Effect of the combination of tetrahydrocannabinol and melatonin (IGC‐AD1) on blood pressure variability in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s Disease

Abstract

Abstract Background Blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) is a risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Medications, such as atypical antipsychotics used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) common in AD, contribute to altering BP. Here we present preliminary data on the use of IGC‐AD1, a combination intervention of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and melatonin, on BP and BPV. Method Participants with hypertension (n = 12) and mild (15.38%) to moderate (84.6%) AD (NIA‐criteria, 10‐active, 2‐placebo, 81.5±5.5yrs, 69.2% women) were enrolled in a three‐Cohort Phase‐1, MAD, safety and tolerability trial (IND146069, NCT04749563). In Cohort‐1, Cohort‐2 and Cohort‐3, one ml QD, BID, and TID of IGC‐AD1 were administered respectively for 14‐days with a minimum of 4‐days washout between Cohorts. For all Cohorts, BP was recorded daily. Coefficients of variation (CV), ∆DBP and ∆SBP (diastolic and systolic blood pressure) were calculated to assess SBP‐variability for each Cohort. A chi‐square was performed to verify whether the difference between controlled and uncontrolled SBP (>140mmHg in more than 20% of values per participant) was related to IGC‐AD1. SBP‐CV difference among Cohorts was determined with a one‐way ANOVA. The difference between active and placebo for each Cohort was assessed with independent t‐tests (dplr R‐Studio). BP‐associated adverse events (AEs) were evaluated daily. Result Variability measures fell within the normal range (∆DVP = 45.0±13.5 mmHg, ∆SBP = 66.44±22.9 mmHg, CV = 7.6±5.3 mmHg) for all three Cohorts. Cohort‐1 (mmHg): ∆SBP = 42.3±15.56, ∆DVP = 25.6±8.86, CV = 10.14±3.84; Cohort‐2 (mmHg): ∆SBP = 41.9±11.73, ∆DVP = 23±9.7, CV = 8.95±1.96; Cohort‐3 (mmHg): ∆SBP = 39.6±11.76, ∆DVP = 23.6±7.82, CV = 8.84±7.83. IGC‐AD1 had no statistically significant effect between controlled and uncontrolled SBP (X2(2) = 1.15, p = 0.562). There was no SBP‐CV mean‐difference among Cohorts (F (2,27) = 0.589, p = 0.562). No differences were detected between placebo and active (Cohort‐1: t(1.64) = 0.315, p = 0.788, Cohort‐2: t(1.31) = ‐0.225, p = 0.85, Cohort‐3: t(3.53) = 1.63, p = 0.188). While BP related AEs were reported, none were deemed, by the PI, to be associated with IGC‐AD1. Conclusion Preliminary data indicate that IGC‐AD1, a cannabis‐based formulation, in trials to treat NPS did not statistically affect BP or BPV in a MAD study indicating that it may not contribute as a risk factor for AD; warranting a larger placebo‐controlled trial.