Increased hippocampal engagement during learning as a marker of sensitivity to psychotomimetic effects of δ-9-THC

The Yin and Yang of Cannabis: A Systematic Review of Human Neuroimaging Evidence of the Differential Effects of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol

Cannabidiol (CBD) and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) have been the most investigated cannabinoids at the human and preclinical levels, although the neurobiological mechanisms underlying their effects remain unclear. Human experimental evidence complemented by observational studies suggests that THC may have psychotogenic effects while CBD may have antipsychotic effects. However, whether their effects on brain function are consistent with their opposing behavioral effects remains unclear. To address this, here we synthesize neuroimaging evidence investigating the acute effects of THC and CBD on human brain function using a range of neuroimaging techniques, with an aim to identify the key brain substrates where THC and CBD have opposing effects. After a systematic search, a review of the available studies indicated marked heterogeneity. However, an overall pattern of opposite effect profiles of the two cannabinoids was evident with some degree of consistency, primarily attributed to the head-to-head challenge studies of THC and CBD. While head-to-head comparisons are relatively few, collectively the evidence suggests that opposite effects of THC and CBD may be present in the striatum, parahippocampus, anterior cingulate/medial prefrontal cortex, and amygdala, with opposite effects less consistently identified in other regions. Broadly, THC seems to increase brain activation and blood flow, whereas CBD seems to decrease brain activation and blood flow. Given the sparse evidence, there is a particular need to understand the mechanisms underlying their opposite behavioral effects because it may not only offer insights into the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of psychotic disorders but also suggest potentially novel targets and biomarkers for drug discovery.

The why behind the high: determinants of neurocognition during acute cannabis exposure

Acute cannabis intoxication may induce neurocognitive impairment and is a possible cause of human error, injury and psychological distress. One of the major concerns raised about increasing cannabis legalization and the therapeutic use of cannabis is that it will increase cannabis-related harm. However, the impairing effect of cannabis during intoxication varies among individuals and may not occur in all users. There is evidence that the neurocognitive response to acute cannabis exposure is driven by changes in the activity of the mesocorticolimbic and salience networks, can be exacerbated or mitigated by biological and pharmacological factors, varies with product formulations and frequency of use and can differ between recreational and therapeutic use. It is argued that these determinants of the cannabis-induced neurocognitive state should be taken into account when defining and evaluating levels of cannabis impairment in the legal arena, when prescribing cannabis in therapeutic settings and when informing society about the safe and responsible use of cannabis.

Differential sensitivity to the acute psychotomimetic effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol associated with its differential acute effects on glial function and cortisol

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use has been associated with psychosis through exposure to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), its key psychoactive ingredient. Although preclinical and human evidence suggests that Δ9-THC acutely modulates glial function and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity, whether differential sensitivity to the acute psychotomimetic effects of Δ9-THC is associated with differential effects of Δ9-THC on glial function and HPA-axis response has never been tested.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study investigated whether sensitivity to the psychotomimetic effects of Δ9-THC moderates the acute effects of a single Δ9-THC dose (1.19 mg/2 ml) on myo-inositol levels, a surrogate marker of glia, in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC), and circadian cortisol levels, the key neuroendocrine marker of the HPA-axis, in a set of 16 healthy participants (seven males) with modest previous cannabis exposure.

RESULTS

The Δ9-THC-induced change in ACC myo-inositol levels differed significantly between those sensitive to (Δ9-THC minus placebo; M = -0.251, s.d. = 1.242) and those not sensitive (M = 1.615, s.d. = 1.753) to the psychotomimetic effects of the drug (t(14) = 2.459, p = 0.028). Further, the Δ9-THC-induced change in cortisol levels over the study period (baseline minus 2.5 h post-drug injection) differed significantly between those sensitive to (Δ9-THC minus placebo; M = -275.4, s.d. = 207.519) and those not sensitive (M = 74.2, s.d. = 209.281) to the psychotomimetic effects of the drug (t(13) = 3.068, p = 0.009). Specifically, Δ9-THC exposure lowered ACC myo-inositol levels and disrupted the physiological diurnal cortisol decrease only in those subjects developing transient psychosis-like symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The interindividual differences in transient psychosis-like effects of Δ9-THC are the result of its differential impact on glial function and stress response.

Unraveling the Intoxicating and Therapeutic Effects of Cannabis Ingredients on Psychosis and Cognition

Research evidence suggests a dose–response relationship for the association between cannabis use and risk of psychosis. Such relationship seems to reflect an increased risk of psychosis not only as a function of frequent cannabis use, but also of high-potency cannabis use in terms of concentration of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), its main psychoactive component. This finding would be in line with the evidence that Δ9-THC administration induces transient psychosis-like symptoms in otherwise healthy individuals. Conversely, low-potency varieties would be less harmful because of their lower amount of Δ9-THC and potential compresence of another cannabinoid, cannabidiol (CBD), which seems to mitigate Δ9-THC detrimental effects. A growing body of studies begins to suggest that CBD may have not only protective effects against the psychotomimetic effects of Δ9-THC but even therapeutic properties on its own, opening new prospects for the treatment of psychosis. Despite being more limited, evidence of the effects of cannabis on cognition seems to come to similar conclusions, with increasing Δ9-THC exposure being responsible for the cognitive impairments attributed to recreational cannabis use while CBD preventing such effects and, when administered alone, enhancing cognition. Molecular evidence indicates that Δ9-THC and CBD may interact with cannabinoid receptors with almost opposite mechanisms, with Δ9-THC being a partial agonist and CBD an inverse agonist/antagonist. With the help of imaging techniques, pharmacological studies in vivo have been able to show opposite effects of Δ9-THC and CBD also on brain function. Altogether, they may account for the intoxicating and therapeutic effects of cannabis on psychosis and cognition.

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol increases striatal glutamate levels in healthy individuals: implications for psychosis

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying the association between cannabis use and acute or long-lasting psychosis are not completely understood. While some evidence suggests altered striatal dopamine may underlie the association, direct evidence that cannabis use affects either acute or chronic striatal dopamine is inconclusive. In contrast, pre-clinical research suggests that cannabis may affect dopamine via modulation of glutamate signaling. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover design was used to investigate whether altered striatal glutamate, as measured using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy, underlies the acute psychotomimetic effects of intravenously administered delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC; 1.19 mg/2 ml), the key psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, in a set of 16 healthy participants (7 males) with modest previous cannabis exposure. Compared to placebo, acute administration of Δ9-THC significantly increased Glutamate (Glu) + Glutamine (Gln) metabolites (Glx) in the left caudate head (P = 0.027). Furthermore, compared to individuals who were not sensitive to the psychotomimetic effects of Δ9-THC, individuals who developed transient psychotic-like symptoms (~70% of the sample) had significantly lower baseline Glx (placebo; P 7= 0.023) and a 2.27-times higher increase following Δ9-THC administration. Lower baseline Glx values (r = -0.55; P = 0.026) and higher previous cannabis exposure (r = 0.52; P = 0.040) were associated with a higher Δ9-THC-induced Glx increase. These results suggest that an increase in striatal glutamate levels may underlie acute cannabis-induced psychosis while lower baseline levels may be a marker of greater sensitivity to its acute psychotomimetic effects and may have important public health implications.

Does thinner right entorhinal cortex underlie genetic liability to cannabis use?

BACKGROUND

Although alterations in medial temporal lobe structures have been previously associated with use of cannabis, one of the most widely used illicit drugs, whether such alterations are a cause or effect of cannabis use has been unclear.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional observational study involving 404 twins/siblings, we have compared cortical thickness and surface area between groups of gender-matched sibling-pairs (concordant cannabis unexposed, concordant exposed and discordant for cannabis exposure) using permutation tests after controlling for potential confounds. Bi-variate polygenic model was used to assess the genetic and environmental contributions underlying cortical morphological phenotypes and frequency of cannabis use.

RESULTS

Cortical thickness of the right entorhinal cortex was significantly lower in the concordant exposed siblings compared to both discordant unexposed and discordant exposed groups [false discovery rate (FDR)-corrected, q < 0.05]. The association between the right entorhinal cortex thickness and frequency of cannabis use is due to the contribution of significant shared additive genetic (ρg = -0.19 ± 0.08; p = 0.02) factors but not unique environment (ρe = 0.05 ± 0.09; p = 0.53). Significantly lower surface area of the right entorhinal cortex in discordant exposed group compared with the discordant unexposed group furnishes preliminary evidence in support of causal effect of cannabis use (FDR-corrected, q < 0.05). However, bi-variate polygenic model-based analysis did not show any significant effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared genetic liability may underlie the association between cannabis exposure and thinner right entorhinal cortex. Prospective longitudinal studies are necessary to definitively disentangle the cause-effect relationships of cannabis use.

The neuropsychopharmacology of cannabis: A review of human imaging studies

The laws governing cannabis are evolving worldwide and associated with changing patterns of use. The main psychoactive drug in cannabis is Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a partial agonist at the endocannabinoid CB₁ receptor. Acutely, cannabis and THC produce a range of effects on several neurocognitive and pharmacological systems. These include effects on executive, emotional, reward and memory processing via direct interactions with the endocannabinoid system and indirect effects on the glutamatergic, GABAergic and dopaminergic systems. Cannabidiol, a non-intoxicating cannabinoid found in some forms of cannabis, may offset some of these acute effects. Heavy repeated cannabis use, particularly during adolescence, has been associated with adverse effects on these systems, which increase the risk of mental illnesses including addiction and psychosis. Here, we provide a comprehensive state of the art review on the acute and chronic neuropsychopharmacology of cannabis by synthesizing the available neuroimaging research in humans. We describe the effects of drug exposure during development, implications for understanding psychosis and cannabis use disorder, and methodological considerations. Greater understanding of the precise mechanisms underlying the effects of cannabis may also give rise to new treatment targets.