Category Archives: THC (Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol)

Pharmacognosy and Effects of Cannabinoids in the Vascular System

Posted on by
Reply
Go to ACS Pharmacology & Translational Science

“Understanding the pharmacodynamics of cannabinoids is an essential subject due to the recent increasing global acceptance of cannabis and its derivation for recreational and therapeutic purposes. Elucidating the interaction between cannabinoids and the vascular system is critical to exploring cannabinoids as a prospective therapeutic agent for treating vascular-associated clinical conditions.

This review aims to examine the effect of cannabinoids on the vascular system and further discuss the fundamental pharmacological properties and mechanisms of action of cannabinoids in the vascular system. Data from literature revealed a substantial interaction between endocannabinoids, phytocannabinoids, and synthetic cannabinoids within the vasculature of both humans and animal models. However, the mechanisms and the ensuing functional response is blood vessels and species-dependent. The current understanding of classical cannabinoid receptor subtypes and the recently discovered atypical cannabinoid receptors and the development of new synthetic analogs have further enhanced the pharmacological characterization of the vascular cannabinoid receptors.

Compelling evidence also suggest that cannabinoids represent a formidable therapeutic candidate for vascular-associated conditions.

Nonetheless, explanations of the mechanisms underlining these processes are complex and paradoxical based on the heterogeneity of receptors and signaling pathways. Further insight from studies that uncover the mechanisms underlining the therapeutic effect of cannabinoids in the treatment of vascular-associated conditions is required to determine whether the known benefits of cannabinoids thus currently outweigh the known/unknown risks.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36407955/

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsptsci.2c00141

The value of real world evidence: The case of medical cannabis

Posted on by
Reply
Frontiers - Crunchbase Company Profile & Funding

“Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have long been considered the gold standard of medical evidence. In relation to cannabis based medicinal products (CBMPs), this focus on RCTs has led to very restrictive guidelines in the UK, which are limiting patient access. There is general agreement that RCT evidence in relation to CBPMs is insufficient at present. As well as commercial reasons, a major problem is that RCTs do not lend themselves well to the study of whole plant medicines.

One solution to this challenge is the use of real world evidence (RWE) with patient reported outcomes (PROs) to widen the evidence base. Such data increasingly highlights the positive impact medical cannabis can have on patients’ lives.

This paper outlines the value of this approach which involves the study of interventions and patients longitudinally under medical care. In relation to CBMPs, RWE has a broad range of advantages. These include the study of larger groups of patients, the use of a broader range and ratio of components of CBMPs, and the inclusion of more and rarer medical conditions. Importantly, and in contrast to RCTs, patients with significant comorbidities-and from a wider demographic profile-can also be studied, so providing higher ecological validity and increasing patient numbers, whilst offering significant cost savings. We conclude by outlining 12 key recommendations of the value of RWE in relation to medical cannabis.

We hope that this paper will help policymakers and prescribers understand the importance of RWE in relation to medical cannabis and help them develop approaches to overcome the current situation which is detrimental to patients.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36405915/

“Cannabis has an excellent safety profile and is a historically established medicine. We hope that this paper will aid policymakers and prescribers understand the value of RWE in relation to medical cannabis and help them develop approaches to overcome the current situation, which is ultimately harmful to patients, restricting access to medicines that could bring relief.”

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1027159/full

Examining the role of cannabinoids on osteoporosis: a review

Posted on by
Reply
SpringerLink

“Purpose: Prior research studies have shown that the endocannabinoid system, influenced by CBD and THC, plays a role in bone remodeling. As both the research on cannabis and use of cannabis continue to grow, novel medicinal uses of both its constituents as well as the whole plant are being discovered. This review examines the role of cannabinoids on osteoporosis, more specifically, the endocannabinoid system and its role in bone remodeling and the involvement of the cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 in bone health, as well as the effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and synthetic cannabinoids on bone.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search of online databases including PUBMED was utilized.

Results: A total of 29 studies investigating the effects of cannabis and/or its constituents as well as the activation or inactivation of cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 were included and discussed.

Conclusion: While many of the mechanisms are still not yet fully understood, both preclinical and clinical studies show that the effects of cannabis mediated through the endocannabinoid system may prove to be an effective treatment option for individuals with osteoporosis.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36401719/

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-022-01190-x

A large Australian longitudinal cohort registry demonstrates sustained safety and efficacy of oral medicinal cannabis for at least two years

Posted on by
Reply
Lopiccolo & Chang in PLoS ONE – BU Linguistics

“Introduction: Oral medicinal cannabis (MC) has been increasingly prescribed for a wide range of clinical conditions since 2016. Despite an exponential rise in prescriptions and publications, high quality clinical efficacy and safety studies are lacking. The outcomes of a large Australian clinical electronic registry cohort are presented.

Methods: A prospective cannabis-naïve patient cohort prescribed oral MC participated in an ongoing longitudinal registry at a network of specialised clinics. Patient MC dose, safety and validated outcome data were collected regularly over two years and analysed.

Results: 3,961 patients (mean age 56.07 years [SD 19.08], 51.0% female) with multimorbidity (mean diagnoses 5.14 [SD 4.08]) and polypharmacy (mean 6.26 medications [SD 4.61]) were included in this analysis. Clinical indications were for: chronic pain (71.9%), psychiatric (15.4%), neurological (2.1%), and other diagnoses (10.7%). Median total oral daily dose was 10mg for Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 22.5mg for cannabidiol (CBD). A stable dose was observed for over two years. 37.3% experienced treatment related adverse events. These were graded mild (67%), moderate (31%), severe (<2%, n = 23) and two (0.1%) serious adverse events. Statistically significant improvements at a p value of <0.001 across all outcomes were sustained for over two years, including: clinical global impression (CGI-E, +39%: CGI-I, +52%; p<0.001), pain interference and severity (BPI, 26.1% and 22.2%; p<0.001), mental health (DASS-21, depression 24.5%, anxiety 25.5%, stress 27.7%; p<0.001), insomnia (ISI, 35.0%; p<0.001), and health status (RAND SF36: physical function, 34.4%: emotional well-being, 37.3%; p<0.001). Mean number of concomitant medications did not significantly change over 2 years (p = 0.481).

Conclusions: Oral MC was demonstrated to be safe and well-tolerated for a sustained period in a large complex cohort of cannabis-naïve, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. There was significant improvement (p<0.001) across all measured clinical outcomes over two years. Results are subject to limitations of Real World Data (RWD) for causation and generalisability. Future high quality randomised controlled trials are awaited”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36399463/

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272241.

Comparing Sublingual and Inhaled Cannabis Therapies for Low Back Pain: An Observational Open-Label Study

Posted on by
Reply
Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal - Thailand Medical News

“Background and objective: Medical cannabis is becoming an acceptable treatment modality in medicine, especially for pain relief. Concurrently, cannabis use is becoming more prevalent worldwide, a public demand-driven trend despite the lack of established scientific basis. This observational open-label study sought to investigate the effectiveness of cannabis therapy for alleviating low back pain symptoms.

Methods: Two types of cannabis treatment modalities were sequentially administered to chronic low back pain patients. After an initial 1-month washout period (WO1), the first modality was cannabidiol (CBD)-rich sublingual extract treatment administered for 10 months. Following another washout period, the second modality, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-rich smoked inflorescence (whole dried cannabis flowers) was administered for 12 months.

Results: Enrolled in the study were 24 patients whose advanced imaging studies (i.e. computerized tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine) revealed disc herniation or spinal stenosis. Three patients dropped out of extract therapy treatment but resumed study participation to receive THC-rich smoking therapy. After a minimum of 2 years, cannabis therapy had reduced lower back pain symptoms, as assessed by Oswestry Disability Index, the SF-12 patient-reported outcome questionnaire, and the visual analogue scale. Pain reduction was not significant during the extract treatment part of the study; however, pain reduction was significant during the inhaled therapy part of the study.

Conclusions: Our findings indicate that inhaled THC-rich therapy is more effective than CBD-rich sublingual extract therapy for treating low back pain and that cannabis therapy is safe and effective for chronic low back pain.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36394500/

https://www.rmmj.org.il/issues/55/articles/1518

Cannabinoids as Prospective Anti-Cancer Drugs: Mechanism of Action in Healthy and Cancer Cells

Posted on by
Reply
Book cover

“Endogenous and exogenous cannabinoids modulate many physiological and pathological processes by binding classical cannabinoid receptors 1 (CB1) or 2 (CB2) or non-cannabinoid receptors.

Cannabinoids are known to exert antiproliferative, apoptotic, anti-migratory and anti-invasive effect on cancer cells by inducing or inhibiting various signaling cascades.

In this chapter, we specifically emphasize the latest research works about the alterations in endocannabinoid system (ECS) components in malignancies and cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, angiogenesis, autophagy, and death by cannabinoid administration, emphasizing their mechanism of action, and give a future perspective for clinical use.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36396926/

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/5584_2022_748

Safety and Effectiveness of Cannabinoids to Danish Patients with Treatment Refractory Chronic Pain – A Retrospective Observational Real-world Study

Posted on by
Reply

“Background: Cannabinoids are considered a therapeutic option to patients suffering from treatment refractory chronic pain (TRCP) insufficiently relieved by conventional analgesics or experiencing intolerable adverse events (AEs) from those. This study aimed to explore safety and effectiveness of oral cannabinoids among patients with TRCP.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted among Danish patients with TRCP being prescribed oral cannabinoids. Data on AEs and changes in pain intensity by numeric rating scale (NRS) before and after initiation of oral cannabinoid therapy were analyzed.

Results: Among 826 eligible patients ≥ 18 years old, 529 (64%) were included for data analysis at first follow- up (F/U1) (median 56 days from baseline) and 214 (26%) for second follow-up (F/U2) (median 126 days from F/U1). Mean age was 60±15.9 years and 70% were females. AEs were in general reported mild to moderate by 42% of patients at F/U1 and 34% at F/U2. AEs were mainly related to gastrointestinal (F/U1: 17% and F/U2: 13%) and nervous system disorders (F/U1: 14% and F/U2: 11%). Reduction in NRS was significantly different at both follow-up consultations compared with baseline (<.0001). Clinically relevant pain reduction (NRS ≥30%) was reported by 17% at F/U1 and 10% of patients at F/U2 in intention-to-treat analysis whereas the figures were 32% and 45% respectively, in per-protocol analysis.

Conclusion: Oral cannabinoid therapy seems to be safe and mildly effective in patients with TRCP. Randomized controlled trials with focus on comparable pain characteristics in diagnostical homogenous patient subgroups are needed for further improvement of evidence level for relief of chronic pain using oral cannabinoids.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36394124/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejp.2054

Nabiximols effect on blood pressure and heart rate in post-stroke patients of a randomized controlled study

Posted on by
Reply
Frontiers - Crunchbase Company Profile & Funding

“Background: Cannabinoids may be useful to treat pain, epilepsy and spasticity, although they may bear an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This study aims to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of nabiximols, a cannabis-based drug, in patients with spasticity following stroke, thus presenting an increased cardiovascular risk.

Methods: This is an ancillary study stemming from the SativexStroke trial: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study aimed at assessing the effect of nabiximols on post-stroke spasticity. Patients were treated with nabiximols oromucosal spray or placebo and assessed before and after two phases of 1-month duration each. Only the phase with the active treatment was considered for each patient who completed the study. The average values of blood pressure (diastolic, systolic, differential) and heart rate from the first 5 days of the phase (lowest nabiximols dosage) were compared to the average values recorded during the last 5 days at the end of the phase (highest nabiximols dosage). Baseline comparisons between gender, stroke type and affected side and correlation between age and blood pressure and heart rate were performed. The study was registered with the EudraCT number 2016-001034-10.

Results: Thirty-four patients completed the study and were included in the analysis. Thirty-one were taking antihypertensive drugs and, among these, 12 were taking beta-blockers. During the study, no arrhythmic events were recorded, blood pressure and heart rate did not show pathological fluctuations, and no cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events occurred. At baseline blood pressure and heart rate were comparable concerning gender, stroke type and affected side. A significant direct correlation emerged between differential blood pressure and age and an inverse correlation between diastolic blood pressure and age. No correlation emerged between systolic blood pressure or heart rate and age. Blood pressure and heart rate did not change during nabiximols treatment compared to the baseline condition.

Conclusion: This ancillary study adds evidence that, in patients who already underwent a cerebrovascular accident, nabiximols does not determine significant blood pressure and heart rate variation or cardiovascular complications. These data support the cardiovascular safety of nabiximols, encouraging more extensive studies involving cannabinoids characterized by slow absorption rates.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36386386/

“In conclusion, an interesting result of this pilot study is the good cardiovascular safety profile of nabiximols in patients with stroke. In these patients, the possible beneficial effect of cannabinoids, such as delaying atherosclerotic progression and inflammation, may deserve further investigation. Furthermore, because of the rapidly changing landscape of cannabis laws and marijuana use in western countries, there is a pressing need for refined policy, education of both clinicians and the public, and new research. Carefully designed, prospective, short- and long-term studies are needed to obtain conclusive data on the safety and efficacy of cannabinoid drugs.”

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.990188/full

Promising Action of Cannabinoids on ER Stress-Mediated Neurodegeneration: An In Silico Investigation

Posted on by
Reply

“Neurodegeneration has been recognized as a clinical episode characterized by neuronal death, including dementia, cognitive impairment and movement disorder. Most of the neurodegenerative deficits, via clinical symptoms, includes common pathogenic features as protein misfolding and aggregation. Therefore, the focus highlights the cellular organelle endoplasmic reticulum (ER) critically linked with the quality control and protein homeostasis. Unfolded protein response (UPR) or ER stress have also been considered as hallmarks for neurodegenerative disorders. It has been implicated that the levels of endocannabinoids (ECB) could rise at the platform of neurodegeneration. In addition, phytocannabinoids (PCB) including cannabidiol (CBD) could also initiate the IRE1, PERK, XBP-1, and ATF6, pathways that could lead to the degradation of the misfolded proteins and termination of protein translation. Thus, our aim was to determine if cannabinoids bind to these ER arm proteins involved in UPR by molecular docking and therefore determine its drug resemblance through ADME analysis. In our study, three cannabinoid receptors (CB1, CB2, and CB3) were considered to demonstrate their neuroprotective actions. The chosen ligands were screened as PCB (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol or THC), CBD, and two ECB, anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). The current findings have advocated that the cannabinoids and their molecular targets have shown considerable binding and their ADME properties also reveals that they possess moderate drug-like properties making it as a valuable option for the treatment and management of neurodegenerative diseases.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36374961/

https://dl.begellhouse.com/journals/0ff459a57a4c08d0,6b57eefe5f7fdc1a,560f019e6ae36432.html

Hippocampal CB1 Receptor mediates antidepressant-like effect of Synthetic Cannabinoid-HU210 in Acute Despair Reaction model in mice

Posted on by
Reply
Neuroscience Letters

“Growing evidence suggests that stress may contribute to the pathophysiology of depression. The alleviation of depressive symptoms is one of the most attractive medical applications of cannabis. Here, we investigated the antidepressant-like actions of synthetic cannabinoid-HU210 in acute despair response and explored the possible underlying mechanisms. Acute stress, induced by forced-swimming, induced depression-like behavior in the sucrose preference test (SPT). HU-210 (50 μg/kg) displayed anti-depressant like effect in the forced swim test in naïve mice and decreased depression-like behavior in the SPT, induced by forced swim stress. Pretreatment with AM251, an inhibitor of CB1R or inhibition of long-term depression (LTD) at hippocampal CA3-CA1 synapses by Tat-GluR2 attenuated the antidepressant like action of HU-210. These results indicate that HU210 produces antidepressant-like effects in acute stress and its underlying mechanism may be related to CB1R activation and hence hippocampal LTD production invivo. Synthetic cannabis or cannabis-related drugs may be used as an early intervention after acute stress exposure to prevent or at least reduce depression-like behaviors.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36372093/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304394022005146?via%3Dihub