TY - JOUR
T1 - Antinociceptive and immune effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol or cannabidiol in male versus female rats with persistent inflammatory pain
AU - Britch, Stevie C.
AU - Goodman, Alan G.
AU - Wiley, Jenny L.
AU - Pondelick, Abby M.
AU - Craft, Rebecca M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2020 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - 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-tetrahy-drocannabinol (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)-1β, 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-1β, 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.
AB - 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-tetrahy-drocannabinol (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)-1β, 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-1β, 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084919480&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85084919480&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1124/jpet.119.262956
DO - 10.1124/jpet.119.262956
M3 - Article
C2 - 32179573
AN - SCOPUS:85084919480
SN - 0022-3565
VL - 373
SP - 416
EP - 428
JO - Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
JF - Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
IS - 3
ER -