Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2025

Tobacco Hornworm as an Insect Model System for Cannabinoid Pre-clinical Studies
Published on: December 29, 2021
Cannabinoids as Potential Cancer Therapeutics: The Concentration Conundrum
Nurgul Carkaci-Salli1, Wesley M Raup-Konsavage1, Deepkamal Karelia1
1Department of Pharmacology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract:
Background: Studies have reported that cannabinoids, in particular Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), significantly reduce cancer cell viability in vitro. Unfortunately, treatment conditions vary significantly across reports. In particular, a majority of reports utilize conditions with reduced serum concentrations (0-3%) that may compromise the growth of the cells themselves, as well as the observed results. Objectives: This study was designed to test the hypothesis that, based on their known protein binding characteristics, cannabinoids would be less effective in the presence of fetal bovine serum (FBS). Moreover, we wished to determine if the treatments served to be cytotoxic or cytostatic under these conditions. Methods: Six cancer cell lines, representing two independent lines of three different types of cancer (glioblastoma, melanoma, and colorectal cancer [CRC]), were treated with 10 μM pure Δ9-THC, CBD, KM-233, and HU-331 for 48 h (in the presence or absence of FBS). Cell viability was measured with the MTT assay. Dose-response curves were then generated comparing the potencies of the four cannabinoids under the same conditions. Results: We found that serum-free medium alone produces cell cycle arrest for CRC cells and slows cell growth for the other cancer types. The antineoplastic effects of three of the four cannabinoids (Δ9-THC, CBD, and KM-233) increase when serum is omitted from the media. In addition, dose-response curves for these drugs demonstrated lower IC50 values for serum-free media compared with the media with 10% serum in all cell lines. The fourth compound, HU-331, was equally effective under both conditions. A further confound we observed is that omission of serum produces dramatic binding of Δ9-THC and CBD to plastic. Conclusions: Treatment of cancer cells in the absence of FBS appears to enhance the potency of cannabinoids. However, omission of FBS itself compromises cell growth and represents a less physiological condition. Given the knowledge that cannabinoids are 90-95% protein bound and have well-known affinities for plastic, it may be ill-advised to treat cells under conditions where the cells are not growing optimally and where known concentrations cannot be assumed (i.e., FBS-free conditions).
More Related Videos
09:20Preclinical Assessment of the Bioactivity of the Anticancer Coumarin OT48 by Spheroids, Colony Formation Assays, and Zebrafish Xenografts
Published on: June 26, 2018
06:19Author Spotlight: Exploring the Role of Ion Channels in Cancer: Characterization and Potential Treatment Approaches
Published on: June 16, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Cannabinoids
Two synthetic agonists of THC,...
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Drugs that Stabilize Microtubules
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Treatment Resistant Cancers
CNS Stimulants: Cocaine, Amphetamines and Cannabinoids