Anti-emetic efficacy and toxicity of nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, in lung cancer chemotherapy.

Abstract

“Nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, and Prochlorperazine were compared in a double-blind crossover study of 34 patients with lung cancer undergoing a 3-day schedule of chemotherapy with Cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin and Etoposide. Symptom scores were significantly better for patients on nabilone for nausea, retching and vomiting (P less than 0.05). Fewer subjects vomited with nabilone (P = 0.05) and the number of vomiting episodes was lower (P less than 0.05); no patients on nabilone required additional parenteral anti-emetic. More patients preferred nabilone for anti-emetic control (P less than 0.005). Adverse effects common with nabilone were drowsiness (57%), postural dizziness (35%) and lightheadedness (18%). Euphoria was seen in 14% and a “high” in 7%. Erect systolic blood pressure was lower in nabilone patients on Day 1 (P = 0.05) but postural hypotension was a major problem in only 7%. Nabilone is an effective oral anti-emetic drug for moderately toxic chemotherapy, but the range and unpredictability of its side-effects warrant caution in its use.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6315040

Cannabidiolic acid prevents vomiting in Suncus murinus and nausea-induced behaviour in rats by enhancing 5-HT(1A) receptor activation.

“BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

To evaluate the ability of cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) to reduce nausea and vomiting and enhance 5-HT(1A) receptor activation in animal models.”

“CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:

Compared to cannabidiol, CBDA displays significantly greater potency at inhibiting vomiting in shrews and nausea in rats, and at enhancing 5-HT(1A) receptor activation, an action that accounts for its ability to attenuate conditioned gaping in rats. Consequently, CBDA shows promise as a treatment for nausea and vomiting, including anticipatory nausea for which no specific therapy is currently available.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23121618

Cannabidiol, a non-psychotropic component of cannabis, attenuates vomiting and nausea-like behaviour via indirect agonism of 5-HT(1A) somatodendritic autoreceptors in the dorsal raphe nucleus.

Abstract

“BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

To evaluate the hypothesis that activation of somatodendritic 5-HT(1A) autoreceptors in the dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) produces the anti-emetic/anti-nausea effects of cannabidiol (CBD), a primary non-psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis.”

“CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:

These results suggest that CBD produced its anti-emetic/anti-nausea effects by indirect activation of the somatodendritic 5-HT(1A) autoreceptors in the DRN.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21827451

Central and peripheral mechanisms contribute to the antiemetic actions of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol against 5-hydroxytryptophan-induced emesis.

Abstract

“Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) prevents cisplatin-induced emesis via cannabinoid CB(1) receptors. Whether central and/or peripheral cannabinoid CB(1) receptors account for the antiemetic action(s) of delta-9-THC remains to be investigated. The 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT=serotonin) precursor, 5-hydroxytryptophan (5-HTP), is an indirect 5-HT agonist and simultaneously produces the head-twitch response (a centrally mediated serotonin 5-HT(2A) receptor-induced behavior) and emesis (a serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor-induced response, mediated by both peripheral and central mechanisms) in the least shrew (Cryptotis parva). The peripheral amino acid decarboxylase inhibitor, carbidopa, prevents the conversion of 5-HTP to 5-HT in the periphery and elevates 5-HTP levels in the central nervous system (CNS). When administered i.p. alone, a 50 mg/kg dose of 5-HTP failed to induce either behaviour while its 100 mg/kg dose produced robust frequencies of both head-twitch response and emesis. Pretreatment with carbidopa (0, 10, 20 and 40 mg/kg) potentiated the ability of both doses of 5-HTP to produce the head-twitch response in a dose-dependent but bell-shaped manner, with maximal potentiation occurring at 20 mg/kg carbidopa. Carbidopa dose-dependently reduced the frequency of 5-HTP (100 mg/kg)-induced emesis, whereas the 10 mg/kg dose potentiated, and the 20 and 40 mg/kg doses suppressed the frequency of vomits produced by the 50 mg/kg dose of 5-HTP. The peripheral and/or central antiemetic action(s) of delta-9-THC (0, 1, 2.5, 5, 10 and 20 mg/kg) against 5-HTP (100 mg/kg)-induced head-twitch response and emesis were investigated in different groups of carbidopa (0, 10 and 20 mg/kg) pretreated shrews. Irrespective of carbidopa treatment, delta-9-THC attenuated the frequency of 5-HTP-induced head-twitch response in a dose-dependent manner with similar ID(50) values. Although delta-9-THC also reduced the frequency of 5-HTP-induced emesis with similar ID(50s), at the 5 mg/kg delta-9-THC dose however, 5-HTP induced significantly less vomits in the 10 and 20 mg/kg carbidopa-treated groups relative to its 0 mg/kg control group. Moreover, increasing doses of carbidopa significantly shifted the inhibitory dose-response effect of delta-9-THC in protecting shrews from 5-HTP-induced emesis to the left. Relatively, a large dose of delta-9-THC (20 mg/kg) was required to significantly reduce the number of vomits produced by direct acting serotonergic 5-HT(3) receptor agonists, serotonin and 2-methylserotonin. Low doses of delta-9-THC (0.1-1 mg/kg) nearly completely prevented 2-methylserotonin-induced, centrally mediated, head-twitch and ear-scratch responses. The results indicate that delta-9-THC probably acts pre- and postsynaptically to attenuate emesis produced by indirect and direct acting 5-HT(3) receptor agonists via both central and peripheral mechanisms. In addition, delta-9-THC prevents 5-HTP-induced head-twitch and emesis via cannabinoid CB(1) receptors since the CB(1) receptor antagonist, SR 141716A [N-piperidino-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methylpyrazole-3-carboxamide], countered the inhibitory actions of an effective dose of delta-9-THC against both behaviours.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15044052

http://www.thctotalhealthcare.com/category/nauseavomiting/

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol differentially suppresses cisplatin-induced emesis and indices of motor function via cannabinoid CB(1) receptors in the least shrew.

“The present study investigates the cannabinoid receptor mechanisms by which Delta(9)-THC produces its antiemetic effects against cisplatin -induced emesis as well as its cannabimimetic activity profile (motor reduction) in the least shrew.

Intraperitoneal administration of Delta(9)-THC (1, 2.5, 5 and 10 mg/kg) dose-dependently reduced both the percentage of animals vomiting (ID(50)=1.8+/-1.6 mg/kg) and the frequency of vomits (ID(50)=0.36+/-1.18 mg/kg) in a potent manner.

The lowest significantly effective antiemetic dose of Delta(9)-THC for the latter emesis parameters was 2.5 mg/kg. Although Delta(9)-THC reduced the frequency of vomits up to 98%, it failed to completely protect all tested shrews from vomiting (80% protection). The cannabinoid CB(1) antagonist (SR 141716A) and not the CB(2) antagonist (SR 144528), reversed the antiemetic effects of Delta(9)-THC in a dose-dependent fashion. Delta(9)-THC (1, 5, 10 and 20 mg/kg, ip) suppressed locomotor parameters (spontaneous locomotor activity, duration of movement and rearing frequency) in a biphasic manner and only the 20-mg/kg dose simultaneously suppressed the triad of locomotor parameters to a significant degree. Subcutaneous (1-10 mg/kg) and intraperitoneal (0.05-40 mg/kg) injection of some doses of SR 141716A caused significant reductions in one or more components of the triad of locomotor parameters but these reductions were not dose dependent. Subcutaneous injection of SR 141716A (0.2, 1, 5 and 10 mg/kg) reversed the motor suppressant effects of a 20-mg/kg dose of Delta(9)-THC (ip) in a dose-dependent manner. Relative to its motor suppressant effects,

Delta(9)-THC is a more potent antiemetic agent. Both effects are probably mediated via CB(1) receptors in distinct loci.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11420092

http://www.thctotalhealthcare.com/category/nauseavomiting/

Antiemetic efficacy of levonantradol compared to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Abstract

“The antiemetic efficacy of im levonantradol, a synthetic cannabinoid, given at a dose of 1 mg every 4 hours, was compared to oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) given at a dose of 15 mg every 4 hours in a double-blind crossover study. Twenty-six patients receiving emetogenic cancer chemotherapy were evaluated. For each drug, 28% of treated patients had no nausea. The median number of emetic episodes with levonantradol was 2.0 versus 3.0 for THC (P = 0.06). Side effects occurred in 91.7% and 97.3% of levonantradol and THC patients, respectively, with drowsiness and dizziness most commonly seen. Side effects were generally well-tolerated, with only 13.9% of levonantradol and 21.6% of THC patients discontinuing treatment because of side effects. Levonantradol appears to be at least as effective an antiemetic as THC and is the only cannabinoid available for parenteral use.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2981616

Levonantradol for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Abstract

“Twenty patients with cancer previously unresponsive to antiemetic treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting were treated with the new tetrahydrocannabinoid Levonantradol. 15 patients experienced substantial relief and 10 of them preferred the drug for further courses. These observations suggest that Levonantradol can be beneficial to patients refractory to conventional antiemetic therapy.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6350696

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in cancer chemotherapy: research problems and issues.

Abstract

“A critical review of the literature assessing the antiemetic efficacy of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy showed considerable inconsistency in results. The equivocal nature of these results partly reflects the difficulty of doing research on antiemetic therapies, but also can be attributed to differences in the adequacy and nature of the research designs, procedures, and assessment instruments that have been used. Several factors were also identified that are seldom studied but may be important in determining whether THC will be effective: patient variables, such as chemotherapy regimen and age; pharmacologic variables, such as drug tolerance, dose, schedule, toxicity, route of administration, and drug interactions; and environmental variables associated with administration setting. The need to differentiate pharmacologically induced from conditioned nausea and vomiting was also pointed out. We believe that THC does have antiemetic efficacy, but the lack of controlled research does not allow precise knowledge of its true effectiveness and toxicity. Well-controlled trials are needed to help answer some of these questions.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6305249

Antiemetic effect of tetrahydrocannabinol. Compared with placebo and prochlorperazine in chemotherapy-associated nausea and emesis.

Abstract

“Fifty-five patients harboring a variety of neoplasms and previously found to have severe nausea or emesis from antitumor drugs were given antiemetic prophylaxis in a double-blind, randomized, crossover fashion. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), prochlorperazine, and placebo were compared. Nausea was absent in 40 of 55 patients receiving THC, eight of 55 patients receiving prochlorperazine, and five of 55 in the placebo group.

The antiemetic effect of THC appeared to be more efficacious for cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and doxorubicin hydrochloride, and less so for mechlorethamine hydrochloride and the nitrosureas.

Tetrahydrocannabinol appears to offer significant control of nausea in most patients and exceeding by far that provided by prochlorperazine.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6254456

 

Amelioration of cancer chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Abstract

“The antinausea and antivomiting effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in children receiving cancer chemotherapy were compared with those of metoclopramide syrup and prochlorperazine tablets in two double-blind studies. THC was found to be a significantly better antinausea and antivomiting agent… In some patients, THC enhanced appetite during a course of chemotherapy. In two patients, a “high” associated with THC administrationwas reported. Drowsiness was reported significantly more frequently with THC.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/231736