Tag Archives: G-Protein coupled receptors

Intrathecal Administration of the Cannabinoid 2 Receptor Agonist JWH015 Can Attenuate Cancer Pain and Decrease mRNA Expression of the 2B Subunit of N-Methyl-d-Aspartic Acid

Posted on by

“Pain has a negative impact on the quality of life in cancer patients…

…we hypothesized that a cannabinoid receptor agonist might be a novel therapy for cancer pain. Taking into consideration the side effects of a CB1 receptor agonist (which limits their clinical application), we chose a CB2 receptor agonist to investigate its effect in cancer pain…

 Recent clinical trials have demonstrated that cannabinoids may have significant positive effects in refractory chronic and cancer pain. The cannabinoids are thought to exert most of their effects by binding to G protein–coupled cannabinoid receptors, which include 2 cloned metabotropic receptors: cannabinoid (CB)1 and CB2…

CONCLUSION: These data indicated that intrathecal administration of cannabinoid receptor agonists might relieve cancer pain… These results also suggested that cannabinoids might be a useful alternative or adjunct therapy for relieving cancer pain.

The use of a CB2 receptor agonist could be a novel option for treatment of cancer pain.”

 

 http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/content/113/2/405.long

The Endocannabinoid System and Pain

Gallery

Posted on by

“Cannabis has been used for more than twelve thousand years and for many different purposes (i.e. fiber, medicinal, recreational). However, the endocannabinoid signaling system has only recently been the focus of medical research and considered a potential therapeutic target. Endocannabinoids … Continue reading → Continue reading →

Targeting cannabinoid agonists for inflammatory and neuropathic pain.

Posted on by

Abstract

“The cannabinoid receptors CB(1) and CB(2) are class A G-protein-coupled receptors. It is well known that cannabinoid receptor agonists produce relief of pain in a variety of animal models by interacting with cannabinoid receptors. CB(1) receptors are located centrally and peripherally, whereas CB(2) receptors are expressed primarily on immune cells and tissues. A large body of preclinical data supports the hypothesis that either CB(2)-selective agonists or CB(1) agonists acting at peripheral sites, or with limited CNS exposure, will inhibit pain and neuroinflammation without side effects within the CNS. There has been a growing interest in developing cannabinoid agonists. Many new cannabinoid ligands have been synthesized and studied covering a wide variety of novel structural scaffolds. This review focuses on the present development of cannabinoid agonists with an emphasis on selective CB(2) agonists and peripherally restricted CB(1) or CB(1)/CB(2) dual agonists for treatment of inflammatory and neuropathic pain.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17594182

Cannabinoid receptors and pain.

Posted on by

Abstract

“Mammalian tissues contain at least two types of cannabinoid receptor, CB(1) and CB(2), both coupled to G proteins. CB(1) receptors are expressed mainly by neurones of the central and peripheral nervous system whereas CB(2) receptors occur centrally and peripherally in certain non-neuronal tissues, particularly in immune cells. The existence of endogenous ligands for cannabinoid receptors has also been demonstrated. The discovery of this ‘endocannabinoid system’ has prompted the development of a range of novel cannabinoid receptor agonists and antagonists, including several that show marked selectivity for CB(1) or CB(2) receptors. It has also been paralleled by a renewed interest in cannabinoid-induced antinociception. This review summarizes current knowledge about the ability of cannabinoids to produce antinociception in animal models of acute pain as well as about the ability of these drugs to suppress signs of tonic pain induced in animals by nerve damage or by the injection of an inflammatory agent. Particular attention is paid to the types of pain against which cannabinoids may be effective, the distribution pattern of cannabinoid receptors in central and peripheral pain pathways and the part that these receptors play in cannabinoid-induced antinociception. The possibility that antinociception can be mediated by cannabinoid receptors other than CB(1) and CB(2) receptors, for example CB(2)-like receptors, is also discussed as is the evidence firstly that one endogenous cannabinoid, anandamide, produces antinociception through mechanisms that differ from those of other types of cannabinoid, for example by acting on vanilloid receptors, and secondly that the endocannabinoid system has physiological and/or pathophysiological roles in the modulation of pain.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11164622

The endocannabinoid system as a key mediator during liver diseases: new insights and therapeutic openings

Posted on by

  “Alcohol abuse, viral hepatitis and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) represent the major causes of chronic liver injury, resulting in progressive accumulation of fibrosis within the liver parenchyma. Progression to cirrhosis exposes patients to life-threatening complications of portal hypertension liver failure and hepatic encephalopathy, and to a high risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma. Overall, chronic liver diseases represent a major health problem with an estimated rate of death in the range of 1 400 000 per year worldwide. Recent findings have revealed a role of endocannabinoids and their receptors in the pathogenesis of several key steps of acute and chronic liver injury, therefore identifying pharmacological modulation of cannabinoid receptors as an attractive strategy for the management of morbidity related to liver injury .”

 

“Chronic liver diseases represent a major health problem due to cirrhosis and its complications. During the last decade, endocannabinoids and their receptors have emerged as major regulators of several pathophysiological aspects associated with chronic liver disease progression. Hence, hepatic cannabinoid receptor 2 (CB2) receptors display beneficial effects on alcoholic fatty liver, hepatic inflammation, liver injury, regeneration and fibrosis. Cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1) receptors have been implicated in the pathogenesis of several lesions such as alcoholic and metabolic steatosis, liver fibrogenesis, or circulatory failure associated with cirrhosis. Although the development of CB1 antagonists has recently been suspended due to the high incidence of central side effects, preliminary preclinical data obtained with peripherally restricted CB1 antagonists give real hopes in the development of active CB1 molecules devoid of central adverse effects. CB2-selective molecules may also offer novel perspectives for the treatment of liver diseases, and their clinical development is clearly awaited. Whether combined treatment with a peripherally restricted CB1 antagonist and a CB2 agonist might result in an increased therapeutic potential will warrant further investigation.”

 

“Cannabis Sativa has a long-standing history of recreational and therapeutic use, starting over 200 years ago. Understanding of pathways involved in the pharmacological properties of cannabinoids has only emerged with the identification of an endocannabinoid system that comprises at least two specific G-protein coupled receptors [cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1) and cannabinoid receptor 2 (CB2)], their endogenous lipidic ligands (endocannabinoids), and enzymes involved in endocannabinoid synthesis and degradation.”

“Over the past 10 years, the endocannabinoid system has emerged as a major player in the pathogenesis of liver diseases. CB1 receptors have been implicated in the pathogenesis of several lesions such as liver fibrogenesis, alcoholic and metabolic steatosis, or circulatory failure associated with cirrhosis. In contrast, stimulation of hepatic CB2 receptors is emerging as an overall protective pathway with antifibrogenic properties and beneficial effects on liver inflammation, alcoholic fatty liver and hepatocyte survival and regeneration. Exciting therapeutic developments expected with the availability of CB1 receptor antagonists have been put to a hold, due to the high incidence of central side effects of first generation compounds. Fortunately, CB1 antagonists devoid of brain penetrance are increasingly being synthetized and initial results suggest that they exhibit beneficial effects expected from previous studies. The clinical development of CB2-selective agonists is also eagerly awaited.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3165953/

Endocannabinoids and Liver Disease. II. Endocannabinoids in the pathogenesis and treatment of liver fibrosis

Posted on by

“Plant-derived cannabinoids such as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) have been used for medicinal purposes for thousands of years. Two G protein-coupled receptors termed CB1 and CB2 were identified in the early 1990s as receptors for cannabinoids…”

“Hepatic fibrosis is the response of the liver to chronic injury and is associated with portal hypertension, progression to hepatic cirrhosis, liver failure, and high incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. On a molecular level, a large number of signaling pathways have been shown to contribute to the activation of fibrogenic cell types and the subsequent accumulation of extracellular matrix in the liver. Recent evidence suggests that the endocannabinoid system is an important part of this complex signaling network. In the injured liver, the endocannabinoid system is upregulated both at the level of endocannabinoids and at the endocannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2. The hepatic endocannabinoid system mediates both pro- and antifibrogenic effects by activating distinct signaling pathways that differentially affect proliferation and death of fibrogenic cell types. Here we will summarize current findings on the role of the hepatic endocannabinoid system in liver fibrosis and discuss emerging options for its therapeutic exploitation.”

“There is overwhelming evidence that the endocannabinoid system plays a major role in the pathophysiology of chronic liver injury and wound healing responses and that modulation of the endocannabinoid system may be exploited for the treatment of liver fibrosis. Among all candidates, CB1 represents the most promising target for antifibrotic therapies. In addition to the antifibrogenic effects of CB1 blockade, one can expect positive effects on other complications such as portal hypertension, ascites formation, hepatic encephalopathy, and cardiomyopathy. Moreover, CB1 antagonism appears to have beneficial effects on hepatic steatosis…”

http://ajpgi.physiology.org/content/294/2/G357.long

[The endocannabinoid system as a novel target for the treatment of liver fibrosis].

Posted on by

Abstract

 “The cannabinoid system comprises specific G protein-coupled receptors (CB1 and CB2), exogenous (marijuana-derived cannabinoids) and endogenous (endocannabinoids) ligands, and a machinery dedicated to endocannabinoid synthesis and degradation. Studies over two decades have extensively documented the crucial role of the cannabinoid system in the regulation of a variety of pathophysiological conditions. However, its role in liver pathology has only been recently unravelled, probably given the low expression of CB1 and CB2 in the normal liver. We have recently demonstrated that CB1 and CB2 receptors display opposite effects in the regulation of liver fibrogenesis during chronic liver injury. Indeed, both receptors are up-regulated in the liver of cirrhotic patients, and expressed in liver fibrogenic cells. Moreover, CB1 receptors are profibrogenic and accordingly, the CB1 antagonist rimonabant reduces fibrosis progression in three experimental models. In keeping with these results, daily cannabis smoking is a risk factor for fibrosis progression in patients with chronic hepatitis C. In contrast, CB2 display antifibrogenic effects, by a mechanism involving reduction of liver fibrogenic cell accumulation. These results may offer new perspectives for the treatment of liver fibrosis, combining CB2 agonist and CB1 antagonist therapy.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17412522

Inhibitors of monoacylglycerol lipase, fatty-acid amide hydrolase and endocannabinoid transport differentially suppress capsaicin-induced behavioral sensitization through peripheral endocannabinoid mechanisms

Posted on by

 “Monoacylglycerol lipase (MGL) and fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) degrade the endocannabinoids 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and anandamide (AEA), respectively… peripheral inhibition of enzymes hydrolyzing 2-AG and AEA suppresses capsaicin-evoked behavioral sensitization with distinct patterns of pharmacological specificity… Modulation of endocannabinoids in the periphery suppressed capsaicin-evoked nocifensive behavior and thermal hyperalgesia through either CB1 or CB2 receptor mechanisms but suppressed capsaicin-evoked mechanical allodynia through CB1 mechanisms only. Inhibition of endocannabinoid transport was more effective in suppressing capsaicin-induced sensitization compared to inhibition of either FAAH or MGL alone. These studies are the first to unveil the effects of pharmacologically increasing peripheral endocannabinoid levels on capsaicin-induced behavioral hypersensitivities. Our data suggest that 2-AG, the putative product of MGL inhibition, and AEA, the putative product of FAAH inhibition, differentially suppress capsaicin-induced nociception through peripheral cannabinoid mechanisms.”

“Cannabis has been used for centuries for its pain-relieving properties. The main active ingredient of cannabis, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, produces antinociception by binding to G protein-coupled CB1 and CB2 receptors. Cannabinoids produce antinociception in animal models of both acute and chronic pain.”

Read more: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900457/

Endogenous cannabinoids and neutrophil chemotaxis.

Posted on by

Abstract

  “Neutrophils are the earliest inflammatory cell to infiltrate tissue, playing an important role in early phagocytosis. Under pathological conditions, pro-inflammatory actions of neutrophils contribute to the development of various inflammatory diseases. G(i) protein-coupled cell-surface receptors are an essential component of pro-migratory responses in leukocytes; however, few investigations regarding inhibitors of cell migration have been reported. Kurihara et al. (2006) and McHugh et al. (2008) have revealed that certain endogenous cannabinoids and lipids are potent inhibitors of induced human neutrophil migration. McHugh et al. implicate a novel SR141716A-sensitive pharmacological target distinct from cannabinoid CB(1) and CB(2) receptors, which is antagonized by N-arachidonoyl-l-serine; and that the CB(2) receptor exerts negative co-operativity upon this receptor. Kurihara et al. demonstrate that fMLP-induced RhoA activity is decreased following endocannabinoid pretreatment, disrupting the front/rear polarization necessary for neutrophils to engage in chemotaxis.

The therapeutic potential of exploiting endocannabinoids as neutrophilic chemorepellants is plain to see.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19647118

Non-CB1, non-CB2 receptors for endocannabinoids, plant cannabinoids, and synthetic cannabimimetics: focus on G-protein-coupled receptors and transient receptor potential channels.

Posted on by

Abstract

“The molecular mechanism of action of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychotropic constituent of Cannabis, has been a puzzle during the three decades separating its characterization, in 1964, and the cloning, in the 1990s, of cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors. However, while these latter proteins do mediate most of the pharmacological actions of THC, they do not seem to act as receptors for other plant cannabinoids (phytocannabinoids), nor are they the unique targets of the endogenous lipids that were originally identified in animals as agonists of CB1 and CB2 receptors, and named endocannabinoids. Over the last decade, several potential alternative receptors for phytocannabinoids, endocannabinoids, and even synthetic cannabimimetics, have been proposed, often based uniquely on pharmacological evidence obtained in vitro. In particular, the endocannabinoid anandamide, and the other most abundant Cannabis constituent, cannabidiol, seem to be the most “promiscuous” of these compounds. In this article, we review the latest data on the non-CB1, non-CB2 receptors suggested so far for endocannabinoids and plant or synthetic cannabinoids, and lay special emphasis on uncharacterized or orphan G-protein-coupled receptors as well as on transient receptor potential channels.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19847654