the complex pharmacology of cannabis

23
© University of Reading 2009 www.reading.ac.uk/cinn 28 June 2013 The complex pharmacology of cannabis Ben J. Whalley [email protected]

Upload: others

Post on 26-May-2022

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

© University of Reading 2009 www.reading.ac.uk/cinn 28 June 2013

The complex pharmacology of cannabis Ben J. Whalley

[email protected]

Page 2: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected] 2

Outline

• Constituents of cannabis – Cannabinoids and non-cannabinoids – Historical changes in composition

• The endocannabinoid system – The physiological system affected by THC – Dispelling myths aka ‘Just because it has ‘cannab’ in the name…’ – Cannabinoids that do act via the endocannabinoid system

• Beyond the endocannabinoid system – Cannabinoids that don’t act via the endocannabinoid system

• Considerations for human medical development and use – Modulating the ubiquitous – Natural ≠ safe – Winning strategies: ‘Smaller & Quicker’ or ‘Slower & Larger’?

Page 3: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Constituents of cannabis • Cannabis: for the most part, we are talking about the plant

Cannabis sativa.

• You’ve probably gathered that it one of the most widely used recreational and medicinal drugs worldwide.

– ~150 million people smoking cannabis daily (WHO)

• May be the first non-food plant cultivated by humans (~8000 BC)[2].

• Best known for its psychoactive constituent, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (‘THC’).

Page 4: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Much, much more than just D9-THC • In addition to D9-THC, cannabis also contains:

• >100 other ‘cannabinoids’ – Cannabinoids are chemical entities that are structurally similar to

THC[3].

– phenol ring, 5-carbon alkyl chain, central pyran ring and mono-unsaturated cyclohexyl ring.

– Not found in any other plant.

• >400 other non-cannabinoids[3]. – Cannot rule out specific effects of these non-cannabinoids.

– e.g. Eugenol: acts at similar receptors in the brain as other drugs (e.g. alcohol; GABAAR).

Page 5: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Constituents of cannabis II

From [4]

Hexanoyl CoA Acetyl CoA

Olivetolic acid

Cannabinerolic acid Cannabigerolic acid

THC acid

THC tetrahydrocannabinol

CBD acid

CBD cannabidiol

CBC acid

CBC cannabichromene

>30 more found since this paper was published in 2005…

Biosynthesis of phyto cannabinoids

Exist as the acid form in the plant and are decarboxylated by smoking and/or storage

Page 6: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

A brief detour into history and human nature… • Historical/ancient use of psychoactive drugs relied upon the

raw plant material or very crude extracts. – E.g. Hashish from marijuana, shamanic drinking of reindeer urine

after feeding animals Amanita muscaria

• Human nature seems to aspire towards more purified and potent end products…often with unintended consequences.

Historical Contemporary

Marijuana/hashish Skunk (breeding)/hash oil

Psilocybe semilanceata (‘Magic mushrooms’), peyote

LSD

Coca leaves Cocaine/crack cocaine

Opium (crude extract) Heroin

Page 7: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Cannabis breeding/’genetics’ • ‘Genetics’ sounds modern and post-human genome project; for cannabis, it’s not.

• Cannabis genetics are based around classical Mendelian, inheritance-driven breeding of plants.

• Male/female plants and easy cloning (‘taking cuttings’) allow for straightforward experimental breeding to optimise for specific cannabinoid compositions

• Recreational use is ~2-3x alleged medicinal use; the majority of breeding has focussed upon optimising D9-THC levels for psychoactivity at the expense of other cannabinoids.

– Strong suggestions of over-emphasis of medicinal use and positive reporting bias.

• Some ‘medicinal’ growers starting to focus upon strains with higher CBD levels but still significant D9-THC present.

– Risks associated with D9-THC – Undesirable side effect profile – Particular risks in paediatrics (permanent ~10 point IQ drop)

7

http://www.genetics.org/content/163/1/335.full.pdf

Page 8: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

The endocannabinoid system in a nutshell • The endocannabinoid systems was first

described in the late 1980s/early 1990s

• Comprises endogenous ligands, receptors, synthesic and degradation enzymes

• Cannabinoid receptors: – cell surface receptors – present on a wide variety of cell types. – two CBR types:

• CB1: principally in the CNS, affect neuronal excitability by modulating neurotransmitter release

• CB2: principally in non-brain areas and linked to immune response

• Endocannabinoids: – Two principal ECs thus far identified:

• anandamide • 2-arachidonoyl glycerol

8

Anandamide 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG)

Page 9: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

It’s a little more complicated than that...

9

Page 10: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

But it’s got ‘cannab-’ in the name... • The endocannabinoid system was so named because the CB1 receptor is the target for

D9-THC. – This does not mean that all cannabinoids act via the endocannabinoid system!

• Numerous synthetic ligands for CB1Rs and CB2Rs have also been developed – e.g. WIN55-212,2, CP55-940, HU-210 (agonists) and AM251, SR141716A (antagonists)

• Most were developed as research compounds to probe the endocannabinoid system – Now notorious as constituents of ‘spice blends’ (‘legal highs’)

• Importantly, of the ~100 plant cannabinoids, 3 are known CB1R/CB2R ligands:

– D9-THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) • principal psychoactive component • Partial agonist at CB1R and CB2R

– CBN (cannabinol) • Agonist • ~50x times less potent than D9-THC

– THCV (tetrahydrocannabivarin) • Competitive antagonist at CB1R and CB2R

10

Page 11: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

All CB1R ligands are not the same…

• D9-THC is a partial agonist at CB1 receptors[6]

• Partial agonists bind to, but do not fully activate the target

receptor.

• Not true for most synthetic cannabinoids

• Found in ‘spice blends’ and ‘incenses’

• Typically full agonists

11

WIN55-212,2

Page 12: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Beyond the endocannabinoid system • The pharmacology of the majority of cannabinoids remains

unknown or poorly defined.

• Goes well beyond effects mediated by the endocannabinoid system

• Cannabidiol (CBD) is typically the second most common plant cannabinoid and so serves as a good example

• No evidence of functional CBD interactions with CB1R/endocannabinoid system

– can act as a low affinity, high potency CB2R antagonist (i.e. at high micromolar concentrations) but concentrations required would be difficult to achieve in vivo.[5]

12

Page 13: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Cannabidiol (CBD) pharmacology

• Non-endocannabinoid targets: – GPR55 antagonist (PMID 17876302)

– 5HT1A agonist (PMID 16258853)

– Adenosine reuptake inhibition

– TRPV1 agonism (PMID 16728591)

– Bidirectional modulation of intracellular Ca2+ (PMID 19228959)

– Allosteric modulator of mu and delta opioid receptors (PMID 16489449)

– VGSC blockade (only at high micromolar concs; unpublished)

• Caveats: – All are in vitro and have not been definitively linked to functional effects

in whole animals/humans.

– Some concentrations used are higher than can be reached in brain (functionally implausible).

13

Page 14: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Disentangling medicinal from recreational • Debates about recreational use of cannabis often invoke the

anecdotal (historical) and modern day evidence base associated with medicinal use.

• Significant risks associated with doing so since: – Assertions very often based on very early preclinical evidence. – Many making such assertions have no scientific, let alone medical,

training – A single personal experience is often used to substantiate

generalisations (‘the miracle of n=1’) – Ancient historical evidence is ascribed greater validity due to its age;

logical? – Personal/subjective/individual experience or perceived ‘persecution’

seem to limit broader thinking about populations and society

• Let’s have a look at some of the established evidence…

14

Page 15: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Historical medicinal use • Written evidence asserting medicinal use predates Christianity.

• Majority of claimed effects are likely to be via D9-THC or CBD as other constituents present in very limited quantities.

• Western knowledge of cannabis begins in the 19th century where medical claims are made for the following:

– Glaucoma – Cramps – Gout – Burns (topically) – Appetite stimulation – Bowel discomfort – Analgesia (pain relief) – Epilepsy – Colic – Insomnia – Diabetes – Complex mental health problems (most likely schizophrenia, depression etc.)

Compiled from: [6, 7 & 8]

Page 16: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Current medicinal use • There are more licensed cannabinoid-based drugs

currently available than one might think:

Name Content Indication

(use) Manufacturer Licence

granted

Sativex THC/CBD (50:50) Pain and spasticity

GW Pharma 2005

Marinol/dronabinol THC Nausea & vomiting, pain, appetite stimulation

Solvay 1988

Nabilone Synthetic THC Pain, nausea & vomiting

Valeant 1985

Rimonabant CB antagonist Anti-obesity/smoking cessation

Sanofi-Aventis 2006 (withdrawn 2008)

Page 17: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Medicinal use: historical vs present • Interesting comparisons between historical usage and

modern day disease targets for cannabinoid

therapeutics.

Historical Modern (L=licensed)

Glaucoma Currently being investigated

Appetite stimulation Marinol (L) and others being developed

Bowel discomfort, colic Colitis, IBS under investigation

Analgesia (pain relief) Sativex (L), Nabilone (L) and others being developed

Epilepsy URB597, CBD, CBDV, THC and THCV under investigation

Insomnia Under investigation

Diabetes THCV? CBD?

Complex mental health problems

CBD for schizophrenia

Page 18: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Natural ≠ safe or ‘the myth of herbals’ • >500 separate constituents of cannabis

• We don’t know what most of them do in the lab, let alone in people.

• We don’t know how many of them might interact with existing medicines or diseases.

• Sharks and deadly nightshade are ‘natural’ but you wouldn’t swim with one before eating the other!

• Whilst a large historical evidence base is useful, historical dogma should not rule the day

– Modern medicine demands modern medicines for hard to treat conditions.

– What’s best for patients?

– Small wins from decriminalising a crude and variable composition herb vs big wins from modern pharmaceuticals based on pure constituents, known mechanisms and randomised, controlled clinical trials.

18

Page 19: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

So why no medicines?

• All drug development business models rely on being able

to protect IPR

• You can’t* patent a pure chemical constituent from a

plant.

• Difficult to find workable business models

• Decades of preclinical evidence is a hindrance.

– See next slide

19

*it’s certainly very tricky!

Page 20: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Epilepsy as an example...

• Huge evidence base asserting anticonvulsant effects.

• Few drugs have been successfully and repeatedly tested in as many preclinical models!

20

Compound

Sp

eci

es

Number of discrete conditions/models/designs

Dose Anticonvulsant No effect

Proconvulsant

THC 6 31 0.25-200 mg/kg

61% 29% 10%

CBD 2 21 1-400 mg/kg

81% 19% 0%

Other plant cannabinoids

2 7 N/A 100% 0% 0%

CB1 receptor agonists

2 55 N/A 73% 18% 2%

(7% mixed effect)

Species Strain Age Model type Disease model MethodSingle compound or co-

administration

Cannabinoid doses

testedDose timing Route Effect

Gross effect

(proconvulsant =

RED,

anticonvulsant =

GREEN, no effect

= BLACK)

Notes Reference

10 mg/kg 5-135 mins before test stimulus10 mg/kg 15-45 mins before test stimulus reduced number of

animals showing signs of seizures

1.25-10 mg/kg 15 mins before test stimulus2.5-10 mg/kg reduced number of animals showing signs of

seizures

10 mg/kg 15 -90 mins before priming stimulus10 mg/kg 15-45 mins before priming stimulus showed

reduced signs of seizures

10-50 mg/kg 15 -90 mins after priming stimulus No effect

Mouse QS Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ 1-80 mg/kg 30 mins before testing No effect PTZ threshold model

30 mins before testing >160 mg/kg protected against hindlimb extension

30 mins before testing 20-75 mg/kg significantly increased hindlimb extension

20 mg/kg 30 mins before testing i.v. Significantly decreased hindlimb extension

THC plus CBD plus CBN

50 mg/kg THC,

50mg/kg CBD, 50

mg/kg CBN

30 mins before testing p.o. Significantly decreased hindlimb extension

50mg/kg THC p.o. was proconvulsant alone

and 50 mg/kg CBD nor CBN p.o. are

anticonvulsant at these doses

THC plus PHN

50mg/kg THC (with a

range on phenytoin

doses)

30 mins before testing p.o. Significantly reduced phenytoin ED50

A proconvulsant THC dose (50 mg/kg p.o.)

reduces AED ED50. Supports earlier proposal

that cannabis and phenytoin interact

synergistically (Loewe et al., 1947)

THC plus PHN plus CBD

50 mg/kg THC, 50

mg/kg CBD (with a

range of phenytoin

doses)

30 mins before testing p.o. Significantly reduced phenytoin ED50

AED ED50 further reduced from that

achieved by coadministration of THC with

phenytoin

Mouse CF-1 Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES THC 1-100mg/kg 120 mins before testing i.p. Significant protection against seizures Blocked by SR141716A Wallace et al., 2001

THC plus PBL25-50 mg/kg THC plus

9.3-40 mg/kg PBL

THC: 120 mins; PBL: 60 mins before

testing

THC: p.o.,

PBL: i.p.Significant potentiation of PBL effect

Potentiation greater than that caused by CBD

reported in same study

THC plus CBD plus PBL

25 mg/kg THC, 25

mg/kg CBD, 9.3-40

mg/kg

phenobarbitone

THC & CBD: 120 mins; PBL: 60 mins

before testing

THC &

CBD: p.o.,

PBL: i.p.

Significant potentiation of PBL effectPotentiation comparable to that caused by

co-administration of THC 50 mg/kg alone

MES 15 mins to 24 hours before testing Significant increase in latency to hindlimb extensionDose timing variation revealed peak effects

at 30 mins

PTZ No effect

Nicotine No effect

Strychnine No effect

Single dose 50 mg/kg significantly dereased latency to seizure

o.d. for 6 days before testing No effect

0.25 mg/kg At onset of kindling Significant reduction of epileptiform after-discharges

At stage 3 (head nodding)

At stage 5 (clonic jumping)

At kindling endpoint

Rat Sprague-Dawley Adult ChronicTemporal lobe

epilepsyPilocarpine-induced SRS 0.5-30mg/kg

Single dose immediately before

EEG and behavioural monitoringi.p. Spontaneous seizures completely prevented Effect blocked by AM251 Wallace et al., 2003

Rat Not stated Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ 15-200 mg/kg 45 mins before testing i.p. Significant anticonvulsant effectAnticonvulsant effects described as

'unreliable'

Corcoran et al., 1973 &

Fried et al., 1973

Photogenic No effect

Amygdala kindling

(electrical)

Significant reduction in seizures and epileptiform after-

discharges

PhotogenicSignificant anticonvulsant effect after treatment at 0.5 but

not 2 hours

PTZ (35 mg/kg in epileptic

fowl)

PTZ (80 mg/kg in non-

epileptic fowl)

Mouse QS Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES CBD plus PBL

50 mg/kg CBD plus 9.3-

40 mg/kg

phenobarbitone

CBD: 2 hours, PBL: 1 hour before

testing

CBD: p.o.,

PBL: i.p.Significant potentiation of PBL effect None Chesher et al., 1975

Mouse CF-1 Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES CBD 1-100mg/kg 120 mins before testing i.p. Significant protection against seizures Not blocked by SR141716A Wallace et al., 2001

Rat Not stated Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES 1.5-12 mg/kg 1 hour before testing i.p. Significant anticonvulsant effect Notably low dose required Izquierdo et al., 1973

PTZ

MES

Mouse ICR Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES 120 mg/kg (ED50) 0.5-6 hours before testing i.p. Significant anticonvulsant effect None Karler et al., 1978

Rat Sprague-Dawley Adult Chronic Generalised seizure Limbic kindling (electrical) 0.3-3 mg/kg 15-300 minutes i.p. Significant increase in threshold to after-discharge None Turkanis et al., 1979

Rat Not stated Adult Chronic

Partial seizure with

secondary

generalisation

Cortical implantation of

cobalt60 mg/kg Twice daily after implantation i.p. No effect None Colasanti et al., 1982

MES Significant anticonvulsant effect

3-mercaptoproprionic acid No effect

Picrotoxin Significant anticonvulsant effect

Isonicotinic acid Significant anticonvulsant effect

Bicuculline Significant anticonvulsant effect

Hydrazine Significant anticonvulsant effect

PTZ Significant anticonvulsant effect

Strychnine No effect

Rat Wistar-Kyoto Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ Significant anticonvulsant effects at 1 & 100 mg/kg None Jones et al., 2010

Rat Wistar-Kyoto Adult AcuteTemporal lobe

seizurePilocarpine (acute) None Jones et al., 2012

Rat Wistar-Kyoto Adult Acute

Partial seizure with

secondary

generalisation

Penicillin None Jones et al., 2012

Mouse Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES CBN 230 mg/kg (ED50) 30 mins before testing i.p. Significant anticonvulsant effect None Karler et al., 1978

Rat Wistar-Kyoto Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ THCV 2.5 mg/kg 1 hour before testing i.p. Significant anticonvulsant effect Anticonvulsant effect lost Hill et al., 2010

Mouse DBA/2 Adult Acute Generalised seizure Audiogenic 1 hour before testing i.p. None

Mouse ICR Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES 1 hour before testing i.p. None

1 hour before testing i.p. None

3.5 hours before testing p.o. None

AcuteTemporal lobe

seizurePilocarpine 1 hour before testing i.p. None

WIN55,212 plus

clonazepam15 mins before testing No effect

15mg/kg WIN55,212 significantly affects

motor function when co-administered (no

effect noted without WIN55,212)

WIN55,212 plus

ethosuximide45 mins before testing

15mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

ethosuximide

15mg/kg WIN55,212 elevated ethosuximide

brain levels; 15mg/kg WIN55,212

significantly affects motor function when co-

administered (no effect noted without

WIN55,212)

WIN55,212 plus valproate 30 mins before testing15mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

valproate

15mg/kg WIN55,212 elevated valproate

levels in brain; 15mg/kg WIN55,212

significantly affects motor function when co-

administered (no effect noted without

WIN55,212)

WIN55,212 plus

phenobarbital60 mins before testing

15mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

phenobarbitone

15mg/kg WIN55,212 significantly affects

motor function when co-administered (no

effect noted without WIN55,212)

WIN55,212 plus valproate 30 mins before testing10mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

valproate

10mg/kg and higher impaired motor function

and memory.

WIN55,212 plus

carbamazepine30 mins before testing

10mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

carbamazepine

10mg/kg and higher impaired motor

function.

WIN55,212 plus

phenobarbitone60 mins before testing

10mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

phenobarbitone

10mg/kg and higher impaired motor function

and memory.

WIN55,212 plus

phenytoin120 mins before testing

10mg/kg WIN55,212 enhanced anticonvulsant effect of

phenytoin

10mg/kg and higher impaired motor function

and memory.

WIN55,212 2.5-15mg/kg 20 mins before testing 15mg/kg elevated threshold to seizure10mg/kg and higher impaired motor

function.

Rat Wistar Juvenile (P20) Acute Generalised seizure Kainic acid WIN55,212 0.5-5mg/kg 90 mins before testing i.p.All doses reduced severity vs vehicle controls but higher

WIN doses exerted a smaller effect on severity.

WIN effect on kainic acid induced seizures is

inversely related.Rudenko, 2012

ACEA 1.25-15mg/kg i.p. Increased threshold to seizure PMSF (FAAH inhibtor) used to prevent ACEA

metabolism

ACEA plus 30mg/kg

valproate1.25-2.5mg/kg i.p. ACEA enhanced the anticonvulsant effect of valproate

ACEA increase available valproate

concentration; ACEA had not effect on motor

function

Rat Long-Evans Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ 40mg/kg 2 hours prior to testingAnimals did not exhibit tonic seizures but progressed

directly to clonic seizures

PEA did not affect any other seizure

features.

Rat Long-Evans Adult Chronic Generalised seizure Amygdala kindling 1, 10 & 100mg/kg 2 hours prior to testing 1mg/kg PEA delayed onset of seizures

PEA only given prior to test session, not prior

to kindling stimuli. Effect on latency lost at

10 & 100mg/kg

PTZ Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

3-mercaptopropionic acid Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

Bicuculline Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

Strychnine Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

Picrotoxin Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

NMDA Significantly reduced tonic convulsions

MES 50 & 100mg/kg 50 & 100mg/kg significantly reduced seizures incidencePeak effect seen at 2 hours after

administration

MES Anandamide 50mg/kg 50mg/kg significantly reduced seizures incidence

WIN55,212 0.5-4mg/kg Significant protection against seizures

WIN55,212 plus diazepam0-4mg/kg of each in

mixed ratios

3:1 ratio (diazepam:WIN55,212) produced synergistic effect

upon protection from seizure

AM404 0.125-4mg/kg No significant effect

AM404 plus diazepam0-4mg/kg of each in

mixed ratiosNo significant effect

URB597 0.05-1mg/kg Significant protection against seizures

URB597 plus diazepam0-2mg/kg of each in

mixed ratiosURB597 antagonised effects of diazepam URB597 is a FAAH inhibitor

WIN55,212 1-100ug Significant increase in latency to seizure

WIN55,212 plus

isoguvacine

1-100ug and 5-50ug

respectively

No significant effect upon isoguvacine-induced increased

latency to seizureIsoguvacine is a GABAAR agonist

URB597 10-100ug No significant effect

URB597 plus isoguvacine10-100ug plus 5-50ug

respectively

No significant effect upon isoguvacine-induced increased

latency to seizureIsoguvacine is a GABAAR agonist

URB602 10-500ug Significant increase in latency to seizure at all doses URB602 is a MAGL inhibitor

ACEA plus carbamazepine No significant effect

ACEA plus lamotrigine No significant effect

ACEA plus oxcarbazepine No significant effect

ACEA phenobarbitone Action of phenobarbitone significantly increasedACEA did not affect phenobarbitone

availability

ACEA plus phenytoin No significant effect

ACEA plus topiramate No significant effect

Rat WAG/Rij Adult Chronic Absence Genetic WIN55,212 3-12mg/kg 2 hours prior to testing s.c.Significantly decreased spike wave discharge incidence but

concomitant increase in durationvanRijn, 2010

ACEA 0.25ug45 mins after establishment of

epileptiform activity.i.c.v.

Frequency and amplitude of epileptiform activity

significantly reduced

ACEA plus memantine0.25ug and 1-20mg/kg

respectively

Memantine 30 mins and ACEA 45

mins after establishment of

epileptiform activity.

i.c.v. Some potentiation of anticonvulsant effect of memantine Memantine is an NMDAR antagonist

Rat Wistar Adult Acute Partial seizureMaximal dentate gyrus

activationWIN55,212 1-21mg/kg

Monitored for up to 120 mins after

administrationi.p. Significant decrease in duration and increase in latency Blocked by co-administration of AM251 Rizzo, 2009

Rat Not stated Adult Acute Partial with Penicillin (i.c.v.) ACEA 2.5-15ug Monitored for up to 120 mins after i.c.v. Significant decrease in frequency only at highest dose Blocked by co-administration of AM251 Kozan, 2009

ACEA 0.1-8mg/kg Up to 60 mins before testing i.p. Significant increase in threshold to seizure

ACEA plus naltrexone0.1-8mg/kg and 1-

500pg/kg respectivelyUp to 60 mins before testing i.p. Significant potentiation of ACEA anticonvulsant effect

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ ACEA 0.1-4mg/kg 60 mins before testing i.p. Significant increase in seizure threshold at 2 & 4 mg/kg ACEA Effect blocked by AM251 Bahremand et al., 2009

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ ACEA 0.1-8mg/kg 15 mins before testing i.p. Significant increase in threshold to seizure at 2-8mg/kgEffect enhanced by ultra-low dose AM251

(100fg/kg-100ng/kg; fg = femtogram)Gholizadeh, 2007

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ ACPA 0.5-2mg/kg 60 mins before testing i.p. Significant increase in threshold to seizure at 1.5-2mg/kg Blocked by AM251 Shafaroodi et al., 2004

Rat Sprague-Dawley Adult ChronicTemporal lobe

epilepsyPilocarpine-induced SRS WIN55,212 5mg/kg

Single dose immediately before

EEG and behavioural monitoringi.p. Spontaneous seizures completely prevented Effect blocked by AM251 Wallace et al., 2003

Mouse CF-1 Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES WIN55,212 1-100mg/kg 120 mins before testing i.p. Significant protection against seizures Blocked by SR141716A Wallace et al., 2001

30 or 60 mins before testing i.p. Seizure duration increased by 4mg/kg at 60 mins only Performed on fully kindled animals

30 mins before kindling stimulus i.p. Kindling significantly retarded Performed during kindling (epileptogenesis)

30 or 60 mins before testing i.p. 1 mg/kg at 30 mins increased afterdischarge threshold Performed on fully kindled animals

30 mins before kindling stimulus i.p. No significant effect Performed during kindling (epileptogenesis)

Rat Wistar Adult Acute Generalised seizure Audiogenic SR141716A 30mg/kg o.d. for 5 days p.o.Seizure severity and duration increased in rats susceptible to

seizure.

Rats not susceptible to audiogenic seizure

showed no seizure response to SR141716A.

High rimonabant dose.

vanRijn, 2011a

AM251 0.25-5mg/kg No significant effect

AM251 plus diazepam0-4mg/kg of each in

mixed ratiosNo significant effect

Rat WAG/Rij Adult Chronic Absence Genetic AM251 6-12mg/kg 2 hours prior to testing s.c. No significant effect vanRijn, 2010

AM251 7.5ug45 mins after establishment of

epileptiform activity.i.c.v.

Frequency and amplitude of epileptiform activity

significantly increasedCakil, 2011

AM251 plus memantine7.5ug and 1-20mg/kg

respectively

Memantine 30 mins and AM251 45

mins after establishment of

epileptiform activity.

i.c.v. No effect on anticonvulsant effect of memantine Memantine is an NMDAR antagonist

Rat Wistar Adult Acute Partial seizureMaximal dentate gyrus

activationAM251 1mg/kg

Monitored for up to 120 mins after

administrationi.p. No significant effect Rizzo, 2009

Rat Not stated Adult Acute

Partial with

secondary

generalisation

Penicillin (i.c.v.) AM251 0.125-1ugMonitored for up to 120 mins after

administrationi.c.v. Significant proconvulsant effect at 0.25 and 0.5ug only Kozan, 2009

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ AM251 0.01-1mg/kg 15 mins before testing i.p. No significant effect Bahremand et al., 2009

Rat Sprague-Dawley Adult Chronic Epileptogenesis Kainic acid SR141716A 10mg/kgOnce at first sign of acute, kainic

acid-induced seizurei.p. No effect Dudek, 2010

Rat Wistar Adult/Immature Chronic

Juvenile head

trauma followed by

acute proconvulsant

challenge 6 weeks

later

Kainic acid SR141716A 1 & 10 mg/kg Immediately following head trama i.p.SR141716A treatment reduced seizure susceptibility to

control levelsEchegoyen, 2009

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ AM251 1fg/kg-1mg/kg 45 mins before testing i.p. No significant effect fg = femtogram (ultra-low dose) Gholizadeh, 2007

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ AM251 0.5-3mg/kg 60 mins before testing i.p.Significant proconvulsant effect at 0.75-3mg/kg (peak effect

at 1mg/kg)Shafaroodi et al., 2004

Rat Wistar Adult N/ANone (healthy

animals)EEG recording SR141716A 30mg/kg o.d. for at least 20 days p.o. 20% of animals (4/20) exhibited spontaneous seizures.

Note very high SR141716A dose; animals

were female and no note of stage of

oeastrous cycle in original report.

vanRijn, 2011a

THC 10mg/kg Increased incidence of seizures on handling

URB597 0.3mg/kg No effect on seizure incidence

HU210 0.01mg/kg Increased incidence of seizures on handling

1 & 3mg/kg

Acute

Rat Wistar-Kyoto

Hill et al., 2012

(submitted)

Published results of cannabinoid effects upon whole animal models of seizure and epilepsy

Generalised seizure i.p.

p.o.

Mouse C57BL/6 AcuteModel uses a priming stimulus at P+19

followed by a test stimulus at P+28

25 - 200 mg/kg

Audiogenic priming

Generalised seizure MES

AcuteMouse Generalised seizure MES

Spontaneously epileptic

Mouse Not stated Acute Generalised seizure 5-400 mg/kg 60 minutes before testing i.p.Apparently highly effective in models reliant

upon GABAergic systems.

CBD

Generalised seizure

MES

No effect

i.p.

i.p.Species exhibits photomyoclonus and is

susceptible to amygdala kindling

Subpopulation of chickens susceptible to

photic stimulation. Susceptible = 'epileptic'

No effect None

No indication of tolerance after 3-4 days

repeated administration

QS

Mouse Not stated Acute Generalised seizure

MES

No indication of tolerance after 3-4 days

repeated administration100 mg/kg

Threshold to seizure reduced60Hz electroshock

Not stated Chronic Generalised seizureAmygdala kindling

(electrical)None

Increased threshold to seizure

Significantly decreased hindlimb extension

Significant anticonvulsant effect

None

0.25 - 4 mg/kg

Generalised seizureChronicMeriones

unguiculatus

6Hz electroshockMouse Not stated Acute

Mouse QS Acute

Generalised seizureAcuteNot stated up to 80 mg/kg

i.p.o.d. for 3-4 days before testing

i.p.

Significantly decreased hindlimb extension

Significant anticonvulsant effect

Boggan et al., 1973

Chesher et al., 1974

Chesher et al., 1975

THC

No effect

~60 minutes before testing

i.p.

Loss of proconvulsant effect upon latency

with chronic treatment suggests

adaptation/tolerance

20 & 50 mg/kg

Standard MES model

Mouse Not stated Acute Generalised seizure 50-200 mg/kg 30 mins before testing p.o.

Acute Generalised seizure 0.25-1 mg/kg 0.5 or 2 hours before testing i.v.

100 mg/kg6Hz electroshock

60Hz electroshock

THC

Gallus

domesticus

Baboon Papio papio Chronic Generalised seizure 0.25-1 mg/kg

Cat

Gerbil

SwissMouse

5-15mg/kg Luszczki, 2011aAcute Generalised seizure PTZ

Karler et al., 1980

Chesher et al., 1974

Consroe et al., 1982

o.d. for 3-4 days before testing

1, 10 & 100 mg/kg 1 hour before testing i.p.

Significant anticonvulsant effects at ≥1 mg/kg

Significant anticonvulsant effect

CBDV 50-200 mg/kg Significant anticonvulsant effect

PTZGeneralised seizure

Luszczki, 2011b

Notable effects in non-seizure models

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Adult

Synthetic CB1 antagonists (see also THCV)

Luszczki, 2006MES

10mg/kg and AED dose-

response

i.p.

MESGeneralised seizureAcute

10 mins prior to testingGeneralised seizureAcuteAdultSwissMouse

Sheerin, 2004

N-

palmitoylethanolamide

0.5 to 4 hours prior to testing

i.p.

i.p.

25mg/kg 2 hours prior to testing Ineffective against clonic convulsions

Lambert, 2001

Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES 30 mins before testing i.p. Naderi, 2008

Mouse OF1 Adult Acute Generalised seizure

Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES Naderi, 2008

Rat Wistar Adult Acute

Partial with

secondary

generalisation

Penicillin (i.c.v.) Cakil, 2011

Wendt et al., 2011Mouse NMRI Adult Chronic Generalised seizure Amygdala kindling

WIN55,212

URB597

2.5 & 4mg/kg

Acute

Partial with

secondary

generalisation

Penicillin (i.c.v.)

o.d. for 8 weeks i.p. Dowie, 2010Mouse R6/1 Adult Chronic Huntington's disease Behavioural observation

Rat Wistar Adult

Bahremand, 2008Mouse NMRI Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ

2.5mg/kg 10 mins prior to testing i.p. Luszczki, 2010Mouse Swiss Adult Acute Generalised seizure MES

Adult Acute Generalised seizure PTZ

Mouse NMRI

30 mins before testing

5 mins before testing i.c.v. Naderi, 2011Rat Wistar

Phytocannabinoids

D9-THC

Mouse

CBD

i.p.

Adult

Other phytocannabinoids

CB1 Agonists

Exogenous synthetic cannabinoids, endocannabinoids, derivatives and precursors

Johnson et al., 1975

Wada et al., 1975

Wada et al., 1975

Loskota et al., 1975

Sofia et al., 1974

Karler et al., 1980

Chicken

None30 mins before testing

Page 21: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Conclusions

• Natural doesn’t automatically mean safe

• Don’t get fooled by ‘cannab-’ in the name

• The endocannabinoid system and THC are only a small

facet to the overall story

• Small vs big wins?

21

Page 22: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

Acknowledgements • Collaborators: Dr C. Williams, Dr G. Stephens, Dr G. Woodhall (Aston, UK),

Prof. L. Sander (NEC & UCL, UK), Prof. E. Williamson & Prof. R. Hampson

(Wake, USA).

• Researchers (past and present): Dr A. Hill, Mr N. Jones, Dr S. Weston, Dr J.

Farrimond, Dr I. Smith, Dr X. Wang, Dr Y. Yamasaki, Mr T. Hill, Mrs C. Hill, Mr

N. Amada, Miss I. Peres, Mrs R. Hadid, Mrs A. Al-Husaini, Mr S. Akiyama, Dr A.

Futamura, Miss M. Mercier, Mr S. Marshall.

22

Page 23: The complex pharmacology of cannabis

[email protected]

References

1. Adams IB, Martin BR. (1996) Cannabis: pharmacology and toxicology in animals and humans.

Addiction. 91(11):1585-614

2. Childers SR, Breivogel CS. (1998) Cannabis and endogenous cannabinoid systems. Drug Alcohol

Depend. 51(1-2):173-87

3. Ashton (2001) Pharmacology and effects of cannabis: a brief review Br J Psychiatry. 178:101-6

4. Elsohly MA, Slade D (2005) Chemical constituents of marijuana: the complex mixture of natural

cannabinoids Life Sci. 78(5):539-48

5. Thomas et al. (2007) Br J Pharmacol 150(5): 613–623

6. Shen M, Thayer SA. (1999) Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol acts as a partial agonist to modulate

glutamatergic synaptic transmission between rat hippocampal neurons in culture. Mol

Pharmacol. 55(1):8-13

23