide an overview of the major findings on the effects of endogenous and/or synthetic cannabinoids on breast and prostate cancer. We also provide insight into receptor independent mechanisms of the anti-cancer effects of cannabinoids under in vitro and in vivo conditions.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23069587

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024320512005930

Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1

Posted on by

“BACKGROUND:

Cannabinoids, in addition to having palliative benefits in cancer therapy, have been associated with anticarcinogenic effects. Although the antiproliferative activities of cannabinoids have been intensively investigated, little is known about their effects on tumor invasion.

CONCLUSION:

Increased expression of TIMP-1 mediates an anti-invasive effect of cannabinoids. Cannabinoids may therefore offer a therapeutic option in the treatment of highly invasive cancers.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18159069

Antitumorigenic Effects of Cannabinoids beyond Apoptosis

Posted on by

“According to the World Health Organization, the cases of death caused by cancer will have been doubled until the year 2030. By 2010, cancer is expected to be the number one cause of death. Therefore, it is necessary to explore novel approaches for the treatment of cancer. Over past years, the antitumorigenic effects of cannabinoids have emerged as an exciting field in cancer research. Apart from their proapoptotic and antiproliferative action, recent research has shown that cannabinoids may likewise affect tumor cell angiogenesis, migration, invasion, adhesion, and metastasization. This review will summarize the data concerning the influence of cannabinoids on these locomotive processes beyond modulation of cancer cell apoptosis and proliferation. The findings discussed here provide a new perspective on the antitumorigenic potential of cannabinoids.

Conclusion

Recent investigations have shown that besides its well known antiapoptotic and antiproliferative action, cannabinoids may also confer antiangiogenic, antimigrative, antiadhesive, anti-invasive, and antimetastatic properties by pathways including activation of both cannabinoid receptors as well as TRPV1. Although a limited number of studies have been published addressing the underlying mechanisms, the currently available results indicate that the modulation of several components of signal transduction pathways, including Src, nuclear factor κB, ERK1/2, HIF-1α, Akt, and modulation of the expression as well as that of the enzymatic action of proteins of the MMP family, EGF, VEGF, IgSF CAMs, and FAK, by cannabinoids might support beneficial effects on tumor cell locomotion and spreading. Based on these facts, evidence is emerging to suggest that cannabinoids are potent inhibitors of both cancer growth and spreading. Because cannabinoids are usually well tolerated and do not develop the toxic effects of conventional chemotherapeutics, more preclinical studies are warranted to investigate a potential utility of these substances as anticancer therapeutics.”

http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/332/2/336.long