“Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) is a multi-functional crop cultivated for fiber, seeds, or phytochemical extraction. Once a major industrial crop in several agro-environments, its cultivation strongly declined in developed countries since World War II. Exploiting hemp vegetative tissue as innovative food has remained largely unexplored.
The current work examined the potential production of hemp microgreens. Six cultivars were assessed for yield and composition of organic acids, amino acids, polyphenols and phytocannabinoids, through IC, FLD-HPLC and UHPLC-HRMS, respectively. Bioactive composition was strongly related to the hemp variety. ‘
Silvana’ demonstrated the highest total content of amino acids and essential amino acids, high concentrations of cannflavin A and B, and moderate levels of cannabidiol and cannabigerol. ‘Finola’ distinguished by the highest concentration of cannflavins and total polyphenols, and the lowest levels of Δ9-THC. Regardless of varietal differences, hemp microgreens proved widely safe in terms of Δ9-THC content.”
“Background: Cannabis-based medicines are widely used in the treatment of a number of medical conditions. Unfortunately, cognitive disturbances are often reported as adverse events, although conversely, cognitive improvements have been reported. Hence, the objective of the present study was to identify, critically appraise and synthesise research findings on the potential impact of cannabis-based medicines on cognitive functioning.
Findings: Twenty-three studies were included, comprising a total of N = 917. Eight studies used Sativex as the cannabis-based medicine two used Epidiolex, two other studies used sprays, three studies used gelatine capsules, five smoked cannabis, two other and finally one studied cannabis withdrawal. Fifteen studies reported non-significant findings; six reported cognitive impairments; one study found cognitive improvement and a single study found improvement following withdrawal. Thirteen studies had cognitive or neuropsychological functioning as the primary outcome.
Conclusions: Due to a large heterogeneity and methodological limitations across studies, it is not possible to make any definite conclusions about the impact of cannabis-based medicines on cognitive functioning. However, the majority of high-quality evidence points in the direction that the negative impact of cannabis-based medicines on cognitive functioning is minor, provided that the doses of THC are low to moderate. On the other hand, long-term use of cannabis based medicines may still adversely affect cognitive functioning. In the studies that found impaired cognitive functioning to be significant, all of the test scores were either within the normal range or below what would be characterised as a neuropsychologically cognitive impairment.”
“The potential positive effect of CBMs on cognitive functioning may be due to practice effects or mediated by alleviation of other medical symptoms, such as pain, depression or sleep problems.”
“Background and aims: Cannabis use is increasingly common among pregnant individuals and might be a risk factor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to test whether prenatal cannabis use is associated with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy.
Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Setting: California USA.
Participants: 58,114 pregnancies (with outcomes from 3/5/2020 to 9/30/2021) among 57,287 unique pregnant women aged 14-54 years who were screened for prenatal substance use, enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) (a healthcare system), and had not tested positive for COVID-19 prior to pregnancy onset.
Measurements: We utilized data from the KPNC electronic health record. Cannabis use status (current, recently quit, non-user) was based on universal screenings during prenatal care (including ≥1 urine toxicology test and self-reported use on a self-administered questionnaire). SARS-CoV-2 infection (based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests) was estimated in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusting for covariates. Secondary analyses examined differences in a) SARS-CoV-2 positivity testing rates and b) SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among those tested.
Findings: We observed 348,810 person-months of follow-up time in our cohort with 41,064 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests, and 6% (n=2,414) of tests being positive. At the start of follow-up, 7% of pregnant individuals had current use, 12% had recently quit, and 81% did not use cannabis. Adjusting for covariates, current use was associated with lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=0.60,95% confidence interval [CI]:0.49-0.74) than non-use. Those who had recently quit did not differ from non-cannabis users in infection rates (aHR=0.96,95%CI:0.86-1.08). Sensitivity analyses among patients who received a SARS-CoV-2 test also found lower odds of infection associated with current versus no cannabis use (aOR=0.76,CI:0.61-0.93).
Conclusions: Current cannabis use appears to be associated with a reduced risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection among pregnant individuals.”
“Cannabidiol (CBD) products have ascribed an uprising trend for their health-promoting effects worldwide. In contrast to Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), CBD exhibits no state of euphoria. Since conversion of CBD into THC in an acidic environment has been reported, it has not been proved whether this degradation will also occur in human gastric fluid.
A total of 9 subjects ingested 400 mg CBD as a water-soluble liquid together with lecithin as an emulsifier and ethanol as a solubilizer. Blood samples were taken up to 4 h, and urine samples were submitted up to 48 h. THC, 11-hydroxy-Δ9-THC (THC-OH), 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-THC (THC-COOH), CBD, 7-hydroxy cannabidiol (7-OH-CBD), and 7-carboxy cannabidiol (7-CBD-COOH) were determined in blood and THC-COOH and 7-CBD-COOH in urine by LC-MS/MS. Neither THC, THC-OH, nor THC-COOH were detectable in any serum specimen. Only two urine samples revealed THC-COOH values slightly above the threshold of 10 ng/ml, which could also be caused by trace amounts of THC being present in the CBD liquid.
It can be concluded that negative consequences for participants of a drug testing program due to a conversion of CBD into THC in human gastric fluid appear unlikely, especially considering a single intake of dosages of less than 400 mg.
Nevertheless, there is a reasonable risk for consumers of CBD products being tested positive for THC or THC metabolites. However, this is probably not caused by CBD cyclization into THC in human gastric fluid but is most likely due to THC being present as an impurity of CBD products.”
“Background: Few studies have reported on the use of cannabinoid products to treat hair loss.
Aim: This article aims to reconcile cannabinoids’ impact on hair growth.
Method: A comprehensive and structured search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar on 23 June 2022.
Result: While cannabidiol (CBD), a phytocannabinoid, may cause hair growth, several other phytocannabinoids may lead to hair loss. Additionally, the effect of CBD on hair growth may be concentration-dependent. CBD may cause hair loss at high concentrations (≥10 μM). Therefore, the concentration of CBD needs to be adjusted so that it is optimal for hair growth. One trial found that once-daily application of CBD-rich topical cannabis extract for six months increased nonvellus hair count by approximately 93.5% in 35 Caucasian AGA patients: 28 males aged 28-72 years [average 43 years] and 7 females aged 46-76 years [average 61 years]. Each application contained 3-4 mg of CBD. The CBD-rich topical cannabis extract was prepared by ultra-pulverizing Cannabis sativa [hemp] flower into a green chalk-like powder [10.78% CBD and 0.21% tetrahydrocannabinol] and then infusing the powder into a lanolin paste and Emu oil carrier.
Conclusion: Topical CBD preparations require further studies to establish their safety and efficacy profile. An ideal topical cannabinoid preparation should contain CBD at the right concentration and lack phytocannabinoid adulterants.”
“Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common cutaneous inflammatory and pruritic diseases in dogs. Considering its multifactorial nature, AD can be a challenging disease to manage, and the therapeutic strategy must often be multimodal. In recent years, research has been moving toward the use of natural products which have beneficial effects on inflammation and itching, and no side effects. Cannabinoid receptors have been demonstrated to be expressed in healthy and diseased skin; therefore, one of the potential alternative therapeutic targets for investigating AD is the endocannabinoid system (ECS).
Objective: To immunohistochemically investigate the expression of the cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2R), and the cannabinoid-related receptors G protein-coupled receptor 55 (GPR55), transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1) and ankyrin 1 (TRPA1) in mast cells (MCs), macrophages, dendritic cells (DCs), T cells, and neutrophils of the skin of dogs with AD.
Animals: Samples of skin tissues were collected from eight dogs with AD (AD-dogs).
Materials and methods: The immunofluorescent stained cryosections of the skins of 8 dogs with AD having antibodies against CB2R, GPR55, TRPV1, TRPA1 were semiquantitatively evaluated. The inflammatory cells were identified using antibodies against tryptase (mast cells), ionized calcium binding adaptor molecule 1 (IBA1) (macrophages/DCs), CD3 (T cells), and calprotectin (neutrophils). The proportions of MCs, macrophages/DCs, T cells, and neutrophils expressing CB2R, GPR55, TRPV1 and TRPA1 were evaluated.
Results: The cells of the inflammatory infiltrate showed immunoreactivity (IR) for all or for some of the cannabinoid and cannabinoid-related receptors studied. In particular, MCs and macrophages/DCs showed CB2R-, GPR55-, TRPA1-, and TRPV1-IR; T cells showed CB2R-, GPR55- and TRPA1-IR, and neutrophils expressed GPR55-IR. Co-localization studies indicated that CB2R-IR was co-expressed with TRPV1-, TRPA1-, and GPR55-IR in different cellular elements of the dermis of the AD-dogs.
Conclusions and clinical importance: Cannabinoid receptor 2, and cannabinoid-related receptors GPR55, TRPV1 and TRPA1 were widely expressed in the inflammatory infiltrate of the AD-dogs. Based on the present findings, the ECS could be considered to be a potential therapeutic target for dogs with AD, and may mitigate itch and inflammation.”
“The evidence regarding the effect of cannabinoid and cannabinoid-related receptors on MCs, macrophages and DCs (CB2R, GPR55, TRPV1, TRPA1), T-cells (CB2R, GPR55, TRPA1), and on neutrophils (GPR55) suggests the possibility that the manipulation of the inflammatory cell functions with endocannabinoids and cannabinoids could result in a novel approach to the treatment of AD. Phytocannabinoids could potentially modulate inflammatory responses by regulating more than one underlying mechanism (inflammatory cells, keratinocytes, sensory nerves, fibroblasts, etc.).”
“The purpose of this study was to evaluate the neuroprotective effect of a cannabidiol-enriched non-psychotropic Cannabis sativa L. extract (CSE) and its main constituents, cannabidiol and β-caryophyllene. An in vitro model of glutamate-induced neuronal excitotoxicity using SH-SY5Y cells was optimized. The impact of CSE on glutamate-impaired cell viability, brain-derived neurotrophic factor release, CB1 protein expression, and ERK levels was evaluated. The involvement of CB1 modulation was verified by the cotreatment with the CB1 antagonist AM4113. CSE was able to significantly protect SH-SY5Y from glutamate-impaired cell viability, and to counteract the changes in brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels, with a mechanism of action involving ERK modulation. Moreover, CSE completely reversed the reduction of CB1 receptor expression induced by glutamate, and the presence of the CB1 antagonist AM4113 reduced CSE effectiveness, suggesting that CBr play a role in the modulation of neuronal excitotoxicity. This work demonstrated the in vitro effectiveness of CSE as a neuroprotective agent, proposing the whole cannabis phytocomplex as a more effective strategy, compared to its main constituents alone, and suggested further investigations by using more complex cell models before moving to in vivo studies.”
“In the wide range of products containing hemp ingredients, cannabinoid oils are the most popular. They have gained popularity not only among people struggling with various health ailments, but also those who search for a neutral way of taking care of their body and mind.
The antioxidant activities of cannabinoid oils differing in the type of their main cannabinoid [i.e., Cannabigerol (CBG), Cannabidiol (CBD), Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), Cannabigerolic acid (CBGA), Cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) or Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (Δ9-THCA)] are compared and discussed in the paper. The oils with the same concentration of their main cannabinoid but prepared in different ways were applied in the experiments.
Following the presented results, cannabinoid oils obtained from the plant extracts are characterized by evidently greater antioxidant activity than those prepared from pure cannabinoids. The essential difference in the antioxidant activity of the oils containing the neutral or acidic form of a given cannabinoid is observed only in the case of THC and THCA oils.”
“Cannabis sativa L. is a plant that contains numerous chemically active compounds including cannabinoids such as trans-Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), and flavone derivatives, such as luteolin-7-O-glucuronide and apigenin glucuronide. In particular, the polar fraction of hemp including many phenolic compounds has been overlooked when compared with the more lipophilic fraction containing cannabinoids. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess two extracts of industrial hemp (C. sativa) of different polarity (aqueous and hexane) by evaluating their antioxidant profile and their neuroprotective potential on pharmacological targets in the central nervous system (CNS). Several assays on in vitro antioxidant capacity (DPPH, superoxide radical, FRAP, ORAC), as well as inhibition of physiological enzymes such as acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and monoaminooxidase A (MAO-A) were carried out in order to find out how these extracts may be helpful to prevent neurodegenerative disorders. Neuro-2a cell line was selected to test the cytotoxic and neuroprotective potential of these extracts. Both extracts showed striking antioxidant capacity in the FRAP and ORAC assays, particularly the hexane extract, and interesting results for the DPPH and superoxide radical uptake assays, with the aqueous extract standing out especially in the latter. In enzyme inhibition assays, the aqueous extract showed AChE and MAO-A inhibitory activity, while the hexane extract only reached IC50 value for AChE inhibitory bioassay. Neuro-2a assays demonstrated that polyphenolic extract was not cytotoxic and exhibited cytoprotective properties against hydrogen peroxide and antioxidant response decreasing reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. These extracts could be a source of compounds with potential benefit on human health, especially related to neurodegenerative disorders.”
“In conclusion, this study provided new insights into the biological activities of two different extracts of C. sativa. It was revealed that these extracts constitute a valuable and interesting natural source of bioactive molecules with great antioxidant properties, potentially capable of preventing neurodegenerative diseases.”
“Cannabis plant has been used from ancient times with therapeutic purposes for treating human pathologies, but the identification of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the therapeutic properties of the phytocannabinoids, the active compounds in this plant, occurred in the last years of the past century.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, seminal studies demonstrated the existence of cannabinoid receptors and other elements of the so-called endocannabinoid system. These G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a key element in the functions assigned to endocannabinoids and appear to serve as promising pharmacological targets. They include CB1, CB2, and GPR55, but also non-GPCRs can be activated by endocannabinoids, like ionotropic receptor TRPV1 and even nuclear receptors of the PPAR family.
Their activation, inhibition, or simply modulation have been associated with numerous physiological effects at both central and peripheral levels, which may have therapeutic value in different human pathologies, then providing a solid experimental explanation for both the ancient medicinal uses of Cannabis plant and the recent advances in the development of cannabinoid-based specific therapies.
This chapter will review the scientific knowledge generated in the last years around the research on the different endocannabinoid-binding receptors and their signaling mechanisms. Our intention is that this knowledge may help readers to understand the relevance of these receptors in health and disease conditions, as well as it may serve as the theoretical basis for the different experimental protocols to investigate these receptors and their signaling mechanisms that will be described in the following chapters.”
