A Preliminary Pharmacokinetic Comparison of Δ-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol Extract Versus Oromucosal Spray in Healthy Men and Women.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1089/can.2023.0249
Caroline A Arout, Hannah M Harris, Noah M Wilson, Kyle F Mastropietro, Amanda M Bozorgi, Gabriela Fazilov, José Tempero, Mariah Walker, Margaret Haney
{"title":"A Preliminary Pharmacokinetic Comparison of Δ-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol Extract Versus Oromucosal Spray in Healthy Men and Women.","authors":"Caroline A Arout, Hannah M Harris, Noah M Wilson, Kyle F Mastropietro, Amanda M Bozorgi, Gabriela Fazilov, José Tempero, Mariah Walker, Margaret Haney","doi":"10.1089/can.2023.0249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Few studies have directly compared the bioavailability of different cannabinoid formulations. Our goal was to assess the pharmacokinetic parameters and relative bioavailability of two Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol (THC:CBD) formulations: orally administered THC:CBD extract and oromucosally administered nabiximols. <b>Methods:</b> This pilot crossover study counterbalanced (1) 1 mL of orally administered THC:CBD extract (10 mg/mL each of THC and CBD in grapeseed oil) and (2) oromucosally administered nabiximols (four sprays of 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD per spray, for a total dose of 10.8 mg THC and 10 mg CBD). Blood samples were obtained pre-dose and at 16 post-dose timepoints over 24 h. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated for THC, 11-hydroxy-tetrahydrocannabinol (11-OH-THC), and CBD. <b>Results:</b> Twelve occasional cannabis users (6 male, 6 female) were tested under fasting conditions. <i>C</i><sub>max</sub> for THC and CBD was significantly higher with significantly shorter half-lives for THC:CBD extract versus nabiximols. <i>C</i><sub>max</sub> for nabiximols was significantly higher in males compared with females. Under both treatment conditions, THC and CBD were undetectable by 24 h post-dose, and 11-OH-THC was markedly reduced from its peak. No serious adverse events were reported. <b>Conclusions:</b> Little is known about the comparative pharmacokinetics of commercially available cannabis products. This pilot study shows that the extract formulation achieved higher THC and CBD concentrations within a shorter time frame than nabiximols. These findings may have implications for clinical populations using these formulations therapeutically. Future studies should examine multiple doses in the context of therapeutic outcomes to characterize the relative clinical utility of these formulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":9386,"journal":{"name":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/can.2023.0249","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Few studies have directly compared the bioavailability of different cannabinoid formulations. Our goal was to assess the pharmacokinetic parameters and relative bioavailability of two Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol (THC:CBD) formulations: orally administered THC:CBD extract and oromucosally administered nabiximols. Methods: This pilot crossover study counterbalanced (1) 1 mL of orally administered THC:CBD extract (10 mg/mL each of THC and CBD in grapeseed oil) and (2) oromucosally administered nabiximols (four sprays of 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD per spray, for a total dose of 10.8 mg THC and 10 mg CBD). Blood samples were obtained pre-dose and at 16 post-dose timepoints over 24 h. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated for THC, 11-hydroxy-tetrahydrocannabinol (11-OH-THC), and CBD. Results: Twelve occasional cannabis users (6 male, 6 female) were tested under fasting conditions. Cmax for THC and CBD was significantly higher with significantly shorter half-lives for THC:CBD extract versus nabiximols. Cmax for nabiximols was significantly higher in males compared with females. Under both treatment conditions, THC and CBD were undetectable by 24 h post-dose, and 11-OH-THC was markedly reduced from its peak. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Little is known about the comparative pharmacokinetics of commercially available cannabis products. This pilot study shows that the extract formulation achieved higher THC and CBD concentrations within a shorter time frame than nabiximols. These findings may have implications for clinical populations using these formulations therapeutically. Future studies should examine multiple doses in the context of therapeutic outcomes to characterize the relative clinical utility of these formulations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.90%
发文量
164
期刊最新文献
A Preliminary Pharmacokinetic Comparison of Δ-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol Extract Versus Oromucosal Spray in Healthy Men and Women. Extending Gender- and Sex-Based Analyses in Cannabis Research: Findings from an Online Sample of Gender Diverse Young Adult Consumers. Re: "Regular Use of Cannabis in Female Athletes Is Associated with a Reduction in Early Anaerobic Power Production" by Lisano et al. Temporal Trends in Semen Quality, Hormone Levels, and Substance Use Among Infertile Men in Pre- and Post-Cannabis Legalization Eras in Canada. Identification and Optimization of more Efficient Olivetolic Acid Synthases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1