Neuroprotective Effect of a Pharmaceutical Extract of Cannabis with High Content on CBD Against Rotenone in Primary Cerebellar Granule Cell Cultures and the Relevance of Formulations.

Introduction: Preclinical research supports the benefits of pharmaceutical cannabis-based extracts for treating different medical conditions (e.g., epilepsy); however, their neuroprotective potential has not been widely investigated. Materials and Methods: Using primary cultures of cerebellar granule cells, we evaluated the neuroprotective activity of Epifractan (EPI), a cannabis-based medicinal extract containing a high level of cannabidiol (CBD), components like terpenoids and flavonoids, trace levels of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, and the acid form of CBD. We determined the ability of EPI to counteract the rotenone-induced neurotoxicity by analyzing cell viability and morphology of neurons and astrocytes by immunocytochemical assays. The effect of EPI was compared with XALEX, a plant-derived and highly purified CBD formulation (XAL), and pure CBD crystals (CBD). Results: The results revealed that EPI induced a significant reduction in the rotenone-induced neurotoxicity in a wide range of concentrations without causing neurotoxicity per se. EPI showed a similar effect to XAL suggesting that no additive or synergistic interactions between individual substances present in EPI occurred. In contrast, CBD did show a different profile to EPI and XAL because a neurotoxic effect per se was observed at higher concentrations assayed. Medium-chain triglyceride oil used in EPI formulation could explain this difference. Conclusion: Our data support a neuroprotective effect of EPI that may provide neuroprotection in different neurodegenerative processes. The results highlight the role of CBD as the active component of EPI but also support the need for an appropriate formulation to dilute pharmaceutical cannabis-based products that could be critical to avoid neurotoxicity at very high doses.

Similarities and differences upon binding of naturally occurring Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol-derivatives to cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors.

We have here assessed, using Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) for comparison, the effect of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (Δ9-THCA) and of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabivarin (Δ9-THCV) that is mediated by human versions of CB1, CB2, and CB1-CB2 receptor functional units, expressed in a heterologous system. Binding to the CB1 and CB2 receptors was addressed in living cells by means of a homogeneous assay. A biphasic competition curve for the binding to the CB2 receptor, was obtained for Δ9-THCV in cells expressing the two receptors. Signaling studies included cAMP level determination, activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway and ß-arrestin recruitment were performed. The signaling triggered by Δ9-THCA and Δ9-THCV via individual receptors or receptor heteromers disclosed differential bias, i.e. the bias observed using a given phytocannabinoid depended on the receptor (CB1, CB2 or CB1-CB2) and on the compound used as reference to calculate the bias factor (Δ9-THC, a selective agonist or a non-selective agonist). These results are consistent with different binding modes leading to differential functional selectivity depending on the agonist structure, and the state (monomeric or heteromeric) of the cannabinoid receptor. In addition, on studying Gi-coupling we showed that Δ9-THCV and Δ9-THCA and Δ9-THCV were able to revert the effect of a selective CB2 receptor agonist, but only Δ9-THCV, and not Δ9-THCA, reverted the effect of arachidonyl-2'-chloroethylamide (ACEA 100 nM) a selective agonist of the CB1 receptor. Overall, these results indicate that cannabinoids may have a variety of binding modes that results in qualitatively different effects depending on the signaling pathway that is engaged upon cannabinoid receptor activation.

A Comparative In Vitro Study of the Neuroprotective Effect Induced by Cannabidiol, Cannabigerol, and Their Respective Acid Forms: Relevance of the 5-HT1A Receptors.

Previous preclinical studies have demonstrated that cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabigerol (CBG), two non-psychotomimetic phytocannabinoids from Cannabis sativa, induce neuroprotective effects on toxic and neurodegenerative processes. However, a comparative study of both compounds has not been reported so far, and the targets involved in this effect remain unknown. The ability of CBD and CBG to attenuate the neurotoxicity induced by two insults involving oxidative stress (hydrogen peroxide, H2O2) and mitochondrial dysfunction (rotenone) was evaluated in neural cell cultures. The involvement of CB-1 and CB-2 or 5-HT1A receptors was investigated. The neuroprotective effect of their respective acids forms, cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) and cannabigerolic acid (CBGA), was also analyzed. MTT and immunocytochemistry assays were used to evaluate cell viability. No significant variation on cell viability was per se induced by the lower concentrations tested of CBD and CBG or CBDA and CBGA; however, high concentrations of CBD, CBDA, or CBGA were toxic since a 40-50% reduction of cell viability was observed. CBD and CBG showed neuroprotective effects against H2O2 or rotenone; however, both compounds were more effective in attenuating the rotenone-induced neurotoxicity. A high concentration of CBDA reduced the rotenone-induced neurotoxicity. WAY100635 (5-HT1A receptor antagonist) but not AM251 and AM630 (CB1 or CB2 receptor antagonists, respectively) significantly diminished the neuroprotective effect induced by CBG only against rotenone. Our results contribute to the understanding of the neuroprotective effect of CBD and CBG, showing differences with their acid forms, and also highlight the role of 5-HT1A receptors in the mechanisms of action of CBG.