Dataset Information

Comparative Metabolomic Profiling of the Metabolic Differences of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol.

ABSTRACT: More than one hundred cannabinoids have been found in cannabis. Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the recognized addictive constituent in cannabis; however, the mechanisms underlying THC-induced toxicity remain elusive. To better understand cannabis-induced toxicity, the present study compared the metabolic pathways of THC and its isomer cannabidiol (CBD) in human and mouse liver microsomes using the metabolomic approach. Thirty-two metabolites of THC were identified, including nine undescribed metabolites. Of note, two glutathione (GSH) and two cysteine (Cys) adducts were found in THC's metabolism. Molecular docking revealed that THC conjugates have a higher affinity with GSH and Cys than with the parent compound, THC. Human recombinant cytochrome P450 enzymes, and their corresponding chemical inhibitors, demonstrated that CYP3A4 and CYP1B1 were the primary enzymes responsible for the formation of THC-GSH and THC-Cys, thus enabling conjugation to occur. Collectively, this study systematically compared the metabolism of THC with the metabolism of CBD using the metabolomic approach, which thus highlights the critical role of metabolomics in identifying novel drug metabolites. Moreover, this study also facilitates mechanistic speculation in order to expand the knowledge of drug metabolism and safety.

SUBMITTER: Rao Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9657426 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Metabolomic Profiling of the Metabolic Differences of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol.

Rao Qianru Q Zhang Ting T Dai Manyun M Li Bin B Pu Qianlun Q Zhao Min M Cheng Yan Y Yan Dongmei D Zhao Qi Q Wu Zhanxuan E ZE Li Fei F

Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 20221104 21

More than one hundred cannabinoids have been found in cannabis. Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the recognized addictive constituent in cannabis; however, the mechanisms underlying THC-induced toxicity remain elusive. To better understand cannabis-induced toxicity, the present study compared the metabolic pathways of THC and its isomer cannabidiol (CBD) in human and mouse liver microsomes using the metabolomic approach. Thirty-two metabolites of THC were identified, including nine undescribed m ...[more]

PMID: 36364400

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceControlled clinical laboratory studies have shown that cannabidiol (CBD) can sometimes attenuate or exacerbate the effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). No studies have evaluated differences in pharmacokinetics (PK) of Δ9-THC and pharmacodynamics (PD) between orally administered cannabis extracts that vary with respect to Δ9-THC and CBD concentrations.ObjectiveTo compare the PK and PD of orally administered Δ9-THC-dominant and CBD-dominant cannabis extracts that contained the same Δ9-THC dose (20 mg).Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial was a within-participant, double-blind, crossover study conducted from January 2021 to March 2022 at the Johns Hopkins University Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Baltimore, MD. Eighteen healthy adults completed 3 randomized outpatient experimental test sessions that were each separated by at least 1 week.InterventionsBrownies containing (1) no cannabis extract (ie, placebo); (2) Δ9-THC-dominant extract (20 mg Δ9-THC with no CBD); and (3) CBD-dominant extract (20 mg Δ9-THC + 640 mg CBD) were administered to participants 30 minutes prior to administering a cytochrome P450 (CYP) probe drug cocktail, which consisted of 100 mg caffeine, 20 mg omeprazole, 25 mg losartan, 30 mg dextromethorphan, and 2 mg midazolam.Main outcomes and measuresChange-from-baseline plasma concentrations for Δ9-THC or Δ9-THC metabolites and scores for subjective drug effects, cognitive and psychomotor performance, and vital signs. The area under the plasma vs concentration vs time curve (AUC) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were determined.ResultsThe participant cohort of 18 adults included 11 males (61.1%) and 7 females (38.9%) with a mean (SD) age of 30 (7) years who had not used cannabis for at least 30 days prior to initiation of the study (mean [SD] day since last cannabis use, 86 [66] days). The CYP cocktail + placebo brownie and the CYP cocktail did not affect any PD assessments. Relative to CYP cocktail + Δ9-THC, CYP cocktail + Δ9-THC + CBD produced a higher Cmax and area under the plasma concentration vs time curve for Δ9-THC, 11-OH-Δ9-THC, and Δ9-THC-COOH. The CYP cocktail + Δ9-THC + CBD increased self-reported anxiety, sedation, and memory difficulty, increased heart rate, and produced a more pronounced impairment of cognitive and psychomotor performance compared with both CYP cocktail + Δ9-THC and CYP cocktail + placebo.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial of oral Δ9-THC and CBD, stronger adverse effects were elicited from a CBD-dominant cannabis extract compared with a Δ9-THC-dominant cannabis extract at the same Δ9-THC dose, which contradicts common claims that CBD attenuates the adverse effects of Δ9-THC. CBD inhibition of Δ9-THC and 11-OH-Δ9-THC metabolism is the likely mechanism for the differences observed. An improved understanding of cannabinoid-cannabinoid and cannabinoid-drug interactions are needed to inform clinical and regulatory decision-making regarding the therapeutic and nontherapeutic use of cannabis products.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04201197.

Project description:ImportanceCannabis use has been associated with increased crash risk, but the effect of cannabidiol (CBD) on driving is unclear.ObjectiveTo determine the driving impairment caused by vaporized cannabis containing Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD.Design, setting, and participantsA double-blind, within-participants, randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience at Maastricht University in the Netherlands between May 20, 2019, and March 27, 2020. Participants (N = 26) were healthy occasional users of cannabis.InterventionsParticipants vaporized THC-dominant, CBD-dominant, THC/CBD-equivalent, and placebo cannabis. THC and CBD doses were 13.75 mg. Order of conditions was randomized and balanced.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP; a measure of lane weaving) during 100 km, on-road driving tests that commenced at 40 minutes and 240 minutes after cannabis consumption. At a calibrated blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.02%, SDLP was increased relative to placebo by 1.12 cm, and at a calibrated BAC of 0.05%, SDLP was increased relative to placebo by 2.4 cm.ResultsAmong 26 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 23.2 [2.6] years; 16 women), 22 (85%) completed all 8 driving tests. At 40 to 100 minutes following consumption, the SDLP was 18.21 cm with CBD-dominant cannabis, 20.59 cm with THC-dominant cannabis, 21.09 cm with THC/CBD-equivalent cannabis, and 18.28 cm with placebo cannabis. SDLP was significantly increased by THC-dominant cannabis (+2.33 cm [95% CI, 0.80 to 3.86]; P < .001) and THC/CBD-equivalent cannabis (+2.83 cm [95% CI, 1.28 to 4.39]; P < .001) but not CBD-dominant cannabis (-0.05 cm [95% CI, -1.49 to 1.39]; P > .99), relative to placebo. At 240 to 300 minutes following consumption, the SDLP was 19.03 cm with CBD-dominant cannabis, 19.88 cm with THC-dominant cannabis, 20.59 cm with THC/CBD-equivalent cannabis, and 19.37 cm with placebo cannabis. The SDLP did not differ significantly in the CBD (-0.34 cm [95% CI, -1.77 to 1.10]; P > .99), THC (0.51 cm [95% CI, -1.01 to 2.02]; P > .99) or THC/CBD (1.22 cm [95% CI, -0.29 to 2.72]; P = .20) conditions, relative to placebo. Out of 188 test drives, 16 (8.5%) were terminated due to safety concerns.Conclusions and relevanceIn a crossover clinical trial that assessed driving performance during on-road driving tests, the SDLP following vaporized THC-dominant and THC/CBD-equivalent cannabis compared with placebo was significantly greater at 40 to 100 minutes but not 240 to 300 minutes after vaporization; there were no significant differences between CBD-dominant cannabis and placebo. However, the effect size for CBD-dominant cannabis may not have excluded clinically important impairment, and the doses tested may not represent common usage.Trial registrationEU Clinical Trials Register: 2018-003945-40.

Project description:Background: Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, a CB1 receptor agonist) and Cannabidiol (CBD, a non-competitive antagonist of endogenous CB1 and CB2 ligands) are two primary components of Cannabis species, and may modulate fear learning in mammals. The CB1 receptor is widely distributed throughout the cortex and some limbic regions typically associated with fear learning. Humans with posttraumatic disorder (PTSD) have widespread upregulation of CB1 receptor density and reduced availability of endogenous cannabinoid anandamide, suggesting a role for the endocannabinoid system in PTSD. Pharmacological blockade of memory reconsolidation following recall of a conditioned response modulates the expression of learned fear and may represent a viable target for the development of new treatments for PTSD. In this study, we focused on assessing the impact of the key compounds of the marijuana plant both singly and, more importantly, in concert on attenuation of learned fear. Specifically, we assessed the impact of THC, CBD, and/or the remaining plant materials (post-extraction; background material), on reconsolidation of learned fear. Method: Male Sprague-Dawley rats received six 1.0 mA continuous foot shocks (contextual training). Twenty-four hours later, rats were re-exposed to the context. Immediately following memory retrieval (recall) rats received oral administration of low dose THC, high dose THC, CBD, CBD + low THC, CBD + high THC [as isolated phytochemicals and, in separate experiments, in combination with plant background material (BM)]. Rodents were tested for freezing response context re-exposure at 24 h and 7 days following training. Results: CBD alone, but not THC alone, significantly attenuated fear memory reconsolidation when administered immediately after recall. The effect persisted for at least 7 days. A combination of CBD and THC also attenuated the fear response. Plant BM also significantly attenuated reconsolidation of learned fear both on its own and in combination with THC and CBD. Finally, THC attenuated reconsolidation of learned fear only when co-administered with CBD or plant BM. Conclusion: CBD may provide a novel treatment strategy for targeting fear-memories. Furthermore, plant BM also significantly attenuated the fear response. However, whereas THC alone had no significant effects, its effects were modulated by the addition of other compounds. Future research should investigate some of the other components present in the plant BM (such as terpenes) for their effects alone, or in combination with isolated pure cannabinoids, on fear learning.

Dataset Information

Comparative Metabolomic Profiling of the Metabolic Differences of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol.

Publications

Comparative Metabolomic Profiling of the Metabolic Differences of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets