Cannabis Users Show Enhanced Expression of CB1-5HT2A Receptor Heteromers in Olfactory Neuroepithelium Cells.

Cannabinoid CB1 receptors (CB1R) and serotonergic 2A receptors (5HT2AR) form heteromers in the brain of mice where they mediate the cognitive deficits produced by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. However, it is still unknown whether the expression of this heterodimer is modulated by chronic cannabis use in humans. In this study, we investigated the expression levels and functionality of CB1R-5HT2AR heteromers in human olfactory neuroepithelium (ON) cells of cannabis users and control subjects, and determined their molecular characteristics through adenylate cyclase and the ERK 1/2 pathway signaling studies. We also assessed whether heteromer expression levels correlated with cannabis consumption and cognitive performance in neuropsychological tests. ON cells from controls and cannabis users expressed neuronal markers such as ßIII-tubulin and nestin, displayed similar expression levels of genes related to cellular self-renewal, stem cell differentiation, and generation of neural crest cells, and showed comparable Na+ currents in patch clamp recordings. Interestingly, CB1R-5HT2AR heteromer expression was significantly increased in cannabis users and positively correlated with the amount of cannabis consumed, and negatively with age of onset of cannabis use. In addition, a negative correlation was found between heteromer expression levels and attention and working memory performance in cannabis users and control subjects. Our findings suggest that cannabis consumption regulates the formation of CB1R-5HT2AR heteromers, and may have a key role in cognitive processing. These heterodimers could be potential new targets to develop treatment alternatives for cognitive impairments.

Non-Linear Formation of EtG and FAEEs after Controlled Administration of Low to Moderate Doses of Ethanol.

AIMS: Ethyl glucuronide (EtG) and fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEEs) are non-oxidative metabolites of alcohol that can be detected in conventional and non-conventional biological matrices for longer periods than alcohol. The aim was to describe the time courses of both biomarkers after ingestion of acute low-moderate doses of ethanol. METHODS: The study design was double-blind, randomized, crossover and controlled with placebo. Participants were distributed in three different cohorts: (a) Cohort-1: two doses of 18 and 30 g of ethanol and placebo were administered to 12 subjects; (b) Cohort-2: two doses of 6 and 12 g of ethanol and placebo were administered to six subjects and (c) Cohort-3: two doses of 24 and 42 g of ethanol and placebo were administered to six subjects. Each participant received two doses of ethanol and placebo. Plasma concentrations (0-6 h) of ethanol and specific FAEEs (palmitic, stearic, linoleic and oleic acid ethyl esters) and urinary concentrations of EtG (0-24 h) were measured. RESULTS: A dose-dependent increase in blood ethanol concentrations was observed. EtG excretion and FAEEs plasmatic concentrations showed a disproportionate increase with the ethanol dose suggesting non-linearity. Area under the curve (AUC0-6h) of ethanol concentrations showed a linear trend with non-oxidative metabolites' concentrations. CONCLUSION: The formation rate of ethanol non-oxidative biomarkers does not follow a linear trend, explained mainly by a disproportionate increase in AUC0-6h of ethanol concentrations in relation to dose. This observation should be taken into account when interpreting results in biological matrices in clinical and forensic settings. SHORT SUMMARY: A double-blind, randomized, crossover and controlled study was conducted administering ethanol (6-42 g). Ethyl glucuronide (EtG) excretion and fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEEs) plasmatic concentrations showed a disproportionate increase with the ethanol dose suggesting non-linearity. This observation should be taken into account when interpreting biomarker concentrations in clinical settings.

Ethanol induces hydroxytyrosol formation in humans.

Previous studies in animals have shown an increase of hydroxytyrosol (OHTyr), a potent phenolic antioxidant and a minor metabolite of dopamine (also called 3,4-dihydroxyphenylethanol or DOPET), after ethanol intake. The interaction between ethanol and dopamine metabolism is the probable mechanism involved. The aim of the study was to establish the contribution of the dose of ethanol on OHTyr formation. 24 healthy male volunteers were included. Subjects were distributed in three different cohorts and each volunteer received two doses of ethanol or placebo. Doses of ethanol administered were 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 42 g. Study design was double-blind, randomized, crossover and controlled. Hydroxytyrosol, tyrosol (Tyr), 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), and homovanillic acid (HVA) urinary excretion, ethanol plasma concentrations and drunkenness were evaluated along a 6-h period. Urinary excretion of OHTyr and Tyr increased with ethanol administered dose. A reduction in the ratio DOPAC/OHTyr from placebo to the highest dose was observed, compatible with a shift in the dopamine metabolism to preferently produce OHTyr instead of DOPAC. Also a dose-dependent increase in plasma ethanol concentrations and subjective effects was observed. This study demonstrates an endogenous production of OHTyr and Tyr in relation to ethanol administered dose in humans. Biological effects of both phenols from this source should be investigated in future studies.

Bilastine vs. hydroxyzine: occupation of brain histamine H1 -receptors evaluated by positron emission tomography in healthy volunteers.

AIM: A close correlation exists between positron emission tomography (PET)-determined histamine H1 -receptor occupancy (H1 RO) and the incidence of sedation. Antihistamines with H1 RO <20% are classified as non-sedating. The objective was to compare the H1 RO of bilastine, a second generation antihistamine, with that of hydroxyzine. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study used PET imaging with [(11) C]-doxepin to evaluate H1 RO in 12 healthy males (mean age 26.2 years), after single oral administration of bilastine (20 mg), hydroxyzine (25 mg) or placebo. Binding potentials and H1 ROs were calculated in five cerebral cortex regions of interest: frontal, occipital, parietal, temporal, insula. Plasma bilastine concentrations, subjective sedation (visual analogue scale), objective psychomotor performance (digital symbol substitution test), physiological variables and safety (adverse events, AEs), were also evaluated. RESULTS: The mean binding potential of all five regions of interest (total binding potential) was significantly greater with bilastine than hydroxyzine (mean value 0.26 vs. 0.13, P < 0.01; mean difference and 95% CI -0.130 [-0.155, 0.105]). There was no significant difference between bilastine and placebo. Overall H1 RO by bilastine was significantly lower than that by hydroxyzine (mean value -3.92% vs. 53.95%, P < 0.01; mean difference and 95% CI 57.870% [42.664%, 73.075%]). There was no significant linear relationship between individual bilastine plasma concentrations and total binding potential values. No significant between-treatment differences were observed for sedation and psychomotor performance. Twenty-six non-serious AEs were reported. Sleepiness or sedation was not reported with bilastine but appeared in some subjects with hydroxyzine. CONCLUSIONS: A single oral dose of bilastine 20 mg had minimal H1 RO, was not associated with subjective sedation or objective impairment of psychomotor performance and was devoid of treatment-related sedative AEs, thus satisfying relevant subjective, objective and PET criteria as a non-sedating antihistamine.

3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy) and alcohol interactions in humans: psychomotor performance, subjective effects, and pharmacokinetics.

3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) is frequently consumed in association with alcohol. The effect of this combination in humans has not been previously investigated. Nine male healthy volunteers received single oral doses of 100 mg of MDMA plus 0.8 g/kg ethanol, 100 mg of MDMA, 0.8 g/kg of ethanol, and placebo in a double blind, double dummy, randomized crossover trial. Measurements included psychomotor performance, subjective effects, and pharmacokinetics. Plasma concentrations of MDMA showed a 13% increase after the use of alcohol, whereas plasma concentrations of alcohol showed a 9 to 15% decrease after MDMA administration. The MDMA-alcohol combination induced longer lasting euphoria and well being than MDMA or alcohol alone. MDMA reversed the subjective sedation induced by alcohol but did not reduce drunkenness feelings. MDMA did not reverse the actions of alcohol on psychomotor abilities. Combined use of MDMA and alcohol causes dissociation between subjective and objective sedation. Subjects may feel euphoric and less sedated and might have the feeling of doing better, but actual performance ability continues to be impaired by the effect of alcohol. Confirmation of these findings in further studies will be highly relevant in terms of road safety.