TABLE 1

Evidence for functionally selective CB2 ligands

Cannabinoid ligands from multiple classes were tested for their abilities to activate ERK1/2 MAPK in rCB2-expressing HEK293 cells, promote β-arrestin2 membrane recruitment in HEK293 cells transiently transfected with rCB2 and β-arrestin2-mRFP, and inhibit VGCCs in mCB2-expressing AtT20 cells. Positive values reflect inhibition of VGCCs and negative values reflect activation (e.g., inverse agonism). Protocols for each experiment were identical to those done in Figs. 4 to 6. Data for ERK1/2 and VGCC experiments were analyzed using unpaired Student's t test vs. native HEK293 or native AtT20 cells, respectively. Data for β-arrestin were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Dunnett post-tests. Data for internalization from Figs. 1 and 2 and binding data obtained from the cited references are included for additional comparison. Drug concentrations: 10 μM 2-AG was used for internalization (n = 12), and 5 μM 2-AG was used for MAPK activation (n = 6–15), β-arrestin recruitment (n = 5–15), and VGCC inhibition (n = 4–17). All other drugs, 1 μM. Values without symbols are not statistically significant.

DrugInternalizationMAPK Activationβ-Arrestin RecruitmentVGCC InhibitionCB2Ki
% basalmembrane/cytosol ratio% inhibitionnM
CP55,94061 ± 1.9130 ± 3.6***1.9 ± 0.11†††17 ± 2.4**0.64–2.8a
WIN55,212–2100 ± 3.2130 ± 4.9**1.1 ± 0.035−3.4 ± 3.20.28–16.2a
AM1241100 ± 6.6100 ± 3.51.0 ± 0.056−0.83 ± 1.13.4b
JWH01591 ± 5.8120 ± 2.4***1.1 ± 0.030−3.9 ± 2.1*14–430a
JWH13377 ± 3.3120 ± 2.7***1.2 ± 0.058†††18 ± 6.2*3.4a
THC100 ± 2.0120 ± 2.2***1.1 ± 0.058−7.0 ± 2.71.7–75a
THCV88 ± 2.0120 ± 2.1**1.0 ± 0.032−17 ± 7.463–75c
AM171071 ± 3.0120 ± 3.2**1.3 ± 0.060†††−3.1 ± 4.16.7d
A-83633982 ± 2.1120 ± 2.5***1.2 ± 0.039††16 ± 4.10.64e
2-AG81 ± 6.3130 ± 8.1*1.1 ± 0.02533 ± 6.2*140–1400a
GW405833N.D.N.D.N.D.−2.5 ± 1.412f
AM630100 ± 2.197 ± 1.31.0 ± 0.022−12 ± 2.4**31a
SR144528130 ± 4.599 ± 2.00.93 ± 0.039−10 ± 3.2*0.040–15a
  • N.D., no data (GW405833 not tested in control cells).

  • * p < 0.05 versus untransfected control cells.

  • ** p < 0.01 versus untransfected control cells.

  • *** p < 0.001 versus untransfected control cells.

  • †† p < 0.01 versus untreated control.

  • ††† p < 0.001, versus untreated control.

  • a Miller and Stella, 2008.

  • b Ibrahim et al., 2003.

  • c Thomas et al., 2005.

  • d Khanolkar et al., 2007.

  • e Yao et al., 2009.

  • f Gallant et al., 1996.