“Objective: This study aims to evaluate preclinical studies on the effects and toxicity of cannabis-derived compounds against Plasmodium sp.

Methods: A literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and LILACS databases until December 2024. Studies that assessed the activity or toxicity of cannabis against Plasmodium sp. in in vitro or in vivo studies were included. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection, data extraction and methodological assessment.

Results: Eight studies published between 2001 and 2022 were included, with the majority conducted in North America (n = 5). Most in vitro studies focused on assessing antimalarial activity through half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀), which ranged from 0.16 to 4.1 μg/mL, indicating mild to high activity.

For the in vivo studies, all reported positive effects, including moderate antimalarial activity and disease tolerance. The toxicity profile of these compounds has not been extensively studied, and most studies present an unknown or unclear risk of bias due to insufficient methodological information.

Conclusions: Future studies should provide more comprehensive details on study design and further validate these findings, especially concerning toxicity.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41093288/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tmi.70044

“Introduction: Cannabis sativa L. has been used for thousands of years to treat intestinal and uterine diseases and as an anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antiepileptic, among others. This study aimed to conduct preclinical studies based on the ethnopharmacological properties of C. sativa.

Methods: For this purpose, the police and health authorities provided the raw plant material, and a crude ethanolic extract of the aerial parts of C. sativa (APCs) was produced, which was subsequently chemically analyzed using combined chromatographic and spectrometric methods. Subsequently, APCs were administered to Swiss mice and Wistar rats for evaluation using the open field test, acetic acid-induced abdominal contraction model, hot plate test, formalin test, carrageenan-induced paw edema, Saccharomyces cerevisiae-induced fever, and primary dysmenorrhea models.

Results: Chemical analysis suggests the presence of classic cannabinoids, such as cannabidiol, tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabigerol, as well as flavonoids and alkaloids. The doses used in the open field test were 1, 3, 10, 30, and 100 mg/kg (gavage, po), with the last two doses responsible for reducing mobility and inducing hypothermia in the animals. In subsequent pharmacological protocols, the doses used were 1, 3, and 10 mg/kg (gavage, po). In the abdominal contraction model, the number of writhing events was reduced by APCs at a dose of 10 mg/kg [median 0.5 (Q25 = 0; Q75 = 5.75, p < 0.05)]. In the hot plate test, the doses of 1, 3, and 10 mg/kg increased the latency time to 17.67 ± 1.33, 18.50 ± 1.31, and 17.33 ± 1.69 s (p < 0.05), respectively. In the formalin test, the effect was restricted to the first phase, with values of 42.33 ± 7.588, 45.50 ± 6.657, and 39.50 ± 7.869 s (p < 0.05) in paw-licking time. In paw edema, the doses of 1 and 3 mg/kg were more constant, restricting the volume to 0.168 ± 0.004 and 0.150 ± 0.004 mL (p < 0.05), respectively. In dysmenorrhea, the doses of 3 and 10 mg/kg reduced abdominal contractions [0 (Q25 = 0; Q75 = 3.0) and 1.0 (Q25 = 0; Q75 = 3.0)].

Conclusion: APCs at the tested doses did not promote an antipyretic effect. These data indicate that APCs have antinociceptive, anti-inflammatory, and anti-dysmenorrheal effects in animal models.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41089847/

“Cannabis sativa L. is a plant from the family Cannabaceae and one of the oldest to be domesticated in the world, with its use dating back to approximately 12,000 years in the Central Asian region.”

“C. sativa has a variety of indications in traditional medicine, in the most diverse forms of use (tea, smoke, vapor, etc.), and is used as a wound healing agent, analgesic, anticonvulsant, hypnotic, tranquilizer, anesthetic, anti-inflammatory, antibiotic, antiparasitic, antispasmodic, digestive, appetite stimulant, diuretic, aphrodisiac, antitussive, and expectorant.”

“Our results suggest that APCs contain classic cannabinoids, flavonoids, and alkaloids, and that classic cannabinoids, THC, and CBD are present. The administration of APCs promoted behavioral changes in the animals consistent with the pharmacological effects of these substances, such as reduced ambulation and hypothermic effect at doses of 30 and 100 mg/kg. In pharmacological studies, antinociceptive, anti-inflammatory, and anti-dysmenorrheal effects were observed in different experimental models and in the 1–10 mg/kg dose range; however, the APCs failed to show an antipyretic effect at these doses.”

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2025.1677987/full

“Background: Impaired inhibitory control has been observed in regular cannabis users. Theories suggest that regular cannabis use is maintained by reward-driven behaviour, which may be underpinned by adaptations in neural reward and inhibitory control systems, thus increasing vulnerability to dependency.

Aims: This study investigated neural correlates of cannabis cue-specific inhibitory control in regular cannabis users and non-users using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS).

Methods: Thirty regular cannabis users and thirty non-user controls completed two inhibitory control tasks (Go/No/Go and Stop-Signal Task), and a measure of attentional bias (Cannabis Stroop task). fNIRS recorded prefrontal and orbitofrontal haemodynamic responses (oxygenated haemoglobin and deoxygenated haemoglobin). Group comparisons and exploratory regressions examined cannabis use characteristics as predictors of behavioural and neural outcomes.

Results: No significant group differences were found in behavioural performance or haemodynamic activity across tasks. Exploratory regressions showed no significant associations between cannabis use characteristics and behavioural or neural outcomes after adjusting for covariates.

Conclusions: No evidence of impaired inhibitory control, attentional bias, or differences in prefrontal function were found in non-dependent cannabis users. Future studies should investigate whether such deficits emerge with heavier or dependent use.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41037310/

“In summary, this study found no significant differences in behavioural performance or neural activation between regular cannabis users and non-user controls during cue-specific inhibitory control tasks.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02698811251358814