Antinociception produced by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in female vs male rats.

The primary aim of this study was to examine sex differences in acute antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in rats. Complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) was administered to adult Sprague-Dawley rats to induce pain and inflammation in one hindpaw; 2.5 h later, vehicle or a single dose of the NSAIDs ibuprofen (1.0-32 mg/kg) or ketoprofen (0.1-10 mg/kg), or the COX-2-preferring inhibitor celecoxib (1.0-10 mg/kg) was injected i.p. Mechanical allodynia, heat hyperalgesia, biased weight-bearing, and hindpaw thickness were assessed 0.5-24 h after drug injection. Ibuprofen and ketoprofen were more potent or efficacious in females than males in reducing mechanical allodynia and increasing weight-bearing on the CFA-injected paw, and celecoxib was longer-acting in females than males on these endpoints. In contrast, ketoprofen and celecoxib were more potent or efficacious in males than females in reducing hindpaw edema. When administered 3 days rather than 2.5 h after CFA, ketoprofen (3.2-32 mg/kg) was minimally effective in attenuating mechanical allodynia and heat hyperalgesia, and did not restore weight-bearing or significantly decrease hindpaw edema, with no sex differences in any effect. Neither celecoxib nor ketoprofen effects were significantly attenuated by cannabinoid receptor 1 or 2 (CB1 or CB2) antagonists in either sex. These results suggest that common NSAIDs administered shortly after induction of inflammation are more effective in females than males in regard to their antinociceptive effects, whereas their anti-inflammatory effects tend to favor males; effect sizes indicate that sex differences in NSAID effect may be functionally important in some cases.

Cannabidiol: pharmacology and therapeutic targets.

RATIONALE: Cannabidiol (CBD) products lacking regulatory approval are being used to self-treat a myriad of conditions and for their unsubstantiated health benefits. The scientific evidence supporting these claims largely arises not from controlled clinical trials, but from the recognition that CBD has numerous biological targets. Yet, CBD is commonly consumed and often in over-the-counter products that are unapproved and of unknown composition. Epidiolex® is the only product that has undergone rigorous pharmacokinetic assessment and testing in clinical trials; it was approved as a non-scheduled drug by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of intractable childhood-onset seizures. However, studies investigating CBD for other medical conditions are limited in number and often lack the scientific rigor, controls, or sample sizes required to draw clinically meaningful conclusions. Although Epidiolex® is safe for human consumption, recent changes in regulation of commercially available CBD products have resulted in limited quality control and products marketed with unknown CBD bioavailability. Even scientifically rigorous studies have used different sources of CBD and different suspension vehicles for administration, making it difficult to compare results among studies and resolve mixed outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This paper reviews the molecular targets, pharmacokinetics, and safety and abuse liability of CBD; additionally, the extant evidence on its potential therapeutic effects for neurological disorders, pain, inflammation, conditions related to immune function, psychiatric disorders, and substance use are described.

Antinociceptive and Immune Effects of Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol or Cannabidiol in Male Versus Female Rats with Persistent Inflammatory Pain.

Chronic pain is the most common reason reported for using medical cannabis. The goal of this research was to determine whether the two primary phytocannabinoids, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), are effective treatments for persistent inflammatory pain. In experiment 1, inflammation was induced by intraplantar injection of Complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA). Then THC (0.0-4.0 mg/kg, i.p.) or CBD (0.0-10 mg/kg, i.p.) was administered twice daily for 3 days. On day 4, THC, CBD, or vehicle was administered, and allodynia, hyperalgesia, weight-bearing, locomotor activity, and hindpaw edema were assessed 0.5-4 hours postinjection. In experiment 2, CFA or mineral oil (no-pain control)-treated rats were given THC (2.0 mg/kg, i.p.), CBD (10 mg/kg, i.p.), or vehicle in the same manner as in experiment 1. Four hours postinjection on day 4, serum samples were taken for analysis of cytokines known to influence inflammatory pain: interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6, IL-10, interferon (IFN)-γ, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α THC dose-dependently reduced pain-related behaviors but did not reduce hindpaw edema, and little tolerance developed to THC's effects. In contrast, CBD effects on inflammatory pain were minimal. THC produced little to no change in serum cytokines, whereas CBD decreased IL-1ß, IL-10, and IFN-γ and increased IL-6. Few sex differences in antinociception or immune modulation were observed with either drug, but CFA-induced immune activation was significantly greater in males than females. These results suggest that THC may be more beneficial than CBD for reducing inflammatory pain in that THC maintains its efficacy with short-term treatment in both sexes and does not induce immune activation. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The pain-relieving effects of cannabidiol (CBD) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are examined in male and female rats with persistent inflammatory pain to determine whether individual phytocannabinoids could be a viable treatment for men and women with chronic inflammatory pain. Additionally, sex differences in the immune response to an adjuvant and to THC and CBD are characterized to provide preliminary insight into immune-related effects of cannabinoid-based therapy for pain.