Cannabimimetic plants: are they new cannabinoidergic modulators?

“Phytochemicals and secondary metabolites able to interact with the endocannabinoid system (Cannabimimetics) have been recently described in a broad range of plants and fruits. These findings can open new alternative avenues to explore for the development of novel therapeutic compounds. The cannabinoids regulate many physiological and pathological functions in both animals and plants. Cannabis sativa is the main plant that produces phytocannabinoids inside resins capable to defend the plant from the aggression of parasites and herbivores. Animals produce anandamide and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol, which thanks to binding with main receptors such as type-1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1R) and the type-2 cannabinoid receptor (CB2R) are involved in inflammation processes and several brain functions. Endogenous cannabinoids, enzymes for synthesis and degradation of cannabinoids, and CB1R and CB2R constitute the endocannabinoid system (ECS). Other plants can produce cannabinoid-like molecules such as perrottetinene extracted from Radula perrottetii, or anandamide and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol extracted from some bryophytes. Moreover, several other secondary metabolites can also interact with the ECS of animals and take the name of cannabimimetics. These phytoextracts not derived from Cannabis sativa can act as receptor agonists or antagonist, or enzyme inhibitors of ECS and can be involved in the inflammation, oxidative stress, cancer, and neuroprotection. Finally, given the evolutionary heterogeneity of the cannabimimetic plants, some authors speculated on the fascinating thesis of the evolutionary convergence between plants and animals regarding biological functions of ECS. The review aims to provide a critical and complete assessment of the botanical, chemical and therapeutic aspects of cannabimimetic plants to evaluate their spread in the world and medicinal potentiality.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30877436

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00425-019-03138-x

CBD as the New Medicine in the Pain Provider’s Armamentarium.

“As providers who currently treat some chronic pain patients with CBD oil as part of a multimodal analgesic treatment regimen, we have found great benefit of this new weapon recently being utilized in our armamentarium. As mentioned in the article, the current political climate surrounding CBD is both vague and ever-changing, which can and does impact treatment and subsequent patient outcomes as pain medicine providers. If we want to make cannabis and CBD into a legitimate medicinal treatment, there must be more regulations on CBD oil production and accurate labeling. Patients will continue to seek CBD oil as an additional option to treat their chronic pain as it gains popularity, so it is our duty as providers to protect them and ensure they have safe options of this new medication to choose from.”

Beneficial and deleterious effects of cannabinoids in the brain: the case of ultra-low dose THC.

Publication Cover

“This article reviews the neurocognitive advantages and drawbacks of cannabinoid substances, and discusses the possible physiological mechanisms that underlie their dual activity. The article further reviews the neurocognitive effects of ultra-low doses of ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC; 3-4 orders of magnitude lower than the conventional doses) in mice, and proposes such low doses of THC as a possible remedy for various brain injuries and for the treatment of age-related cognitive decline.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30864864

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00952990.2019.1578366?journalCode=iada20

Cannabidiol enhances the passage of lipid nanocapsules across the blood-brain barrier both in vitro and in vivo.

 Molecular Pharmaceutics“Diseases affecting the central nervous system (CNS) should be regarded as a major health challenge due to the current lack of effective treatments given the hindrance to brain drug delivery imposed by the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Since efficient brain drug delivery should not solely rely on passive targeting, active targeting of nanomedicines into the CNS is being explored. The present study is devoted to the development of lipid nanocapsules (LNCs) decorated with non-psychotropic cannabinoids as pioneering non-immunogenic brain targeting molecules and to the evaluation of their brain targeting ability both in vitro and in vivo. Noticeably, both the permeability experiments across the hCMEC/D3 cell-based in vitro BBB model and the biodistribution experiments in mice consistently demonstrated that the highest brain targeting ability was achieved with the smallest-sized cannabinoid-decorated LNCs. Importantly, the enhancement in brain targeting achieved with the conjugation of CBD to LNCs outperformed by 6-fold the enhancement observed for the G-Technology® (the main brain active strategy that has already entered clinical trials for the treatment of CNS diseases) As the transport efficiency across the BBB certainly determines the efficacy of the treatments for brain disorders, small cannabinoid-decorated LNCs represent auspicious platforms for the design and development of novel therapies for CNS diseases.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30865462

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.8b01344

“Cannabidiol could help deliver medications to the brain. Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive compound in cannabis, is being touted as beneficial for many health conditions, ranging from anxiety to epilepsy. Although much more research is needed to verify these claims, scientists have now shown that CBD could have a different use as a ‘Trojan horse’: helping slip medications across the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and into mouse brains.”   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190417102739.htm

Cannabinoid Use in Patients With Gastroparesis and Related Disorders: Prevalence and Benefit.

 

Image result for Am J Gastroenterol.

“Gastroparesis (Gp) can be a challenging disorder to manage due to the paucity of treatment options. We do not know how frequently patients with Gp symptoms resort to cannabinoids to address their symptoms. This study (i) determines the prevalence of cannabinoid use in patients with Gp symptoms, (ii) describes the patients with Gp symptoms using cannabinoids, and (iii) assesses the patients’ perceived benefit of cannabinoids for Gp symptoms.

METHODS:

Consecutive outpatients with symptoms suggestive of Gp seen on follow-up at our academic center from June 2018 to September 2018 filled out questionnaires on their symptoms and the current treatments.

RESULTS:

Of 197 patients, nearly half (n = 92, 46.7%) reported current (35.5%) or past (11.2%) use of cannabinoids, including tetrahydrocannabinol (n = 63), dronabinol (n = 36), and/or cannabidiol (n = 16). Of these, most perceived improvement in Gp symptoms from cannabinoids (93.5% with tetrahydrocannabinol, 81.3% with cannabidiol, and 47.2% with dronabinol). Cannabinoids were used most commonly via smoking (n = 46). Patients taking cannabinoids were younger (41.0 ± 15.4 vs 48.0 ± 15.9 years; P < 0.01) and had a higher Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index total score (3.4 ± 1.0 vs 2.8 ± 1.3; P < 0.01) compared with patients with no history of cannabinoid use.

CONCLUSIONS:

A third of patients with Gp symptoms actively use cannabinoids for their chronic symptoms. Most of these patients perceive improvement in their symptoms with cannabinoids. Patients taking cannabinoids were younger and more symptomatic than those not taking cannabinoids. Further studies on the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids in Gp will be useful.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30865015

https://journals.lww.com/ajg/Abstract/2019/06000/Cannabinoid_Use_in_Patients_With_Gastroparesis_and.23.aspx

Does morning affect contribute to daily Cannabis use?

Addictive Behaviors

“Several theories posit that cannabis and other substances are used to reduce negative affect. This daily report study considered whether variations in positive and negative affect, reported each morning, contributed to the likelihood of cannabis use later that day. We also explored whether levels of positive and negative affect reported immediately after cannabis use improved, relative to that day’s morning levels. The sample included 183 men and 183 women representing heterosexual, cannabis-using couples from the community. Participants made independent, daily reports of affect and cannabis use episodes for 30 consecutive days. Using multilevel modeling, we modeled men’s and women’s use of cannabis on a given day as a function of morning levels of positive, hostile, and anxious affect, accounting for partner cannabis use that day, and mean levels of positive and negative affect. Men and women were more likely to use cannabis on a given day when morning positive affect was lower than typical for the person and when partner used cannabis that day. Neither hostile nor anxious affect contributed to later use of cannabis. Immediately after cannabis use, positive affect increased, and hostile and anxious affect decreased relative to that day’s morning levels. The improved affect immediately after use suggests a mechanism of positive reinforcement.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30856545

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030646031831339X?via%3Dihub

Promoting cannabis products to pharmaceutical drugs.

European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

“Cannabis sativa is widely used for medical purposes. However, to date, aroma, popular strain name or the content of two phytocannabinoids-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are mostly considered for therapeutic activity. This is despite the hundreds of compounds in this plant and their potential synergistic interactions in mixtures. New, specific and effective cannabis-based drugs must be developed to achieve adequate medical standards for the use of cannabis. To do this, the comprehensive molecular profile of cannabis-based drugs must be defined, and mixtures of compounds should be tested for superior therapeutic activity due to synergistic effects compared to individually isolated cannabis compounds. The biological pathways targeted by these new drugs should also be characterized more accurately. For drug development and design, absorption, distribution, metabolism and elimination versus toxicity (ADME/Tox) must be characterized, and therapeutic doses identified. Promoting the quality and therapeutic activity of herbal or synthetic cannabis products to pharma grade is a pressing need worldwide.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30851400

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098719300880?via%3Dihub

Cannabinoid Signaling in the Skin: Therapeutic Potential of the “C(ut)annabinoid” System.

molecules-logo

“The endocannabinoid system (ECS) has lately been proven to be an important, multifaceted homeostatic regulator, which influences a wide-variety of physiological processes all over the body. Its members, the endocannabinoids (eCBs; e.g., anandamide), the eCB-responsive receptors (e.g., CB₁, CB₂), as well as the complex enzyme and transporter apparatus involved in the metabolism of the ligands were shown to be expressed in several tissues, including the skin. Although the best studied functions over the ECS are related to the central nervous system and to immune processes, experimental efforts over the last two decades have unambiguously confirmed that cutaneous cannabinoid (“c[ut]annabinoid”) signaling is deeply involved in the maintenance of skin homeostasis, barrier formation and regeneration, and its dysregulation was implicated to contribute to several highly prevalent diseases and disorders, e.g., atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, scleroderma, acne, hair growth and pigmentation disorders, keratin diseases, various tumors, and itch. The current review aims to give an overview of the available skin-relevant endo- and phytocannabinoid literature with a special emphasis on the putative translational potential, and to highlight promising future research directions as well as existing challenges.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30845666

https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/24/5/918

New Insights of Uterine Leiomyoma Pathogenesis: Endocannabinoid System.

 

“The aim of this study was to determine if components of the endocannabinoid system are modulated in uterine leiomyomas (fibroids). Components studied included cannabinoid receptors 1 (CB1) and 2 (CB2); the G protein-coupled receptor GPR55; transient potential vanilloid receptor 1 (TRPV1) and the endocannabinoid modulating enzymes N-acylphosphatidylethanolamine-specific phospholipase D (NAPE-PLD) and fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH), and their N-acylethanolamine (NAE) ligands: N-arachidonylethanolamine (AEA), N-oleoylethanolamine (OEA), and N-palmityolethanaolamine (PEA). MATERIAL AND METHODS Transcript levels of CB1, CB2, TRPV1, GPR55, NAPE-PLD, and FAAH were measured using RT-PCR and correlated with the tissue levels of the 3 NAEs in myometrial tissues. The tissues studied were: 1) fibroids, 2) myometrium adjacent/juxtaposed to the fibroid lesions, and 3) normal myometrium. Thirty-seven samples were processed for NAE measurements and 28 samples were used for RT-PCR analyses. RESULTS FAAH expression was significantly lower in fibroids, resulting in a NAPE-PLD: FAAH ratio that favors higher AEA levels in pre-menopausal tissues, whilst PEA levels were significantly lower, particularly in post-menopausal women, suggesting PEA protects against fibroid pathogenesis. The CB1: CB2 ratio was lower in fibroids, suggesting that loss of CB1 expression affects the fibroid cell phenotype. Significant correlations between reduced FAAH, CB1, and GPR55 expression and PEA in fibroids indicate that the loss of these endocannabinoid system components are biomarkers of leiomyomata. CONCLUSIONS Loss of expression of CB1, FAAH, GPR55, and PEA production are linked to the pathogenesis of uterine fibroids and further understanding of this might eventually lead to better disease indicators or the development of therapeutic potentials that might eventually be used in the management of uterine fibroids.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30842391

https://basic.medscimonit.com/abstract/index/idArt/914019

The Relationship between Marijuana Use Prior to Sex and Sexual Function in Women.

Sexual Medicine Open Access - Click here to go back to the homepage

“Scientific research on the effects of marijuana on sexual functioning in women, including libido, arousal, orgasm, and satisfaction, is limited.

AIM:

To evaluate women’s perceptions of the effect of marijuana use before sexual activity.

METHODS:

A cross-sectional design, from March 2016-February 2017, within a single, academic, obstetrics and gynecology practice, was performed. Patients were given a questionnaire at their visit and asked to complete it anonymously and place it in a locked box after their visit.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

The primary outcome was satisfaction in the sexual domains of drive, orgasm, lubrication, dyspareunia, and overall sexual experience. The secondary outcome was the effect of the frequency of marijuana use on satisfaction.

RESULTS:

Of the 373 participants, 34.0% (n = 127) reported having used marijuana before sexual activity. Most women reported increases in sex drive, improvement in orgasm, decrease in pain, but no change in lubrication. After adjusting for race, women who reported marijuana use before sexual activity had 2.13 higher odds of reporting satisfactory orgasms (adjusted odds ratio = 2.13; 95% CI = 1.05, 4.35) than women who reported no marijuana use. After adjusting for race and age, women with frequent marijuana use, regardless of use before sex or not, had 2.10 times higher odds of reporting satisfactory orgasms than those with infrequent marijuana use (adjusted odds ratio = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.01-4.44).

CONCLUSION:

Marijuana appears to improve satisfaction with orgasm. A better understanding of the role of the endocannabinoid system in women is important, because there is a paucity of literature, and it could help lead to development of treatments for female sexual dysfunction. ”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30833225

https://www.smoa.jsexmed.org/article/S2050-1161(19)30009-1/fulltext