Novel Lipid Formulation Increases Absorption of Oral Cannabidiol (CBD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cannabidiol (CBD) is an approved treatment for childhood epilepsies and a candidate treatment for several other CNS disorders. However, it has poor oral bioavailability. We investigated the effect of a novel lipid formulation on its absorption in humans and on its tissue distribution in mice. Methods: In a double-blind crossover study in fasting healthy volunteers, we compared the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of 1000 mg of CBD in the lipid formulation and in a powder formulation (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05032807). In a second study, male CD1 mice were administered CBD in either the lipid formulation or dissolved in water, via oral gavage (n = 1 per timepoint). The tissue distribution of CBD was assessed using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometric imaging. Results: Plasma exposure (AUC0–48) of CBD was nine times greater for the lipid formulation than the powder formulation (611.1 ng·h/mL [coefficient of variation {CV%}: 104.6] and 66.8 ng·h/mL [CV%: 50.7], respectively). With the powder formulation, the AUC0–48 was related to the concentration of specific gastrointestinal bacteria and bile acids. These associations were attenuated with the lipid formulation. In the animal study, after treatment with the lipid formulation, measurable concentrations of CBD were identified in all organs. For the aqueous formulation, tissue concentrations of CBD were below the limit of quantification. Conclusions: Administering oral CBD in a lipid formulation was associated with an increase in its gastrointestinal absorption, as well as an attenuation of the relationship between its absorption and features of the gut microbiome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".