Cited by 162Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisPsychedelics and Drug Studies

Diminished gray matter in the hippocampus of cannabis users: possible protective effects of cannabidiol

Demirakca, Traute, Sartorius, Alexander, Ende, Gabriele, Meyer, Nadja, Welzel, Helga, Skopp, Gisela, Mann, Karl, Hermann, Derik·2010·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Background Chronic cannabis use has been associated with memory deficits and a volume reduction of the hippocampus, but none of the studies accounted for different effects of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD).Methods Using a voxel based morphometry approach optimized for small subcortical structures (DARTEL) gray matter (GM) concentration and volume of the hippocampus were measured in 11 chronic recreational cannabis users and 13 healthy controls, and correlated with THC and CBD from hair analyses. GM volume was calculated by modulating VBM using Jacobian determinants derived from the spatial normalization.Results Cannabis users showed lower GM volume located in a cluster of the right anterior hippocampus (P(uncorr)=0.002; effect size Cohen's d=1.34). In a regression analysis an inverse correlation of the ratio THC/CBD with the volume of the right hippocampus (P(uncorr) p<0.001, Cohen's d=3.43) was observed. Furthermore Cannabidiol correlated positively with GM concentration (unmodulated VBM data), but not with GM volume (modulated VBM) in the bilateral hippocampus (P=0.03 after correction for hippocampal volume; left hippocampus Cohen's d=4.37 and right hippocampus 4.65).Conclusions Lower volume in the right hippocampus in chronic cannabis users was corroborated. Higher THC and lower CBD was associated with this volume reduction indicating neurotoxic effects of THC and neuroprotective effects of CBD. This confirms existing preclinical and clinical results. As a possible mechanism the influence of cannabinoids on hippocampal neurogenesis is suggested.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.09.020

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Demirakca, T., Sartorius, A., Ende, G., Meyer, N., Welzel, H., Skopp, G., Mann, K., & Hermann, D.
Affiliations
  • Central Institute of Mental Health (DE)
  • University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
Corresponding author
Hermann, Derik
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-11-02
Volume
114
Issue
2-3
Pages
242-5
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035301573
Cited by
162
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
Keywords
chronic cannabis use, hippocampus, gray matter volume, cannabidiol, tetrahydrocannabinol, THC:CBD ratio, hippocampal neurogenesis, neuroprotection, neurotoxicity, memory impairment, hair analysis
MeSH terms
Adult, Cannabidiol, Cannabis, Hippocampus, Humans, Male, Marijuana Smoking, Organ Size, Dronabinol, Neuroprotective Agents, Neurogenesis, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review