Objective To present a summary of current scientific evidence about the cannabinoid, cannabidiol (CBD) with regards to their relevance to epilepsy and other selected neuropsychiatric disorders. Methods We summarize the presentations from a conference in which invited participants reviewed relevant aspects of the physiology, mechanisms of action, pharmacology and data from studies with animal models and human subjects. Results Cannabis has been used to treat disease since ancient times. Δ9-THC is the major psychoactive ingredient and cannabidiol (CBD) is the major non-psychoactive ingredient in cannabis. Cannabis and Δ9-THC are anticonvulsant in most animal models but can be proconvulsant in some healthy animals. Psychotropic effects of Δ9-THC limit tolerability. CBD is anticonvulsant in many acute animal models but there is limited data in chronic models. The antiepileptic mechanisms of CBD are not known, but may include effects on the equilibrative nucleoside transporter; the orphan G-protein-coupled receptor GPR55; the transient receptor potential of melastatin type 8 channel; the 5-HT1a receptor; the α3 and α1 glycine receptors; and the transient receptor potential of ankyrin type 1 channel. CBD has neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects. CBD appears to be well tolerated in humans but small and methodologically limited studies of CBD in human epilepsy have been inconclusive. More recent anecdotal reports of high-ratio CBD:Δ9-THC medical marijuana have claimed efficacy, but studies were not controlled. Significance CBD bears investigation in epilepsy and other neuropsychiatric disorders, including anxiety, schizophrenia, addiction and neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. However, we lack data from well-powered double-blind randomized, controlled studies on the efficacy of pure CBD for any disorder. Initial dose-tolerability and double-blind randomized, controlled studies focusing on target intractable epilepsy populations such as patients with Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut syndromes are being planned. Trials in other treatment-resistant epilepsies may also be warranted.
Advances in therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease that lead to even small delays in onset and progression of the condition would significantly reduce the global burden of the disease. To effectively test compounds for Alzheimer's disease and bring therapy to individuals as early as possible there is an urgent need for collaboration between academic institutions, industry and regulatory organizations for the establishment of standards and networks for the identification and qualification of biological marker candidates. Biomarkers are needed to monitor drug safety, to identify individuals who are most likely to respond to specific treatments, to stratify presymptomatic patients and to quantify the benefits of treatments. Biomarkers that achieve these characteristics should enable objective business decisions in portfolio management and facilitate regulatory approval of new therapies.
Radiotracer imaging (RTI) of the nigrostriatal dopaminergic system is a widely used but controversial biomarker in Parkinson disease (PD). Here the authors review the concepts of biomarker development and the evidence to support the use of four radiotracers as biomarkers in PD: [18F]fluorodopa PET, (+)-[11C]dihydrotetrabenazine PET, [123I]beta-CIT SPECT, and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Biomarkers used to study disease biology and facilitate drug discovery and early human trials rely on evidence that they are measuring relevant biologic processes. The four tracers fulfill this criterion, although they do not measure the number or density of dopaminergic neurons. Biomarkers used as diagnostic tests, prognostic tools, or surrogate endpoints must not only have biologic relevance but also a strong linkage to the clinical outcome of interest. No radiotracers fulfill these criteria, and current evidence does not support the use of imaging as a diagnostic tool in clinical practice or as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials. Mechanistic information added by RTI to clinical trials may be difficult to interpret because of uncertainty about the interaction between the interventions and the tracer.
Interest is increasing rapidly in the use of surrogate markers as primary measures of the effectiveness of investigational drugs in definitive drug trials. Many such surrogate markers have been proposed as potential candidates for use in definitive effectiveness trials of agents to treat neurologic or psychiatric disease, but as of this date, there are no such markers that have been adequately "validated," that is, shown to predict the effect of the treatment on the clinical outcome of interest. While the current law and regulations permit the United States Food and Drug Administration to base the approval of a drug product on a determination the effect of the drug on an unvalidated surrogate marker (that is, one for which it is not known that an effect on the surrogate actually predicts the desired clinical benefit), there are a number of difficulties in interpreting trials that use surrogate markers as primary measures of drug effect. In this article, the relevant regulatory context will be discussed, as well as the epistemological problems related to the interpretation of clinical trials in which unvalidated surrogate markers are used as primary outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.