ABSTRACT
Cannabidiol (CBD), the major non-psychoactive compound found in cannabis, is frequently used both as a nutraceutical and therapeutic. Despite anecdotal evidence as an anticancer agent, little is known about the effect CBD has on cancer cells. Given the intractability and poor prognoses of brain cancers in human and veterinary medicine, we sought to characterize the in vitro cytotoxicity of CBD on human and canine gliomas. Glioma cells treated with CBD showed a range of cytotoxicity from 4.9 to 8.2 µg/ml; canine cells appeared to be more sensitive than human. Treatment with >5 µg/ml CBD invariably produced large cytosolic vesicles. The mode of cell death was then interrogated using pharmacologic inhibitors. Inhibition of apoptosis was sufficient to rescue CBD-mediated cytotoxicity. Inhibition of RIPK3, a classical necroptosis kinase, also rescued cells from death and prevented the formation of the large cytosolic vesicles. Next, cellular mitochondrial activity in the presence of CBD was assessed and within 2 hours of treatment CBD reduced oxygen consumption in a dose dependent manner with almost complete ablation of activity at 10 µg/ml CBD. Fluorescent imaging with a mitochondrial-specific dye revealed that the large cytosolic vesicles were, in fact, swollen mitochondria. Lastly, calcium channels were pharmacologically inhibited and the effect on cell death was determined. Inhibition of mitochondrial channel VDAC1, but not the TRPV1 channel, rescued cells from CBD-mediated cytotoxicity. These results demonstrate the cytotoxic nature of CBD in human and canine glioma cells and suggest a mechanism of action involving dysregulation of calcium homeostasis and mitochondrial activity.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether cell-based and tissue-based immunofluorescent assays (IFAs) run in parallel could be used to detect glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) autoantibodies in the CSF of dogs with meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) and other CNS disorders. ANIMALS: 15 CSF samples obtained from dogs with presumed MUO (n = 5), CNS disease other than MUO (5), and idiopathic epilepsy (5). PROCEDURES: All CSF samples underwent parallel analysis with a cell-based IFA that targeted the α isoform of human GFAP and a tissue-based IFA that involved mouse brain cryosections. Descriptive data were generated. RESULTS: Only 1 CSF sample yielded mildly positive results on the cell-based IFA; that sample was from 1 of the dogs with presumed MUO. The remaining 14 CSF samples tested negative on the cell-based IFA. All 15 CSF samples yielded negative results on the tissue-based IFA. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that concurrent use of a cell-based IFA designed to target the human GFAP-α isoform and a tissue-based IFA that involved mouse tissue cryosections was inadequate for detection of GFAP autoantibodies in canine CSF samples. Given that GFAP autoantibodies were likely present in the CSF samples analyzed, these findings suggested that epitopes differ substantially between canine and human GFAP and that canine GFAP autoantibody does not bind to mouse GFAP. Without a positive control, absence of GFAP autoantibody in this cohort cannot be ruled out. Further research is necessary to develop a noninvasive and sensitive method for diagnosis of MUO in dogs.
