Next Article in Journal
Exploring the Relationship Between Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Haplotype Variants, Personality, and Nicotine Usage in Women
Previous Article in Journal
Integrated Transcriptome and Metabolome Analyses Uncover Cholesterol-Responsive Gene Networks
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Molecular Mechanisms of the Endocannabinoid System with a Focus on Reproductive Physiology and the Cannabinoid Impact on Fertility

1
Department of Reproduction and Farm Animals, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 50-375 Wroclaw, Poland
2
Department of General and Experimental Pathology, Wroclaw Medical University, 50-368 Wroclaw, Poland
3
Department of Food Chemistry and Biocatalysis, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Science, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 50-375 Wroclaw, Poland
4
Department of Animal Physiology and Biostructure, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 50-375 Wroclaw, Poland
5
Department of Internal Diseases with Clinic for Horses, Dogs, and Cats, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, pl. Grunwaldzki 47, 50-366 Wroclaw, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26(15), 7095; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26157095
Submission received: 14 May 2025 / Revised: 8 July 2025 / Accepted: 16 July 2025 / Published: 23 July 2025

Abstract

The endocannabinoid system (ECS) is a complex neuromodulatory network involved in maintaining physiological balance through interactions with various neurotransmitter and hormonal pathways. Its key components—cannabinoid receptors (CBRs)—are activated by endogenous ligands and exogenous cannabinoids such as those found in the Cannabis sativa plant. Although cannabinoids like cannabidiol (CBD) have garnered interest for their potential therapeutic effects, evidence regarding their safety, particularly for reproductive health, remains limited. This review summarizes the structure and molecular mechanisms of the ECS, its role in reproductive physiology—including its interactions with the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis (HPG axis), gametogenesis, implantation, and lactation—and the possible consequences of cannabinoid exposure for fertility. In addition, we focus on the involvement of the ECS and cannabinoids in breast cancer, highlighting emerging evidence on their dual role in tumor progression and therapy. These insights emphasize the need for further research to better define the therapeutic potential and risks associated with cannabinoid use in reproductive health and breast cancer.

1. Introduction

Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) is one of the oldest cultivated plants, used for various industrial (e.g., fiber production), nutritional (e.g., seed oil production), and medicinal purposes. Archaeological and historical records indicate that cannabis has been employed in traditional medicine across many ancient cultures. In China, hemp seeds are consumed for their nutritional value and used medicinally to treat malaria, rheumatism, constipation, and other ailments [1,2]. In India, cannabis was recognized as a sacred plant and applied in treating pain, seizures, and inflammation [2,3]. Middle Eastern and African societies used cannabis to manage infections, gastrointestinal disorders, and complications during childbirth [4,5]. The routes of administration and methods of preparation varied depending on the region and purpose of use, including oral ingestion, smoking, and topical application.
In the 19th century, cannabis attracted attention in Western medicine. Notably, William B. O’Shaughnessy introduced cannabis into European pharmacology as a treatment for tetanus, cholera, rabies, and rheumatic conditions [3,6]. Around the same time, French psychiatrist Jacques-Joseph Moreau explored its psychoactive effects in mental illness and neurological disorders [7]. However, inconsistent effects and a lack of standardized dosing, along with increasing social and regulatory concerns, led to a decline in medical use. Cannabis was removed from the U.S. Pharmacopeia in 1941 and later classified as a Schedule I controlled substance, significantly hindering research for several decades [3].
The discovery and isolation of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in the 1960s by Raphael Mechoulam and colleagues [8,9] marked the beginning of modern cannabinoid research. These breakthroughs paved the way for the identification of the endocannabinoid system (ECS)—a conserved lipid signaling network consisting of cannabinoid receptors (CBRs), endogenous ligands such as anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), and enzymes involved in their synthesis and degradation [10,11]. The ECS is now known to play a crucial role in maintaining homeostasis by regulating processes within the nervous, endocrine, immune, and reproductive systems [12,13,14,15,16,17].
With growing interest in the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids—especially CBD—numerous products are marketed as natural alternatives to conventional pharmaceuticals. However, scientific evidence regarding their safety and long-term effects remains limited, particularly in relation to reproductive health. Most available data concern THC, while studies on the safety profile of CBD and other plant-derived cannabinoids (phytocannabinoids) are still emerging [11,13]. Additionally, cannabinoids have been investigated for their involvement in tumor biology, with particular emphasis on breast cancer, where they appear to exert both pro- and anti-tumor effects depending on the context [18,19,20,21,22].
The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the molecular architecture and signaling mechanisms of the ECS, its physiological role in reproduction, and the effects of exogenous cannabinoids on fertility. Special attention is given to the role of ECS in breast cancer, with a focus on its potential as a therapeutic target and the associated biological risks.

2. The Endocannabinoid System

ECS plays a crucial role in regulating and maintaining homeostasis across virtually all physiological processes in the body [12,13,14,15,16,17]. It achieves this balance primarily through the production of endogenous ligands (known as endocannabinoids or endogenous cannabinoids), which act to restore physiological equilibrium when homeostasis is disrupted. Central to ECS function are two principal G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs): cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1) and cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2). Due to their distinct tissue distribution and involvement in diverse biological pathways, these receptors make them promising targets for therapeutic intervention [23].
Although the ECS was discovered relatively recently, it is now recognized as a highly conserved signaling system across nearly all species [10]. Beyond CBRs and their endogenous ligands, the ECS encompasses enzymes responsible for the synthesis, transport, and degradation of endocannabinoids. Key enzymes include fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL), which inactivate endocannabinoids, thereby tightly regulating ECS activity [11].

2.1. Cannabinoid Receptors

2.1.1. CB1 and CB2: Types, Structure, and Mechanisms of Action

CB1 and CB2 are integral components of the ECS and belong to class A (rhodopsin-like) GPCRs [24,25]. Both receptors primarily couple with Gi/o proteins and mediate their effects by inhibiting adenylate cyclase activity, leading to decreased intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels [26,27,28]. CB1 has also been shown to couple with Gq and, in some contexts, Gs proteins, although the latter remains less defined for CB2 [29,30].
CB1 is predominantly expressed in the central nervous system, (CNS), while CB2 is more abundant in immune-related tissues. However, both receptors are also present in peripheral organs, including reproductive tissues such as the ovary, uterus, testis, and placenta, where they modulate local endocrine, immune, and cellular functions [14,26,29,30].
Upon activation by endocannabinoids or exogenous cannabinoids, both receptors initiate intracellular signaling cascades, including the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway and the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT (Protein Kinase B) pathway. These signaling routes regulate key cellular processes such as proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis, migration, and inflammation [18,31,32,33,34,35]. In reproductive tissues, these pathways are involved in folliculogenesis, spermatogenesis, implantation, and placental development, while in cancer, they are implicated in tumor growth, angiogenesis, and immune evasion [19,20,21,22,27,36,37].
Although CB1 and CB2 possess complex structural features—including seven transmembrane helices and distinct ligand binding domains—this review focuses on their signaling relevance in reproductive and oncological contexts. Notably, ligand binding modulates calcium and potassium channel activity, influencing neurotransmitter and hormone release, which may affect gonadotropin regulation and reproductive homeostasis [38,39,40,41,42,43].
Emerging data also suggest a functional interplay between the ECS and other signaling systems, such as the dopaminergic and oxytocinergic pathways, which are critical for neuroendocrine regulation of reproduction and sexual behavior [44,45,46,47].

2.1.2. Location of CB1 and CB2

CBRs have been characterized so far in various vertebrate species. Although present throughout virtually all tissues, a certain localization tendency of individual CBRs was observed. Despite some interspecies variation, CB1 shows a conserved expression pattern, with its highest density consistently found in the CNS, where it plays a key role in regulating neuronal activity, and to a lesser extent in the periphery (e.g., adrenal glands, bone marrow, heart, lungs, prostate) [11,25,48,49,50,51]. Studies have shown that these receptors are most highly expressed in axons and presynaptic terminals of neurons in the amygdala, hippocampus, cortex, basal ganglia outflow tracts, and cerebellum [52], which is consistent with previous observations indicating that cannabinoids have a marked effect on locomotor activity, cognitive functions, and memory performance, as well as pain, appetite, and emotions [34,53]. Upon activation, the CB1 receptor increases the activity of calcium and potassium ion channels, which consequently modulates the release of neurotransmitters. Functionally significant expression of this receptor has also been detected in cardiovascular, hormonal, and digestive tissues—it has been noted, among other things, that it reduces intestinal motility and secretion, supports anti-inflammatory effects (by inhibiting the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines), helps control vomiting, and regulates cell growth and survival, influencing proliferation and apoptosis, which is important in the case of cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. This wide distribution of CB1 receptors in the body underlies their diverse functions [10,34,43,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67] (Figure 1).
In contrast, research indicates that CB2 receptors are predominantly expressed in the cells of the digestive and immune systems. This distribution partly accounts for the immunomodulatory properties of cannabinoids [23,25,58,68,69,70,71,72]. Moreover, CB2 expression was also detected in the CNS, more precisely in astrocytes and microglia [73]. The mechanism of their action involves the inhibition of adenylyl cyclase activity via Gi/Goα subunits and interaction with stimulatory Gαi/o proteins, leading to altered intracellular cAMP levels and modulation of downstream MAPK signaling cascades, which significantly affect both mature and developing tissues [74,75,76,77]. Signaling through these receptors plays a major role in modulating inflammation. It is also associated with neuroprotective effects and the maintenance of bone mass [10,13,78,79]. Additionally, research has already been carried out on the effects of CB2 agonists in slowing down neurodegenerative diseases (e.g., Alzheimer’s disease) [80] (Figure 2).
Furthermore, although data remain limited, preliminary studies in humans and various animal species demonstrate the presence and functional importance of both receptors in reproductive tissues (i.e., ovaries, corpus luteum (CL), uterus, placenta, testes, vas deferens) and mammary glands [10,65,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104] (Table 1). A detailed discussion of this topic is provided in Section 3 (The Role of the Endocannabinoid System and Cannabinoids in Reproductive Processes) and Section 4 (Meaning of the endo- and exocannabinoids for the mammary tumor (development and treatment)) in this article.

2.2. Cannabinoid Ligands

Cannabinoid ligands are molecules that interact with CRBs modulating their activity and initiating downstream cellular signaling. These ligands can be broadly classified into three major groups: (1) endogenous cannabinoids, which are synthesized naturally within the body and include compounds such as anandamide and 2-AG; (2) plant-derived cannabinoids, primarily found in Cannabis sativa, including THC, CBD, and other minor phytocannabinoids; and (3) synthetic cannabinoids, (SCs), structurally diverse compounds developed to mimic or modulate activity of CBRs. Each group exhibits distinct affinity, efficacy, and receptor selectivity profiles, influencing a wide range of physiological and pathological processes.
The term exogenous cannabinoids is sometimes used functionally to refer to both phytocannabinoids and SCs, as they originate outside the organism.The following subsections explore each group in detail, including their biosynthesis and receptor interactions.

2.2.1. Endogenous Cannabinoids (Endocannabinoids)

The identification of CB1 and CB2 receptors enabled the discovery of natural endocannabinoids—molecules that are neurotransmitters responsible for activating receptors. Most attention has been paid to research on AEA and 2-AG [105,106,107,108]. These molecules are released postsynaptically and exert a homeostatic function by activating CBRs, resulting in the rapid inhibitory modulation of neurotransmitters responsible for various biological processes such as pain, inflammation, immunity, bone growth, and anxiety [109]. Endocannabinoids bind to receptors, inhibit voltage-gated calcium channels and adenylate cyclase activity, and stimulate MAPK pathways [105,110,111]. To achieve this, the production and inactivation/hydrolysis of endocannabinoids is tightly controlled by the precise action of metabolic enzymes: FAAH (AEA degradation) and MAGL (2-AG degradation) [10,79]. Additionally, studies have shown that endocannabinoids bind to the CB1 with slightly greater affinity than to the CB2 receptor [72]. Similarly, inhibition of cAMP by AEA is greater for the CB1 [112], whereas inhibition of cAMP production by 2-AG is greater for CB2 [113]. Interestingly, analyses have shown that 2-AG occurs in the brain in concentrations 170 times higher than AEA, and additionally, it acts as a full agonist, causing the characteristic effects associated with cannabinoid agonists [114]. In addition to CBRs, both AEA and 2-AG also interact with other receptors [115,116,117,118].
Beyond their biochemical and homeostatic roles, endocannabinoids such as AEA and 2-AG have also been implicated in the regulation of reproductive functions, including follicular development, sperm capacitation, embryo implantation, and uterine contractility, highlighting their physiological relevance beyond the endocannabinoid signaling in the nervous system (see Section 3).

2.2.2. Plant-Derived Cannabinoids (Phytocannabinoids)

In recent years, growing societal acceptance, widespread use of cannabis (both recreational and medical), and legalization in some countries have prompted scientists to examine its constituents and their effects on the body [119]. Cannabis sativa L. is an Asian plant with a rich chemical composition; in addition to primary metabolites (e.g., fatty acids and amino acids), it also contains secondary metabolites, including phytocannabinoids—plant-derived exogenous cannabinoids capable of interacting with CBRs. Among these classes, cannabinoids are well-studied compounds whose structure resembles that of endocannabinoids produced by the human body and effectively mimics their action. Phytocannabinoids exhibit a wide range of therapeutic properties, including analgesic, muscle relaxant, immunosuppressive, anti-inflammatory, antiallergic, sedative, mood-elevating, appetite-stimulating, antiemetic, and anticancer effects [11,120,121,122,123,124,125,126] (Figure 3).
Recent analyses indicate that exogenous cannabinoids can directly influence tumor growth by inducing cancer cell death and/or inhibiting proliferation [127] and indirectly reduce the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) [128]. At physiological concentrations, they may also support the recovery of damaged macromolecules and organelles, thereby helping maintain the structural integrity and functional balance of lysosomes [129,130]. These effects result from activation of CBRs or competition between endocannabinoids and metabolic enzymes [131]. Experiments have identified important aspects of this mechanism and provided insight into how cannabinoid agonists induce biased signaling [131]. It is also important to note that upon binding extracellular ligands such as phytocannabinoids, GPCRs interact with specific subsets of heterotrimeric G proteins, which in turn activate or inhibit various effector enzymes and ion channels. Among phytocannabinoids, two compounds have been studied in detail: THC and CBD [132].
Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol
Initially, the rapid increase in cannabis use worldwide (e.g., as an analgesic, anticonvulsant, sedative, or antiemetic for nausea in pregnant women), combined with its psychoactive effects and strong affinity for CB1 receptors in the CNS, made THC a primary subject of scientific research. It acts as a partial agonist of CB1, and its effects include downregulation of the secondary messenger cAMP via inhibition of adenylate cyclase [58,133]. Among other properties, THC can inhibit the production of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) [134]. As noted, it also has strong narcotic properties mediated by central CBRs, which are well documented. The observed psychotropic effects include euphoria, relaxation, and antinociception [49]. Because endocannabinoids are crucial for proper brain development, these effects may result from cannabinoids disrupting endocannabinoid homeostasis, despite structural differences between these groups of compounds [135,136]. Current studies show that adolescent cannabinoid use may lead to structural, functional, and histological brain alterations that could underlie some long-term behavioral and psychological harms [137]. It has also been shown that cannabinoid use in this group significantly slows the learning process [138]. As a partial rather than full CB1 agonist, THC exhibits lower cytotoxicity compared to SCs (e.g., CP-55,940) and therefore has a better safety profile [133,139].
Cannabidiol
In recent years, interest in CBD has grown significantly due to its psychoactive but non-intoxicating properties, along with considerable clinical potential as an alternative to conventional therapies for various health disorders in humans and animals, including its FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-approved use in the treatment of epilepsy [13]. It is the second most abundant phytocannabinoid in cannabis, accounting for up to 40% of the dry weight of some varieties [140]. Like THC, CBD has neuroprotective, antioxidant, and antimicrobial effects [126,141]. Although structurally similar [142], these two compounds have different mechanisms of action. While THC is a partial agonist of CB1 and CB2 with direct interaction, CBD has lower affinity for both receptors and is a CB1 antagonist. Moreover, Laprairie et al. (2015) reported that CBD largely acts as a negative allosteric modulator (NAM) of CB1 receptor agonism by THC and 2-AG [143]. CBD’s minimal agonism at CBRs may account for its negligible psychotropic effect [144]. In addition, cannabidiol has the ability to interact with other receptors, e.g., opioids, which has been tested on rodents and in vitro [144]. Additionally, unlike THC, CBD can activate the receptor transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1), primarily found in the nervous system and involved in the generation and transmission of pain signals, as well as inhibit FAAH activity and AEA reuptake [145,146]. Preliminary clinical studies also indicate that CBD may alleviate symptoms of anxiety, motor and cognitive disorders, pain, and epileptic seizures. However, the specific mechanisms of action of its biological effects remain unclear [78].
Cannabis likely contains smaller compounds beyond the two main cannabinoids discussed. As they are believed to have greater pharmacological activity, scientific research on these compounds is expected to grow significantly in the coming years. Interestingly, one important parameter influencing the biological activity of THC-like cannabinoids is the length of the C3 alkyl chain. A minimum of three carbon atoms is required for receptor binding. Activity increases with chain length up to eight carbons, after which it begins to decline. When the number of carbon atoms is greater than eight, the activity begins to decrease again [147].
Other Minor Phytocannabinoids
Beyond the major phytocannabinoids such as THC and CBD, Cannabis sativa produces over 100 minor cannabinoids, including cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabinol (CBN), and tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) [10,72,73]. These compounds have been reported to exert anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and neuroprotective effects [10,72,77].
However, their biological activity appears to be lower and less well characterized than that of THC or CBD. To date, little is known about their influence on reproductive processes or hormone-related cancers. Available data are mostly preclinical and focus on general physiological responses rather than specific reproductive or oncological endpoints [72,78].

2.2.3. Synthetic Cannabinoids

Research on CBRs structure, supported by bioinformatic and cheminformatic models, enabled the synthesis of a chemically diverse group of compounds known as SCs [148]. Following the identification and cloning of CBRs, numerous structurally diverse substances were studied for their ability to bind to and activate these receptors, leading to large-scale synthesis. These compounds contributed to studies on both classical and non-classical receptors within the ECS, as well as to the development of potential therapies for diseases such as multiple sclerosis and HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) [149]. Unfortunately, some of these substances were misused as narcotics and appeared on the black market [150].
On the international pharmaceutical market, SC-based drugs that are structurally and functionally similar to THC are available. Dronabinol, approved by the FDA in 1985, is used to treat anorexia associated with HIV/AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) and chemotherapy-induced nausea. Studies are ongoing into its use for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) and chronic pain in palliative care. However, it can cause side effects such as neuropsychiatric and hemodynamic disorders, seizures, addiction, and paradoxical nausea and vomiting [151]. In Canada and the United Kingdom, nabilone is approved for use. It causes milder side effects, such as drowsiness, dizziness, dry mouth, and fatigue, and is used for treating chronic pain, insomnia, spasticity, and symptoms of neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s [152,153,154].
In addition, a SC, JT11, has recently been characterized as a highly selective CB2 receptor agonist. It shows promising anti-inflammatory properties via modulation of signaling pathways and cytokine release in immune cells, such as peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Unlike many classical cannabinoids that primarily act on CB1 receptors, the CB2 selectivity of JT11 reduces psychoactive effects while potentially offering therapeutic benefits in inflammatory conditions. Its ability to induce proapoptotic activity and regulate immune responses highlights JT11 as a novel candidate for further investigation into cannabinoid-based therapies targeting CB2 receptors [155].
Recreational SCs, misleadingly marketed as synthetic marijuana or fake weed, are sold under names such as “Spice” (Europe), “K2” (USA), and “Bonzai” or “Jamaica” (Turkey) as supposedly safe alternatives to marijuana. In reality, they often contain high-affinity CB1 agonists, resulting in more intense, violent, and dangerous effects than natural cannabis products. Consequently, they are classified as new psychoactive substances (NPSs) [156,157,158].
The synthetic THC analog HU-210, considered a classical cannabinoid, has a narcotic potency at least 100 times greater than THC. Another group of SCs, labeled as “non-classical”, includes cyclohexylphenols or 3-arylcyclohexanols (CP compounds), developed as potential pain relievers in the 1980s. Other SC variants unrelated to THC have also emerged, such as aminoalkylindoles like naphthoylindoles (e.g., JWH-018), phenylacetylindoles (e.g., JWH-250), and benzoylindoles (e.g., AM-2233). JWH-018 is likely the most well-known SC, with a potency three times that of THC [106,159].
Recent SCs exhibit increasing structural diversity, likely designed to bypass legal restrictions on earlier substances. While the trade of cannabis and THC-containing products is strictly regulated under anti-drug laws, controlling SCs is far more challenging, raising their potential for misuse [160].

2.3. Non-Classical Cannabinoid Receptors

In addition to CB1 and CB2, several other receptors—commonly referred to as non-classical CBRs—have been proposed to participate in cannabinoid signaling. These include GPRs such as GPR55 and GPR18, ion channels like TRPV1, and nuclear receptors including peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) [10,85,87,90]. These receptors have been implicated in diverse physiological processes, including inflammation, nociception, energy metabolism, and immune responses [10,85,88].
Although their expression has been observed in some reproductive tissues [10,89,90], current knowledge of their roles in reproductive physiology or hormone-dependent cancers, such as breast cancer, is limited and largely derived from in vitro studies or animal models. Further research is necessary to clarify their significance in these contexts.

3. The Role of the Endocannabinoid System and Cannabinoids in Reproductive Processes

The relationship between cannabinoids and reproductive function can be considered in the context of endogenous interactions between components of the ECS and the hormonal pathways that regulate reproductive processes. It should also be examined in relation to the effects of exogenous cannabinoids, which, by binding to CBRs expressed at various levels of the reproductive regulatory axis, may significantly modulate these processes. The ECS has been shown to play a critical role in regulating both male and female reproductive functions, including gametogenesis, fertility, fertilization, implantation, embryonic and fetal development, gonadal maturation, libido, and lactation (Table 2 and Table 3). Disruption of ECS activity may lead to reproductive and mammary gland dysfunction. Despite the growing interest in this field, studies investigating the influence of exogenous cannabinoids on reproduction—and thus their safety—remain limited. Existing research has primarily focused on the effects of THC in humans and in rodent models. Although some controversies have emerged, most available studies suggest a potentially adverse impact of these compounds on reproductive outcomes.

3.1. ECS and Cannabinoids in Female Reproductive Processes

3.1.1. ECS and Its Physiological Connections with the Hypothalamic–Pituitary–Gonadal Axis(HPG Axis): Influence on the Secretion of Sex Hormones and Menstrual Cycle Regulation

ECS is present throughout the HPG axis and modulates key reproductive processes in both sexes. ECS components, especially the CB1 receptor, are found in GnRH (Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone)-secreting neurons of the hypothalamus, where endocannabinoids like AEA inhibit GnRH release either directly or indirectly via GABAergic interneurons [161]. This leads to decreased secretion of downstream hormones, including luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and prolactin (PRL) [161,162,163,164].
Disruption or absence of CBRs impairs hormonal release and reproductive function [162]. In females, ECS dysregulation has been linked to menstrual irregularities, anovulation, and delayed ovulation, associated with altered receptor expression in the hypothalamus, anterior pituitary, ovaries, and endometrium [163,164]. Chronic exposure to THC has been shown to reduce GnRH, LH, FSH, and PRL levels [165,166,167,168,169,170,171]. In animal models (rats, rhesus monkeys), THC exposure delays puberty onset, disrupts estrous cycles, and affects endometrial stromal differentiation [111,172,173], possibly via altered ovarian and pituitary signaling [174].
Bidirectional regulation between sex hormones and ECS components has also been demonstrated. Estradiol (E2) modulates ECS elements in the uterus, and AEA levels fluctuate with the menstrual cycle [84,173,175,176]. Importantly, reduced FAAH activity—responsible for AEA degradation—has been associated with miscarriage [111,177]. ECS dysregulation, especially due to exogenous cannabinoids, may contribute to reproductive pathologies such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) [178] and is also linked to altered CB1/CB2 receptor expression in endometrial disorders [179,180].

3.1.2. ECS in Female Reproductive Tissues and Gametes

CB1 and CB2 receptors are expressed in ovarian follicles at multiple stages—primordial, primary, and secondary—suggesting their role in folliculogenesis and oocyte maturation [161]. FAAH is localized in the cytoplasm of oocytes and granulosa cells across these stages, and luteal cells are immunopositive for both CB1 and FAAH [181,182], indicating ECS involvement in follicular selection, ovulation, and corpus luteum (CL) function.
Pirone et al. (2017) identified stage-specific localization of ECS components in feline reproductive tissues [181]. CB1 was found exclusively in the granulosa cells of tertiary follicles, while FAAH was broadly expressed from early follicular stages and in various ovarian compartments. In the fallopian tube, FAAH was present in both ciliated and non-ciliated epithelial cells, whereas CB1 was restricted to ciliated cells—possibly serving as a species-specific cellular marker [181,182].
Although in vivo studies have not consistently demonstrated ECS-mediated inhibition of progesterone (P4) secretion by the CL [111,182,183,184,185,186,187,188,189], in vitro bovine studies suggest that CBR activation may antagonize luteotrophic signals (LH, Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1), PGE2). This effect is mediated by the inhibition of adenylate cyclase, activation of Protein Kinase C (PKC), and increased intracellular calcium levels, all of which promote luteolysis [190,191,192,193,194,195,196]. ECS involvement in luteal regression has also been demonstrated in sheep [79].

3.1.3. ECS in Fertilization, Pregnancy, and Lactation

ECS plays a critical role during fertilization and early pregnancy. Disruption of AEA synthesis in the ovary or uterus impairs embryo development and implantation [197]. In vitro studies show that high AEA levels inhibit blastocyst development and attachment [198] and that FAAH is expressed in preimplantation embryos [111]. Cannabinoids may delay or block embryo transport through the oviduct, potentially increasing the risk of ectopic pregnancy [101,199,200].
All ECS components are present in the uterus. AEA inhibits oxytocin-induced contractions, promoting uterine quiescence during pregnancy. As parturition approaches, AEA is converted to prostaglandins via arachidonic acid, promoting labor onset [161]. CB2, FAAH, AEA, and TRPV1 have been detected in the placenta [96,161,201]. Notably, CB1 expression is higher in placentas from cesarean deliveries compared to spontaneous labor, suggesting a role in parturition pathways [161]. AEA is active during early pregnancy, aiding implantation, while 2-AG levels—much higher than AEA—peak during brain development [161], underscoring the importance of the ECS in fetal neurodevelopment.
Maternal cannabis consumption has been associated with increased risks of preterm birth, low birth weight, neonatal intensive care admission, and neurodevelopmental disorders [180,186,187,188,189,202]. These effects likely result from ECS pathway disruptions critical to implantation, placental function, and fetal development. Nonetheless, some human studies have shown no significant fertility decline among cannabis users [203,204], underscoring the need for further research.
Finally, the ECS influences lactation through the regulation of PRL secretion. Chronic THC exposure suppresses PRL and impairs milk production [133,199]. Both CB1 and CB2 are expressed in mammary glands, and THC metabolites readily cross the placenta and appear in breast milk, potentially affecting neonatal development [196,203,205,206].
These findings highlight the need for tightly regulated ECS activity during the peri-implantation period and throughout pregnancy and lactation.

3.2. ECS and Cannabinoids in Male Reproductive Processes

3.2.1. ECS in Male Reproductive Tissues and Male Gametes

Components of the ECS exhibit distinct localization patterns in spermatozoa. The CB1 receptor is distributed along the sperm head membrane, midpiece, and tail, where it contributes to membrane stability. In contrast, the CB2 receptor is predominantly localized in the sperm head membrane [161]. The ECS plays a crucial role in regulating key sperm functions such as capacitation and the acrosome reaction. Schuel et al. [99] demonstrated that appropriate levels of AEA in seminal plasma maintain sperm in a metabolically quiescent state, while its gradual decline within the female reproductive tract facilitates sperm activation.
The ECS is fundamentally involved in male reproductive physiology. CB1 and CB2 receptors as well as AEA have been identified in human testicular tissue, including Sertoli and Leydig cells, and in spermatozoa, where receptor localization differs [207,208,209]. In sperm, activation of the CB1 receptor has been shown to reduce both viability and motility [98,210,211]. Additionally, TRPV1 signaling is present in Sertoli cells, where its activation induces apoptosis [212].
Based on these findings, an inverse correlation between seminal endocannabinoid levels and sperm motility has been established [213]. Therefore, disturbances in the endocannabinoid balance in seminal plasma can adversely affect spermatogenesis and male fertility.

3.2.2. ECS in Spermatogenesis and Male Reproductive Health

Experimental studies indicate that cannabinoids exert detrimental effects on the male reproductive system. THC penetrates the blood–testis barrier in a concentration-dependent manner that correlates with serum levels. Similarly to its effects in females, it disrupts the HPG axis, which regulates sperm production and sex hormone secretion [214]. Chronic cannabinoid exposure has been associated with decreased LH levels, while FSH levels remain largely unchanged and testosterone (T) concentrations show inconsistent alterations [215,216].
The negative influence of cannabis on semen quality is well-documented in both humans and rodent models and includes reductions in sperm count and concentration, as well as alterations in morphology and motility [216,217,218]. Furthermore, studies focused on CBD alone have demonstrated its gonadotoxic effects on mammalian spermatogenesis via multiple mechanisms. Long-term cannabinoid use has also been linked to clinical manifestations including gynecomastia, erectile dysfunction, and reduced potency [219].

3.3. ECS and Cannabinoids in Gonadal Development and Steroidogenesis

CB1 and CB2 are expressed in the gonads, where they modulate cellular differentiation, proliferation, and steroidogenesis. Exogenous cannabinoid exposure during fetal or perinatal periods may cause long-term endocrine disruptions, including altered testicular architecture and testosterone production [220].

3.4. The Role of the ECS in Libido Regulation

ECS plays a pivotal role in modulating sexual motivation and behavior via central and peripheral mechanisms. The key neurochemical pathways involved include the dopaminergic and oxytocinergic systems, which serve as essential mediators of sexual drive and reward processing. Activation of the ECS influences these pathways, thereby affecting libido and sexual performance.
THC, the primary psychoactive cannabinoid, exhibits biphasic effects on sexual motivation: at lower doses, THC may enhance libido by stimulating dopaminergic signaling, whereas higher doses or chronic use tend to suppress sexual desire and function. This dose-dependent modulation highlights the complex influence of cannabinoids on sexual behavior [220,221,222,223]. However, available data remain limited, particularly with regard to species-specific responses, highlighting the need for further investigation to elucidate the precise mechanisms and translational relevance.

3.5. Sex-Specific Differences in Reproductive ECS Activity

Sex-based differences in ECS activity are evident in central reproductive centers. In rodents, CB1 density is higher in the male hypothalamus and pituitary, while females exhibit elevated circulating AEA levels [161]. Moreover, the menstrual cycle influences ECS activity, as receptor and enzyme expression levels fluctuate, contributing to sex-specific physiology and ECS-related reproductive disorders.

3.6. ECS Receptors and Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs)

ECS is present in both female and male gonads. Disruptions of this system can lead to dysfunctions in the reproductive organs and gametes. This can occur when external substances bind to ECS receptors, leading to unfavorable modulation. This may result from interactions with EDCs, such as phthalates. It is now known that these substances can interact with components of the ECS. It has been shown, for example, that DINP (diisononyl phthalate) impairs the ECS gene expression profile in both male and female gonads of zebrafish. In humans, germ cell tumors, which are a component of testicular dysgenesis syndrome (TDS), are associated with the malignant transformation of precursor cells into germ cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS). According to Barchi et al. [224], cannabinoid signaling may play a crucial role in this process. Another substance that can interfere with the ECS is bisphenol A (BPA), which binds to CB1.

3.7. Cannabinoids and Non-Steroidial Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in the Context of Reproduction

It is worth noting that cannabinoids, like NSAIDs, have been shown to act as selective cyclooxygenase type 2 (COX-2) inhibitors [225]. In mammals, prostaglandins are synthesized from arachidonic acid through the action of cyclooxygenase (COX), specifically its two isoforms—cyclooxygenase type 1 (COX-1) and COX-2—which are differentially expressed [226,227]. COX-1 activity has been observed in virtually all mammalian tissues, and the prostaglandin produced by this isoform plays essential roles in normal physiological processes [226]. In contrast, COX-2 expression is induced by factors such as cytokines, mitogens, and endotoxins, with its primary function being the increased production of prostaglandins during inflammatory states [227].
Prostaglandins are also crucial bioregulators of reproductive functions. Numerous studies suggest that, from a biophysical and biochemical perspective, the process of ovulation resembles a typical inflammatory response [228,229,230,231]. The pre-ovulatory surge of gonadotropins enhances the expression of COX, primarily COX-2, in granulosa and theca cells of ovarian follicles. In many species, increased COX-2 expression during the pre-ovulatory period leads to elevated prostaglandin levels (mainly prostaglandin E (PGE) within the follicle). This, in turn, raises P4 concentrations, highlighting the significance of these components in ovulation and their supportive role in the early stages of CL development [229,232,233,234]. Furthermore, it has already been demonstrated that COX-2 expression is critical for oocyte maturation and early embryonic development, while prostaglandins play a vital role in preparing the endometrium for embryo implantation [235,236,237,238,239].
Numerous studies conducted on various species indicate that COX-2 inhibitors can have both positive and negative effects on fertility. Research on the use of selected NSAIDs during the periovulatory period, conducted in humans, primates, rats, mice, rabbits, pigs, sheep, and cows, predominantly suggests a significantly negative impact of these drugs on fertility [240,241,242]. In humans, primates, and rabbits, NSAIDs were found to disrupt ovulation, leading some researchers to propose their use as an alternative to hormonal contraception [240,241,242]. In women, cases of “luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome” were reported, which resolved after discontinuation of the drugs [243]. In dogs, NSAIDs reduced P4 levels but did not negatively affect fertility [244]. Conversely, other studies on the administration of COX-2 inhibitors during various phases of the ovarian cycle showed no negative impact on reproductive capacity in animals [245,246,247] and even improved outcomes in embryo transfer procedures in cattle and mares [245,247,248]. However, their harmful effects were observed in early pregnancy in Holstein heifers [249]. There are also suggestions that the influence of NSAIDs depends on their anti-inflammatory properties—some drugs more effectively inhibited ovulation, while others had no significant impact [250].
Given the role of cyclooxygenase in the ovarian cycle, the similar mechanisms of action of cannabinoids and NSAIDs, and the known impact of NSAIDs on reproductive processes, cannabinoid ligands may also have potential significance in this context. Preliminary scientific analyses have already begun exploring this hypothesis. Notably, the findings of Cosentino et al. (2022), who investigated the effects of CBD on the expression and function of COX-1 and COX-2 in human neutrophils, revealed that CBD profoundly inhibits COX-1 and COX-2 mRNA (messenger Ribonucleic Acid) expression without significantly affecting PGE2 production [251]. However, these aspects require further, more detailed research.

4. Meaning of the Endo- and Exocannabinoids for the Mammary Tumor (Development and Treatment)

4.1. The Role of the ECS in Cancer Biology

As already mentioned, endocannabinoids present in vertebrates and invertebrates can modulate the activity of proteins involved in cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. For this reason, it has been hypothesized that the ECS may be involved in controlling cancer cell survival [252]. Given the widespread processes of carcinogenesis (including in the breast) and the mechanisms of the ECS, scientists have been investigating the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids, which has been widely described in the literature. However, the results of research on the role of the ECS in the development of cancer are contradictory. Some data suggest that the ECS may be excessively activated, which may promote tumor growth [253]. Conversely, other studies indicate that the ECS has anticancer effects by inhibiting tumor growth [254,255]. There is already a theory that this effect may be dose-dependent—low doses of cannabinoids promote cell proliferation, while higher doses exhibit antiproliferative effects [256].

4.2. Interaction Between ECS and Hormonal Regulation in Breast Cancer

It is already known that the ECS, together with sex hormones, plays an important role in the pathogenesis of breast cancer, modulating key processes such as proliferation, angiogenesis, metastasis, and response to treatment [18,19]. Previous studies have shown that, as in other cancers, the ECS undergoes significant changes in breast cancer. These changes are closely related to tumor aggressiveness. Elevated levels of endocannabinoids, as well as altered expression of CBRs and enzymes responsible for endocannabinoid metabolism, have been associated with more aggressive cancer phenotypes, emphasizing the involvement of the ECS in its progression [20].
The CB2 receptor is clearly overexpressed in breast cancer, especially in HER2 (Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Positive) tumors, where it occurs in about 90% of cases. Increased CB2 expression correlates with poorer prognosis and increased tumor aggressiveness. CB2 mRNA levels have been found to be higher in estrogen receptor negative (ER−)/progesterone receptor negative (PR−) tumors compared with estrogen receptor positive (ER+)/progesterone receptor positive (PR+) tumors and are also elevated in high-grade histologies [21,22,256]. Such differential expression of CBRs in tumor subtypes could provide a molecular basis for personalized cannabinoid-based therapies. However, CB2 expression in ER+ tumors is associated with better prognosis. In addition, increased N-acylphosphatidylethanolamine, the precursor of AEA, as well as higher levels of MAGL have been observed, particularly in ductal carcinomas [18,257,258].

4.3. Cannabinoids in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)

Most studies of cannabinoids in breast cancer have focused TNBC. Studies have shown that cannabinoid sensitivity in human breast cancer cell cultures correlates with tumor aggressiveness; ER− cell lines are more sensitive than ER+ lines [256]. CBD, one of the most studied phytocannabinoids, has been shown to reduce proliferation in MDA-MB-231 cells, potentially through activation of TRPV1 and other unknown targets [19,259]. Furthermore, CBD induces apoptosis in human breast cancer MDA-MB-231 cells by engaging CB1, CB2, and TRPV1. This apoptosis is a result of endoplasmic reticulum stress, inhibition of the AKT/mTOR (Mechanistic Target of Rapamycin) pathway, and activation of autophagy [260]. The ability of CBD to inhibit cell survival has also been linked to interactions with pathways involving PPARs, mTOR, and cyclin D1, as demonstrated by Sultan et al. 2018 [261]. In turn, THC has been reported to promote proliferation in MDA-MB-231 cells [262]. CBD also exhibits antimigratory and anti-invasive properties in various TNBC cell lines, mediated by inhibition of EGF (Epidermal Growth Factor)/EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) signaling and downstream cascades involved in cell proliferation, survival, and inflammatory responses [263]. Given the involvement of these pathways in tumor progression, ECS-targeted modulation may offer dual benefits—attenuating tumor growth while minimizing adverse systemic effects. Studies in mouse xenograft models have confirmed the tumor-inhibiting effects of CBD, although CBD resistance has been observed in some cases [259,264]. CBD also reduces metastatic potential by downregulating inhibitor of differentiation protein 1 (Id-1) via modulation of the ERK (Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase) pathway. Sustained activation of ERK is associated with growth inhibition, while transient activation promotes cell proliferation [264,265]. In addition, CBD increases the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which may further inhibit Id-1 activity, increasing apoptosis [259,260,264,265]. However, TNBC cell survival has also been shown to be dependent on ROS levels, suggesting a complex role of ROS in the breast cancer microenvironment [266]. These findings suggest that targeting oxidative stress pathways through ECS modulation could represent a novel therapeutic avenue, particularly in cancers with high ROS-related aggressiveness, such as TNBC. SCs such as JWH-133 have shown significant antitumor effects in TNBC models. JWH-133 reduced tumor growth and angiogenesis in both xenograft and genetically modified mouse models [267]. These compounds inhibit cell migration through mechanisms involving CB1 and CB2. They interfere with key regulators of cytoskeletal remodeling and adhesion, thereby reducing the ability of cells to migrate and invade surrounding tissues [268,269]. In addition, they inhibit the COX-2/PGE2 axis and modulate the ERK signaling pathway [267,270]. By influencing both immune and vascular components of the tumor microenvironment, ECS modulation may reshape the tumor milieu toward an anti-cancer state. SCs such as Met-F-AEA, WIN 55,212-2, and JWH-133 have also been shown to induce cell cycle arrest and reduce metastatic potential, suggesting broad antiproliferative and antimetastatic properties [267,269]. While mechanistic details continue to emerge, the clinical relevance of ECS modulation in oncology is underscored by these preclinical findings.

4.4. Cannabinoids in HER2+ Breast Cancer

In HER2+ breast cancer, overexpression of CB2 has been associated with poorer patient outcomes [22]. Preclinical studies suggest that CB2 activation in HER2+ tumor models may mediate antitumor effects, making CB2-targeted therapies promising for inhibiting tumor growth [256]. The most prominent studies in this context have used MMTV-neu (Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus-neu) mice, a well-established model for HER2+ tumors. This study demonstrated that THC reduced tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting the AKT signaling pathway. Similar effects were observed with JWH-133, a CB2-selective agonist [271].

4.5. Cannabinoids in Luminal A (ER+) Breast Cancer

Luminal A tumors, predominantly ER+, are the most commonly diagnosed subtype of breast cancer. Cannabinoid studies in this subtype have yielded promising results. AEA has been shown to inhibit basal, PRL-induced, and nerve growth factor (NGF)-induced proliferation in MCF-7 and EFM-19 cells via activation of CB1. This inhibition involved cell cycle arrest and activation of the Raf-1/ERK/MAPK pathway, resulting in decreased expression of PRL and the NGF receptor [256,272]. Similar antiproliferative effects were observed when THC acted on EVSA-T (Estrogen-Responsive Mammary Tumor Cell Line) cells via activation of CB2, mediated by inhibition of CDK1 (Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1) and activation of JunD (component of the AP-1 transcription factor) [273,274]. However, there is conflicting evidence, with some studies showing that THC may promote cell proliferation in MCF-7 cells through mechanisms involving Act1 (NF-κB Activating Protein 1) and HER2 (Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2) [262,275,276,277]. On the other hand, CBD has been shown to reduce cell survival and induce apoptosis in T-47D cells via modulation of PPAR, mTOR, and cyclin D1 pathways [262]. In addition, CBD can induce endoplasmic reticulum stress in MCF-7 cells, leading to cell death via increased ROS and calcium levels, likely mediated by TRPV1 activation [278]. As for other cannabinoids, CBG has been reported to reduce proliferation in MCF-7 cells [259], while CBN appears to stimulate proliferation in the same model [276,277]. Furthermore, THC analogues have been shown to bind to ER\estrogen receptor alpha (ERα), potentially activating this receptor, which has been implicated in antitumor activity. THC has also been reported to prevent E2-induced proliferation in MCF-7 cells via an ER-independent mechanism [279]. A recent study by Almada et al. showed that AEA, CBD, and THC reduced cell viability and disrupted cell cycle progression in MCF-7aro cells. AEA and THC induced apoptosis, while CBD promoted autophagy-mediated cell death. These cannabinoids also inhibited aromatase activity, further supporting their potential role in modulating estrogen signaling [280,281,282]. Interestingly, THC has been shown to increase estrogen receptor beta (ERβ) expression, which is considered beneficial in the treatment of ER+ breast cancer [283].

4.6. Cannabinoids in Combination with Hormonal Therapies

A promising area of research is the study of combining cannabinoids with endocrine therapies. Tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), has been identified as a modulator of CB1 and CB2, acting as an inverse agonist of these receptors. Studies have shown additive antiproliferative effects when tamoxifen is combined with THC or cannabinoid-based formulations in T-47D cells [284,285]. However, conflicting data suggest that THC may promote MCF-7 cell growth in combination with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) [275]. Overall, cannabinoids have shown potential to inhibit tumor growth and prevent metastasis in ER+ breast cancer. These effects are primarily achieved through cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, and autophagy, driven by activation of CB1 and CB2 and modulation of pathways such as mTOR and Raf-1/ERK/MAPK.
Therefore, cannabinoids, both natural and synthetic, represent a promising group of therapeutic compounds whose potential requires further clinical investigation.

5. Summary

As the stigma surrounding cannabis use continues to decline and legal access becomes more widespread, understanding the molecular mechanisms of CBRs and their ligands is increasingly important. This is particularly true as clinical and preclinical reports on phytocannabinoid activity accumulate. Although the ECS remains under investigation, numerous scientific studies have shown that CBRs and cannabinoids are not only responsible for psychoactive effects but also act as key mediators of crucial physiological processes, such as analgesia, immune regulation, appetite, nausea control, and mitigation of various pathologies. Many of these effects likely result from complex agonist/antagonist interactions involving CB1, CB2, and other GPCRs, yet the system’s complexity and interplay with other regulatory networks remain incompletely understood. Research on lesser-known phytocannabinoids—many of which demonstrate stronger biological activity than THC or CBD—shows particular promise for future therapeutic applications. While many fundamental mechanisms have already been explored, challenges remain in determining structure–function relationships, which is especially critical given that cannabinoid effects likely extend beyond CBRs. As a result, future studies will likely focus on their interaction with other GPCRs and related proteins.
Although many studies focus on the adverse effects of cannabis and its active compounds—particularly THC—it is important to distinguish between the physiological role of the endogenous cannabinoid system and the pharmacological impact of exogenous cannabinoids. The ECS is a tightly regulated signaling network involved in maintaining reproductive homeostasis. It modulates the HPG axis, gametogenesis, implantation, placental development, and early embryogenesis. The expression of cannabinoid receptors CBRs and endocannabinoid-metabolizing enzymes in reproductive tissues suggests a critical role in fertility and pregnancy maintenance.
However, cannabis exposure—especially chronic or high-dose use—has been associated with endocrine disruption, menstrual irregularities, ovulatory dysfunction, impaired spermatogenesis, and placental insufficiency. These observations do not merely reflect the toxic effects of THC but rather indicate that exogenous cannabinoids may dysregulate the finely tuned ECS, leading to downstream reproductive disturbances. In this context, THC acts as a functional probe that reveals the physiological relevance of ECS integrity. Therefore, the adverse reproductive outcomes observed in cannabis users should be interpreted not only as evidence of THC toxicity but also as indirect confirmation of the ECS’s physiological importance in reproductive regulation. This dual perspective enhances our understanding of how endocannabinoid tone and receptor signaling contribute to reproductive health and opens new avenues for therapeutic targeting of the ECS in infertility or pregnancy-related disorders.
Most existing research has focused on THC, with other cannabinoids remaining understudied. It is important to emphasize that cannabis-derived products commonly available on the market may contain complex cannabinoid profiles, sometimes with up to 60% of the extract composed of active cannabinoids. These formulations include not only CBD but also its acidic precursor CBDA (Cannabidiolic Acid), which exhibits different bioavailability and biological effects. Other co-occurring compounds include CBC, ∆8-THC, ∆9-THC, CBG, CBN, and their acidic forms [194,195,204,206].
Preliminary preclinical and animal studies involving species relevant to veterinary medicine, such as cats or ruminants, suggest that cannabinoids—particularly CBD—may provide health benefits in managing osteoarthritis, pruritus, epilepsy, and anxiety-related disorders. Their perceived natural origin and accessibility make them an attractive alternative to conventional pharmaceuticals. However, some suggested uses—such as for separation anxiety—still lack empirical confirmation. Moreover, despite increasing cannabinoid use in therapeutic contexts, comprehensive safety data remain limited, especially concerning reproductive health in both humans and animals. Of particular concern is the uncontrolled availability of cannabinoid products, leading to their unregulated use without medical supervision. Additionally, quality standards for these products vary significantly between countries, increasing the risk of exposure to unlabeled THC or contaminants in low-quality formulations. Although CBD does not produce intoxication like THC and is generally regarded as less toxic, it is psychoactive, and its long-term safety profile still requires further investigation. Observed side effects in animal studies have included gastrointestinal disturbances and alterations in liver enzyme activity, indicating the need for controlled and species-specific safety evaluations [233,234].
While CBD appears to be a promising therapeutic option, data regarding its effects—especially on reproductive physiology—are still scarce. Moreover, the physiological role of the ECS in reproduction itself remains incompletely understood and warrants further investigation. Most studies focus on rodent models, with even less information available for non-rodent species. Moreover, the physiological role of the ECS in reproduction itself remains incompletely understood and warrants further investigation. Moreover, many of the other bioactive compounds present in cannabis extracts have not yet been systematically evaluated. Available studies to date generally suggest potential negative effects of cannabinoids on reproductive health, underscoring the urgent need for detailed, species-specific investigations to draw reliable conclusions. Although this review includes studies on species relevant to veterinary medicine, it does not aim to provide a systematic overview of veterinary-specific cannabinoid research.
In conclusion, current evidence suggests that the ECS plays a crucial role in reproductive physiology. Exogenous cannabinoids—especially when used chronically or in uncontrolled doses—may disrupt this system and impair reproductive health. This underlines the need for cautious and evidence-based use of cannabinoids, as well as for further mechanistic and translational studies focusing on fertility, pregnancy, and endocrine regulation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.K. (Patrycja Kalak) and M.D.; formal analysis, P.K. (Piotr Kupczyk), T.G.; resources, P.K. (Patrycja Kalak) and M.J.; writing—original draft preparation, P.K. (Patrycja Kalak), P.K. (Piotr Kupczyk), A.S. and M.D.; writing—review and editing, P.K. (Patrycja Kalak), M.D., P.K. (Piotr Kupczyk) and W.N.; visualization, P.K. (Patrycja Kalak), M.J.; supervision, M.D., A.N. and A.S.; project administration, M.D., A.S., P.K. (Piotr Kupczyk) and W.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The article is part of a PhD dissertation titled “Assessment of the Effects of Cannabidiol (CBD) on Selected Functions of the Reproductive System (In Vivo and In Vitro Studies) and Analysis of Cannabinoid Receptor Expression in the Reproductive System and Mammary Gland in a Domestic Dog Model”, prepared during Doctoral School at the Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences. The APC is financed by Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
2-AG2-Arachidonoylglycerol
AEAAnandamide
Act1NF-κB Activating Protein 1
AIAromatase Inhibitor
AIDSAcquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
AKTProtein Kinase B
BPABisphenol-A
cAMPCyclic Adenosine Monophosphate
CBCCannabichromene
CBDCannabidiol
CBDACannabidiolic Acid
CBGCannabigerol
CBNCannabinol
CBRCannabinoid Receptor
CB1Cannabinoid Receptor type 1
CB2Cannabinoid Receptor type 2
CDK1Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1
CLCorpus Luteum
CNSCentral Nervous System
COX-1Cyclooxygenase type 1
COX-2Cyclooxygenase type 2
DINPDiisononyl phthalate
E2Estradiol
ECSEndocannabinoid System
EDCEndocrine-disrupting chemical
EGFEpidermal Growth Factor
EGFREpidermal Growth Factor Receptor
ER-Estrogen Receptor Negative
ER+Estrogen Receptor Positive
ERαEstrogen Receptor Alpha
ERβEstrogen Receptor Beta
ERKExtracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase
EVSA-TEstrogen-Responsive Mammary Tumor Cell Line
FAAHFatty Acid Amide Hydrolase
FDAFood and Drug Administration
FSHFollicle-Stimulating Hormone
GCNISGerm cell neoplasia in situ
GnRHGonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
GPCRG Protein-Coupled Receptor
HER2Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2
HER2+Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Positive
HIVHuman Immunodeficiency Virus
HPG axisHypothalamic–Pituitary–Gonadal Axis
Id-1Inhibitor of Differentiation Protein 1
LHLuteinizing Hormone
MAGLMonoacylglycerol Lipase
MAPKMitogen-Activated Protein Kinase
MMTV-neuMouse Mammary Tumor Virus-neu
mRNAMessenger Ribonucleic Acid
mTORMechanistic Target of Rapamycin
NAMNegative Allosteric Modulator
NGFNerve Growth Factor
NPSNew Psychoactive Substances
NSAIDNon-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug
OSASObstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome
P4Progesterone
PCOSPolycystic Ovary Syndrome
PGEProstaglandin E
PGE1Prostaglandin E1
PGE2Prostaglandin E2
PI3KPhosphatidylinositol-3-kinase
PKCProtein Kinase C
PPARPeroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor
PRProgesterone Receptor
PR-Progesterone Receptor Negative
PR+Progesterone Receptor Positive
PRLProlactin
PTSDPost-Traumatic Stress Disorder
ROSReactive Oxygen Species
SCSynthetic Cannabinoid
SERMSelective Estrogen Receptor Modulator
TTestosterone
TDSTesticular dysgenesis syndrome
THC∆9-Tetrahydrocannabinol
THCVTetrahydrocannabivarin
TNBCTriple-Negative Breast Cancer
TRPV1Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 1
VEGFVascular Endothelial Growth Factor

References

  1. Russo, E.B. History of Cannabis and Its Preparations in Saga, Science, and Sobriquet. Chem. Biodivers. 2007, 4, 1614–1648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Touw, M. The Religious and Medicinal Uses of Cannabisin China, India and Tibet. J. Psychoact. Drugs 1981, 13, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Aldrich, M. History of Therapeutic cannabis. In Cannabis in Medical Practice; Mathre, M.L., Ed.; McFarland: Jefferson, NC, USA, 1997; pp. 35–55. [Google Scholar]
  4. Fankhauser, M. History of Cannabis in Western Medicine. In Cannabis and Cannabinoids; Grotenhermen, F., Russo, E., Eds.; The Haworth Integrative Healing Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2002; pp. 37–51. [Google Scholar]
  5. Pinho, A.R. Social and Medical Aspects of the Use of Cannabis in Brazil. In Cannabis and Culture; Rubin, V., Ed.; De Gruyter Mouton: Berlin, NY, USA, 1975; pp. 293–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Du Toit, B.M. Cannabis in Africa; Balkema: Rotterdam, The Neatherlands, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  7. Brill, H.; Nahas, G.G. Cannabis Intoxication and Mental Illness. In Marihuana in Science and Medicine; Nahas, G.G., Ed.; Raven Press: New York, NY, USA, 1984; pp. 263–306. [Google Scholar]
  8. Long, E.L.; Malone, D.; Taylor, D. The Pharmacological Effects of cannabidiol. DrugsFuture 2005, 30, 747. [Google Scholar]
  9. Silver, R.J. The Endocannabinoid System of Animals. Animals 2019, 9, 686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Hartsel, J.A.; Boyar, K.; Pham, A.; Silver, R.J. Cannabis in Veterinary medicine: Cannabinoid Therapies for Animals. In Nutraceuticals in Veterinary Medicine; Gupta, R.C., Srivastava, A., Lall, R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 121–155. [Google Scholar]
  11. Yu, C.H.J.; Rupasinghe, V.H.P. Cannabidiol-based Natural Health Products for Companion animals: Recent Advances in the Management of anxiety, pain, and Inflammation. Res. Vet. Sci. 2021, 140, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Campolongo, P.; Trezza, V. The Endocannabinoid system: A Key Modulator of Emotions and Cognition. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2012, 6, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Corsato Alvarenga, I.; Panickar, K.S.; Hess, H.; McGrath, S. Scientific Validation of Cannabidiol for Management of Dog and Cat Diseases. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 2023, 11, 227–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Osei-Hyiaman, D.; Harvey-White, J.; Bátkai, S.; Kunos, G. The Role of the Endocannabinoid System in the Control of Energy Homeostasis. Int. J. Obes. 2006, 30, S33–S38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Silvestri, C.; Di Marzo, V. The Endocannabinoid System in Energy Homeostasis and the Etiopathology of Metabolic Disorders. Cell Metab. 2013, 17, 475–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Tibiriça, E. The Multiple Functions of the Endocannabinoid system: A Focus on the Regulation of Food Intake. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2010, 2, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Woods, S.C. The Endocannabinoid System: Mechanisms behind Metabolic Homeostasis and Imbalance. Am. J. Med. 2007, 120, S9–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Guindon, J.; Hohmann, A.G. The Endocannabinoid System and cancer: Therapeutic Implications. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2011, 163, 1447–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Laezza, C.; Pagano, C.; Navarra, G.; Pastorino, O.; Proto, M.C.; Fiore, D.; Piscitelli, A.; Ligresti, A.; Bifulco, M.; Di Marzo, V.; et al. The Endocannabinoid System: A Target for Cancer Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Śledziński, P.; Zeyland, J.; Słomski, R.; Nowak, A. The Current State and Future Perspectives of Cannabinoids in Cancer Biology. Cancer Med. 2018, 7, 765–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Alves, P.; Amaral, C.; Teixeira, N.; Correia-da-Silva, G. Cannabis sativa: Much More beyond Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Pharmacol. Res. 2020, 157, 104822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Fraguas-Sánchez, A.I.; Torres-Suárez, A.I. Medical Use of Cannabinoids. Drugs 2018, 78, 1665–1703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Makriyannis, A. 2012 Division of Medicinal Chemistry Award Address. Trekking the Cannabinoid Road: A Personal Perspective. J. Med. Chem. 2014, 57, 3891–3911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hryhorowicz, S.; Kaczmarek-Ryś, M.; Andrzejewska, A.; Staszak, K.; Hryhorowicz, M.; Korcz, A.; Słomski, R. Allosteric Modulation of Cannabinoid Receptor 1—Current Challenges and Future Opportunities. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 5874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Munro, S.; Thomas, K.L.; Abu-Shaar, M. Molecular Characterization of a Peripheral Receptor for Cannabinoids. Nature 1993, 365, 61–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Howlett, A.C. Inhibition of Neuroblastoma Adenylate Cyclase by Cannabinoid and Nantradol Compounds. Life Sci. 1984, 35, 1803–1810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Latorraca, N.R.; Venkatakrishnan, A.J.; Dror, R.O. GPCR Dynamics: Structures in Motion. Chem. Rev. 2016, 117, 139–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Weis, W.I.; Kobilka, B.K. The Molecular Basis of G Protein–Coupled Receptor Activation. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2018, 87, 897–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Calandra, B.; Portier, M.; Kernéis, A.; Delpech, M.; Carillon, C.; Le Fur, G.; Ferrara, P.; Shire, D. Dual Intracellular Signaling Pathways Mediated by the Human Cannabinoid CB1 Receptor. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 1999, 374, 445–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Glass, M.; Felder, C.C. Concurrent Stimulation of Cannabinoid CB1 and Dopamine D2 Receptors Augments cAMP Accumulation in Striatal Neurons: Evidence for a GsLinkage to the CB1 Receptor. J. Neurosci. 1997, 17, 5327–5333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Bonhaus, D.W.; Chang, L.K.; Kwan, J.; Martin, G.R. Dual Activation and Inhibition of Adenylyl Cyclase by Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists: Evidence for Agonist-Specific Trafficking of Intracellular Responses. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1998, 287, 884–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Childers, S.R.; Deadwyler, S.A. Role of Cyclic AMP in the Actions of Cannabinoid Receptors. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1996, 52, 819–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Deadwyler, S.A.; Hampson, R.E.; Mu, J.; Whyte, A.; Childers, S. Cannabinoids Modulate Voltage Sensitive Potassium A-current in Hippocampal Neurons via a cAMP-dependent process. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1995, 273, 734–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kendall, D.A.; Yudowski, G.A. Cannabinoid Receptors in the Central Nervous System: Their Signaling and Roles in Disease. Front. Cell. Neurosci. 2017, 10, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mashabela, M.D.; Kappo, A.P. Anti-Cancer and Anti-Proliferative Potential of Cannabidiol: A Cellular and Molecular Perspective. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 5659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gouldson, P.; Calandra, B.; Legoux, P.; Kernéis, A.; Rinaldi-Carmona, M.; Barth, F.; Broillet, M.C.; Le Fur, G.; Perret, C.; Pertwee, R.; et al. Mutational Analysis and Molecular Modelling of the Antagonist SR 144528 Binding Site on the Human Cannabinoid CB2 Receptor. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2000, 401, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Tao, Q.; McAllister, S.D.; Andreassi, J.; Nowell, K.W.; Cabral, G.A.; Hurst, D.P.; Griffin, G.; Abood, M.E.; Makriyannis, A.; Pertwee, R.; et al. Role of a Conserved Lysine Residue in the Peripheral Cannabinoid Receptor (CB2): Evidence for Subtype Specificity. Mol. Pharmacol. 1999, 55, 605–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Caulfield, M.P.; Brown, D.A. Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists Inhibit Ca Current in NG108-15 Neuroblastoma Cells via a Pertussis toxin-sensitive Mechanism. Br. J. Pharmacol. 1992, 106, 231–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Felder, C.C.; Joyce, K.E.; Briley, E.M.; Mansouri, J.; Mackie, K.; Blond, O.; Lai, Y.; Seltzman, H.H.; Makriyannis, A.; Martin, B.R.; et al. Comparison of the Pharmacology and Signal Transduction of the Human Cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors. Mol. Pharmacol. 1995, 48, 443–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Henry, D.J.; Chavkin, C. Activation of Inwardly Rectifying Potassium Channels (GIRK1) by co-expressed Rat Brain Cannabinoid Receptors in Xenopus Oocytes. Neurosci. Lett. 1995, 186, 91–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Mackie, K.; Hille, B. Cannabinoids Inhibit N-type Calcium Channels in neuroblastoma-glioma Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1992, 89, 3825–3829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mackie, K.; Lai, Y.; Westenbroek, R.E.; Mitchell, R.E. Cannabinoids Activate an Inwardly Rectifying Potassium Conductance and Inhibit Q-type Calcium Currents in AtT20 Cells Transfected with Rat Brain Cannabinoid Receptor. J. Neurosci. 1995, 15, 6552–6561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Di Marzo, V.; Melck, D.; Bisogno, T.; De Petrocellis, L. Endocannabinoids: Endogenous cannabinoid receptor ligands with neuromodulatory action. Trends Neurosci. 1999, 22, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Meschler, J.P.; Conley, T.J.; Howlett, A.C. Cannabinoid and Dopamine Interaction in Rodent brain: Effects on Locomotor Activity. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 2000, 67, 567–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Nava, F.; Carta, G.; Battasi, A.M.; Gessa, G.L. D2 Dopamine Receptors Enable Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced Memory Impairment and Reduction of Hippocampal Extracellular Acetylcholine Concentration. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2000, 130, 1201–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Sullivan, J.M. Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Learning and Memory Impairments Produced by Cannabinoids. Learn. Mem. 2000, 7, 132–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tsou, K.; Mackie, K.; Sañudo-Peña, M.C.; Walker, J.M. Cannabinoid CB1 Receptors Are Localized Primarily on cholecystokinin-containing GABAergic Interneurons in the Rat Hippocampal Formation. Neuroscience 1999, 93, 969–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hua, T.; Vemuri, K.; Nikas, S.P.; Laprairie, R.B.; Wu, Y.; Qu, L.; Pu, M.; Korde, A.; Jiang, S.; Ho, J.H.; et al. Crystal Structures of agonist-bound Human Cannabinoid Receptor CB 1. Nature 2017, 547, 468–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Hua, T.; Vemuri, K.; Pu, M.C.; Qu, L.; Han, G.W.; Wu, Y.R.; Zhao, S.; Shui, W.; Sun, H.J.; Wu, L.J.; et al. Crystal Structure of the Human Cannabinoid Receptor CB1. Cell 2016, 167, 750–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Mackie, K. Distribution of Cannabinoid Receptors in the Central and Peripheral Nervous System. In Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; pp. 299–325. [Google Scholar]
  51. Matsuda, L.A.; Lolait, S.J.; Brownstein, M.J.; Young, A.C.; Bonner, T.I. Structure of a Cannabinoid Receptor and Functional Expression of the Cloned cDNA. Nature 1990, 346, 561–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Baker, D.; Pryce, G.; Giovannoni, G.; Thompson, A.J. The Therapeutic Potential of Cannabis. Lancet Neurol. 2003, 2, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Hryhorowicz, S.; Kaczmarek-Ryś, M.; Zielińska, A.; Scott, R.J.; Słomski, R.; Pławski, A. Endocannabinoid System as a Promising Therapeutic Target in Inflammatory Bowel Disease–a Systematic Review. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 790803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ahluwalia, J.; Urban, L.; Capogna, M.; Bevan, S.; Nagy, I. Cannabinoid 1 Receptors Are Expressed in Nociceptive Primary Sensory Neurons. Neuroscience 2000, 100, 685–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Buckley, N.E.; Hansson, S.; Harta, G.; Mezey, É. Expression of the CB1 and CB2 Receptor Messenger RNAs during Embryonic Development in the Rat. Neuroscience 1998, 82, 1131–1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Calignano, A.; Rana, G.L.; Giuffrida, A.; Piomelli, D. Control of Pain Initiation by Endogenous Cannabinoids. Nature 1998, 394, 277–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Friedel, R.H.; Schnürch, H.; Stubbusch, J.; Barde, Y.A. Identification of Genes Differentially Expressed by Nerve Growth factor- and neurotrophin-3-dependent Sensory Neurons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1997, 94, 12670–12675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Howlett, A.C.; Barth, F.; Bonner, T.I.; Cabral, G.; Casellas, P.; Devane, W.A.; Felder, C.C.; Herkenham, M.; Martin, B.R.; Mechoulam, R.; et al. International Union of Pharmacology. XXVII Classif. Cannabinoid Recept. Pharmacol. Rev. 2002, 54, 161–202. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ishac, E.; Jiang, L.; Lake, K.D.; Varga, K.; Abood, M.E.; Kunos, G. Inhibition of Exocytotic Noradrenaline Release by Presynaptic Cannabinoid CB1 Receptors on Peripheral Sympathetic Nerves. Br. J. Pharmacol. 1996, 118, 2023–2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Martin, R.S.; Luong, L.A.; Welsh, N.J.; Eglen, R.M.; Martin, G.R.; MacLennan, S.J. Effects of Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists on neuronally-evoked Contractions of Urinary Bladder Tissues Isolated from rat, mouse, pig, dog, Monkey and Human. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2000, 129, 1707–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Pertwee, R.G. Cannabinoids and the Gastrointestinal Tract. Gut 2001, 48, 859–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Rice, W.; Shannon, J.M.; Burton, F.; Fiedeldey, D. Expression of a brain-type Cannabinoid Receptor (CB1) in Alveolar Type II Cells in the lung: Regulation by Hydrocortisone. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 1997, 327, 227–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ross, R.A.; Coutts, A.A.; McFarlane, S.M.; Anavi-Goffer, S.; Irving, A.J.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; Seltzman, H.H.; Martin, B.R.; Di Marzo, V.; et al. Actions of Cannabinoid Receptor Ligands on Rat Cultured Sensory neurones: Implications for Antinociception. Neuropharmacology 2001, 40, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Schatz, A.R.; Lee, M.; Condie, R.B.; Pulaski, J.T.; Kaminski, N.E. Cannabinoid Receptors CB1 and CB2: A Characterization of Expression and Adenylate Cyclase Modulation within the Immune System. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 1997, 142, 278–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Elphick, M.R.; Egertova, M. The Neurobiology and Evolution of Cannabinoid Signalling. Philos. Trans. R Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2001, 356, 381–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Piomelli, D.; Giuffrida, A.; Calignano, A.; Rodríguez de Fonseca, F. The Endocannabinoid System as a Target for Therapeutic Drugs. Trends. Pharmacol. Sci. 2000, 21, 218–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Rubino, T.; Viganò, D.; Massi, P.; Parolaro, D. Changes in the Cannabinoid Receptor Binding, G Protein Coupling, and Cyclic AMP Cascade in the CNS of Rats Tolerant to and Dependent on the Synthetic Cannabinoid Compound CP55,940. J. Neurochem. 2000, 75, 2080–2086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chen Djie Gao, M.; Gao Ffei Su, Q.; Wu, J. Brain Cannabinoid Receptor 2: Expression, Function and Modulation. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 2017, 38, 312–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Galiazzo, G.; Giancola, F.; Stanzani, A.; Fracassi, F.; Bernardini, C.; Forni, M.; Olivieri, M.; Capucchio, M.T.; Pietra, M.; Abramo, F.; et al. Localization of Cannabinoid Receptors CB1, CB2, GPR55, and PPARα in the Canine Gastrointestinal Tract. Histochem. Cell. Biol. 2018, 150, 187–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Li, X.T.; Hua, T.; Vemuri, K.; Ho, J.H.; Wu, Y.R.; Wu, L.J.; Zhuang, Y.; Korde, A.; Zhao, Q.; Shen, L.; et al. Crystal Structure of the Human Cannabinoid Receptor CB2. Cell 2019, 176, 459–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Pertwee, R. Cannabinoid Receptors and Their Ligands. Eur. Neuropsychopharmacol. 2002, 12, 127–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Pertwee, R.G.; Ross, R.A. Cannabinoid receptors and their ligands. Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fat. Acids (PLEFA) 2002, 66, 101–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Mackie, K. Cannabinoid receptors: Where They Are and What They Do. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2008, 20, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bouaboula, M.; Poinot-Chazel, C.; Marchand, J.; Canat, X.; Bourrie, B.; Rinaldi-Carmona, M.; Shire, D.; Fur, G.L.; Kunos, G.; Pertwee, R.G.; et al. Signaling Pathway Associated with Stimulation of CB2 Peripheral Cannabinoid Receptor. Involvement of Both Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase and Induction of Krox-24 Expression. Eur. J. Biochem. 1996, 237, 704–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Saroz, Y.; Kho, D.T.; Glass, M.; Graham, E.S.; Grimsey, N.L. Cannabinoid Receptor 2 (CB2) Signals via Gαs and Induces IL-6 and IL-10 Cytokine Secretion in Human Primary Leukocytes. ACS Pharmacol. Transl. Sci. 2019, 2, 414–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Slipetz, D.M.; O’Neill, G.P.; Favreau, L.; Dufresne, C.; Gallant, M.; Gareau, Y.; Jamali, K.; Makriyannis, A.; Young, A.; Pertwee, R.G.; et al. Activation of the Human Peripheral Cannabinoid Receptor Results in Inhibition of Adenylyl cyclase. Mol. Pharmacol. 1995, 48, 352–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Soethoudt, M.; Grether, U.; Fingerle, J.; Grim, T.W.; Fezza, F.; De Petrocellis, L.; Ligresti, A.; Ross, R.A.; Di Marzo, V.; Pertwee, R.G.; et al. Cannabinoid CB2 Receptor Ligand Profiling Reveals Biased Signalling and off-target Activity. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 13958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Shahbazi, F.; Grandi, V.; Banerjee, A.; Trant, J.F. Cannabinoids and Cannabinoid Receptors: The Story so Far. iScience 2020, 23, 101301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Tsutahara, N.M.; Weems, Y.S.; Arreguin-Arevalo, J.A.; Nett, T.M.; LaPorte, M.E.; Uchida, J.; Taylor, A.A.; Pertwee, R.G.; Kunos, G.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Effects of Endocannabinoid 1 and 2 (CB1; CB2) Receptor Agonists on Luteal weight, Circulating progesterone, Luteal mRNA for Luteinizing Hormone (LH) receptors, and Luteal Unoccupied and Occupied Receptors for LH in Vivo in Ewes. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2011, 94, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Maccarrone, M.; Battista, N.; Centonze, D. The Endocannabinoid Pathway in Huntington’s disease: A Comparison with Other Neurodegenerative Diseases. Prog. Neurobiol. 2007, 81, 349–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Bouaboula, M.; Rinaldi, M.; Carayon, P.; Carillon, C.; Delpech, B.; Shire, D.; Kunos, G.; Pertwee, R.G.; Martin, B.R.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Cannabinoid-receptor Expression in Human Leukocytes. Eur. J. Biochem. 1993, 214, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Cacciola, G.; Chioccarelli, T.; Altucci, L.; Fasano, S.; Pierantoni, R.; Cobellis, G. The Endocannabinoid System in Vertebrate Male reproduction: A Comparative Overview. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2008, 286, S17–S23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Christopoulos, A.; Coles, P.; Lay, L.; Lew, M.J.; Angus, J.A. Pharmacological Analysis of Cannabinoid Receptor Activity in the Rat Vas Deferens. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2001, 132, 1281–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Das, S.K.; Paria, B.C.; Chakraborty, I.; Dey, S.K. Cannabinoid ligand-receptor Signaling in the Mouse uterus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1995, 92, 4332–4336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. El-Talatini, M.R.; Taylor, A.H.; Konje, J.C. The Role of Endocannabinoids in Pregnancy. BJOG 2009, 116, 1249–1257. [Google Scholar]
  86. El-Talatini, M.R.; Taylor, A.H.; Elson, J.C.; Brown, L.; Davidson, A.C.; Konje, J.C. Localisation and Function of the Endocannabinoid System in the Human Ovary. Dey SK, editor. PLoS ONE 2009, 4, e4579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. El-Talatini, M.R.; Taylor, A.H.; Elson, J.C.; Brown, L.; Davidson, A.C.; Konje, J.C. The Relationship between Plasma Anandamide Levels and the Duration of the Follicular Phase of the Menstrual Cycle. Fertil. Steril. 2009, 92, 802–807. [Google Scholar]
  88. Fonseca, B.M.; Teixeira, N.A.; Almada, M.; Taylor, A.H.; Konje, J.C.; Correia-da-Silva, G. Modulation of the Novel Cannabinoid Receptor-GPR55-during Rat Fetoplacental Development. Placenta 2011, 32, 462–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Gurm, H.; Hirota, J.A.; Raha, S. Cannabinoid Signalling in Immune–reproductive Crosstalk during Human Pregnancy. Biomedicines 2021, 9, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Gérard, C.; Mollereau, C.; Vassart, G.; Parmentier, M. Molecular Cloning of a Human Cannabinoid Receptor Which Is Also Expressed in Testis. Biochem. J. 1991, 279, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Gervasi, M.G.; Visconti, P.E. Molecular Changes and Signaling Events Occurring in Sperm during Epididymal Transit. Andrology 2016, 4, 832–845. [Google Scholar]
  92. Grimaldi, P.; Pucci, M.; Siena, D.; Giacomo, D.; Pirazzi, V.; Geremia, R. The Endocannabinoid System and Pivotal Role of the CB2 Receptor in Mouse Spermatogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 11131–11136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Maccarrone, M.; Finazzi-Agrò, A. Endocannabinoid Signaling at the periphery: Role in Female Reproduction. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2015, 36, 524–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Maccarrone, M.; Falciglia, K.; Rienzo, D.; Finazzi-Agrò, A. Endocannabinoids, hormone-cytokine Networks and Human Fertility. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2005, 17, 509–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Mechoulam, C.T.; Ross, R.A. Inhibition of Human Tumor Cell Line Proliferation by endocannabinoids: Association with Cannabinoid Receptors and Other Targets. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2012, 165, 2414–2427. [Google Scholar]
  96. Park, B.; Gibbons, H.M.; Mitchell, M.D.; Glassa, M. Identification of the CB1 Cannabinoid Receptor and Fatty Acid Amide Hydrolase (FAAH) in the Human Placenta. Placenta 2003, 24, 473–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Rossato, M.; Popa, I.; Ferigo, M.; Clari, G.; Foresta, C. Human Sperm Express Cannabinoid Receptor Cb1, the Activation of Which Inhibits motility, Acrosome reaction, and Mitochondrial Function. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2005, 90, 984–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Sampaio, C.; Watanabe, M.; Contarini, M.S.; Gonzalez-Martinez, S.; Oliveira, A.R.; González-Calvo, L.; Dalmaz, C.; De Felício, C.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Expression of Cannabinoid Receptors and Their Role in the Regulation of Mammary Gland Development. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2010, 648, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  99. Schuel, H.; Burkman, L.J.; Lippes, J.; Crickard, K.; Forester, E.; Piomelli, D.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; Martin, B.R.; Di Marzo, V.; et al. Evidence That anandamide-signaling Regulates Human Sperm Functions Required for Fertilization. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2002, 8, 929–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Sun, X.; Xie, H.; Yang, J.; Wang, H.; Bradshaw, H.B.; Dey, S.K. Endocannabinoid Signaling Directs Differentiation of Trophoblast Cell Lineages and Blastocyst Implantation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 3897–3902. [Google Scholar]
  101. Wang, H.; Guo, Y.; Wang, D.; Kingsley, P.J.; Marnett, L.J.; Das, S.K.; Makriyannis, A.; Martin, B.R.; Di Marzo, V.; Pertwee, R.G.; et al. Aberrant Cannabinoid Signaling Impairs Oviductal Transport of Embryos. Nat. Med. 2004, 10, 1074–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Wang, H.; Xie, H.; Dey, S.K. Endocannabinoid Signaling Directs Periimplantation Events. AJP-Endocrinol. Metab. 2006, 290, E21–E26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Weems, Y.S.; Lewis, A.W.; Neuendorff, D.A.; Randel, R.D.; Weems, C.W. Endocannabinoid (ECN) Receptor Agonists Affect Cow Luteal Function. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2009, 90, 89–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Maccarrone, M.; Bab, I.; Bíró, T.; Cabral, G.A.; Dey, S.K.; Di Marzo, V.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; Martin, B.R.; Mechoulam, R.; et al. Endocannabinoid Signaling at the periphery: 50 Years after THC. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2009, 30, 601–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Devane, W.; Hanus, L.; Breuer, A.; Pertwee, R.; Stevenson, L.; Griffin, G.; Gibson, D.; Mandelbaum, A.; Sulton-Mekkes, J.; Meiri, H.; et al. Isolation and Structure of a Brain Constituent That Binds to the Cannabinoid Receptor. Science 1992, 258, 1946–1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mechoulam, R.; Ben-Shabat, S.; Hanus, L.; Ligumsky, M.; Kaminski, N.E.; Schatz, A.R.; Sheskin, T.; Gopher, A.; Almog, S.; Martin, B.R.; et al. Identification of an Endogenous 2-monoglyceride, Present in Canine gut, That Binds to Cannabinoid Receptors. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1995, 50, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Picone, R.P.; Khanolkar, A.D.; Xu, W.; Ayotte, L.A.; Thakur, G.A.; Hurst, D.P.; Makriyannis, A.; Griffin, G.; Martin, B.R.; Pauli, G.F.; et al. (-)-7′-Isothiocyanato-11-hydroxy-1′,1′-dimethylheptylhexahydrocannabinol (AM841), a High-Affinity Electrophilic Ligand, Interacts Covalently with a Cysteine in Helix Six and Activates the CB1 Cannabinoid Receptor. Mol. Pharmacol. 2005, 68, 1623–1635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Sugiura, T.; Kondo, S.; Sukagawa, A.; Nakane, S.; Shinoda, A.; Itoh, K.; Yamamoto, I.; Waku, K.; Satoh, Y.; Matsuda, S.; et al. 2-Arachidonoylglycerol: A Possible Endogenous Cannabinoid Receptor Ligand in Brain. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1995, 215, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Mackie, K. Cannabinoid Receptors as Therapeutic Targets. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2006, 46, 101–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Bouaboula, M.; Poinot-Chazel, C.; Bourrié, B.; Canat, X.; Calandra, B.; Rinaldi-Carmona, M.; Shire, D.; Kunos, G.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Activation of mitogen-activated Protein Kinase by Stimulation of the Central Cannabinoid Receptor CB1. Biochem. J. 1995, 312, 637–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Habayeb, O.M.; Bell, S.C.; Konje, J.C. Endogenous cannabinoids: Metabolism and Their Role in Reproduction. Life Sci. 2002, 70, 1963–1977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Jhaveri, M.D.; Richardson, D.; Chapman, V. Endocannabinoid Metabolism and uptake: Novel Targets for Neuropathic and Inflammatory Pain. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2007, 152, 624–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. McAllister, S.D.; Glass, M. CB1 and CB2 receptor-mediated signalling: A Focus on Endocannabinoids. Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fat. Acids (PLEFA) 2002, 66, 161–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Stella, N.; Schweitzer, P.; Piomelli, D. A Second Endogenous Cannabinoid That Modulates long-term Potentiation. Nature 1997, 388, 773–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Matias, I.; Gonthier, M.P.; Orlando, P.; Martiadis, V.; De Petrocellis, L.; Cervino, C.; Di Marzo, V.; Makriyannis, A.; Pertwee, R.G.; Martin, B.R.; et al. Regulation, Function, and Dysregulation of Endocannabinoids in Models of Adipose and β-Pancreatic Cells and in Obesity and Hyperglycemia. J. Clin Endocrinol. Metab. 2006, 91, 3171–3180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Sigel, E.; Baur, R.; Racz, I.; Marazzi, J.; Smart, T.G.; Zimmer, A.; Mechoulam, R.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; Martin, B.R.; et al. The Major Central Endocannabinoid Directly Acts at GABA (A) Receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 18150–18155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Spivak, C.E.; Kim, W.; Liu, Q.R.; Lupica, C.R.; Doyle, M.E. Blockade of beta-cell K(ATP) Channels by the endocannabinoid, 2-arachidonoylglycerol. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2012, 423, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Zygmunt, P.M.; Petersson, J.; Andersson, D.A.; Chuang, H.; Sørgård, M.; Di Marzo, V.; Julius, D.; Högestätt, E.D. Vanilloid Receptors on Sensory Nerves Mediate the Vasodilator Action of Anandamide. Nature 1999, 400, 452–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Gaoni, Y.; Mechoulam, R. Isolation, Structure, and Partial Synthesis of an Active Constituent of Hashish. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 1646–1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Blebea, N.M.; Pricopie, A.I.; Vlad, R.A.; Hancu, G. Phytocannabinoids: Exploring Pharmacological Profiles and Their Impact on Therapeutical Use. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 4204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Croxford, J.L.; Yamamura, T. Cannabinoids and the Immune system: Potential for the Treatment of Inflammatory diseases? J. Neuroimmunol. 2005, 166, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Darmani, N.A. Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and Synthetic Cannabinoids Prevent Emesis Produced by the Cannabinoid CB1 Receptor antagonist/inverse Agonist SR141716A. Neuropsychopharmacology 2001, 24, 198–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Mattes, R.D.; Engelman, K.; Shaw, L.M.; Elsohly, M.A. Cannabinoids and Appetite Stimulation. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 1994, 49, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Smith, F.L.; Fujimori, K.; Lowe, J.; Welch, S.P. Characterization of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Anandamide Antinociception in Nonarthritic and Arthritic Rats. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 1998, 60, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Sofia, R.D.; Solomon, T.A.; Barry, H. Anticonvulsant Activity of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol Compared with Three Other Drugs. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 1976, 35, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Van Klingeren, B.; Ten Ham, M. Antibacterial Activity of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1976, 42, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Fonseca, B.M.; Correia-Da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N.A. Cannabinoid-induced Cell Death in Endometrial Cancer cells: Involvement of TRPV1 Receptors in Apoptosis. J. Physiol. Biochem. 2018, 74, 261–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Blázquez, C.; González-Feria, L.; Álvarez, L.; Haro, A.; Casanova, M.L.; Guzmán, M. Cannabinoids Inhibit the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Pathway in Gliomas. Cancer Res. 2004, 64, 5617–5623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. García, C.; Palomo-Garo, C.; García-Arencibia, M.; Ramos, J.A.; Pertwee, R.G.; Fernández-Ruiz, J. Symptom-relieving and Neuroprotective Effects of the Phytocannabinoid Δ9-THCV in Animal Models of Parkinson’s Disease. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2011, 163, 1495–1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Noonan, J.; Tanveer, R.; Klompas, A.; Gowran, A.; McKiernan, J.; Campbell, V.A. Endocannabinoids Prevent beta-amyloid-mediated Lysosomal Destabilization in Cultured Neurons. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 38543–38554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Fonseca, B.M.; Rebelo, I. Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Reproduction and Fertility: Where We Stand. Reprod. Sci. 2022, 29, 2429–2439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. De Briyne, N.; Holmes, D.; Sandler, I.; Stiles, E.; Szymanski, D.; Moody, S.; Breen, J.; Martin, B.R.; Pertwee, R.G.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Cannabis, Cannabidiol Oils and Tetrahydrocannabinol—What Do Veterinarians Need to Know? Animals 2021, 11, 892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Krishna Kumar, K.; Shalev-Benami, M.; Robertson, M.J.; Hu, H.; Banister, S.D.; Hollingsworth, S.A.; Gumpper, R.H.; Carpenter, B.; Skripnikova, E.; Makriyannis, A.; et al. Structure of a Signaling Cannabinoid Receptor 1-G Protein Complex. Cell 2019, 176, 448–458.e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Burstein, S.; Levin, E.; Varanelli, C. Prostaglandins and cannabis—II Inhibition of Biosynthesis by the Naturally Occurring Cannabinoids. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1973, 22, 2905–2910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Rabin, R.A.; George, T.P. Cannabis and psychosis: Understanding the Smoke Signals. Lancet Psychiatry 2016, 3, 909–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Volkow, N.; Baler, R.; Compton, W.; Weiss, S. Adverse Health Effects of Marijuana Use. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014, 371, 878–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Blest-Hopley, G.; Colizzi, M.; Giampietro, V.; Bhattacharyya, S. Is the Adolescent Brain at Greater Vulnerability to the Effects of Cannabis? A Narrative Review of the Evidence. Front Psychiatry 2020, 11, 859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Blest-Hopley, G.; O’Neill, A.; Wilson, R.; Giampietro, V.; Bhattacharyya, S. Disrupted parahippocampal and midbrain function underlie slower verbal learning in adolescent-onset regular cannabis use. Psychopharmacology 2021, 238, 1315–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Tomiyama, K.; Funada, M. Cytotoxicity of Synthetic Cannabinoids on Primary Neuronal Cells of the forebrain: The Involvement of Cannabinoid CB1 Receptors and Apoptotic Cell Death. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2014, 274, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Mechoulam, R.; Peters, M.; Murillo-Rodriguez, E.; Hanuš, L.O. Cannabidiol–Recent Advances. Chem. Biodivers. 2007, 4, 1678–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Hacke, A.C.M.; Lima, D.; Costa, D.; Deshmukh, K.; Li, N.; Chow, A.M.; Zhang, Y.; Kim, Y.; Huang, X.; Wang, L.; et al. Probing the Antioxidant Activity of delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol in Cannabis Sativa Extracts. Analyst 2019, 144, 4952–4961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ranganarayanan, P.; Thanigesan, N.; Ananth, V.; Jayaraman, V.K.; Ramakrishnan, V. Identification of Glucose-Binding Pockets in Human Serum Albumin Using Support Vector Machine and Molecular Dynamics Simulations. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. 2016, 13, 148–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Laprairie, R.B.; Bagher, A.M.; Kelly, M.E.M.; Denovan-Wright, E.M. Cannabidiol Is a Negative Allosteric Modulator of the Cannabinoid CB1 Receptor. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2015, 172, 4790–4805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Muccioli, G.G. Endocannabinoid Biosynthesis and inactivation, from Simple to Complex. Drug Discov. Today 2010, 15, 474–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Del Giudice, E.; Rinaldi, L.; Passarotto, M.; Facchinetti, F.; D’Arrigo, A.; Guiotto, A.; Leon, A.; Baraldi, P.G.; Peri, F.; Buriani, A.; et al. Cannabidiol, unlike Synthetic cannabinoids, Triggers Activation of RBL-2H3 Mast Cells. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2007, 81, 1512–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. De Petrocellis, L.; Bisogno, T.; Maccarrone, M.; Davis, J.B.; Finazzi-Agrò, A.; Di Marzo, V. The Activity of Anandamide at Vanilloid VR1 Receptors Requires Facilitated Transport across the Cell Membrane and Is Limited by Intracellular Metabolism. J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 12856–12863. [Google Scholar]
  147. Bow, E.W.; Rimoldi, J.M. The Structure–Function Relationships of Classical Cannabinoids: CB1/CB2 Modulation. Perspect Med. Chem. 2016, 8, 17–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Kupczyk, P.; Rykała, M.; Serek, P.; Pawlak, A.; Słowikowski, B.; Hołysz, M.; Małopolska, M.; Dzięgiel, P.; Piasecki, T.; Gajewska, M.; et al. The Cannabinoid Receptors System in horses: Tissue Distribution and Cellular Identification in Skin. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2022, 36, 1508–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Miagkoff, L.; Girard, C.A.; St-Jean, G.; Richard, H.; Beauchamp, G. Cannabinoid Receptors Are Expressed in Equine Synovium and Upregulated with Synovitis. Equine Vet. J. 2022, 55, 681–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Pertwee, R.G. The Therapeutic Potential of Drugs That Target Cannabinoid Receptors or Modulate the Tissue Levels or Actions of endocannabinoids. AAPS J. 2005, 7, E625–E654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. O’Donnell, B.; Meissner, H.; Gupta, V. Dronabinol; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  152. Berlach, D.M.; Shir, Y.; Ware, M.A. Experience with the Synthetic Cannabinoid Nabilone in Chronic Noncancer Pain. Pain Med. 2006, 7, 25–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Peball, M.; Heim, B.; Carbone, F.; Schorr, O.; Werkmann, M.; Ellmerer, P.; Mahlknecht, P.; Knaus, H.G.; Goebel, G.; Seppi, K.; et al. Long-term Safety and Efficacy of open-label Nabilone on Sleep and Pain in Parkinson’s Disease. NPJ Parkinson’s Dis. 2024, 10, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Ware, M.A.; Fitzcharles, M.A.; Joseph, L.; Shir, Y. The Effects of Nabilone on Sleep in Fibromyalgia: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesth Analg. 2010, 110, 604–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Capozzi, A.; Caissutti, D.; Mattei, V.; Gado, F.; Martellucci, S.; Longo, A.; Lattanzi, W.; Ortona, E.; Aloisi, A.M.; Maccarrone, M.; et al. Anti-Inflammatory Activity of a CB2 Selective Cannabinoid Receptor Agonist: Signaling and Cytokines Release in Blood Mononuclear Cells. Molecules 2021, 27, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Bukke, V.N.; Archana, M.; Villani, R.; Serviddio, G.; Cassano, T. Pharmacological and Toxicological Effects of Phytocannabinoids and Recreational Synthetic cannabinoids: Increasing Risk of Public health. Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. De Oliveira, M.C.; Vides, M.C.; Lassi, D.L.S.; Torales, J.; Ventriglio, A.; Bombana, H.S.; Tavares, H.; Souza, D.; Molina, V.A.; Fabrazzo, M.; et al. Toxicity of Synthetic Cannabinoids in K2/Spice: A Systematic Review. Brain Sci. 2023, 13, 990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Gunderson, E.W.; Haughey, H.M.; Ait-Daoud, N.; Joshi, A.S.; Hart, C.L. “Spice” and “K2” Herbal Highs: A Case Series and Systematic Review of the Clinical Effects and Biopsychosocial Implications of Synthetic Cannabinoid Use in Humans. Am. J. Addict. 2012, 21, 320–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Day, I.N.M.; Thompson, R.J. UCHL1 (PGP 9.5): Neuronal Biomarker and Ubiquitin System Protein. Prog. Neurobiol. 2010, 90, 327–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Andrews, R.; Jorge, R.; Christie, R.; Gallegos, A. From JWH-018 to OXIZIDS: Structural Evolution of Synthetic Cannabinoids in the European Union from 2008 to Present Day. Drug Test Anal. 2022, 15, 378–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Pařízek, A.; Suchopár, J.; Laštůvka, Z.; Alblová, M.; Hill, M.; Dušková, M. The Endocannabinoid System and Its Relationship to Human Reproduction. Physiol. Res. 2023, 72, S365–S380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Wenger, T.; Ledent, C.; Csernus, V.; Gerendai, I. The Central Cannabinoid Receptor Inactivation Suppresses Endocrine Reproductive Functions. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2001, 284, 363–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Cecconi, S.; Rossi, G.; Castellucci, A.; D’Andrea, G.; Maccarrone, M. Endocannabinoid Signaling in Mammalian Ovary. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2014, 178, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Resuehr, D.; Glore, D.R.; Taylor, H.S.; Bruner-Tran, K.L.; Osteen, K.G. Progesterone-dependent Regulation of Endometrial Cannabinoid Receptor Type 1 (CB1-R) Expression Is Disrupted in Women with Endometriosis and in Isolated Stromal Cells Exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD). Fertil Steril. 2012, 98, 948–956.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Ayalon, D.; Nir, I.; Cordova, T. Acute Effect of delta1-tetrahydrocannabinol on the hypothalamo-pituitary-ovarian Axis in the Rat. Neuroendocrinology 1977, 23, 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Brents, L.K. Marijuana, the Endocannabinoid System and the Female Reproductive System. Yale J. Biol. Med. 2016, 89, 175–191. [Google Scholar]
  167. Chakravarty, I.; Shah, P.G.; Sheth, A.R.; Ghosh, J.J. Mode of Action of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on hypothalamo—pituitary Function in Adult Female Rats. Reproduction 1979, 57, 113–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Dalterio, S.; Mayfield, D.; Bartke, A. Effects of Delta 9-THC on Plasma Hormone Levels in Female Mice. Subst. Alcohol Actions Misuse 1983, 4, 339–345. [Google Scholar]
  169. Liu, X.; Herbison, A.E. Dopamine Regulation of gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Neuron Excitability in Male and Female Mice. Endocrinology 2013, 154, 340–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Mendelson, J.H.; Mello, N.K.; Ellingboe, J. Acute Effects of Marihuana Smoking on Prolactin Levels in Human females. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1985, 232, 220–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Mendelson, J.H.; Mello, N.K.; Ellingboe, J.; Skupny, A.S.; Lex, B.W.; Griffin, M. Marihuana Smoking Suppresses Luteinizing Hormone in women. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1986, 237, 862–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Field, E.; Tyrey, L. Delayed Sexual Maturation during Prepubertal Cannabinoid treatment: Importance of the Timing of treatment. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1990, 254, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Neradugomma, N.K.; Drafton, K.; Mor, G.G.; Mao, Q.C. Marijuana-derived Cannabinoids Inhibit Uterine Endometrial Stromal Cell Decidualization and Compromise trophoblast-endometrium Crosstalk. Reprod. Toxicol. 2019, 87, 100–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Gammon, C.M.; Freeman, G.M.; Xie, W.; Petersen, S.L.; Wetsel, W.C. Regulation of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Secretion by Cannabinoids. Endocrinology 2005, 146, 4491–4499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Maia, J.; Almada, M.; Silva, A.; Correia-da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N.; Sá, S.I.; Amaral, C.; Fonseca, B.M.; Oliveira, P.; Moreira, J.A.; et al. The Endocannabinoid System Expression in the Female Reproductive Tract Is Modulated by Estrogen. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2017, 174, 40–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Scotchie, J.G.; Savaris, R.F.; Martin, C.E.; Young, S.L. Endocannabinoid Regulation in Human Endometrium across the Menstrual Cycle. Reprod. Sci. 2014, 22, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Maccarrone, M.; Valensise, H.; Bari, M.; Lazzarin, N.; Romanini, C.; Finazzi-Agrò, A. Relation between decreased anandamide hydrolase concentrations in human lymphocytes and miscarriage. Lancet 2000, 355, 1326–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Juan, C.C.; Chen, K.H.; Wang, P.H.; Hwang, J.L.; Seow, K.M. Endocannabinoid System Activation May Be Associated with Insulin Resistance in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2015, 104, 200–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Shen, X.; Duan, H.; Wang, S.; Gan, L.; Xu, Q.; Li, J.J. Decreased Expression of Cannabinoid Receptors in the Eutopic and Ectopic Endometrium of Patients with Adenomyosis. Biomed. Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 5468954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Tanaka, K.; Mayne, L.; Khalil, A.; Baartz, D.; Eriksson, L.; Mortlock, S.A.; Cooper, D.; Ewing, A.; Lee, A.; Sgro, M.; et al. The Role of the Endocannabinoid System in Aetiopathogenesis of endometriosis: A Potential Therapeutic Target. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2020, 244, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Pirone, A.; Lenzi, C.; Briganti, A.; Abbate, F.; Levanti, M.; Abramo, F.; Castaldo, L.; Miragliotta, V.; Mariotti, V.; Casini, L.; et al. Spatial Distribution of Cannabinoid Receptor 1 and Fatty Acid Amide Hydrolase in the Cat Ovary and Oviduct. Acta Histochem. 2017, 119, 417–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Fonseca, B.M.; Correia-da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N.A. Anandamide-Induced Cell Death: Dual Effects in Primary Rat Decidual Cell Cultures. Placenta 2009, 30, 686–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Battista, N.; Bari, M.; Rapino, C.; Trasatti, F.; D’Agostino, A.; Maccarrone, M. Regulation of Female Fertility by the Endocannabinoid System. Hum. Fertil. 2007, 10, 207–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Battista, N.; Pasquariello, N.; Di Thomaso, M.; Maccarrone, M. Interplay between endocannabinoids, Steroids and Cytokines in the Control of Human Reproduction. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2008, 20, 82–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Fride, E. Multiple Roles for the Endocannabinoid System during the Earliest Stages of Life: Pre- and Postnatal Development. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2008, 20, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Fride, E.; Gobshtis, N.; Dahan, H.; Weller, A.; Giuffrida, A.; Ben-Shabat, S. The Endocannabinoid System during development: Emphasis on Perinatal Events and Delayed Effects. Vitam. Horm. 2009, 81, 139–158. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  187. Habayeb, O.M.; Taylor, A.H.; Bell, S.C.; Taylor, D.J.; Konje, J.C. Expression of the Endocannabinoid System in Human First Trimester Placenta and Its Role in Trophoblast Proliferation. Endocrinology 2008, 149, 5052–5060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Pagotto, U.; Marsicano, G.; Cota, D.; Lutz, B.; Pasquali, R. The Emerging Role of the Endocannabinoid System in Endocrine Regulation and Energy Balance. Endocr. Rev. 2006, 27, 73–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Trabucco, E.; Acone, G.; Marenna, A.; Pierantoni, R.; Cacciola, G.; Chioccarelli, T.; Cobellis, G.; Manna, C.; Fasano, S.; Ferraro, B.; et al. Endocannabinoid System in First Trimester Placenta: Low FAAH and High CB1 Expression Characterize Spontaneous Miscarriage. Placenta 2009, 30, 516–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  190. Niswender, G.D.; Schwall, R.H.; Fitz, T.A.; Farin, C.E.; Sawyer, H.R. Regulation of Luteal Function in Domestic ruminants: New Concepts. Recent Prog. Horm. Res. 1985, 41, 101–151. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  191. Niswender, G.D.; Davis, T.L.; Griffith, R.J.; Bogan, R.L.; Monser, K.; Bott, R.C.; Wiltbank, M.C.; Stormshak, F.; Nett, T.M.; Juengel, J.L.; et al. Judge, Jury and executioner: The auto-regulation of Luteal Function. Soc. Reprod. Fertil. 2007, 64, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Weems, C.W.; Weems, Y.S.; Randel, R.D. Prostaglandins and Reproduction in Female Farm Animals. Vet. J. 2006, 172, 206–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Wiltbank, M.C.; Diskin, M.G.; Niswender, G.D. Differential Actions of Second Messenger Systems in the Corpus luteum. J. Reprod. Fertil. 1991, 43, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Wiltbank, M.C.; Belfiore, C.J.; Niswender, G.D. Steroidogenic Enzyme Activity after Acute Activation of Protein Kinase (PK) a and PKC in Ovine Small and Large Luteal Cells. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 1993, 97, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. McGuire, W.J.; Juengel, J.L.; Niswender, G.D. Protein Kinase C Second Messenger System Mediates the Antisteroidogenic Effects of Prostaglandin F2α in the Ovine Corpus Luteum in Vivo. Biol. Reprod. 1994, 51, 800–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Wiltbank, M.C.; Guthrie, P.B.; Matfson, M.P.; Kater, S.B.; Niswender, G.D. Hormonal Regulation of Free Intracellular Calcium Concentrations in Small and Large Ovine Luteal Cells1. Biol. Reprod. 1989, 41, 771–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Lo, J.O.; Hedges, J.C.; Girardi, G. Impact of cannabinoids on pregnancy, reproductive health, and offspring out-comes. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2022, 227, 571–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Liu, W.M.; Duan, E.K.; Cao, Y.J. Effects of Anandamide on Embryo Implantation in the Mouse. Life Sci. 2002, 71, 1623–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Horne, A.W.; Phillips, J.A.; Kane, N.; Lourenco, P.C.; McDonald, S.E.; Williams, A.R.W.; Milne, S.A.; Shaw, J.L.V.; Critchley, H.O.D.; Saunders, P.T.K.; et al. CB1 Expression Is Attenuated in Fallopian Tube and Decidua of Women with Ectopic Pregnancy. Aziz SA, editor. PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e3969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  200. Shao, R. Understanding the Mechanisms of Human Tubal Ectopic pregnancies: New Evidence from Knockout Mouse Models. Hum. Reprod. 2009, 25, 584–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  201. Sun, X.; Dey, S.K. Endocannabinoid Signaling in Female Reproduction. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2012, 3, 349–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  202. Leemaqz, S.Y.; Dekker, G.A.; McCowan, L.M.; Kenny, L.C.; Myers, J.E.; Simpson, N.A.B.; Roberts, C.T.; Giannoulatou, E.; Denny, K.J.; Clifton, V.L.; et al. Maternal Marijuana Use Has Independent Effects on Risk for Spontaneous Preterm Birth but Not Other Common Late Pregnancy Complications. Reprod. Toxicol. 2016, 62, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Kasman, A.M.; Thoma, M.E.; McLain, A.C.; Eisenberg, M.L. Association between Use of Marijuana and Time to Pregnancy in Men and women: Findings from the National Survey of Family Growth. Fertil. Steril. 2018, 109, 866–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Wise, L.A.; Wesselink, A.K.; Hatch, E.E.; Rothman, K.J.; Mikkelsen, E.M.; Sørensen, H.T.; Hahn, K.A.; McKinnon, C.; Mahalingaiah, S.; Yeung, E.H.; et al. Marijuana Use and Fecundability in a North American Preconception Cohort Study. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2017, 72, 208–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Bertrand, K.A.; Hanan, N.J.; Honerkamp-Smith, G.; Best, B.M.; Chambers, C.D. Marijuana Use by Breastfeeding Mothers and Cannabinoid Concentrations in Breast Milk. Pediatrics 2018, 142, e20181076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Blackard, C.; Tennes, K. Human Placental Transfer of Cannabinoids. N. Engl. J. Med. 1984, 311, 797. [Google Scholar]
  207. Amoako, A.A.; Marczylo, T.H.; Lam, P.M.W.; Willets, J.M.; Derry, A.; Elson, J.; Taylor, A.H.; Konje, J.C.; Cooke, M.S.; Jabbour, H.N.; et al. Quantitative Analysis of Anandamide and Related Acylethanolamides in Human Seminal Plasma by Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B 2010, 878, 3231–3237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Aquila, S.; Guido, C.; Santoro, A.; Perrotta, I.; Laezza, C.; Bifulco, M.; Fasano, S.; Maradonna, F.; Sciarra, F.; Jannini, E.A.; et al. Human Sperm Anatomy: Ultrastructural Localization of the Cannabinoid1 Receptor and a Potential Role of Anandamide in Sperm Survival and Acrosome Reaction. Anat. Rec. Adv. Integr. Anat. Evol. Biol. 2009, 293, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Bari, M.; Battista, N.; Pirazzi, V.; Maccarrone, M. The Manifold Actions of Endocannabinoids on Female and Male Reproductive Events. Front. Biosci. 2011, 16, 498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Agirregoitia, E.; Carracedo, A.; Subirán, N.; Valdivia, A.; Agirregoitia, N.; Peralta, L.; Gómez, M.; Rodriguez, J.; López, R.; Fernández, L.; et al. The CB(2) Cannabinoid Receptor Regulates Human Sperm Cell Motility. Fertil Steril. 2010, 93, 1378–1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  211. Amoako, A.A.; Marczylo, T.H.; Marczylo, E.L.; Elson, J.; Willets, J.M.; Taylor, A.H.; Konje, J.C.; Cooke, M.S.; Jabbour, H.N.; Macdonald, I.A.; et al. Anandamide Modulates Human Sperm motility: Implications for Men with Asthenozoospermia and Oligoasthenoteratozoospermia. Hum. Reprod. 2013, 28, 2058–2066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  212. Rossi, G.; Gasperi, V.; Paro, R.; Barsacchi, D.; Cecconi, S.; Maccarrone, M. Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Activates Fatty Acid Amide Hydrolase by Protein Kinase a and Aromatase-Dependent Pathways in Mouse Primary Sertoli Cells. Endocrinology 2007, 148, 1431–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  213. Zufferey, F.; Donzé, N.; Rahban, R.; Senn, A.; Stettler, E.; Rudaz, S.; Nef, S.; Rossier, M.F. Semen Endocannabinoids Are Correlated to Sperm Quality in a Cohort of 200 Young Swiss Men. Andrology 2020, 8, 1126–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Lee, M.S.; Lanes, A.; Ginsburg, E.S.; Fox, J.H. Delta-9 THC Can Be Detected and Quantified in the Semen of Men Who Are Chronic Users of Inhaled Cannabis. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2020, 37, 1497–1504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Fantus, R.J.; Lokeshwar, S.D.; Kohn, T.P.; Ramasamy, R. The Effect of Tetrahydrocannabinol on Testosterone among Men in the United States: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. World J. Urol. 2020, 38, 3275–3282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Kolodny, R.C.; Masters, W.H.; Kolodner, R.M.; Toro, G. Depression of Plasma Testosterone Levels after Chronic Intensive Marihuana Use. N. Engl. J. Med. 1974, 290, 872–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Carroll, K.; Pottinger, A.M.; Wynter, S.; DaCosta, V. Marijuana Use and Its Influence on Sperm Morphology and motility: Identified Risk for Fertility among Jamaican Men. Andrology 2019, 8, 136–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Murphy, S.K.; Itchon-Ramos, N.; Visco, Z.; Huang, Z.; Grenier, C.; Schrott, R.; Smith, K.; Kirby, E.; Tsuruda, L.; Fiedler, K.; et al. Cannabinoid Exposure and Altered DNA Methylation in Rat and Human Sperm. Epigenetics 2018, 13, 1208–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Pizzol, D.; Demurtas, J.; Stubbs, B.; Soysal, P.; Mason, C.; Isik, A.T.; Corsonello, A.; Maggi, G.; Pilotto, A.; Onder, G.; et al. Relationship between Cannabis Use and Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am. J. Mens. Health 2019, 13, 1557988319892464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. de Araújo-Ramos, A.T.; Martino-Andrade, A.J. Role of the endocannabinoid system in gonadal development: Implications for endocrine disruption and reproductive toxicity. Reprod. Toxicol. 2025, 132, 108822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Rodríguez-Manzo, G.; Canseco-Alba, A. The endogenous cannabinoid system modulates male sexual behavior expression. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2023, 17, 1198077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Lynn, B.; Gee, A.; Zhang, L.; Pfaus, J.G. Effects of Cannabinoids on Female Sexual Function. Sex Med. Rev. 2020, 8, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  223. Barbonetti, A.; Rastrelli, G.; Sparano, C.; Castellini, C.; Vignozzi, L.; Maggi, M.; Lenzi, A.; Isidori, A.M.; Corona, G.; Forti, G.; et al. Is marijuana a foe of male sexuality? Data from a large cohort of men with sexual dysfunction. Andrology 2024, 12, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  224. Barchi, M.; Innocenzi, E.; Giannattasio, T.; Dolci, S.; Rossi, P.; Grimaldi, P. Cannabinoid Receptors Signaling in the Development, Epigenetics, and Tumours of Male Germ Cells. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 21, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Takeda, S.; Misawa, K.; Yamamoto, I.; Watanabe, K. Cannabidiolic Acid as a Selective cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitory Component in Cannabis. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2008, 36, 1917–1921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Hayes, E.C.; Rock, J.A. COX-2 Inhibitors and Their Role in Gynecology. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 2002, 57, 768–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Kurumbail, R.G.; Stevens, A.M.; Gierse, J.K.; McDonald, J.J.; Stegeman, R.A.; Park, J.Y.; Smith, K.J.; Hamberg, M.; Roberts, L.J.; Seibert, K.; et al. Structural Basis for Selective Inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 by anti-inflammatory Agents. Nature 1996, 384, 644–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Algire, J.E.; Srikandakumar, A.; Guilbault, L.A.; Downey, B.R. Preovulatory Changes in Follicular Prostaglandins and Their Role in Ovulation in cattle. Can. J. Vet. Res. 1992, 56, 67–69. [Google Scholar]
  229. Kowalewski, M.P.; Fox, B.; Gram, A.; Boos, A.; Reichler, I. Prostaglandin E2 Functions as a Luteotrophic Factor in the Dog. Reproduction 2013, 145, 213–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Murdoch, W.J. Effect of a Steriodal (prednisolone) and Nonsteroidal (indomethacin) Antiinflammatory Agent on Ovulation and Follicular Accumulation of Prostaglandin F2α in Sheep. Prostaglandins 1989, 37, 331–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  231. Stone, S.; Khamashta, M.A.; Nelson-Piercy, C. Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Reversible Female Infertility. Drug Saf. 2002, 25, 545–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  232. Concannon, P.W. Reproductive Cycles of the Domestic Bitch. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2011, 124, 200–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  233. Kowalewski, M.P. Endocrine and Molecular Control of Luteal and Placental Function in Dogs. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2012, 47, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Papa, P.C.; Kowalewski, M.P. Factors Affecting the Fate of the Canine Corpus luteum: Potential Contributors to Pregnancy and non-pregnancy. Theriogenology 2020, 150, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Chakraborty, I.; Dąs, S.K.; Wang, J.; Dey, S.K. Developmental Expression of the cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 Genes in the Periimplantation Mouse Uterus and Their Differential Regulation by the Blastocyst and Ovarian Steroids. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 1996, 16, 107–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Lim, H.; Paria, B.C.; Das, S.K.; Dinchuk, J.E.; Langenbach, R.; Trzaskos, J.M.; Meyer, K.; Smith, R.V.; Dubois, R.N.; Rodgers, J.; et al. Multiple Female Reproductive Failures in Cyclooxygenase 2–Deficient Mice. Cell 1997, 91, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Matsumoto, H.; Ma, W.; Smalley, W.; Trzaskos, J.M.; Breyer, R.M.; Dey, S.K. Diversification of Cyclooxygenase-2-Derived Prostaglandins in Ovulation and Implantation1. Biol. Reprod. 2001, 64, 1557–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Sirois, J.; Doré, M. The Late Induction of Prostaglandin G/H Synthase-2 in Equine Preovulatory Follicles Supports Its Role as a Determinant of the Ovulatory Process. Endocrinology 1997, 138, 4427–4434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Wang, H.; Dey, S.K. Lipid Signaling in Embryo Implantation. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2005, 77, 84–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Hester, K.E.; Harper, M.J.K.; Duffy, D.M. Oral Administration of the cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) Inhibitor Meloxicam Blocks Ovulation in non-human Primates When Administered to Simulate Emergency Contraception. Hum. Reprod. 2010, 25, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Salhab, A.S.; Amro, B.I.; Shomaf, M.S. Further Investigation on Meloxicam Contraceptivity in Female rabbits: Luteinizing Unruptured follicles, a Microscopic Evidence. Contraception 2003, 67, 485–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Weiss, E.A.; Gandhi, M. Preferential Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors as a Nonhormonal Method of Emergency contraception: A Look at the Evidence. J. Pharm. Pract. 2016, 29, 160–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Smith, G.C.; Roberts, R.M.; Hall, C.; Nuki, G. Reversible Ovulatory Failure Associated with the Development of Luteinized Unruptured Follicles in Women with Inflammatory Arthritis Taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Rheumatology 1996, 35, 458–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  244. Dzięcioł, M.; Szpaczek, A.; Uchańska, O.; Niżański, W. Influence of a Single Dose of Meloxicam Administrated during Canine Estrus on Progesterone Concentration and Fertility—A Clinical Case Study. Animals 2022, 12, 655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  245. Koblischke, P.; Kindahl, H.; Budik, S.; Aurich, J.; Palm, F.; Walter, I.; Aurich, C.; Hölker, M.; Lefebvre, R.; Troedsson, M.; et al. Embryo Transfer Induces a Subclinical Endometritis in Recipient Mares Which Can Be Prevented by Treatment with non-steroid anti-inflammatory Drugs. Theriogenology 2008, 70, 1147–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  246. Paksoy, Z.; Daş, H. Nonsteroid anti-inflammatory Drugs to Improve Fertility in Cows. In Success in Artificial Insemination—Quality of Semen and Diagnostics Employed; Lemma, A., Ed.; Intech: Houston, TX, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  247. Singh, S.P.; Kumar, A.; Bhavsar, P.; Bhavsar, M.; Sourya, N.; Singh, A.K.; Patel, R.; Shah, N.; Desai, P.; Chauhan, J.; et al. Application of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) for Improvement of Cattle Fertility. Deleted J. 2021, 10, 404–407. [Google Scholar]
  248. McNaughtan, J.W. The Effect of Prostaglandin Inhibitor on Pregnancy Rates of Heifer Embryo Transfer Recipients; Brigham Young University Utah: Provo, UT, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  249. Erdem, H.; Guzeloglu, A. Effect of Meloxicam Treatment during Early Pregnancy in Holstein Heifers. Reprod. Domest. Animals 2009, 45, 625–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Espey, L.L.; Kohda, H.; Mori, T.; Okamura, H. Rat Ovarian Prostaglandin Levels and Ovulation as Indicators of the Strength of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory Drugs. Prostaglandins 1988, 36, 875–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Cosentino, M.; Legnaro, M.; Luini, A.; Ferrari, M.; Sodergren, M.; Pacchetti, B.; Bianchi, F.; Castiglione, F.; Mazzei, M.; Rossi, A.; et al. Effect of Cannabidiol on Cyclooxygenase Type 1 and 2 Expression and Function in Human Neutrophils. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res. 2022, 8, 999–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  252. Grimaldi, C.; Capasso, A. The Endocannabinoid System in the Cancer therapy: An Overview. Curr. Med. Chem. 2011, 18, 1575–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  253. Malfitano, A.M.; Ciaglia, E.; Gangemi, G.; Gazzerro, P.; Laezza, C.; Bifulco, M. Update on the Endocannabinoid System as an Anticancer Target. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2011, 15, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  254. Fonseca, B.M.; Teixeira, N.A.; Correia-da-Silva, G. Cannabinoids as Modulators of Cell Death: Clinical Applications and Future Directions. Rev. Physiol. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2017, 173, 63–88. [Google Scholar]
  255. Velasco, G.; Sánchez, C.; Guzmán, M. Towards the Use of Cannabinoids as Antitumour Agents. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012, 12, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Caffarel, M.M.; Andradas, C.; Pérez-Gómez, E.; Guzmán, M.; Sánchez, C. Cannabinoids: A New Hope for Breast Cancer therapy? Cancer Treat Rev. 2012, 38, 911–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Bisogno, T.; Hanuš, L.; De Petrocellis, L.; Tchilibon, S.; Ponde, D.E.; Brandi, I.; Moriello, A.S.; Davis, J.B.; Mechoulam, R.; Di Marzo, V. Molecular Targets for Cannabidiol and Its Synthetic analogues: Effect on Vanilloid VR1 Receptors and on the Cellular Uptake and Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Anandamide. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2001, 134, 845–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Fraguas-Sánchez, A.I.; Martín-Sabroso, C.; Torres-Suárez, A.I. Insights into the Effects of the Endocannabinoid System in cancer: A Review. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2018, 175, 2566–2580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Ligresti, A.; Moriello, A.S.; Starowicz, K.; Matias, I.; Pisanti, S.; De Petrocellis, L.; Petrosino, S.; Bifulco, M.; Di Marzo, V.; Portella, G.; et al. Antitumor Activity of Plant Cannabinoids with Emphasis on the Effect of Cannabidiol on Human Breast Carcinoma. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2006, 318, 1375–1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Shrivastava, A.; Kuzontkoski, P.M.; Groopman, J.E.; Prasad, A. Cannabidiol Induces Programmed Cell Death in Breast Cancer Cells by Coordinating the cross-talk between Apoptosis and Autophagy. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2011, 10, 1161–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Sultan, A.S.; Marie, M.A.; Sheweita, S.A. Novel Mechanism of cannabidiol-induced Apoptosis in Breast Cancer Cell Lines. Breast 2018, 41, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. McKallip, R.J.; Nagarkatti, M.; Nagarkatti, P.S. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol Enhances Breast Cancer Growth and Metastasis by Suppression of the Antitumor Immune Response. J. Immunol. 2005, 174, 3281–3289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  263. Elbaz, M.; Nasser, M.W.; Ravi, J.; Wani, N.A.; Ahirwar, D.K.; Zhao, H.; Qamri, Z.; Nasser, M.; Sharma, S.; Gupta, P.; et al. Modulation of the Tumor Microenvironment and Inhibition of EGF/EGFR pathway: Novel Anti-tumor Mechanisms of Cannabidiol in Breast Cancer. Mol. Oncol. 2015, 9, 906–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  264. McAllister, S.D.; Murase, R.; Christian, R.T.; Lau, D.; Zielinski, A.J.; Allison, J.; Graham, N.; Patel, R.; Brundige, D.; Zhang, B.; et al. Pathways Mediating the Effects of Cannabidiol on the Reduction of Breast Cancer Cell proliferation, invasion, and Metastasis. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2011, 129, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  265. McAllister, S.D.; Christian, R.T.; Horowitz, M.P.; Garcia, A.; Desprez, P.Y. Cannabidiol as a Novel Inhibitor of Id-1 Gene Expression in Aggressive Breast Cancer Cells. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2007, 6, 2921–2927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. Sarmiento-Salinas, F.L.; Delgado-Magallón, A.; Montes-Alvarado, J.B.; Ramírez-Ramírez, D.; Flores-Alonso, J.C.; Cortés-Hernández, P.; Martínez-López, D.; Pérez-Gómez, E.; Cerutti, C.; Moreno-Bueno, G.; et al. Breast Cancer Subtypes Present a Differential Production of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and Susceptibility to Antioxidant Treatment. Front Oncol. 2019, 9, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Qamri, Z.; Preet, A.; Nasser, M.W.; Bass, C.E.; Leone, G.; Barsky, S.H.; Wani, N.A.; Elbaz, M.; Sharma, S.; Gupta, P.; et al. Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists Inhibit Tumor Growth and Metastasis of Breast Cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2009, 8, 3117–3129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Grimaldi, C.; Pisanti, S.; Laezza, C.; Malfitano, A.M.; Santoro, A.; Vitale, M.; Di Francia, R.; Iacuzzo, I.; Borrelli, F.; Scuderi, M.; et al. Anandamide Inhibits Adhesion and Migration of Breast Cancer Cells. Exp. Cell. Res. 2006, 312, 363–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Laezza, C.; Pisanti, S.; Malfitano, A.M.; Bifulco, M. The Anandamide analog, Met-F-AEA, Controls Human Breast Cancer Cell Migration via the RHOA/RHO Kinase Signaling Pathway. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 2008, 15, 965–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Nasser, M.W.; Qamri, Z.; Deol, Y.S.; Smith, D.; Shilo, K.; Zou, X.; Sharma, S.; Gupta, P.; Elbaz, M.; Leone, G.; et al. Crosstalk between Chemokine Receptor CXCR4 and Cannabinoid Receptor CB2 in Modulating Breast Cancer Growth and Invasion. Batra SK, editor. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e23901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Caffarel, M.M.; Andradas, C.; Mira, E.; Pérez-Gómez, E.; Cerutti, C.; Moreno-Bueno, G.; Elbaz, M.; Nasser, M.; Sharma, S.; Gupta, P.; et al. Cannabinoids Reduce ErbB2-driven Breast Cancer Progression through Akt Inhibition. Mol. Cancer 2010, 9, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  272. De Petrocellis, L.; Melck, D.; Palmisano, A.; Bisogno, T.; Laezza, C.; Bifulco, M.; Di Marzo, V.; Petrosino, S.; Starowicz, K.; Matias, I.; et al. The Endogenous Cannabinoid Anandamide Inhibits Human Breast Cancer Cell Proliferation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1998, 95, 8375–8380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Caffarel, M.M.; Sarrió, D.; Palacios, J.; Guzmán, M.; Sánchez, C. Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol Inhibits Cell Cycle Progression in Human Breast Cancer Cells through Cdc2 Regulation. Cancer Res. 2006, 66, 6615–6621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Caffarel, M.M.; Moreno-Bueno, G.; Cerutti, C.; Palacios, J.; Guzman, M.; Mechta-Grigoriou, F.; Perez, E.; Mira, E.; Andradas, C.; Eskell, L.; et al. JunD Is Involved in the Antiproliferative Effect of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol on Human Breast Cancer Cells. Oncogene 2008, 27, 5033–5044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  275. Takeda, S.; Yamamoto, I.; Watanabe, K. Modulation of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced MCF-7 Breast Cancer Cell Growth by Cyclooxygenase and Aromatase. Toxicology 2009, 259, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Takeda, S.; Yamaori, S.; Motoya, E.; Matsunaga, T.; Kimura, T.; Yamamoto, I.; Hashimoto, K.; Kondo, S.; Sugiura, M.; Watanabe, K.; et al. Delta(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol Enhances MCF-7 Cell Proliferation via Cannabinoid receptor-independent Signaling. Toxicology 2008, 245, 141–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  277. Watanabe, K.; Motoya, E.; Matsuzawa, N.; Funahashi, T.; Kimura, T.; Matsunaga, T.; Tanaka, Y.; Yamaori, S.; Takeda, S.; Yamamoto, I.; et al. Marijuana Extracts Possess the Effects like the Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. Toxicology 2005, 206, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  278. De La Harpe, A.; Beukes, N.; Frost, C.L. CBD Activation of TRPV1 Induces Oxidative Signaling and Subsequent ER Stress in Breast Cancer Cell Lines. Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem. 2022, 69, 420–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Von Bueren, A.O.; Schlumpf, M.; Lichtensteiger, W. Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol Inhibits 17beta-estradiol-induced Proliferation and Fails to Activate Androgen and Estrogen Receptors in MCF7 Human Breast Cancer cells. Anticancer. Res. 2008, 28, 85–89. [Google Scholar]
  280. Almada, M.; Oliveira, A.; Amaral, C.; Fernandes, P.A.; Ramos, M.J.; Fonseca, B.; Silva, A.S.; Correia-da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N.; Maretti-Costa, M.C.; et al. Anandamide Targets aromatase: A Breakthrough on Human Decidualization. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Mol. Cell Biol. Lipids 2019, 1864, 158512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Almada, M.; Amaral, C.; Oliveira, A.; Fernandes, P.A.; Ramos, M.J.; Fonseca, B.M.; Silva, A.S.; Correia-da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N.; Maretti-Costa, M.C.; et al. Cannabidiol (CBD) but Not Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) Dysregulate in Vitro Decidualization of Human Endometrial Stromal Cells by Disruption of Estrogen Signaling. Reprod. Toxicol. 2020, 93, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Amaral, C.; Trouille, F.M.; Almeida, C.F.; Correia-da-Silva, G.; Teixeira, N. Unveiling the Mechanism of Action behind the anti-cancer Properties of Cannabinoids in ER+ Breast Cancer cells: Impact on Aromatase and Steroid Receptors. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2021, 210, 105876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Takeda, S.; Yoshida, K.; Nishimura, H.; Harada, M.; Okajima, S.; Miyoshi, H.; Sugiura, M.; Watanabe, K.; Motoya, E.; Yamamoto, I.; et al. Δ(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol Disrupts estrogen-signaling through up-regulation of Estrogen Receptor Β (ERβ). Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2013, 26, 1073–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Blasco-Benito, S.; Seijo-Vila, M.; Caro-Villalobos, M.; Tundidor, I.; Andradas, C.; García-Taboada, E.; Pérez-Gómez, E.; Cerutti, C.; Moreno-Bueno, G.; Caffarel, M.M.; et al. Appraising the “entourage effect”: Antitumor Action of a Pure Cannabinoid versus a Botanical Drug Preparation in Preclinical Models of Breast Cancer. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2018, 157, 285–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Prather, P.L.; FrancisDevaraj, F.; Dates, C.R.; Greer, A.K.; Bratton, S.M.; Ford, B.M.; Bolognese, R.J.; Schaus, J.M.; Kaplan, H.F.; Oldham, W.M.; et al. CB1 and CB2 Receptors Are Novel Molecular Targets for Tamoxifen and 4OH-Tamoxifen. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2013, 441, 339–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Functions of CB1 receptors.
Figure 1. Functions of CB1 receptors.
Ijms 26 07095 g001
Figure 2. Functions of CB2 receptors.
Figure 2. Functions of CB2 receptors.
Ijms 26 07095 g002
Figure 3. The drawing schematically shows Cannabis sativa L. plant and its known or potential therapeutic properties of phytocannabinoids derived from this plant. It should be remembered that the main source of phytocannabinoids is the flowers.
Figure 3. The drawing schematically shows Cannabis sativa L. plant and its known or potential therapeutic properties of phytocannabinoids derived from this plant. It should be remembered that the main source of phytocannabinoids is the flowers.
Ijms 26 07095 g003
Table 1. Location of cannabinoid receptors in the reproductive system and their known/potential effects on human and animal reproductive function.
Table 1. Location of cannabinoid receptors in the reproductive system and their known/potential effects on human and animal reproductive function.
SpeciesReceptor SubtypeLocalization of Cannabinoid ReceptorsKnown/Potential Effects on
HumansCB1HPG axis *, Uterus,
Testes, Spermatozoa,
Mammary Gland
  • Hormonal regulation
  • Mammary gland development/lactation
  • Spermatogenesis disorders
CB2HPG axis *, Endometrium,
Placenta
  • Embryo implantation
  • Labor and neonatal development
Non-human
primates
CB1HPG axis *, Endometrium, Myometrium,
Testes, Spermatozoa
  • Hormonal regulation
  • Uterine contractility
  • Sperm motility
CB2HPG axis *,
Endometrium,
Testes, Spermatozoa
  • Hormonal regulation
  • Uterine contractility
  • Spermatogenesis
CattleCB1Corpus Luteum, Uterus
  • Modulation of luteal function
  • Control of prostaglandin synthesis
  • Regulation of uterine contractility
CB2Corpus Luteum,
Uterine Immune Cells
  • Embryo implantation
  • Immunomodulation and tolerance
  • Anti-inflammatory effects
SheepCB1Ovaries, Uterus
  • Steroid hormones synthesis
  • Follicular maturation
  • Control of prostaglandin release
  • Endometrial receptivity
CB2Uterus, Uterine Immune Cells
  • Modulation of immune response
  • Cytokine regulation
  • Implantation support
PigsCB1Uterus
  • Embryo implantation
CB2Placenta
  • Pregnancy maintenance
RodentsCB1HPG axis *, Uterus,
Ovarian Follicles,
Testes, Epididymis,
Vas Deferens
  • Hormonal regulation
  • Ovulation
  • Gamete/embryo transport
  • Embryo implantation
  • Spermatogenesis disorders
CB2HPG axis *, Uterus,
Endometrium,
Ovarian Follicles, Placenta,
Testes, Epididymis,
Vas Deferens
CatsCB1Ovaries, Ovarian Follicles
  • Ovulation
  • Follicular development
  • Potential luteal regulation
CB2Ovarian Follicles, Luteal Cells
  • Ovulation
  • Potential luteal regulation
* HPG axis: hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis. CB1 is more abundant in the central nervous system and reproductive tract, whereas CB2 is often found in immune-related cells, including those of the placenta and mammary gland [81,85,89,96]. Expression levels and functions vary depending on the phase of the estrous/menstrual cycle, gestation, and lactation stage [87]. Immunomodulatory roles of CB2 are especially relevant in the placenta and maternal–fetal interface [81,85,89,96].
Table 2. The role of the endocannabinoid system in reproductive functions in females.
Table 2. The role of the endocannabinoid system in reproductive functions in females.
Female Reproductive FunctionECS ComponentEffects/Role
OvulationCB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGModulation of GnRH, LH, and FSH secretion; involvement in follicular development and ovulatory peak
Ovarian functionCB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGRegulation of folliculogenesis, steroidogenesis, and oocyte maturation
Oviductal transportCB1, AEACB1 modulates embryo transport; high AEA disrupts oviductal motility
Uterine receptivity and implantationCB1, CB2, AEAAEA gradient crucial for implantation; dysregulation linked to miscarriage
Pregnancy and placentaCB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGModulates trophoblast proliferation, vascularization, and immune tolerance; altered ECS linked to complications
LactationCB1, CB2, AEAInhibition of prolactin secretion via CB1; involvement in hypothalamic regulation
Menstrual/cycle regulationCB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGRegulation of HPG axis, endometrial remodeling, and steroid secretion
Pathological states (e.g., endometriosis, PCOS)CB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGDysregulated ECS expression; potential target for modulation
Table 3. The role of the endocannabinoid system in reproductive functions in males.
Table 3. The role of the endocannabinoid system in reproductive functions in males.
Male Reproductive FunctionECS ComponentEffects/Role
Spermatogenesis and testicular functionCB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGRegulation of Sertoli cell activity, spermatid maturation, and testosterone secretion
Epididymal maturationCB1, CB2, AEAModulation of sperm motility and maturation; protective role against oxidative stress
Sperm capacitation and fertilizationCB1, CB2, AEAHigh AEA impairs capacitation; CB1 controls acrosome reaction
Libido/sexual behaviorCB1, AEAInhibitory effects on hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis; suppression of sexual drive
Hormonal regulationCB1, AEADecreased LH, FSH, and testosterone secretion via hypothalamic-pituitary modulation
Seminal plasma ECS contentAEA, 2-AGDetected in semen; possible role in sperm activation and immune tolerance
Pathological states (e.g., infertility, varicocele)CB1, CB2, AEA, 2-AGECS imbalance linked to poor sperm quality and reproductive disorders
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kalak, P.; Kupczyk, P.; Szumny, A.; Gębarowski, T.; Jasiak, M.; Niedźwiedź, A.; Niżański, W.; Dzięcioł, M. Molecular Mechanisms of the Endocannabinoid System with a Focus on Reproductive Physiology and the Cannabinoid Impact on Fertility. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 7095. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26157095

AMA Style

Kalak P, Kupczyk P, Szumny A, Gębarowski T, Jasiak M, Niedźwiedź A, Niżański W, Dzięcioł M. Molecular Mechanisms of the Endocannabinoid System with a Focus on Reproductive Physiology and the Cannabinoid Impact on Fertility. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2025; 26(15):7095. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26157095

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kalak, Patrycja, Piotr Kupczyk, Antoni Szumny, Tomasz Gębarowski, Marcin Jasiak, Artur Niedźwiedź, Wojciech Niżański, and Michał Dzięcioł. 2025. "Molecular Mechanisms of the Endocannabinoid System with a Focus on Reproductive Physiology and the Cannabinoid Impact on Fertility" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 26, no. 15: 7095. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26157095

APA Style

Kalak, P., Kupczyk, P., Szumny, A., Gębarowski, T., Jasiak, M., Niedźwiedź, A., Niżański, W., & Dzięcioł, M. (2025). Molecular Mechanisms of the Endocannabinoid System with a Focus on Reproductive Physiology and the Cannabinoid Impact on Fertility. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 26(15), 7095. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26157095

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop