Tag Archives: cannabis

Cannabis and the brain.

Posted on by

Abstract

“The active compound in herbal cannabis, Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, exerts all of its known central effects through the CB(1) cannabinoid receptor. Research on cannabinoid mechanisms has been facilitated by the availability of selective antagonists acting at CB(1) receptors and the generation of CB(1) receptor knockout mice. Particularly important classes of neurons that express high levels of CB(1) receptors are GABAergic interneurons in hippocampus, amygdala and cerebral cortex, which also contain the neuropeptides cholecystokinin. Activation of CB(1) receptors leads to inhibition of the release of amino acid and monoamine neurotransmitters. The lipid derivatives anandamide and 2-arachidonylglycerol act as endogenous ligands for CB(1) receptors (endocannabinoids). They may act as retrograde synaptic mediators of the phenomena of depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition or excitation in hippocampus and cerebellum. Central effects of cannabinoids include disruption of psychomotor behaviour, short-term memory impairment, intoxication, stimulation of appetite, antinociceptive actions (particularly against pain of neuropathic origin) and anti-emetic effects. Although there are signs of mild cognitive impairment in chronic cannabis users there is little evidence that such impairments are irreversible, or that they are accompanied by drug-induced neuropathology. A proportion of regular users of cannabis develop tolerance and dependence on the drug. Some studies have linked chronic use of cannabis with an increased risk of psychiatric illness, but there is little evidence for any causal link. The potential medical applications of cannabis in the treatment of painful muscle spasms and other symptoms of multiple sclerosis are currently being tested in clinical trials. Medicines based on drugs that enhance the function of endocannabinoids may offer novel therapeutic approaches in the future.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12764049

The neurobiology and evolution of cannabinoid signalling.

Posted on by

Abstract

“The plant Cannabis sativa has been used by humans for thousands of years because of its psychoactivity. The major psychoactive ingredient of cannabis is Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, which exerts effects in the brain by binding to a G-protein-coupled receptor known as the CB1 cannabinoid receptor. The discovery of this receptor indicated that endogenous cannabinoids may occur in the brain, which act as physiological ligands for CB1. Two putative endocannabinoid ligands, arachidonylethanolamide (‘anandamide’) and 2-arachidonylglycerol, have been identified, giving rise to the concept of a cannabinoid signalling system. Little is known about how or where these compounds are synthesized in the brain and how this relates to CB1 expression. However, detailed neuroanatomical and electrophysiological analysis of mammalian nervous systems has revealed that the CB1 receptor is targeted to the presynaptic terminals of neurons where it acts to inhibit release of ‘classical’ neurotransmitters. Moreover, an enzyme that inactivates endocannabinoids, fatty acid amide hydrolase, appears to be preferentially targeted to the somatodendritic compartment of neurons that are postsynaptic to CB1-expressing axon terminals. Based on these findings, we present here a model of cannabinoid signalling in which anandamide is synthesized by postsynaptic cells and acts as a retrograde messenger molecule to modulate neurotransmitter release from presynaptic terminals. Using this model as a framework, we discuss the role of cannabinoid signalling in different regions of the nervous system in relation to the characteristic physiological actions of cannabinoids in mammals, which include effects on movement, memory, pain and smooth muscle contractility. The discovery of the cannabinoid signalling system in mammals has prompted investigation of the occurrence of this pathway in non-mammalian animals. Here we review the evidence for the existence of cannabinoid receptors in non-mammalian vertebrates and invertebrates and discuss the evolution of the cannabinoid signalling system. Genes encoding orthologues of the mammalian CB1 receptor have been identified in a fish, an amphibian and a bird, indicating that CB1 receptors may occur throughout the vertebrates. Pharmacological actions of cannabinoids and specific binding sites for cannabinoids have been reported in several invertebrate species, but the molecular basis for these effects is not known. Importantly, however, the genomes of the protostomian invertebrates Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans do not contain CB1 orthologues, indicating that CB1-like cannabinoid receptors may have evolved after the divergence of deuterostomes (e.g. vertebrates and echinoderms) and protostomes. Phylogenetic analysis of the relationship of vertebrate CB1 receptors with other G-protein-coupled receptors reveals that the paralogues that appear to share the most recent common evolutionary origin with CB1 are lysophospholipid receptors, melanocortin receptors and adenosine receptors. Interestingly, as with CB1, each of these receptor types does not appear to have Drosophila orthologues, indicating that this group of receptors may not occur in protostomian invertebrates. We conclude that the cannabinoid signalling system may be quite restricted in its phylogenetic distribution, probably occurring only in the deuterostomian clade of the animal kingdom and possibly only in vertebrates.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11316486

Cannabis and cannabinoid receptors.

Posted on by

Abstract

“Cannabis and cannabinoids exert many of their biological functions through receptor-mediated mechanisms. Two types of cannabinoid receptors have been identified, namely CB(1) and CB(2), both coupled to a G protein. CB(1) receptors have been detected in the central nervous system (where they are responsible for the characteristic effects of Cannabis, including catalepsy, depression of motor activity, analgesia and feelings of relaxation and well being) and in peripheral neurons (where their activation produces a suppression in neurotransmitter release in the heart, bladder, intestine and vas deferens). Cannabinoid CB(2) receptors have only been detected outside the central nervous system, mostly in cells of the immune system, presumably mediating cannabinoid-induced immunosuppression and antinflammatory effects. With the discovery of cannabinoid receptors for exogenous cannabinoids, also endogenous cannabinoids (anandamide, 2-arachidonylglycerol) have been described.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10930707

Cannabis reinforcement and dependence: role of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor.

Posted on by

Abstract

“Awareness of cannabis dependence as a clinically relevant issue has grown in recent years. Clinical and laboratory studies demonstrate that chronic marijuana smokers can experience withdrawal symptoms upon cessation of marijuana smoking and have difficulty abstaining from marijuana use. This paper will review data implicating the cannabinoid CB1 receptor in regulating the behavioral effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannobinol (THC), the primary psycho-active component of cannabis, across a range of species. The behavioral effects that will be discussed include those that directly contribute to the maintenance of chronic marijuana smoking, such as reward, subjective effects, and the positive and negative reinforcing effects of marijuana, THC and synthetic cannabinoids. The role of the CB1 receptor in the development of marijuana dependence and expression of withdrawal will also be discussed. Lastly, treatment options that may alleviate withdrawal symptoms and promote marijuana abstinence will be considered.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2731704/

Dronabinol for the Treatment of Cannabis Dependence: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Posted on by

   “The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dronabinol, a synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, a naturally occurring pharmacologically active component of marijuana, in treating cannabis dependence… This is the first trial using an agonist substitution strategy for treatment of cannabis dependence. Dronabinol showed promise, it was well-tolerated, and improved treatment retention and withdrawal symptoms. Future trials might test higher doses, combinations of dronabinol with other medications with complementary mechanisms, or with more potent behavioral interventions.

The agonist substitution strategy has been effective for other substance use disorders, mainly nicotine (nicotine patch, other nicotine replacement products, varenicline) and opioid dependence (methadone, buprenorphine). Therefore, dronabinol, an orally bioavailable synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive component of marijuana acting at the cannabinoid 1 (CB1) receptor, seems a logical candidate medication for cannabis dependence. An ideal agonist medication has low abuse potential, reduces withdrawal symptoms and craving, and decreases the reinforcing effects of the target drug, thereby facilitating abstinence. Dronabinol has been shown to reduce cannabis withdrawal symptoms in laboratory settings among non-treatment seeking cannabis users. Although dronabinol produced modest positive subjective effects among cannabis users in the laboratory, there is little evidence of abuse or diversion of dronabinol in community settings. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dronabinol for patients seeking treatment for cannabis dependence. This is, to our knowledge, the largest clinical trial to date to evaluate a pharmacologic intervention for cannabis dependence, and the first to attempt agonist substitution.

.In conclusion, agonist substitution pharmacotherapy with dronabinol, a synthetic form of THC, showed promise for treatment of cannabis dependence, reducing withdrawal symptoms and improving retention in treatment, although it failed to improve abstinence. The trial showed that among adult cannabis-dependent patients, dronabinol was well accepted, with good adherence and few adverse events. Future studies should consider testing higher doses of dronabinol, with longer trial lengths, combining dronabinol with other medications acting through complementary mechanisms or more potent behavioral interventions. Moreover, the field should particularly seek to develop high affinity CB1 partial agonists.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3154755/

The cannabis withdrawal syndrome.

Posted on by

Abstract

“PURPOSE OF REVIEW:

The demand for treatment for cannabis dependence has grown dramatically. The majority of the people who enter the treatment have difficulty in achieving and maintaining abstinence from cannabis. Understanding the impact of cannabis withdrawal syndrome on quit attempts is of obvious importance. Cannabis, however, has long been considered a ‘soft’ drug, and many continue to question whether one can truly become dependent on cannabis. Skepticism is typically focused on whether cannabis use can result in ‘physiological’ dependence or withdrawal, and whether withdrawal is of clinical importance.

RECENT FINDINGS:

The neurobiological basis for cannabis withdrawal has been established via discovery of an endogenous cannabinoid system, identification of cannabinoid receptors, and demonstrations of precipitated withdrawal with cannabinoid receptor antagonists. Laboratory studies have established the reliability, validity, and time course of a cannabis withdrawal syndrome and have begun to explore the effect of various medications on such withdrawal. Reports from clinical samples indicate that the syndrome is common among treatment seekers.

SUMMARY:

A clinically important withdrawal syndrome associated with cannabis dependence has been established. Additional research must determine how cannabis withdrawal affects cessation attempts and the best way to treat its symptoms.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16612207

Adverse effects of cannabis. (2011)

Posted on by

Abstract

“Cannabis, Cannabis sativa L., is used to produce a resin that contains high levels of cannabinoids, particularly delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which are psychoactive substances. Although cannabis use is illegal in France and in many other countries, it is widely used for its relaxing or euphoric effects, especially by adolescents and young adults. What are the adverse effects of cannabis on health? During consumption? And in the long term? Does cannabis predispose users to the development of psychotic disorders? To answer these questions, we reviewed the available evidence using the standard Prescrire methodology. The long-term adverse effects of cannabis are difficult to evaluate. Since and associated substances, with or without the user’s knowledge. Tobacco and alcohol consumption, and particular lifestyles and behaviours are often associated with cannabis use. Some traits predispose individuals to the use of psychoactive substances in general. The effects of cannabis are dosedependent.The most frequently report-ed adverse effects are mental slowness, impaired reaction times, and sometimes accentuation of anxiety. Serious psychological disorders have been reported with high levels of intoxication. The relationship between poor school performance and early, regular, and frequent cannabis use seems to be a vicious circle, in which each sustains the other. Many studies have focused on the long-term effects of cannabis on memory, but their results have been inconclusive. There do not * About fifteen longitudinal cohort studies that examined the influence of cannabis on depressive thoughts or suicidal ideation have yielded conflicting results and are inconclusive. Several longitudinal cohort studies have shown a statistical association between psychotic illness and self-reported cannabis use. However, the results are difficult to interpret due to methodological problems, particularly the unknown reliability of self-reported data. It has not been possible to establish a causal relationship in either direction, because of these methodological limitations. In Australia, the marked increase in cannabis use has not been accompanied by an increased incidence of schizophrenia. On the basis of the available data, we cannot reach firm conclusions on whether or not cannabis use causes psychosis. It seems prudent to inform apparently vulnerable individuals that cannabis may cause acute psychotic decompensation, especially at high doses. Users can feel dependent on cannabis, but this dependence is usually psychological. Withdrawal symptoms tend to occur within 48 hours following cessation of regular cannabis use, and include increased irritability, anxiety, nervousness, restlessness, sleep difficulties and aggression. Symptoms subside within 2 to 12 weeks. Driving under the influence of cannabis doubles the risk of causing a fatal road accident. Alcohol consumption plays an even greater role. A few studies and a number of isolated reports suggest that cannabis has a role in the occurrence of cardiovascular adverse effects, especially in patients with coronary heart disease. Numerous case-control studies have investigated the role of cannabis in the incidence of some types of cancer. Its role has not been ruled out, but it is not possible to determine whether the risk is distinct from that of the tobacco with which it is often smoked. Studies that have examined the influence of cannabis use on the clinical course of hepatitis C are inconclusive. Alcohol remains the main toxic agent that hepatitis C patients should avoid. In practice, the adverse effects of low-level, recreational cannabis use are generally minor, although they can apparently be serious in vulnerable individuals. The adverse effects of cannabis appear overall to be less serious than those of alcohol, in terms of neuropsychological and somatic effects, accidents and violence.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21462790

Cannabis–1988.

Posted on by

Abstract

“In this updating review of research on cannabis particular attention has been paid to the increasing number of studies of the disposition of the components of cannabis in man, as well as possible effects on health. Specific binding sites for cannaboids have not been demonstrated. Approximately 80 metabolites of tetrahydrocannabiol (THC) have been discovered, of which 11-OH-THC is the main metabolite, but it contributes little to the overall effect when the drug is smoked or given intravenously. The minimum plasma level of THC associated with the psychotropic effect is 25 ng/ml. Cannabis may produce directly an acute panic reaction, a toxic delirium, and acute paranoid state, or acute mania. Cannabis use may aggrevate schizophrenia, but it is much less certain whether it can lead to sociopathy or even to “amotivational syndrome”. Despite widespread use of cannabis in virtually all parts of the world, no catastrophic effects on health have been noted. Cannabis appears to be relatively safe as compared with current social drugs. It is, however, still too early in the history of the present episode of cannabis use to be sanguine about possible bad effects.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2852450

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

Posted on by

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

Substitution profile of the cannabinoid agonist nabilone in human subjects discriminating δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Posted on by

Abstract

“OBJECTIVES:

The central effects of Δ-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ-THC), the primary active constituent of cannabis, are attributed to cannabinoid CB1 receptor activity, although clinical evidence is limited. Drug discrimination has proven useful for examining the neuropharmacology of drugs, as data are concordant with the actions of a drug at the receptor level. The aim of this study was to determine the profile of behavioral and physiological effects of the cannabinoid agonist nabilone in humans trained to discriminate Δ-THC.

METHODS:

Six cannabis users learned to identify when they received oral Δ-THC (25 mg) or placebo and then received a range of doses of the cannabinoid agonists nabilone (1, 2, 3, and 5 mg) and Δ-THC (5, 10, 15, and 25 mg). The dopamine reuptake inhibitor methylphenidate (5, 10, 20, and 30 mg) was included as a negative control. Subjects completed the Multiple-Choice Procedure, and self-report, task performance, and physiological measures were collected.

RESULTS:

Nabilone shared discriminative-stimulus effects with the training dose of Δ-THC, produced subject-rated drug effects that were comparable to those of Δ-THC, and increased heart rate. Methylphenidate did not engender Δ-THC-like discriminative-stimulus effects.

CONCLUSIONS:

These data demonstrate that the interoceptive effects of nabilone are similar to Δ-THC in cannabis users. The overlap in their behavioral effects is likely due to their shared mechanism as CB1 receptor agonists. Given the relative success of agonist replacement therapy to manage opioid, tobacco, and stimulant dependence, these results also support the evaluation of nabilone as a potential medication for cannabis-use disorders.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20838217