Tag Archives: cannabinoid receptors

Effects of anandamide in migraine: data from an animal model.

Posted on by

Abstract

“Systemic nitroglycerin (NTG) produces spontaneous-like migraine attacks in migraine sufferers and induces a condition of hyperalgesia in the rat 4 h after its administration. Endocannabinoid system seems to be involved in the modulation of NTG-induced hyperalgesia, and probably, in the pathophysiological mechanisms of migraine. In this study, the analgesic effect of anandamide (AEA) was evaluated by means of the formalin test, performed in baseline conditions and following NTG-induced hyperalgesia in male Sprague-Dawley rats. AEA was administered 30 min before the formalin injection. In addition, the effect of AEA (administered 30 min before NTG injection) was investigated on NTG-induced Fos expression and evaluated 4 h following NTG injection. AEA induced a significant decrease in the nociceptive behavior during both phases of the formalin test in the animals treated with vehicle, while it abolished NTG-induced hyperalgesia during the phase II. Pre-treatment with AEA significantly reduced the NTG-induced neuronal activation in nucleus trigeminalis caudalis, confirming the results obtained in our previous study, and in area postrema, while the same treatment induced an increase of Fos expression in paraventricular and supraoptic nuclei of the hypothalamus, parabrachial nucleus, and periaqueductal grey. The study confirms that a dysfunction of the endocannabinoid system may contribute to the development of migraine attacks and that a pharmacological modulation of CB receptors can be useful for the treatment of migraine pain.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072518/

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

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

Targeting the endocannabinoid system for the treatment of cancer– a practical view.

Posted on by

“In recent years, considerable interest has been generated by findings that cannabinoids not only have useful palliative effects, but also can affect the viability and invasivity of a variety of different cancer cells. In the present review, the potential of targeting the cannabinoid system for the treatment of cancer is considered from a practical, rather than a mechanistic viewpoint, addressing questions such as whether human tumour cells express CB receptors; whether the potencies of action of cannabinoids in vitro match the potencies expected on the base of receptor theory; what is known about the in vivo effects of cannabinoids and cancer, and how relevant the experiments undertaken are to the clinical situation; and finally, what approaches can be taken to minimise unwanted effects of cannabinoid treatment. It is concluded that cannabinoids (or agents modulating the endogenous cannabinoid system) are an attractive target for drug development in the cancer area, but that more in vivo studies, particularly those investigating the potential of cannabinoids as an addition to current treatment strategies, are needed.”  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20370711

http://www.eurekaselect.com/85470/article

Cannabinoids for Cancer Treatment: Progress and Promise

Posted on by

“Cannabinoids are a class of pharmacologic compounds that offer potential applications as antitumor drugs, based on the ability of some members of this class to limit inflammation, cell proliferation, and cell survival. In particular, emerging evidence suggests that agonists of cannabinoid receptors expressed by tumor cells may offer a novel strategy to treat cancer. Here, we review recent work that raises interest in the development and exploration of potent, nontoxic, and nonhabit forming cannabinoids for cancer therapy.

 there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that cannabinoids can be explored as chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of cancer.”

 http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/68/2/339.long

Cannabimimetic fatty acid derivatives in cancer and inflammation.

Posted on by

“Evidence for the role of the cannabimimetic fatty acid derivatives (CFADs), i.e. anandamide (arachidonoylethanolamide, AEA), 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), in the control of inflammation and of the proliferation of tumor cells is reviewed here. The biosynthesis of AEA, PEA, or 2-AG can be induced by stimulation with either Ca(2+) ionophores, lipopolysaccharide, or platelet activating factor in macrophages, and by ionomycin or antigen challenge in rat basophilic leukemia (RBL-2H3) cells (a widely used model for mast cells). These cells also inactivate CFADs through re-uptake and/or hydrolysis and/or esterification processes. AEA and PEA modulate cytokine and/or arachidonate release from macrophages in vitro, regulate serotonin secretion from RBL-2H3 cells, and are analgesic in some animal models of inflammatory pain. However, the involvement of endogenous CFADs and cannabinoid CB(1) and CB(2) receptors in these effects is still controversial. In human breast and prostate cancer cells, AEA and 2-AG, but not PEA, potently inhibit prolactin and/or nerve growth factor (NGF)-induced cell proliferation. Vanillyl-derivatives of anandamide, such as olvanil and arvanil, exhibit even higher anti-proliferative activity. These effects are due to suppression of the levels of the 100 kDa prolactin receptor or of the high affinity NGF receptors (trk), are mediated by CB(1)-like cannabinoid receptors, and are enhanced by other CFADs. Inhibition of adenylyl cyclase and activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase underlie the anti-mitogenic actions of AEA. The possibility that CFADs act as local inhibitors of the proliferation of human breast cancer is discussed here.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10785541

The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation

Posted on by

“Anandamide was the first brain metabolite shown to act as a ligand of “central” CB1 cannabinoid receptors. Here we report that the endogenous cannabinoid potently and selectively inhibits the proliferation of human breast cancer cells in vitro. Anandamide dose-dependently inhibited the proliferation of MCF-7 and EFM-19 cells with IC50 values between 0.5 and 1.5 microM and 83-92% maximal inhibition at 5-10 microM. The proliferation of several other nonmammary tumoral cell lines was not affected by 10 microM anandamide. The anti-proliferative effect of anandamide was not due to toxicity or to apoptosis of cells but was accompanied by a reduction of cells in the S phase of the cell cycle. A stable analogue of anandamide (R)-methanandamide, another endogenous cannabinoid, 2-arachidonoylglycerol, and the synthetic cannabinoid HU-210 also inhibited EFM-19 cell proliferation, whereas arachidonic acid was much less effective. These cannabimimetic substances displaced the binding of the selective cannabinoid agonist [3H]CP 55, 940 to EFM-19 membranes with an order of potency identical to that observed for the inhibition of EFM-19 cell proliferation. Moreover, anandamide cytostatic effect was inhibited by the selective CB1 receptor antagonist SR 141716A. Cell proliferation was arrested by a prolactin mAb and enhanced by exogenous human prolactin, whose mitogenic action was reverted by very low (0.1-0.5 microM) doses of anandamide. Anandamide suppressed the levels of the long form of the prolactin receptor in both EFM-19 and MCF-7 cells, as well as a typical prolactin-induced response, i.e., the expression of the breast cancer cell susceptibility gene brca1. These data suggest that anandamide blocks human breast cancer cell proliferation through CB1-like receptor-mediated inhibition of endogenous prolactin action at the level of prolactin receptor.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC20983/