Almog Uziel1, Anat Gelfand2, Keren Amsalem2, Paula Berman2, Gil M Lewitus2, David Meiri2, Dan Y Lewitus1. 1. Department of Polymers and Plastics Engineering, Shenkar College of Engineering, Design and Art, Ramat-Gan 52526, Israel. 2. The Laboratory of Cancer Biology and Cannabinoid Research, Department of Biology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 320003, Israel.
Abstract
The therapeutic effect of the Cannabis plant largely depends on the presence and specific ratio of a spectrum of phytocannabinoids. Although prescription of medicinal Cannabis for various conditions constantly grows, its consumption is mostly limited to oral or respiratory pathways, impeding its duration of action, bioavailability, and efficacy. Herein, a long-acting formulation in the form of melt-printed polymeric microdepots for full-spectrum cannabidiol (CBD)-rich extract administration is described. When injected subcutaneously in mice, the microdepots facilitate sustained release of the encapsulated extract over a two-week period. The prolonged delivery results in elevated serum levels of multiple, major and minor, phytocannabinoids for over 14 days, compared to Cannabis extract injection. A direct analysis of the microdepots retrieved from the injection site gives rise to an empirical model for the release kinetics of the phytocannabinoids as a function of their physical traits. As a proof of concept, we compare the long-term efficacy of a single administration of the microdepots to a single administration of Cannabis extract in a pentylenetetrazol-induced convulsion model. One week following administration, the microdepots reduce the incidence of tonic-clonic seizures by 40%, increase the survival rate by 50%, and the latency to first tonic-clonic seizures by 170%. These results suggest that a long-term full-spectrum Cannabis delivery system may provide new form of Cannabis administration and treatments.
The therapeutic effect of the Cannabis plant largely depends on the presence and specific ratio of a spectrum of phytocannabinoids. Although prescription of medicinal Cannabis for various conditions constantly grows, its consumption is mostly limited to oral or respiratory pathways, impeding its duration of action, bioavailability, and efficacy. Herein, a long-acting formulation in the form of melt-printed polymeric microdepots for full-spectrum cannabidiol (CBD)-rich extract administration is described. When injected subcutaneously in mice, the microdepots facilitate sustained release of the encapsulated extract over a two-week period. The prolonged delivery results in elevated serum levels of multiple, major and minor, phytocannabinoids for over 14 days, compared to Cannabis extract injection. A direct analysis of the microdepots retrieved from the injection site gives rise to an empirical model for the release kinetics of the phytocannabinoids as a function of their physical traits. As a proof of concept, we compare the long-term efficacy of a single administration of the microdepots to a single administration of Cannabis extract in a pentylenetetrazol-induced convulsion model. One week following administration, the microdepots reduce the incidence of tonic-clonic seizures by 40%, increase the survival rate by 50%, and the latency to first tonic-clonic seizures by 170%. These results suggest that a long-term full-spectrum Cannabis delivery system may provide new form of Cannabis administration and treatments.
A central principle underlying the use of whole-plant medicines
is that herbs are inherently polypharmaceutical. The potential synergy
between the vast number of active ingredients contained in herbs has
garnered attention in the phytomedicine field in recent years. Of
all the plant species with therapeutic properties, Cannabis is one of the most versatile in terms of its phytochemistry.[1−3] More than 500 natural compounds belonging to a broad range of chemical
classes have been identified or isolated from Cannabis.[4,5] The most abundant are the phytocannabinoids (plant-derived
cannabinoids), a family of terpenophenolic compounds uniquely produced
by the plant as secondary metabolites.[6,7] Gill et al.,[8] showed that the activity of Δ9-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), the primary active ingredient of Cannabis, is influenced by other compounds present in the plant, promoting
the notion of phytochemical synergy in Cannabis pharmacology.[9−12] Gallily et al.,[13] reported that the bell-shaped
dose–response of purified CBD, another major constituent of Cannabis, is partially alleviated by other phytocannabinoids
or noncannabinoids present in the plant. Recently, it was demonstrated
that CBD-rich extracts of Cannabis have a superior
therapeutic profile for treating refractory epilepsy compared to the
isolated cannabinoid.[14] These results were
supported by the finding that different high-CBD containing Cannabis strains produced different anticonvulsant properties
in a pentylenetetrazol (PTZ) test in mice, despite having similar
CBD content.[5] These differences may arise
from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions, whose
combined therapeutic effects are greater than the sum of their parts.[4,9,15,16]In recent years, Cannabis use for medical
purposes
continues to evolve, as shown by the growing number of states now
permitting its administration for a variety of conditions, including
chronic pain, cancer associated pain, chemotherapy-induced nausea
and vomiting, spacticity associated with multiple scelerosis, Parkinson’s
disease, post-traumatic stress disorder, and intractable epilepsy.[12,17] Currently, the administration of whole-plant Cannabis is mainly through inhalation pathways, via vaporization or smoking,
or by oral ingestion of edible products.[18,19] Such consumption sharply increases the therapeutic ingredient levels
in the bloodstream and is followed by a short therapeutic action period,
lasting no longer than several hours.[12,20,21] In addition, phytocannabinoids are lipophilic molecules
with low aqueous solubility and susceptibility to degradation, limiting
their oral bioavailability. Furthermore, phytocannabinoids absorption
is highly dependent on various factors, such as their lipophilic nature,
whether the patient had eaten recently, or inhalation conditions.[10,12,22] These limiting factors may be
overcome via the development of novel dosage forms that are specifically
designed to improve the therapeutic efficacy of active substances.[10,23]Polymeric microspheres that are employed to encapsulate, protect,
and deliver pharmaceuticals in a rate-controlled manner are potentially
an attractive dosage form. In these systems, the polymer matrix acts
as a carrier that modulates drug release kinetics, significantly extending
its residence time and bioavailability, while reducing plasma levels
fluctuations and administration frequency.[24,25] Several polymeric systems based on poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) and polycaprolactone (PCL) have been developed in
recent years for long-term delivery of CBD, Δ9-THC
and the cannabinoid derivative 1-naphthalenyl[4-(pentyloxy)-1-naphthalenyl]methanone
(CB13). In vitro, these systems demonstrated sustained release over
a two to three week period,[26−29] and inhibition of cancer cell proliferation.[27,28] In addition, the ability of the polymeric carriers to improve oral
absorption[22] and extend the pain-relieving
effect of CB13[30] has been shown in vivo.
Moreover, the continuous release of CBD or Δ9-THC
reduced the growth of glioma xenografts in tumor-bearing mice,[31] and the incorporation of CBD-loaded microspheres
in an osteoconductive scaffold improved bone healing.[32] However, the encapsulation and delivery of the whole Cannabis plant extract, critical for exploiting synergistic
effects, using polymeric carriers has not been reported. In the present
study, we aimed to develop polymer-based microdepots as a controlled-release Cannabis formulation. To this end, PCLmicrodepots loaded
with whole-plant medicinal Cannabis extract were
produced via melt printing and characterized in terms of physiochemical
characteristics, encapsulation efficiency and release behavior in
vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, the release of phytocannabinoids into
the systemic circulation and its effect on PTZ-induced convulsions
in a mouse model was compared to a bolus of pure Cannabis extract as a proof of concept for the therapeutic potential of the
microdepots.
Materials
and Methods
Materials
PCL (Mw ∼ 14 000),
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), Tween 20, cremophor, phosphate buffered
saline (PBS, pH 7.4), liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry
(LC/MS) grade acetic acid, and high-performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC) grade dichloromethane were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Rehovot,
Israel). LC/MS grade acetonitrile, methanol, and water, and HPLC grade
ethanol were obtained from Mercury Scientific and Industrial Products
Ltd. (Rosh Haayin, Israel) or Bio-Lab Ltd. (Jerusalem, Israel). (−)-trans-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (Δ9-THCA), cannabidiolic acid (CBDA), cannabigerolic acid (CBGA),
cannabichromenic acid (CBCA), cannabinolic acid (CBNA), cannabidivarinic
acid (CBDVA), Δ9-THC, CBD, cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene
(CBC), CBN, (−)-trans-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabivarin
(Δ9-THCV), cannabidivarin (CBDV), cannabichromevarin
(CBCV), Δ9-THC-d3, CBD-d3, and CBN-d3 were purchased
from Sigma-Aldrich (Rehovot, Israel). All the phytocannabinoid standards
were of analytical grade (>98%).
Cannabis Extraction and Analysis
Air-dried medical Cannabis female flowers were
ground to a fine powder using an electrical grinder, and heat-decarboxylated
in an oven at 130 °C for 1 h. Approximately 30 g of the decarboxylated
flowers were accurately weighed and extracted with 300 mL ethanol.
Samples were sonicated in an ultrasonic bath for 30 min and then agitated
in an orbital shaker at 25 °C for 15 min. Samples were then filtered
under pressure through Whatman No. 4 filter paper and the ethanol
was evaporated at 38 °C under reduced pressure using a rotary
evaporator (Laborata 4000; Heidolph Instruments GmbH & Co. KG;
Germany). A sample of the extract was analyzed for phytocannabinoid
composition using a Thermo Scientific ultrahigh-performance liquid
chromatography (UHPLC) system coupled with a Q Exactive Focus Hybrid
Quadrupole-Orbitrap MS (Thermo Scientific, Bremen, Germany). The chromatographic
method and MS parameters are detailed in Phytocannabinoid Analysis
Method 1 (see Methods in the Supporting Information). Identification and absolute quantification of phytocannabinoids
was performed by external calibrations as described by Berman et al.[5]
Microdepot Preparation
Microdepots
encapsulating whole-plant Cannabis extract were prepared
via a melt printing technique.[33] Briefly,
molten PCL was mixed with 30 wt % CBD-rich extract at 60 °C.
Then, the mixture was jetted through a 100 μm flat nozzle onto
nonwetting surfaces using a pneumatic jetting apparatus (P-Dot CT,
Liquidyn [Nordson EFD], Oberhaching, Germany). A fluid temperature
of 90 °C, fluid pressure of 0.1 bar, valve pressure of 4.9–5.1
bar, spring tightness of 0.6 turns and distance of ∼10 mm between
the nozzle and the surface were applied to form discrete microspheres.
The microdepots were left to cool to room temperature and stored at −4
°C until further use. The formation of the microdepots was captured
using a digital high-speed camera (120 Phantom v12) equipped with
a microscopic lens (Nikon 10 x CFI Plan Achromat), at a frame rate
of 48 000–58 000 fps.
Microdepot
Characterization
The particle
size and size distribution of the microdepots were determined using
a Malvern Mastersizer 3000 laser diffraction particle sizer (with
a Hydro EV unit). The surface morphology of the microdepots was observed
using a scanning electron microscopy. The microdepots were sputter-coated
with Au–Pd alloy and then imaged using a JEOL JSM-IT200 SEM
operated at an acceleration voltage of 20 kV. The appearance of the
microdepots was imaged using a Dino-Lite Premier AM7013MZT digital
hand-held microscope.
Phytocannabinoid Encapsulation
Efficiency
Cannabis extract microdepots
(approximately 3
mg) were dissolved in 200 μL of dichloromethane, then precipitated
with 4 mL ethanol followed by vortex for 1 h. The suspension was filtered
through 0.22 μm PTFE-filters to remove polymeric debris and,
analyzed for phytocannabinoid concentration with a Thermo Scientific
UHPLC system coupled with an ISQ EC Single Quadrupole MS (Thermo Scientific,
Bremen, Germany) as described in Phytocannabinoid Analysis Method
2 (see Methods in the Supporting Information). Phytocannabinoid encapsulation efficiencies were determined by
dividing the measured phytocannabinoid content by the theoretical
value. Only phytocannabinoids constituting more than 0.5 wt % of the
extract were reported.
Thermal Stability
To examine the
long-term thermal stability of the Cannabis extract
at the processing temperature, we kept the molten mixture at 90 °C
and sampled at 1, 10, 20, and 30 h time points. The samples were prepared
and analyzed by LC/MS as described in the former section to determine
phytocannabinoids content.
In Vitro Release Study
In vitro release
kinetics of phytocannabinoids from the polymeric microdepots was determined
by incubation in PBS under sink conditions. Microdepots weighing approximately
6 mg were suspended in 20 mL PBS (pH 7.4) containing 0.1% w/v Tween
20 at 37 °C under constant agitation. At predetermined time intervals,
the release medium was withdrawn and replenished with fresh prewarmed
medium. The obtained supernatant was freeze-dried, dissolved in 1
mL of ethanol, filtered, and then analyzed for phytocannabinoid content
by LC/MS (see Phytocannabinoid Analysis Method 2 in Methods in the Supporting Information). SEM analyses were
employed as previously described, to determine changes in microdepot
sizes and surface morphologies during the dissolution test, and optical
images were taken to follow their appearance.
In Vivo
Release Study and Pharmacokinetics
The in vivo release characteristics
of the microdepots were studied
in mice. Animal studies were performed in compliance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals established
by the National Institutes of Health. All procedures and protocols
were approved by the Technion Administrative Panel of Laboratory Animal
Care (#:IL_050–05–2018). Adult male mice weighing 20–25
g (C57BL/6 J; The Jackson Laboratory) were randomly assigned to two
groups and treated with either Cannabis extract microdepots
or a Cannabis extract solution. Samples of Cannabis extract microdepots were suspended in 1 mL injection
medium containing 1% w/w carboxymethylcellulose and 1% w/w Tween20
in saline.[34] The suspended microdepots
were then administrated via subcutaneous injection through a 20g syringe
into mice at a dose of 200 mg/kg extract under isoflurane anesthesia.
As a control, Cannabis extract dissolved in 1:1:18
ethanol:cremophor:injection medium (25 mg/mL), was injected subcutaneously
at an equivalent dose. Four mice from each group were sacrificed at
1, 2, 3, 7, and 14 days postadministration, and blood samples were
collected via cardiac puncture. Blood samples were set aside for 30
min at room temperature and then centrifuged for 30 min at 4 °C.
Serum was collected and stored at −80 °C until analysis.
Area under curve (AUC) values were calculated directly from the serum
concentration–time curve using the linear trapezoidal method,
from the first day to the last time point.Phytocannabinoid
extraction from serum was performed as follows: 600 μL of the
extraction solution (0.1% v/v acetic acid in a methanol:acetonitrile
1:1 mixture) spiked with 20 ng/mL deuterated internal standards (ISs)
were added to 200 μL of serum samples. Samples were thoroughly
vortexed and then centrifuged for 20 min at 4 °C for protein
and cell precipitation. The supernatants were then transferred into
3 mL of 0.1% v/v acetic acid in water, and loaded onto Agela Cleanert
C8 solid phase extraction (SPE) cartridges (500 mg of sorbent, 50
μm particle size). Phytocannabinoids were eluted from the columns
using 2 mL of 0.1% v/v acetic acid in methanol, evaporated to dryness
by speedvac, and reconstituted in 100 μL of ethanol. Phytocannabinoids
in serum samples were analyzed using a Thermo Scientific UHPLC system
coupled with a Q Exactive Focus Hybrid Quadrupole-Orbitrap MS (Thermo
Scientific, Bremen, Germany).[5] The chromatographic
and mass spectrometric parameters were the same as those described
in Phytocannabinoid Analysis Method 1 (see Methods
in the Supporting Information). For quantification of phytocannabinoids
in serum samples, phytocannabinoid standards were prepared in ethanol
to concentrations ranging from 0.2 to 2000 ng/mL for Δ9-THCA, Δ9-THC, CBDA, and CBD, and 0.125 to 500 ng/mL
for all the other components. Standard calibration curves were then
constructed by adding similar volumes of each concentration standard
and a mixture of all deuterated ISs at a concentration of 30 ng/mL.
The ratios of the unlabeled and labeled ions were plotted against
the amounts of spiked standards, and the calibration curves were determined
empirically according to a weighted least-squares linear regression
method with a weighting factor of 1/X.At the
same time points, the microdepots were collected from the
injection site, washed with ddH2O to remove cellular debris,
and freeze-dried. Samples of dried microdepots (approximately 3 mg)
were then dissolved in dichloromethane and prepared for LC/MS analysis
as described in the Encapsulation Efficiency section to determine the remaining phytocannabinoid content. In addition,
the morphology and appearance of the microdepots after release were
documented.
Microdepot Anticonvulsant
Activity
The anticonvulsant activity assay was based on previous
work.[5] One week following administration
of Cannabis extract microdepots or Cannabis extract solution (as described above), mice (n = 10) were subcutaneously
injected with PTZ by a treatment-blind experimenter at a dose of 80
mg/kg and then monitored for 30 min. The epileptic seizures were captured
using a video recording system for epileptic seizures analysis in
real-time (SeizureScan, Clever Sys., Inc., Virginia, USA), and the
progress of seizure activity from normal behavior (P0) to behavior
arrest (P1), to twitches (P2), to forelimb clonus (P3), to generalized
clonic convulsions (P4), to tonic-clonic convulsions (P5) was recorded.
The latency to first P5 convulsions, incidence of P5 convulsing animals
and survival were analyzed. Following this monitoring, blood samples
were collected from surviving mice via cardiac puncture to determine
phytocannabinoid serum levels.
Statistical
Analysis
In the microdepots
characterization and release studies, data were determined as mean
± SD. In the study of microdepot anticonvulsant activity, the
latency to first tonic-clonic seizures was determined as mean ±
SEM. Significant differences in latency between experimental groups
were determined using a paired student t test with p value <0.05. Percent of protection against development
of tonic-clonic seizure and death subsequent to PTZ administration
was compared using the χ2 test with p value >0.05 for both seizure protection and mortality protection.
Results
Formation and Characterization
of Cannabis-Loaded Microdepots
The phytocannabinoid
profile of the decarboxylated high-CBDCannabis extract
used in this study appears in Table . The extract contained more than 50 wt % CBD and five
other phytocannabinoids, CBDA, CBG, Δ9-THC, CBC,
and CBDV, having a weight percent above 0.5%. After mixing the liquid
extract with the molten PCL, a solid mixture was obtained upon cooling,
entrapping 30 wt % of the whole extract. A melt printing technique[33,35] was employed to produce polymeric microdepots. The deposition of
the molten mixture on top of nonwetting surfaces using a pneumatic
jetting apparatus operating at temperatures above the melting point
of the polymeric system, yielded discrete, near-perfect spherical
microparticles. Figure A shows a sequence of images captured using a high-speed camera emphasizing
the spontaneous formation of an extract-loaded microsphere, upon interaction
of the molten jet with the oleophobic substrate (the captured video
can be seen in Video S1). The microspheres
preserve their spherical shape during solidification and appear brown
in color (Figure B).
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images revealed round, uniform,
and individualized microparticles, with a textured surface (Figure C), distinct from
the smooth surface obtained for neat PCL microspheres printed from
melt.[35] The particle size distribution
was narrow and monodispersed, with a d50 of 257.80 ± 2.49 μm and a span value of 0.68 ± 0.05
μm, as measured using laser diffraction analysis (Figure S1).
Table 1
Phytocannabinoid
Profile of the Decarboxylated
High-CBD Cannabis Extract, And Their Encapsulation
Efficiencies (EEs) in PCL Microdepots Loaded with 30 wt % Extract
phytocannabinoid
content (wt %)
EE (%)
CBD
54.68
102.5 ± 0.6
CBDA
2.50
92.1 ± 1.2
Δ9-THC
2.36
103.5 ± 2.4
CBG
2.35
90.0 ± 4.1
CBC
2.17
93.5 ± 2.1
CBDV
1.65
101.1 ± 3.7
CBDVA
0.42
CBN
0.20
Δ9-THCV
0.17
CBGA
0.09
Figure 1
Formation of Cannabis extract microdepots. (A)
Sequential images showing the evolution of a PCL microdepot loaded
with 30 wt % Cannabis extract onto a nonwetting surface.
(B) Optical and (C) SEM micrographs of a resulting microdepot. Scale
bar: (A) 100 and (B, C) 50 μm.
Formation of Cannabis extract microdepots. (A)
Sequential images showing the evolution of a PCLmicrodepot loaded
with 30 wt % Cannabis extract onto a nonwetting surface.
(B) Optical and (C) SEM micrographs of a resulting microdepot. Scale
bar: (A) 100 and (B, C) 50 μm.Recent developments in the field of micro- or nanoparticles for
controlled phytocannabinoid delivery involve only single constituents,
such as CBD,[27,31,32] Δ9-THC,[28,31] and CB13.[26,30,36] None have described the encapsulation
of the full spectrum of Cannabisphytocannabinoids.
Here, we were able to encapsulate all the phytocannabinoids present
in the extract above 0.5 wt %, with encapsulation efficiencies of
more than 90% (Table ). This high encapsulation efficiency is possibly due to the closed
environment of the melt processing and the exclusion of organic solvents.[33,37] However, one potential concern with melt processing techniques involves
the exposure of active pharmaceutical ingredients to elevated temperatures.[38,39] Considering phytocannabinoid susceptibility to heat degradation,[40] the thermal stability of the phytocannabinoids
in the polymeric matrix was studied during and postprocessing. Figure S2 shows that phytocannabinoid compositions
remained nearly constant during microdepot printing and within the
first 10 h. Afterward, a decrease in CBDA, CBD, and Δ9-THC contents and an increase in cannabinol (CBN) content were detected,
possibly due to decarboxylation of the acidic phytocannabinoids to
their neutral forms and oxidation reactions.[15,41,42]
In Vitro Phytocannabinoids
Release
Prior to the in vivo study, we evaluated the feasibility
of the polymeric
carrier to sustain phytocannabinoids release in vitro, under simulated
physiological conditions. Figure A presents the in vitro release profiles, over 21 days,
of the different phytocannabinoids in the extract-loaded microdepots.
The microdepots showed a sustained release profile, in total releasing
70% of the entrapped predominant phytocannabinoid, CBD, and 52–64%
CBDV, CBG, Δ9-THC, and CBC with no initial burst
release. CBDA, the acidic precursor of CBD, was released much faster
than the other neutral phytocannabinoids, accounting for 70% cumulative
release after 1 day, probably because of its higher aqueous solubility
that increased the molecule propensity for diffusion.[43] The slightly lower cumulative release amounts of CBDV,
CBG, Δ9-THC, and CBC compared to CBD may be related
to the lower loadings of these minor phytocannabinoids.[44] The micrographs of the microdepots taken during
the dissolution study (Figure B–E) revealed no significant changes in microdepot
sizes or evidence for surface erosion. Magnified micrographs (Figure F–I) show
the formation of pores in the microdepots’ surface that grew
over time from hundreds of nanometers to several micrometers. Pristine
PCLmicrodepots incubated in the same release medium remained intact
during the study period, as can be seen in Figure
S3. These findings, along with PCL’s inherent semicrystalline,
low vitreous transition temperature, and hydrophobic nature, suggest
that diffusion is the governing mechanism of the Cannabis components’ release from the polymeric carrier.[27,45,46]
Figure 2
In vitro release study. (A) Phytocannabinoids
in vitro release
profiles from PCL microdepots loaded with 30 wt % Cannabis extract (mean ± SD, n = 3). (B–I) SEM
micrographs depicting the surface morphology of Cannabis extract microdepots (B) before and following (C) 7, (D) 14, and
(E) 21 days of the in vitro release study. Scale bar: 50 μm.
(F–I) Corresponding magnified micrographs of (B–E).
Scale bar: 5 μm.
In vitro release study. (A) Phytocannabinoids
in vitro release
profiles from PCLmicrodepots loaded with 30 wt % Cannabis extract (mean ± SD, n = 3). (B–I) SEM
micrographs depicting the surface morphology of Cannabis extract microdepots (B) before and following (C) 7, (D) 14, and
(E) 21 days of the in vitro release study. Scale bar: 50 μm.
(F–I) Corresponding magnified micrographs of (B–E).
Scale bar: 5 μm.
In Vivo
Phytocannabinoid Release
Biodegradable polymeric microdepots
are widely used to deliver medications
in a rate-controlled manner.[47] However,
direct analysis of these systems during release studies in vivo is
rarely reported. The performance of the formulation within the subcutaneous
tissue is usually predicted based on in vitro dissolution tests followed
by deconvolution of pharmacokinetic data to estimate the in vivo absorption
profile.[48,49] These predictions are rarely accurate, because
current in vitro environments do not accurately reflect the biological
factors present in the subcutaneous environment, that largely affect
the drug release kinetics.[50−52] Therefore, to evaluate the in
vivo performance of the formulation, mice were injected with a single
subcutaneous injection of Cannabis-loaded microdepots,
or a Cannabis extract solution at an equivalent dose.
At different time points, microdepots were collected from the subcutaneous
tissue in order to evaluate the amounts of phytocannabinoids released,
and phytocannabinoids’ serum levels were analyzed to obtain
pharmacokinetic profiles.Because the microdepots did not migrate
from the injection site, we were able to recover them (Figure S4) and directly analyze the release behavior
in vivo. Phytocannabinoid release profiles were determined according
to their remaining content in the retrieved microdepots. CBDA was
not detectable in the recovered microdepots 24 h post administration,
in correlation with its fast release in vitro. Figure A demonstrates sustained phytocannabinoid
delivery, with close to zero-order release kinetics during the first
week (R2> 0.980 in linear regression), followed by a
slower
release rate during the second week, corresponding to the deceleration
in the release rate in vitro after the first week. An empirical model
correlating between the phytocannabinoids in vivo release rate within
the first week (zero order release rate) and their physiochemical
characteristics was examined. As can be seen in Figure B, a linear relationship (correlation coefficient
of 0.985) between phytocannabinoids’ average release rate,
lipophilicity (Log P) and molecular weight (Mw) was
found, following the expression:Log P values (logarithm
of
partition coefficient) were calculated using ChemAxon software. The
model depicts that the greater the lipophilicity of a phytocannabinoid,
the faster it releases, possibly because of the lipophilic nature
of the subcutaneous site. In contrast, the larger the molecules are,
the slower they diffuse. This relationship may then be applied to
predict the in vivo release behavior of other phytocannabinoids, which
might be included in other Cannabis strains.
Figure 3
In vivo release
study. (A) Phytocannabinoid in vivo release profiles
from Cannabis extract microdepots recovered from
the subcutaneous tissue (mean ± SD, n = 4).
(B) Average release rate within the first week of the study versus
phytocannabinoids’ lipophilicity (Log P) and
molecular weight. The dotted line represents linear regression. (C–J)
SEM micrographs depicting the surface morphology of Cannabis extract microdepots (C) before and following (D) 3, (E) 7, and (F)
14 days of the in vivo release study. Scale bar: 50 μm. (G–J)
Corresponding magnified micrographs of C–F. Scale bar: 5 μm.
In vivo release
study. (A) Phytocannabinoid in vivo release profiles
from Cannabis extract microdepots recovered from
the subcutaneous tissue (mean ± SD, n = 4).
(B) Average release rate within the first week of the study versus
phytocannabinoids’ lipophilicity (Log P) and
molecular weight. The dotted line represents linear regression. (C–J)
SEM micrographs depicting the surface morphology of Cannabis extract microdepots (C) before and following (D) 3, (E) 7, and (F)
14 days of the in vivo release study. Scale bar: 50 μm. (G–J)
Corresponding magnified micrographs of C–F. Scale bar: 5 μm.The microstructure of the recovered microdepots
was also investigated
at different stages of the release study and no signs of surface erosion
or deformation were observed (Figure C–F). The pores that were formed
on the microdepots’ surface reached dimensions of several microns
after 1 week (Figure G–J), faster than in the dissolution study, corroborating
with the observed higher released amounts (Figure A). In addition, the appearance of the microdepots
was documented during the in vitro and in vivo release studies. As
shown in Figure ,
the microdepots gradually lost their brown color with time. This might
be the result of sustained release from the polymer matrix of other
pigment molecules usually present in Cannabis extracts,
such as flavonoids, carotenoids, and chlorophylls.[7]
Figure 4
Optical images of Cannabis extract microdepots
(A) before and following (B) 7, (C) 14, and (D) 21 days of the in
vitro release study; and (E) before and following (F) 7 and (G) 14
days of the in vivo release study. Scale bar: 100 μm.
Optical images of Cannabis extract microdepots
(A) before and following (B) 7, (C) 14, and (D) 21 days of the in
vitro release study; and (E) before and following (F) 7 and (G) 14
days of the in vivo release study. Scale bar: 100 μm.Serum levels of 3 predominant neutral phytocannabinoids,
CBD, Δ9-THC, and CBG were measured, and their pharmacokinetic
profiles
are shown in Figure . Because the first blood samples were taken 24 h postdose, phytocannabinoid
levels at shorter times were not available. Administration of Cannabis extract solution for immediate release resulted
in a more abrupt increase in phytocannabinoid bloodstream levels and
faster elimination compared to microdepots administration. Importantly,
microdepot administration resulted in sustained, elevated serum phytocannabinoid
levels, over the 14 day study period. The serum concentration of CBD
reached a maximum during the first day following injection, then decreased
gradually and was maintained at a steady level, significantly higher
than the immediate-release group (p < 0.05). To
determine the relative bioavailability, we compared the AUC1–14 from microdepot administration to the AUC1–14 from
solution administration of Cannabis extract. Over
the 14 day time period, the relative bioavailability of the CBD released
from the extract in microdepots was more than two-fold higher than
that of the extract solution. Significantly higher steady serum levels
(p < 0.05), enhanced bioavailability and extended
absorption duration were observed also for CBG and Δ9-THC, despite their much lower content. This demonstrates the potential
of the formulation to improve the systemic exposure of both major
and minor components, which is important for supporting potentially
synergistic effects. It should be noted that the microdepots and the
immediate-release extract were suspended in the same injection medium
for administration, in order to control for the effects of the medium
on the delivery of the therapeutic agents into the bloodstream.
Figure 5
Serum concentration–time
profiles of CBD, CBG, and Δ9-THC following subcutaneous
administration of PCL microdepots
loaded with 30 wt % Cannabis extract (solid line)
and Cannabis extract solution (dashed line) in mice
(mean ± SD, n = 4).
Serum concentration–time
profiles of CBD, CBG, and Δ9-THC following subcutaneous
administration of PCLmicrodepots
loaded with 30 wt % Cannabis extract (solid line)
and Cannabis extract solution (dashed line) in mice
(mean ± SD, n = 4).
Microdepot Anticonvulsant Activity
The
therapeutic potential of the microdepots as a controlled release
formulation for whole-plant Cannabis extracts was
evaluated via a PTZ model in mice. The specific Cannabis extract used was chosen after it has previously demonstrated superior
anticonvulsant effects when compared to different equally high-CBDCannabis strains against PTZ-induced convulsions, 30 min
post Cannabis injections, when phytocannabinoid circulation
levels were high.[5] Here, in order to evaluate
the long-term activity of the microdepots, we administered PTZ injections
to mice 1 week after a single subcutaneous injection of Cannabis-loaded microdepots or Cannabis extract solution.
Mice were monitored for 30 min after induction, and the epileptic
seizures were analyzed and ranked according to a seizure profile.
The microdepots showed greater reduction in the incidence of tonic-clonic
seizures, higher survival rates and increased latency to first tonic-clonic
seizure, compared to the extract solution injected control group (Figure A, B). In addition,
the phytocannabinoid levels measured at day 7 (Figure C) were similar to those obtained in the
in vivo release study at the same time point, indicating the reproducible
release of the active agents from the polymeric microdepots.
Figure 6
Effect of Cannabis-loaded microdepots or Cannabis extract solution on PTZ-induced convulsions in
mice. (A) Incidence of tonic-clonic seizures and percent of mortality
protection (compared among groups using the χ2 test, p > 0.05). (B) Latency to first tonic-clonic seizures
(mean
± SEM, *p < 0.05). (C) CBD, CBG, and Δ9-THC serum levels 7 days following administration of Cannabis-loaded microdepots and pure Cannabis extract (mean ± SD).
Effect of Cannabis-loaded microdepots or Cannabis extract solution on PTZ-induced convulsions in
mice. (A) Incidence of tonic-clonic seizures and percent of mortality
protection (compared among groups using the χ2 test, p > 0.05). (B) Latency to first tonic-clonic seizures
(mean
± SEM, *p < 0.05). (C) CBD, CBG, and Δ9-THC serum levels 7 days following administration of Cannabis-loaded microdepots and pure Cannabis extract (mean ± SD).
Discussion
In this study, we have proposed
a novel Cannabis delivery system, in the form of
polymeric microdepots, for full-spectrum Cannabis administration. Encapsulating Cannabis extract
in a PCL matrix via a one-step printing process was effective
in entrapping a wide range of phytocannabinoids in a single polymeric
microdepots and modulating their release rate. Similar sustained release
of both major and minor phytocannabinoid components was observed and
this important for supporting potential synergistic effects of multiple
components. Cumulatively higher phytocannabinoid amounts were released
from the microdepots in vivo by day 14 and with greater variance between
the different phytocannabinoids, compared to the in vitro release
study. Although only limited information is currently available regarding
the in vivo release of pharmaceuticals from PCL, it can be assumed
that the faster release kinetics in vivo are a result of an accelerated
diffusion rate due to the presence of biological compounds such as
lipids.[53,54] These biological factors, which are not
accurately represented in vitro, probably contributed to the observed
difference in phytocannabinoids’ transport rate at the subcutaneous
site, as had been shown in the empirical model. This model provided
insights into the release and delivery kinetics of several active
ingredients in vivo as a function of their physiochemical properties.
These findings may contribute to the future development of “polypills”
in which multiple active pharmaceutical ingredients are incorporated
in a single dosage form.[55] The sustained
release enhanced the bioavailability and elevated phytocannabinoid
levels in the serum up to 14 days following administration, significantly
increasing the in vivo residence time of these highly lipophilic molecules.
Moreover, the growing evidence for high-CBD extract’s efficacy
in treating seizure disorders[14,56] had led us to evaluate
the potential of the depots to promote long-term anticonvulsive activity
using the PTZseizure model. PTZ has been previously shown to be a
useful model for evaluating cannabinoids anticonvulsant effects in
murines.[57−59] The depot’s effectiveness against PTZ-induced
convulsions was demonstrated 1 week after subcutaneous administration,
compared to a bolus of pure Cannabis extract. This
implies that long-acting microdepots are suitable for the parenteral
delivery of medicinal Cannabis and might prolong
its therapeutic action while attenuating peak serum levels, significantly
differing from the current conventional Cannabis treatment
for epilepsy, based on a twice daily oral dose administration.[60,61] Such systems may provide a convenient and stable long-term treatment
for patients suffering from chronic conditions or may supply an alternative
delivery form for those incapable of inhaling or swallowing.
Conclusions
Existing implantable drug delivery depots
are designed to release
only a single phytocannabinoid, even though it is suggested that whole-plant Cannabis extracts have superior therapeutic effects over
individual components. Herein, we propose the use of long-acting polymeric
microspheres, performing as depots, for the encapsulation and controlled
delivery of the full Cannabis plant spectrum. In
mouse models, we demonstrate that these depots are capable of simultaneously
delivering multiple phytocannabinoids and significantly extending
their circulation time. Therefore, these depots may be advantageous
for harnessing long-term Cannabis therapeutic potential
while supporting potential synergistic interactions between the plant’s
components, as demonstrated in an acute convulsion model.
Authors: L Martín-Banderas; I Muñoz-Rubio; J Prados; J Álvarez-Fuentes; J M Calderón-Montaño; M López-Lázaro; J L Arias; M C Leiva; M A Holgado; M Fernández-Arévalo Journal: Int J Pharm Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 5.875
Authors: Nicholas A Jones; Andrew J Hill; Imogen Smith; Sarah A Bevan; Claire M Williams; Benjamin J Whalley; Gary J Stephens Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2009-11-11 Impact factor: 4.030
Authors: Dolores Hernán Pérez de la Ossa; Maria Esther Gil-Alegre; Alessia Ligresti; María Del Rosario Aberturas; Jesús Molpeceres; Ana Isabel Torres; Vincenzo Di Marzo Journal: J Drug Target Date: 2013-06-18 Impact factor: 5.121
Authors: Dolores Hernán Pérez de la Ossa; Mar Lorente; Maria Esther Gil-Alegre; Sofía Torres; Elena García-Taboada; María Del Rosario Aberturas; Jesús Molpeceres; Guillermo Velasco; Ana Isabel Torres-Suárez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Shiri Procaccia; Gil Moshe Lewitus; Carni Lipson Feder; Anna Shapira; Paula Berman; David Meiri Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 5.988