Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38794207›Full record

ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Using In Silico Molecular Docking to Explain Differences in Receptor Binding Behavior of HHC and THCV Isomers: Revealing New Binding Modes.

Mehdi Haghdoost, Yossef López de Los Santos, Megan Brunstetter, Morgan L Ferretti, Matthew Roberts, Marcel O Bonn-Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Tetrahydrocannabivarin is Not Tetrahydrocannabinol.Cannabis and cannabinoid research · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

6 authors.

Mehdi HaghdoostNalu Bio Inc., 38 Keyes Avenue, Suite 117, San Francisco, CA 94129, USA.
Yossef López de Los SantosBiological and Environmental Science and Engineering Division, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-5929-0370
Megan BrunstetterCharlotte's Web, 700 Tech Court, Louisville, CO 80027, USA.
Morgan L FerrettiDepartment of Psychological Science, University of Arkansas, 216 MEMH, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.
Matthew RobertsNalu Bio Inc., 38 Keyes Avenue, Suite 117, San Francisco, CA 94129, USA.
Marcel O Bonn-MillerCharlotte's Web, 700 Tech Court, Louisville, CO 80027, USA.

Funding

Charlotte's Web (United States) NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even slight structural differences between phytocannabinoid isomers are usually enough to cause a change in their biological properties. In this study, we used in vitro CB1 agonism/antagonism assays to compare the receptor binding functionality of THCV (tetrahydrocannabivarin) and HHC (hexahydrocannabinol) isomers and applied molecular docking to provide an explanation for the difference in the activities. No CB1 agonism was observed for ∆9- and ∆8-THCV. Instead, both isomers antagonized CP 55940, with ∆9-THCV being approximately two times more potent than the ∆8 counterpart (IC

Indexed as

agonistantagonistCB1 receptorhexahydrocannabinolmolecular dockingtetrahydrocannabivarin

Identifiers

PMID38794207
PMCPMC11125018

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.