Abstract
Obesity and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) constitute global and growing epidemics that result in therapeutic dead ends. There is an urgent need for new and accessible treatments to improve and widen both preventive and curative approaches against NAFLD. The endocannabinoid system (ECS) is recognized as a complex signaling apparatus closely related to metabolic disorders and is a key target for treating NAFLD. Despite a lack of conclusive clinical trials, observational and pre-clinical studies highlight putative benefits of phytocannabinoids on liver steatosis through multiple pathways. Owing to both its safety profile and its diversity of active compounds acting primarily (although not exclusively) on the ECS—and its expanded version, the endocannabinoidome, the Cannabis plant should be considered a major prospect in the treatment of NAFLD. However, seizing this opportunity, and intensifying clinical research in this direction, will require overcoming both scientific and nonscientific barriers.
Keywords: cannabidiol, cannabinoids, cannabis, diabetes, insulin resistance, liver steatosis, metabolic disorders, NAFLD, NASH
Introduction
Obesity prevalence in the upcoming years is expected to increase globally and at the European level.1,2 This rise is accompanied by a similar trend for associated metabolic disorders such as diabetes, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH),3,4 which is an inflammatory and fibrotic stage of NAFLD that can lead to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and end-stage liver disease. A quarter of the world's adult population currently suffers from NAFLD.3
Insulin resistance plays a key role in the pathogenesis of NAFLD, which however results also from the interplay between diet, gut microbiota dysbiosis, genetic factors, and de novo lipogenesis. Lifestyle changes toward healthier diets and increased physical activity continue to be prescribed as first-line treatments. Nevertheless, long-term adherence to healthier behavioral changes remains a great challenge for patients and their providers.5,6
Given the current trends, and the fact that new drugs are still under evaluation to control inflammation and progression toward advanced stages of liver fibrosis,7,8 there is an urgent need to offer novel and innovative treatment options to prevent and manage NAFLD. There are complex links relating the endocannabinoid system (ECS) and its extended version—the endocannabinoidome—to metabolic and hepatic disorders.
As cannabinoids can modify ECS functioning, in this perspective article, we argue in favor of intensifying research on full-spectrum cannabis and cannabinoids as promising therapeutic options for metabolic disorders and NAFLD.
The ECS, a Pro-Homeostatic System
The ECS is a signaling network composed of cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2), their ligands (endocannabinoids), and ligand synthesizing and degrading enzymes. Its expanded version, which includes a plethora of lipid mediators with similar metabolic pathways but often different targets, constitutes the endocannabinoidome.9
The ECS and the endocannabinoidome, in particular, are complex systems, expressed through most organs, and involved in many physiological pathways. The ECS is widely involved in food intake and energy homeostasis, including hepatic glucose and lipid homeostasis and, therefore, is connected to metabolic disorders (Fig. 1).10 Both CB1 and CB2 are present in liver tissue and mediate a number of biological functions in different types of liver cells. Both receptors, as well as peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs), impact lipid metabolism and apparently participate in NAFLD development and its progression to NASH.11,12 Specifically, CB1 (and to a lesser extent CB2) antagonism is a strategy to prevent or reduce hepatic steatosis in pre-clinical models.11
FIG. 1.
Involvement of the ECS in a vicious cycle leading to liver steatosis and NASH. ECS, endocannabinoid system; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
Importantly, gut dysbiosis, a peculiarity of people with metabolic and associated hepatic disorders, seems to be causally related to alterations of the ECS and the endocannabinoidome, which have been found to regulate gut permeability.9,13 Through both direct and indirect effects on the gut microbiome, the endocannabinoidome is also comprehensively involved in the mechanisms of inflammation and oxidative stress, which are key components of obesity and NASH.9
In people with obesity14 and metabolic disorders (including hepatic steatosis15,16), the ECS is overactive (featuring elevated endocannabinoid “tone”), which leads to disruption in homeostasis, contributing to metabolic disorder genesis and/or persistence, thus fuelling a vicious cycle that further disrupts ECS functioning (Fig. 1).10
The ECS has been named after the Cannabis sativa plant, which produces multiple phytocannabinoids (exogenous cannabinoids coming from plant material) and terpenes that also interact with the ECS and the endocannabinoidome functioning.
The ECS and the endocannabinoidome are sensitive to lifestyle modifications, in particular to the relative intake of n-3 and n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids, pre- and/or probiotic consumption and physical activity.9 The effectiveness of lifestyle interventions on NAFLD/NASH is actually likely mediated in part by the improvement of ECS and endocannabinoidome functioning.
Cannabinoids from Cannabis (or “phytocannabinoids”) act on cannabinoid receptors, and several other endocannabinoidome receptors (i.e., PPARα and γ, thermosensitive transient receptor potential channels, and some orphan G-protein coupled receptors, such as GPR6, GPR18, and GPR55).17 They also are linked with an impact on gut microbiota composition,9 thereby potentially affecting all of the physiopathological conditions that are influenced by intestinal microorganisms.
The Therapeutic Promises of Cannabinoids for Liver and Metabolic Diseases
Evidence from observational studies on cannabis use
Observational studies conducted among cannabis users found a significant inverse relationship between cannabis use and body weight, potentially related to a long-lasting downregulation of CB1,18 therefore mimicking CB1 blockade. Data regarding cannabis use and liver steatosis tend to display a similar pattern,19–21 although null effects have occasionally been reported,22,23 as well as isolated negative effects among untreated hepatitis C virus-infected individuals.24 In addition, protective effects of cannabis use on the occurrence of insulin resistance and diabetes have also been observed in diverse populations.25–27
Advances in pre-clinical and clinical studies on cannabinoids
The effects on the liver of the main studied cannabinoids are summarized in Figure 2.
FIG. 2.
Nonexhaustive pathways by which cannabis chemical components may exert beneficial actions on liver steatosis. Direct modulation of CB1 by CBD and THC is not represented. CB2, cannabinoid receptor 2; CBD, cannabidiol; CBDA, cannabidiolic acid; THC, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol; THCA, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid; THCV, tetrahydrocannabivarin.
Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are the most abundant and studied phytocannabinoids. As a partial CB1 agonist, THC is likely to be pro-steatotic.11 Contrary to THC, CBD, a nonpsychoactive cannabinoid for which a CB1 negative allosteric modulator activity has been suggested, is a promising candidate as an antisteatotic agent,11 and has already yielded results in animal and in vitro models.28 Moreover, as an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory molecule,29–31 CBD is likely to protect the liver from progression to NASH.
However, a phase 2 randomized controlled dose-ranging trial comparing 200/400/800 mg CBD per day with placebo in people with liver steatosis (8-week treatment, n=25) showed no statistically significant benefit of CBD regarding liver triglyceride levels.32 Because 800 mg per day is within the upper range of doses used for CBD and is efficacious for other conditions,33,34 this lack of effect is unlikely due to underdosing. Low-dose CBD, alone or in combination with tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), also had no impact on liver triglyceride levels in people with diabetes.35
THCV, the third most studied phytocannabinoid, acts as a neutral antagonist of CB1 at low doses, and is a competitive antagonist of this receptor only in the presence of its agonists. The clinical benefits of THCV are limited to glucose homeostasis but not liver fat content.35
However, promising results on fatty liver were found in in vitro and animal models.28 PPARα and γ are part of the endocannabinoidome and THC and CBD increase their transcriptional activity, and exert effects that are inhibited by selective antagonists of PPARγ, whereas THCV does not exhibit these properties.11 Use of PPARγ agonists is associated with histological improvement in NAFLD.36 Finally, expected mechanisms potentially underlying the protection cannabis gives against metabolic disorders include downregulation of CB1 after exposure to THC, and/or direct regulation of appetite, food intake, and food preference through the action of THC and other cannabinoids.10,18
Besides the “major” phytocannabinoids, other, still understudied, cannabinoids such as cannabinoid acid precursors in the plant flowers (e.g., tetrahydrocannabinolic acid [THCA] or cannabidiolic acid [CBDA]), may be of interest for NAFLD prevention, due either to their interaction with endocannabinoidome receptors, or, as previously suggested for CBD, their immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, or antioxidant actions.37–39 Interacting with the intestinal epithelial barrier and microbiota are other pathways that phytocannabinoids may follow to impact NAFLD pathogenesis,40,41 in addition to potential psychosocial or behavioral pathways.42
A protective effect of rimonabant—a synthetic CB1 antagonist—on obesity-associated hepatic steatosis has been shown in rats,43 and on hepatic fat infiltration in severely uncontrolled diabetic rats.44 Positive effects have also been obtained in humans.45,46 However, rimonabant was quickly withdrawn because of serious psychiatric side effects,47 thereby contributing to reduce the interest in using cannabinoids as treatment for metabolic disorders.
To circumvent untoward behavioral effects observed after treatment with brain-penetrant CB1 antagonists, peripherally restricted CB1-targeting drugs have been developed, with positive results on cardiometabolic parameters in obese mice,48–50 as well as liver steatosis.51 Clinical trials have already started,52,53 with drugs deemed ready to move to phase 2 studies,54 thus opening the way to a promising new treatment paradigm for obesity-related disorders such as liver steatosis.
Why we should explore the potential of specific varieties of the Cannabis plant as a whole
As valuable as they are, studies on isolated cannabinoids should not make us miss the opportunity that whole-plant cannabis extracts represent. Indeed, the Cannabis plant generates a large number of various cannabinoid and noncannabinoids compounds, including fatty acids, terpenoids, and flavonoids, in quantities that vary according to its chemical variety (chemovar or chemotype).55,56 Functional interactions between CBD and THC have been highlighted.57 More broadly, the pharmacological contributions of minor cannabinoids or noncannabinoid compounds have been highlighted and popularized under the term “entourage effect.”55
Through synergistic mechanisms between different cannabis chemical components, “full-spectrum” cannabis extracts may thus have different and potentially superior effects compared with those observed with purified major cannabinoids.55 A parallel could be made with the effectiveness of the Mediterranean diet, superior to the one of isolated nutrients.58 Interactions between different cannabis compounds may also participate in reducing some side effects or adverse events associated with the treatment with single phytocannabinoids.55 Moreover, direct effects of noncannabinoid components found in full-spectrum extracts (e.g., limonene, β-caryophyllene or other terpenes) on metabolic disorders should not be excluded.59–62
If these nonpurified extracts are prepared following standardized and reproducible Good Manufacturing Practices, and tested in controlled clinical trials, they might provide better evidence as potential treatment of NAFLD than anecdotal beneficial effects of cannabis use on NAFLD. They may represent an alternative to isolated cannabinoids, as they are expected to partly act through several more biological pathways than pure compounds.
Prospects for Future Research
The astounding plasticity of the Cannabis genome, as well as the identification of the enzymes for the production of the major phytocannabinoids, could soon enable the agricultural production of plants with high levels of desired compounds.55 Finding proper synergistic cocktails of active cannabis components is key, and characterization and chemical profiling of strains for a specific medical use should become an important step of the research process toward the development of cannabis-based treatments.
In the same way that fully standardized chemotypes of the Cannabis plant have been developed as nabiximols (Sativex®) for clinical use against spasticity in multiple sclerosis, it would be possible to develop chemotypes rich in CBD, THCV, and/or β-caryophyllene (a terpene with CB2 agonist action found also in other plants63) for the prevention or treatment of NAFLD. However, and importantly, the pharmacological and toxicological characteristics of understudied cannabis components will have to be investigated before they are quantitatively incorporated in such composite medications.
An advantage of full-spectrum (i.e., whole flower) cannabis material or extracts is that they can be produced according to frugal innovation principles (i.e., substantial cost reduction, concentration on core functionalities, and optimization of performance levels64). This would facilitate production in limited resource settings, although at the expense of the standardization and reproducibility (and perhaps even the safety) of these treatments.
Remaining Barriers to Overcome and Fears to Dispel
One of the main barriers of expanded research on medical cannabis is the fear of its psychiatric side effects and risk of dependence, both caused mainly by THC through activation of CB1 receptors. Psychiatric side effects and dependence risks would be minimized in a medical context. Indeed, both are related to long-term and/or intense cannabis use, and in particular to the heavy use of THC-rich cannabis varieties.
The presence of significant proportions of specific cannabinoids such as CBD in cannabis products can attenuate the effects of THC.57 Delivering cannabis in a medical context would imply being able to control the quantity and quality of the cannabinoid component profile. Prescription of cannabis medicines after medical consultation would imply checking for risk factors for psychiatric disorders and dependence, drug–drug interactions,65 adjusting posology and/or redefining the optimal cannabis-based product according to side effects, tolerance, and liver disease progression.
Safe and effective routes such as smoke-free inhalation or oromucosal administration66 should be privileged as opposed to smoke-based routes. Moreover, according to the route of administration adopted, the dose–response has to be carefully explored, as it may narrow the therapeutic window of phytocannabinoids.67
Before the cannabinoid-related field of research is fully explored, several barriers need to be overcome, such as legal restrictions and supply barriers.68 Furthermore, as seen among health care providers,69 the stigma associated with cannabis use is present and likely to affect all people involved in research programs, from funding institutions to laboratory directors. These nonscientific barriers must not prevent us from seizing the opportunity to explore novel potential treatments to alleviate the growing prevalence of metabolic disorders and their hepatic complications.
Conclusions: Can Cannabis Provide the Real “Cure”?
Cannabis and cannabinoids must follow the same rigorous, vigilant, and objective evaluation processes as any other promising candidate treatment for hepatic steatosis. The current knowledge on the impact of nutrition and physical activity on the ECS9,70,71 encourages combining cannabis-based medicines and lifestyle changes into comprehensive patient-centered approaches to ensure improvements not only on clinical outcomes but also in quality of life in people at risk of advanced stages of liver disease.
Abbreviations Used
- CBD
cannabidiol
- ECS
endocannabinoid system
- CBDA
cannabidiolic acid
- NAFLD
nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
- NASH
nonalcoholic steatohepatitis
- PPARs
peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors
- THCA
tetrahydrocannabinolic acid
- THC
Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol
- THCV
tetrahydrocannabivarin
Authors' Contributions
T.B., P.C., and F.M. wrote the original outline of the article; T.B. wrote the first draft of the article; P.C. supervised and revised the article in its entirety; and F.M., P.B., and V.D. contributed to and revised the whole article until its final version.
Author Disclosure Statement
T.B., F.M., P.C., and P.B. have no competing financial interests related to this topic. V.D.M. is the recipient of research grants from GW Pharmaceuticals, United Kingdom. P.C. received research grants from MSD and Intercept for research unrelated to this topic.
Funding Information
T.B. work is funded by ANRS | Emergent Infectious Diseases.
Cite this article as: Barré T, Di Marzo V, Marcellin F, Burra P, Carrieri P (2023) Expanding research on cannabis-based medicines for liver steatosis: a low-risk high-reward way out of the present deadlock? Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 8:1, 5–11, DOI: 10.1089/can.2022.0014.
References
- 1. Janssen F, Bardoutsos A, Vidra N. Obesity prevalence in the long-term future in 18 European countries and in the USA. OFA. 2020;13:514–527. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Ampofo AG, Boateng EB. Beyond 2020: modelling obesity and diabetes prevalence. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;167:108362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Younossi Z, Anstee QM, Marietti M, et al. Global burden of NAFLD and NASH: trends, predictions, risk factors and prevention. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;15:11–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Karlsen TH, Sheron N, Zelber-Sagi S, et al. The EASL–Lancet Liver Commission: protecting the next generation of Europeans against liver disease complications and premature mortality. Lancet. 2021. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01701-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Burgess E, Hassmén P, Pumpa KL. Determinants of adherence to lifestyle intervention in adults with obesity: a systematic review. Clin Obes. 2017;7:123–135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Middleton KR, Anton SD, Perri MG. Long-term adherence to health behavior change. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2013;7:395–404. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Neuschwander-Tetri BA. Therapeutic landscape for NAFLD in 2020. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:1984–1998.e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Newsome PN, Buchholtz K, Cusi K, et al. A placebo-controlled trial of subcutaneous semaglutide in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:1113–1124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Di Marzo V, Silvestri C. Lifestyle and metabolic syndrome: contribution of the endocannabinoidome. Nutrients. 2019;11. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/nu11081956. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Silvestri C, Di Marzo V. The endocannabinoid system in energy homeostasis and the etiopathology of metabolic disorders. Cell Metab. 2013;17:475–490. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Berk K, Bzdega W, Konstantynowicz-Nowicka K, et al. Phytocannabinoids—a green approach toward non-alcoholic fatty liver disease treatment. J Clin Med. 2021;10.[Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/jcm10030393. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Skat-Rørdam J, Højland Ipsen D, Lykkesfeldt J, et al. A role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2019;124:528–537. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Di Marzo V. New approaches and challenges to targeting the endocannabinoid system. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2018;17:623–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. André A, Gonthier MP. The endocannabinoid system: its roles in energy balance and potential as a target for obesity treatment. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2010;42:1788–1801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Zelber-Sagi S, Azar S, Nemirovski A, et al. Serum levels of endocannabinoids are independently associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2017;25:94–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Westerbacka J, Kotronen A, Fielding AB, et al. Splanchnic balance of free fatty acids, endocannabinoids, and lipids in subjects with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology. 2010;139. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.06.064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Piscitelli F, Di Marzo V. Cannabinoids: a class of unique natural products with unique pharmacology. Rend Fis Acc Lincei. 2021;32:5–15. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Clark TM, Jones JM, Hall AG, et al. Theoretical explanation for reduced body mass index and obesity rates in cannabis users. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res. 2018;3:259–271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Adejumo AC, Alliu S, Ajayi TO, et al. Cannabis use is associated with reduced prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0176416. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Barré T, Rojas Rojas T, Lacombe K, et al. Cannabis use and reduced risk of elevated fatty liver index in HIV-HCV co-infected patients: a longitudinal analysis (ANRS CO13 HEPAVIH). Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2021. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1080/14787210.2021.1884545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Kim D, Kim W, Kwak MS, et al. Inverse association of marijuana use with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease among adults in the United States. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0186702. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Wang X, Liu Z, Liu W. Does cannabis intake protect against non-alcoholic fatty liver disease? A two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Front Genet. 2020;11. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00949. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Muniyappa R, Sable S, Ouwerkerk R, et al. Metabolic effects of chronic cannabis smoking. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2415–2422. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Hézode C, Zafrani ES, Roudot-Thoraval F, et al. Daily cannabis use: a novel risk factor of steatosis severity in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:432–439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Barré T, Nishimwe ML, Protopopescu C, et al. Cannabis use is associated with a lower risk of diabetes in chronic hepatitis C-infected patients (ANRS CO22 Hepather cohort). J Viral Hepatitis. 2020;27:1473–1483. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Sidney S. Marijuana use and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a review. Curr Diab Rep. 2016;16:117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Carrieri MP, Serfaty L, Vilotitch A, et al. Cannabis use and reduced risk of insulin resistance in HIV-HCV infected patients: a longitudinal analysis (ANRS CO13 HEPAVIH). Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61:40–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Silvestri C, Paris D, Martella A, et al. Two non-psychoactive cannabinoids reduce intracellular lipid levels and inhibit hepatosteatosis. J Hepatol. 2015;62:1382–1390. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Zurier RB, Burstein SH. Cannabinoids, inflammation, and fibrosis. FASEB J. 2016;30:3682–3689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Petrosino S, Verde R, Vaia M, et al. Anti-inflammatory properties of cannabidiol, a nonpsychotropic cannabinoid, in experimental allergic contact dermatitis. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2018;365:652–663. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Atalay S, Jarocka-Karpowicz I, Skrzydlewska E. Antioxidative and anti-inflammatory properties of cannabidiol. Antioxidants (Basel). 2019;9. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/antiox9010021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Jazz Pharmaceuticals. A randomised, partially-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot, dose-ranging study to assess the effect of cannabidiol (CBD) on liver fat levels in subjects with fatty liver disease. clinicaltrials.gov; 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01284634 Accessed February 17, 2022.
- 33. Millar SA, Stone NL, Bellman ZD, et al. A systematic review of cannabidiol dosing in clinical populations. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85:1888–1900. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Larsen C, Shahinas J. Dosage, efficacy and safety of cannabidiol administration in adults: a systematic review of human trials. J Clin Med Res. 2020;12:129–141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Jadoon KA, Ratcliffe SH, Barrett DA, et al. Efficacy and safety of cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabivarin on glycemic and lipid parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group pilot study. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:1777–1786. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Choudhary NS, Kumar N, Duseja A. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors and their agonists in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2019;9:731–739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Borrelli F, Fasolino I, Romano B, et al. Beneficial effect of the non-psychotropic plant cannabinoid cannabigerol on experimental inflammatory bowel disease. Biochem Pharmacol. 2013;85:1306–1316. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. O'Sullivan SE. An update on PPAR activation by cannabinoids. Br J Pharmacol. 2016;173:1899–1910. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Palomares B, Ruiz-Pino F, Garrido-Rodriguez M, et al. Tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A (THCA-A) reduces adiposity and prevents metabolic disease caused by diet-induced obesity. Biochem Pharmacol. 2020;171:113693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Alhamoruni A, Wright K, Larvin M, et al. Cannabinoids mediate opposing effects on inflammation-induced intestinal permeability. Br J Pharmacol. 2012;165:2598–2610. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Gigli S, Seguella L, Pesce M, et al. Cannabidiol restores intestinal barrier dysfunction and inhibits the apoptotic process induced by Clostridium difficile toxin A in Caco-2 cells. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2017;5:1108–1115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Lopez HL, Cesareo KR, Raub B, et al. Effects of hemp extract on markers of wellness, stress resilience, recovery and clinical biomarkers of safety in overweight, but otherwise healthy subjects. J Diet Suppl. 2020;0:1–26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Gary-Bobo M, Elachouri G, Gallas JF, et al. Rimonabant reduces obesity-associated hepatic steatosis and features of metabolic syndrome in obese Zucker fa/fa rats. Hepatology. 2007;46:122–129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Chang E, Kim DH, Yang H, et al. CB1 receptor blockade ameliorates hepatic fat infiltration and inflammation and increases Nrf2-AMPK pathway in a rat model of severely uncontrolled diabetes. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0206152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Després Jean-Pierre, Ross Robert, Boka Gabor, et al. Effect of rimonabant on the high-triglyceride/low–HDL-cholesterol dyslipidemia, intraabdominal adiposity, and liver fat. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009;29:416–423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Bergholm R, Sevastianova K, Santos A, et al. CB(1) blockade-induced weight loss over 48 weeks decreases liver fat in proportion to weight loss in humans. Int J Obes (Lond). 2013;37:699–703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Sam AH, Salem V, Ghatei MA. Rimonabant: from RIO to Ban. J Obes. 2011;2011:432607. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Tam J, Vemuri VK, Liu J, et al. Peripheral CB1 cannabinoid receptor blockade improves cardiometabolic risk in mouse models of obesity. J Clin Invest. 2010;120:2953–2966. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Tam J, Cinar R, Liu J, et al. Peripheral cannabinoid-1 receptor inverse agonism reduces obesity by reversing leptin resistance. Cell Metab. 2012;16. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2012.07.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Tang Y, Ho G, Li Y, et al. Beneficial metabolic effects of CB1R anti-sense oligonucleotide treatment in diet-induced obese AKR/J mice. PLoS One. 2012;7:e42134. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Khan N, Laudermilk L, Ware J, et al. Peripherally selective CB1 receptor antagonist improves symptoms of metabolic syndrome in mice. ACS Pharmacol Transl Sci. 2021;4:757–764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Inversago Pharma Inc. A single center, phase I, double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single ascending oral doses of INV-101 in healthy male and female subjects. clinicaltrials.gov; 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04531150 Accessed February 17, 2022.
- 53. Goldfinch Bio, Inc. A first-in-human, phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of GFB-024 as a single dose in healthy overweight and obese participants and as multiple doses in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. clinicaltrials.gov; 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04880291 Accessed February 17, 2022.
- 54. Inversago Pharma. The peripheral CB1 blockade: a novel therapeutic avenue to address key metabolic conditions. Biopharma Dealmakers. 2020. https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-020-01154-5 Accessed February 21, 2022.
- 55. Russo EB. The case for the entourage effect and conventional breeding of clinical cannabis: no “Strain,” No Gain. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1969. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. LaVigne JE, Hecksel R, Keresztes A, et al. Cannabis sativa terpenes are cannabimimetic and selectively enhance cannabinoid activity. Sci Rep. 2021;11:8232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Boggs DL, Nguyen JD, Morgenson D, et al. Clinical and preclinical evidence for functional interactions of cannabidiol and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2018;43:142–154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Suárez M, Boqué N, Del Bas JM, et al. Mediterranean diet and multi-ingredient-based interventions for the management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Nutrients. 2017;9. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/nu9101052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Victor Antony Santiago J, Jayachitra J, Shenbagam M, et al. Dietary d-limonene alleviates insulin resistance and oxidative stress-induced liver injury in high-fat diet and L-NAME-treated rats. Eur J Nutr. 2012;51:57–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Ahmad SB, Rehman MU, Fatima B, et al. Antifibrotic effects of D-limonene (5(1-methyl-4-[1-methylethenyl]) cyclohexane) in CCl4 induced liver toxicity in Wistar rats. Environ Toxicol. 2018;33:361–369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Hashiesh HM, Meeran MFN, Sharma C, et al. Therapeutic potential of β-caryophyllene: a dietary cannabinoid in diabetes and associated complications. Nutrients. 2020;12. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/nu12102963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Souza MT de S, Almeida JRG da S, Araujo AA de S, et al. Structure–activity relationship of terpenes with anti-inflammatory profile—a systematic review. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2014;115:244–256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Hashiesh HM, Sharma C, Goyal SN, et al. A focused review on CB2 receptor-selective pharmacological properties and therapeutic potential of β-caryophyllene, a dietary cannabinoid. Biomed Pharmacother. 2021;140:111639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Prabhu J. Frugal innovation: doing more with less for more. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2017;375:20160372. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Cox EJ, Maharao N, Patilea-Vrana G, et al. A marijuana-drug interaction primer: precipitants, pharmacology, and pharmacokinetics. Pharmacol Ther. 2019;201:25–38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Lanz C, Mattsson J, Soydaner U, et al. Medicinal cannabis: in vitro validation of vaporizers for the smoke-free inhalation of cannabis. PLoS One. 2016;11. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Linares IM, Zuardi AW, Pereira LC, et al. Cannabidiol presents an inverted U-shaped dose-response curve in a simulated public speaking test. Braz J Psychiatry. 2019;41:9–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Alexander SP. Barriers to the wider adoption of medicinal Cannabis. Br J Pain. 2020;14:122–132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Melnikov S, Aboav A, Shalom E, et al. The effect of attitudes, subjective norms and stigma on health-care providers' intention to recommend medicinal cannabis to patients. Int J Nurs Pract. 2021;27:e12836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. McPartland JM, Guy GW, Di Marzo V. Care and feeding of the endocannabinoid system: a systematic review of potential clinical interventions that upregulate the endocannabinoid system. PLoS One. 2014;9.[Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Armeli F, Bonucci A, Maggi E, et al. Mediterranean diet and neurodegenerative diseases: the neglected role of nutrition in the modulation of the endocannabinoid system. Biomolecules. 2021;11. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3390/biom11060790. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


