Minor Cannabinoids Show Antimyeloma Activity in Cell and Mouse Models
A 2024 study explored whether four lesser-known cannabis compounds—cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabinol (CBN), and cannabidivarin (CBDV)—could affect multiple myeloma cells and the bone damage associated with the disease. The research, published in BioFactors, found anticancer activity in laboratory models and reported that CBN reduced tumor weight in a preliminary mouse experiment. The findings remain preclinical and do not show that cannabinoid products treat multiple myeloma in people.
Multiple myeloma develops when abnormal plasma cells accumulate in the bone marrow. The disease can also disrupt the balance between bone-forming osteoblasts and bone-resorbing osteoclasts, contributing to fractures and destructive bone lesions. Although treatment options have expanded, relapsed and treatment-resistant disease remains difficult to manage. Current clinical information on multiple myeloma is available from the National Cancer Institute’s treatment overview.
In the study, researchers from the University of Camerino in Italy and Entourage Biosciences tested the four cannabinoids in three human multiple myeloma cell lines. All four compounds reduced cell viability, although their activity varied. CBN and CBDV were the most potent in these assays, followed by CBG and CBC.
Additional experiments indicated that the compounds triggered necrotic cell death in the myeloma cells. The researchers also observed increased levels of γ-H2AX, a marker associated with DNA damage. These results suggest that the cannabinoids were doing more than temporarily slowing cell growth, but they do not establish how the compounds would work in patients or whether the same effects would occur at clinically achievable doses.
Effects on myeloma-related bone damage
The study also examined interactions between myeloma cells and bone-related cells. In an invasion assay using a human osteoblast cell line, all four cannabinoids reduced the movement of myeloma cells toward the osteoblasts. CBG and CBN produced the strongest effects in that experiment.
Researchers then assessed bone resorption using osteoclasts derived from THP-1 cells and bovine bone slices. CBG, CBC, CBN, and CBDV all reduced measures of bone breakdown after 14 days, with CBG, CBN, and CBDV showing the strongest activity. These findings are relevant because excessive osteoclast activity is one of the biological processes behind myeloma-associated bone lesions. However, the experiments used simplified laboratory systems rather than human bone tissue in a living patient.
CBN reduced tumor weight in a mouse model
CBN was selected for a preliminary in vivo experiment because it performed particularly well in the earlier tests. Researchers implanted U266 myeloma cells beneath the skin of mice. Once tumors became detectable, the animals received either a control solution or CBN at 15 milligrams per kilogram by subcutaneous injection every three days for three weeks.
At the end of the treatment period, mice given CBN had significantly lower tumor weights than control animals. The researchers reported no statistically significant differences between groups in body weight or the weights of the liver, spleen, and pancreas. Those measurements provide limited preliminary information about tolerability; they should not be interpreted as proof that CBN has been established as safe, particularly in humans.
The study’s primary source, “Anticancer effect of minor phytocannabinoids in preclinical models of multiple myeloma,” tested CBG, CBC, CBN, and CBDV in cell-based models and tested only CBN in the mouse xenograft model. It did not include patients, compare cannabinoids with approved myeloma therapies, or determine whether the compounds improve survival or other clinical outcomes.
That distinction is important. Cannabinoids have been investigated for cancer-related symptoms such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, but the National Cancer Institute notes that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved cannabis or cannabinoids as cancer treatments. Evidence from laboratory and animal studies cannot by itself establish an anticancer treatment for people, and cannabinoid products may also interact with conventional medicines.
The results nevertheless identify several questions for future research. Further studies will need to clarify the compounds’ molecular targets, activity against primary myeloma cells, effects on normal tissues, pharmacokinetics, and potential interactions with existing treatments. Carefully designed clinical trials would be required before any of these minor cannabinoids could be considered part of multiple myeloma therapy.
