Smoking is the most common route of administration for cannabis; however, vaping cannabis extracts and synthetic cannabinoids ("fake marijuana") in electronic cigarette devices has become increasingly popular. Yet, most animal models used to investigate biological mechanisms underlying cannabis use employ injection as the route of administration. This study evaluated a novel e-cigarette device that delivers aerosolized cannabinoids to mice. The effects of aerosolized and injected synthetic cannabinoids (CP 55,940, AB-CHMINACA, XLR-11, and JWH-018) in mice were compared in a battery of bioassays in which psychoactive cannabinoids produce characteristic effects. The most potent cannabinoids (CP 55,940 and AB-CHMINACA) produced the full cannabinoid profile (ie, hypothermia, hypolocomotion, and analgesia), regardless of the route of administration. In contrast, aerosolized JWH-018 and XLR-11 did not produce the full profile of cannabimimetic effects. Results of time course analysis for hypothermia showed that aerosol exposure to CP 55,940 and AB-CHMINACA produced faster onset of effects and shorter duration of action than injection. The ability to administer cannabinoids to rodents using the most common route of administration among humans provides a method for collecting preclinical data with enhanced translational relevance.

Diversion of synthetic cannabinoids from the lab to drugs of abuse has become increasingly prevalent in recent years. Moreover, as earlier synthetic cannabinoids were banned, manufacturers introduced a new supply of novel compounds to serve as replacements. Hence, the chemical diversity of synthetic cannabinoid analogs has also rapidly increased. The present study examined 8 new synthetic cannabinoids: AM-1220, AM-2232, AM-2233, AM-679, EAM-2201, JWH-210, JHW-251, and MAM-2201. Each compound was assessed for binding affinity and functional activation of CB1 and CB2 receptors, and pharmacological equivalence with Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in THC drug discrimination. All compounds bound to and activated CB1 and CB2 receptors, although efficacy at the CB2 receptor was reduced compared to that for the CB1 receptor. Similarly, all compounds stimulated [35S]GTPγS binding through the CB1 receptor, and all compounds except AM-1220 and AM-2233 stimulated [35S]GTPγS binding through the CB2 receptor. Furthermore, these compounds, along with CP55,940, substituted for THC in THC drug discrimination. Rank order of potency in drug discrimination was correlated with CB1 receptor binding affinity. Together, these results suggest that all test compounds share the THC-like subjective effects of marijuana. Interestingly, the most potent compounds in CB1 binding in the present study were also the compounds that have been found recently in the U.S., MAM-2201, EAM-2201, JWH-210, AM-2233, and AM-1220. These results indicate that the evolution of the synthetic cannabinoid drug market may be focused toward compounds with increased potency. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Designer Drugs and Legal Highs.'