Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Differential regulation of Cav 3.2 and Cav 2.2 calcium channels by CB1 receptors and cannabidiol.
Harding, Erika K; Souza, Ivana A; Gandini, Maria A; Gadotti, Vinícius M; Ali, Md Yousof; Huang, Sun; Antunes, Flavia T T; Trang, Tuan; Zamponi, Gerald W.
Afiliación
  • Harding EK; Department of Comparative Biology and Experimental Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Souza IA; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, and Physiology & Pharmacology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Gandini MA; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Gadotti VM; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, and Physiology & Pharmacology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Ali MY; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Huang S; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, and Physiology & Pharmacology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Antunes FTT; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Trang T; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, and Physiology & Pharmacology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
  • Zamponi GW; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Br J Pharmacol ; 180(12): 1616-1633, 2023 06.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36647671
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

PURPOSE:

Cannabinoids are a promising therapeutic avenue for chronic pain. However, clinical trials often fail to report analgesic efficacy of cannabinoids. Inhibition of voltage gate calcium (Cav ) channels is one mechanism through which cannabinoids may produce analgesia. We hypothesized that cannabinoids and cannabinoid receptor agonists target different types of Cav channels through distinct mechanisms. EXPERIMENTAL

APPROACH:

Electrophysiological recordings from tsA-201 cells expressing either Cav 3.2 or Cav 2.2 were used to assess inhibition by HU-210 or cannabidiol (CBD) in the absence and presence of the CB1 receptor. Homology modelling assessed potential interaction sites for CBD in both Cav 2.2 and Cav 3.2. Analgesic effects of CBD were assessed in mouse models of inflammatory and neuropathic pain. KEY

RESULTS:

HU-210 (1 µM) inhibited Cav 2.2 function in the presence of CB1 receptor but had no effect on Cav 3.2 regardless of co-expression of CB1 receptor. By contrast, CBD (3 µM) produced no inhibition of Cav 2.2 and instead inhibited Cav 3.2 independently of CB1 receptors. Homology modelling supported these findings, indicating that CBD binds to and occludes the pore of Cav 3.2, but not Cav 2.2. Intrathecal CBD alleviated thermal and mechanical hypersensitivity in both male and female mice, and this effect was absent in Cav 3.2 null mice. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS Our findings reveal differential modulation of Cav 2.2 and Cav 3.2 channels by CB1 receptors and CBD. This advances our understanding of how different cannabinoids produce analgesia through action at different voltage-gated calcium channels and could influence the development of novel cannabinoid-based therapeutics for treatment of chronic pain.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cannabidiol / Cannabinoides / Dolor Crónico Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: Br J Pharmacol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cannabidiol / Cannabinoides / Dolor Crónico Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: Br J Pharmacol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá