BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Cannabidiol (CBD) and Δ9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) interact with transient receptor potential (TRP) channels and enzymes of the endocannabinoid system. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH The effects of 11 pure cannabinoids and botanical extracts [botanical drug substance (BDS)] from Cannabis varieties selected to contain a more abundant cannabinoid, on TRPV1, TRPV2, TRPM8, TRPA1, human recombinant diacylglycerol lipase α (DAGLα), rat brain fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH), COS cell monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL), human recombinant N‐acylethanolamine acid amide hydrolase (NAAA) and anandamide cellular uptake (ACU) by RBL‐2H3 cells, were studied using fluorescence‐based calcium assays in transfected cells and radiolabelled substrate‐based enzymatic assays. Cannabinol (CBN), cannabichromene (CBC), the acids (CBDA, CBGA, THCA) and propyl homologues (CBDV, CBGV, THCV) of CBD, cannabigerol (CBG) and THC, and tetrahydrocannabivarin acid (THCVA) were also tested. KEY RESULTS CBD, CBG, CBGV and THCV stimulated and desensitized human TRPV1. CBC, CBD and CBN were potent rat TRPA1 agonists and desensitizers, but THCV‐BDS was the most potent compound at this target. CBG‐BDS and THCV‐BDS were the most potent rat TRPM8 antagonists. All non‐acid cannabinoids, except CBC and CBN, potently activated and desensitized rat TRPV2. CBDV and all the acids inhibited DAGLα. Some BDS, but not the pure compounds, inhibited MAGL. CBD was the only compound to inhibit FAAH, whereas the BDS of CBC > CBG > CBGV inhibited NAAA. CBC = CBG > CBD inhibited ACU, as did the BDS of THCVA, CBGV, CBDA and THCA, but the latter extracts were more potent inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS These results are relevant to the analgesic, anti‐inflammatory and anti‐cancer effects of cannabinoids and Cannabis extracts. LINKED ARTICLES This article is part of a themed issue on Cannabinoids in Biology and Medicine. To view the other articles in this issue visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bph.2011.163.issue-7

Cannabinoids can affect both the activity and the expression of TRPV1-4 channels, with various potential therapeutic applications, including in the gastrointestinal tract.

No abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSEPhytocannabinoids in Cannabis sativa have diverse pharmacological targets extending beyond cannabinoid receptors and several exert notable anticonvulsant effects. For the first time, we investigated the anticonvulsant profile of the phytocannabinoid cannabidivarin (CBDV) in vitro and in in vivo seizure models. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACHThe effect of CBDV (1-100 mM) on epileptiform local field potentials (LFPs) induced in rat hippocampal brain slices by 4-aminopyridine (4-AP) application or Mg 2+ -free conditions was assessed by in vitro multi-electrode array recordings. Additionally, the anticonvulsant profile of CBDV (50-200 mg·kg -1 ) in vivo was investigated in four rodent seizure models: maximal electroshock (mES) and audiogenic seizures in mice, and pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) and pilocarpine-induced seizures in rats. The effects of CBDV in combination with commonly used antiepileptic drugs on rat seizures were investigated. Finally, the motor side effect profile of CBDV was investigated using static beam and grip strength assays. KEY RESULTS CBDV significantly attenuated status epilepticus-like epileptiform LFPs induced by 4-AP and Mg 2+-free conditions. CBDV had significant anticonvulsant effects on the mES (Ն100 mg·kg ) alone had no effect against pilocarpine-induced seizures, but significantly attenuated these seizures when administered with valproate or phenobarbital at this dose. CBDV had no effect on motor function. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONSThese results indicate that CBDV is an effective anticonvulsant in a broad range of seizure models. Also it did not significantly affect normal motor function and, therefore, merits further investigation as a novel anti-epileptic in chronic epilepsy models. LINKED ARTICLESThis article is part of a themed section on Cannabinoids. To view the other articles in this section visit http://dx

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Cannabinoid receptor activation induces prostate carcinoma cell (PCC) apoptosis, but cannabinoids other than Δ9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which lack potency at cannabinoid receptors, have not been investigated. Some of these compounds antagonize transient receptor potential melastatin type‐8 (TRPM8) channels, the expression of which is necessary for androgen receptor (AR)‐dependent PCC survival. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH We tested pure cannabinoids and extracts from Cannabis strains enriched in particular cannabinoids (BDS), on AR‐positive (LNCaP and 22RV1) and ‐negative (DU‐145 and PC‐3) cells, by evaluating cell viability (MTT test), cell cycle arrest and apoptosis induction, by FACS scans, caspase 3/7 assays, DNA fragmentation and TUNEL, and size of xenograft tumours induced by LNCaP and DU‐145 cells. KEY RESULTS Cannabidiol (CBD) significantly inhibited cell viability. Other compounds became effective in cells deprived of serum for 24 h. Several BDS were more potent than the pure compounds in the presence of serum. CBD‐BDS (i.p.) potentiated the effects of bicalutamide and docetaxel against LNCaP and DU‐145 xenograft tumours and, given alone, reduced LNCaP xenograft size. CBD (1–10 µM) induced apoptosis and induced markers of intrinsic apoptotic pathways (PUMA and CHOP expression and intracellular Ca2+). In LNCaP cells, the pro‐apoptotic effect of CBD was only partly due to TRPM8 antagonism and was accompanied by down‐regulation of AR, p53 activation and elevation of reactive oxygen species. LNCaP cells differentiated to androgen‐insensitive neuroendocrine‐like cells were more sensitive to CBD‐induced apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS These data support the clinical testing of CBD against prostate carcinoma. LINKED ARTICLE This article is commented on by Pacher et al., pp. 76–78 of this issue. To view this commentary visit http://dx.doi.org/

OBJECTIVE Cannabidiol (CBD) and D9 -tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) are nonpsychoactive phytocannabinoids affecting lipid and glucose metabolism in animal models. This study set out to examine the effects of these compounds in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 62 subjects with noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes were randomized to five treatment arms: CBD (100 mg twice daily), THCV (5 mg twice daily), 1:1 ratio of CBD and THCV (5 mg/5 mg, twice daily), 20:1 ratio of CBD and THCV (100 mg/5 mg, twice daily), or matched placebo for 13 weeks. The primary end point was a change in HDLcholesterol concentrations from baseline. Secondary/tertiary end points included changes in glycemic control, lipid profile, insulin sensitivity, body weight, liver triglyceride content, adipose tissue distribution, appetite, markers of inflammation, markers of vascular function, gut hormones, circulating endocannabinoids, and adipokine concentrations. Safety and tolerability end points were also evaluated. RESULTSCompared with placebo, THCV significantly decreased fasting plasma glucose (estimated treatment difference [ETD] = 21.2 mmol/L; P < 0.05) and improved pancreatic b-cell function (HOMA2 b-cell function [ETD = 244.51 points; P < 0.01]), adiponectin (ETD = 25.9 3 10 6 pg/mL; P < 0.01), and apolipoprotein A (ETD = 26.02 mmol/L; P < 0.05), although plasma HDL was unaffected. Compared with baseline (but not placebo), CBD decreased resistin (2898 pg/ml; P < 0.05) and increased glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (21.9 pg/ml; P < 0.05). None of the combination treatments had a significant impact on end points. CBD and THCV were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONSTHCV could represent a new therapeutic agent in glycemic control in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

Compared with 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.

The mean Cmax values (<12 ng/mL) recorded in this study were well below those reported in patients who smoked/inhaled cannabis, which is reassuring since elevated Cmax values are linked to significant psychoactivity. There was also no evidence of accumulation on repeated dosing.