Cannabidiol modulation of antinociceptive tolerance to Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol
Humans typically self-administer cannabidiol (CBD) and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) together repeatedly (as in cannabis, cannabis extract, or Sativex®) to relieve pain. It has been suggested that one benefit of the drug combination may be decreased tolerance development.
The present study compared the development of tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of THC given alone versus combined with CBD, in rats.
THC dose-effect curves on tail withdrawal and paw pressure tests were obtained before and after twice-daily treatment with vehicle or CBD (10 mg/kg), plus vehicle or THC (3.6 mg/kg females; 9.3 mg/kg males) for 4 days.
On the first day, THC was more potent in females than males on both nociceptive tests. From pre- to post-chronic (day 1 to day 6), THC potency on the tail withdrawal test decreased more in females than males, and rats that had been treated with CBD + THC repeatedly showed greater rightward/downward shifts of the THC dose-effect curve than rats that had been treated with THC alone. Analysis of blood samples taken after day 6 testing showed that serum THC levels were higher in CBD + THC-treated females than in vehicle + THC-treated females, and THC’s active metabolite 11-OH-THC and its inactive metabolite THC-COOH were lower in CBD + THC-treated rats than in vehicle + THC-treated rats of both sexes. CBD also increased serum levels of the active metabolite cannabinol in both sexes.
The decrease in THC’s antinociceptive effects after repeated CBD exposure may be due to CBD-induced inhibition of THC metabolism, and/or antagonism of THC effects that emerges with repeated CBD treatment.
KeywordsSex differences Cannabinoids Pain
The authors thank Kelly Hewitt and Abby Pondelick for excellent technical assistance.
This research was funded by NIDA DA016644 (J. Wiley, PI), by a Diversity Supplement to DA016644 (to support N. Greene), and by funds dedicated for marijuana research by the State of Washington Initiative Measure 502.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th edition. Washington (DC): National Academies Press, 2011Google Scholar
- Hindocha C, Freeman TP, Schafer G, Gardener C, Das RK, Morgan CJ, Curran HV (2015) Acute effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol and their combination on facial emotion recognition: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in cannabis users. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 25:325–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hložek T, Uttl L, Kadeřábek L, Balíková M, Lhotková E, Horsley RR, Nováková P, Šichová K, Štefková K, Tylš F, Kuchař M, Páleníček T (2017) Pharmacokinetic and behavioural profile of THC, CBD, and THC+CBD combination after pulmonary, oral, and subcutaneous administration in rats and confirmation of conversion in vivo of CBD to THC. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 27:1223–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Klein C, Karanges E, Spiro A, Wong A, Spencer J, Huynh T, Gunasekaran N, Karl T, Long LE, Huang XF, Liu K, Arnold JC, McGregor IS (2011) Cannabidiol potentiates Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) behavioural effects and alters THC pharmacokinetics during acute and chronic treatment in adolescent rats. Psychopharmacology 218:443–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nadulski T, Pragst F, Weinberg G, Roser P, Schnelle M, Fronk EM, Stadelmann AM (2005) Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study about the effects of cannabidiol (CBD) on the pharmacokinetics of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) after oral application of THC verses standardized cannabis extract. Ther Drug Monit 27:799–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- National Research Council (2011) Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th edition. National Academies Press, Washington (DC)Google Scholar
- Todd SM, Zhou C, Clarke DJ, Chohan TW, Bahceci D, Arnold JC (2017) Interactions between cannabidiol and Δ9-THC following acute and repeated dosing: rebound hyperactivity, sensorimotor gating and epigenetic and neuroadaptive changes in the mesolimbic pathway. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 27:132–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar