Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33141759›Full record

ArticleJCI insight2020

Adverse effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol on neuronal bioenergetics during postnatal development.

Johannes Beiersdorf, Zsofia Hevesi, Daniela Calvigioni, Jakob Pyszkowski, Roman Romanov, Edit Szodorai, Gert Lubec, Sally Shirran, Catherine H Botting, Siegfried Kasper and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCI insight, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.

Johannes BeiersdorfDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Zsofia HevesiDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Daniela CalvigioniDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jakob PyszkowskiOptics11, VU University Campus, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Roman RomanovDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Edit SzodoraiDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Gert LubecParacelsus Private Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Sally ShirranSchool of Chemistry, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, United Kingdom.
Catherine H BottingSchool of Chemistry, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, United Kingdom.
Siegfried KasperDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Geoffrey W GuyGW Phamaceuticals, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.
Roy GrayGW Phamaceuticals, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.
Vincenzo Di MarzoEndocannabinoid Research Group, Institute of Biomolecular Chemistry, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Pozzuoli, Italy.
Tibor HarkanyDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Erik KeimpemaDepartment of Molecular Neurosciences, Center for Brain Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · ATSalisbury University · USUniversity of St Andrews · GBAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec · CAKarolinska Institutet · SEParacelsus Medical University · AT

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 094476/Z/10/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ongoing societal changes in views on the medical and recreational roles of cannabis increased the use of concentrated plant extracts with a Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of more than 90%. Even though prenatal THC exposure is widely considered adverse for neuronal development, equivalent experimental data for young age cohorts are largely lacking. Here, we administered plant-derived THC (1 or 5 mg/kg) to mice daily during P5-P16 and P5-P35 and monitored its effects on hippocampal neuronal survival and specification by high-resolution imaging and iTRAQ proteomics, respectively. We found that THC indiscriminately affects pyramidal cells and both cannabinoid receptor 1+ (CB1R)+ and CB1R- interneurons by P16. THC particularly disrupted the expression of mitochondrial proteins (complexes I-IV), a change that had persisted even 4 months after the end of drug exposure. This was reflected by a THC-induced loss of membrane integrity occluding mitochondrial respiration and could be partially or completely rescued by pH stabilization, antioxidants, bypassed glycolysis, and targeting either mitochondrial soluble adenylyl cyclase or the mitochondrial voltage-dependent anion channel. Overall, THC exposure during infancy induces significant and long-lasting reorganization of neuronal circuits through mechanisms that, in large part, render cellular bioenergetics insufficient to sustain key developmental processes in otherwise healthy neurons.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, NewbornCell DeathDronabinolFemaleHippocampusMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLNeurogenesisNeuronsDronabinolCell BiologyDevelopmentNeurodevelopment

Identifiers

PMID33141759
PMCPMC7714410
OpenAlexW3097502690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.