- Reaction score
- 2,721
There seem to be quite a fair few companies in hair cloning now. HairClone, Rapunzel just to name a couple, then there’s L’Oréal trying to 3D print hair. Guess we will see who is actually worth their salt in time.
Aclaris Therapeutics Announces “positive” 6 Month Results Of Phase 2 Androgenetic Alopecia Trial
- Thread starter clams
- Start date
3D print hair lmao
Yeah...
Those are piss weak results. Theses are six-month results ffs. You see the "baseline" result on the left? I had almost that bad of diffuse loss behind the hairline when I got onto Minoxidil and finasteride. It was completely filled in before a year was up after getting on the meds. The guy's hairline in this has seen such a meager improvement that I guarantee you none of his friends and family would even think he's any less bald.
Sorry that your delusions about JAK have been shattered after all this time, but it's painfully obvious this is a garbage treatment for male pattern baldness
They actually plan to 4D print it from cultivated cells, so it's actually pretty promising if they can develop the tech well enough to ensure survival of the cells during printing.
Doubt they'd have a real good idea would happen in the trial bud, they have a stack of JAK inhibitors and told the bioinformatics boys (or in this case internship for thesis? https://www.cell.com/cell-stem-cell/fulltext/S1934-5909(19)30011-6) to figure out which one potentially works for Androgenetic Alopecia. Why else would they go to a dosing study now. We can't simulate human skin/follicle dev, otherwise we wouldn't need 3/6/12 months for every f*****g study.
Topical for AA (https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/ti6chyax 19:50) $1000/$2000 a script, let's say that's 6 months? $250 a month for 5/cm^2 increase, doubt many people would use it, unless longer usage/upping concentration/lower price.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 2,721
I’ll add to this that a heart has now already been 4/3D printed with success. Organ printing has been essentially mastered. I don’t see why they cannot achieve this for the hair organ!
The TAHC improvement of 24 seen in that patient was better than the average improvement in the original Propecia study. Obviously the study as a whole produced disappointing results, but calling those results in particular bad is absurd.
- Reaction score
- 334
guys don't be mad, I think they forgot the clarify that you need this + LLLT in order to get complete regrowth to NW0.
Yeah, so? Who cares?
Dhurat study was miles better. Rogaine's official results are better.
It's about visual improvement here, and what JAK offers is such a weak improvement that it's ostensibly worthless.
Drugs are not going to cure male pattern baldness.
It's all up to cell therapy and to a lesser extent, wounding — because those can provide hair in cosmetically-worthwhile amounts.
The way to look at this is like this: Does the patient still look bald(ing)? If yes, then it's not a solution. That's why I don't understand NW6s who get transplants so they can be NW4s. It's like losing 20 pounds when you're still 270 and saying you're "slim" now.
Go big or go home, and most of this sh*t simply isn't going big enough.
You're forgetting about an entirely different segment of the market, those that are in the earlier stages of balding (or who had a hair transplant) that are trying to maintain a decent head of hair. A drug with a novel mechanism of action that increased TAHC by +24 is good news for anyone in the Norwood 1-2 range. You can keep more hair on your head for longer, delaying Norwood progression. Any dermatologist will tell you that prevention is the best way to currently treat balding. This was never meant to cure those with significant hair loss. Aclaris knew about the AA subjects that maintained their Androgenetic Alopecia pattern from the start.
I agree that cells are going to be the answer, but until we see a therapy definitively working, I'll gladly take any drug that might help.
- Reaction score
- 986
An increase of 5.6 hairs per square centimeter ... not something that would get me excited but I was expecting nothing at all.
So maybe next year we will see new results with higher concentration and it will be the almost best day of our life - the best day would be when the cure will be ours. Maybe not.
I'm curious if it can at least help with the itchy ... hm hm
So maybe next year we will see new results with higher concentration and it will be the almost best day of our life - the best day would be when the cure will be ours. Maybe not.
I'm curious if it can at least help with the itchy ... hm hm
I'm not forgetting that, it's just that it doesn't really matter because there's already been a drug on the market for 30 years that does that.
I know that answer enrages people here, and yes I'm aware that it doesn't always work, etc. but that's just not how these bean counters and stockholders see it.
Swoop had brought up on here some years ago, and I've referenced it a billion times: PureTech and some others had done market research which showed that the reason most men didn't use conventional drugs — if they were even aware of them at all — was simply because of meager regrowth. That was the reason; not side effects or anything else.
There is also the matter that Aderans' treatment was able to stop the loss, but they still shelved it anyway. It was the RepliCel before RepliCel; it could've helped people like you and me, but they shelved it.
The reason is simple: The market demands regrowth, that's where the money is, not maintenance.
I'm going to call it early based on the history of the business and predict that Aclaris will probably shelve this before it goes through all the motions. Follica is surely headed to market within a couple years, same with Shiseido. They'd be up against a treatment that can actually regrow cosmetically-worthwhile amounts of hair, and one that can provide (as far is currently known) indefinite maintenance after one injection.
By the time it would make it to market, there are going to be better, cheaper alternatives to JAK. You can bet on it.
I don’t know much of the science behind this topical for male pattern baldness. I’m happy they are trying, but like many the 6 month results are weak.
I’ve tried about everything, but I’m not inclined /excited to try this. This may sound like a joke but methinks using urine/semen on edges/scalp would get more results.
I’ve tried about everything, but I’m not inclined /excited to try this. This may sound like a joke but methinks using urine/semen on edges/scalp would get more results.
- Reaction score
- 1,132
Lol at Follica
Site updated : http://www.follicabio.com
Looks like they gave up on their own formula, and are just gonna release their disruptive device...20 frikin' years of trials
They'll just throw this to derms and goodbye, stick with minoxidil and finasteride
Also no more in-home device or topical dispenser, or any of their smartapp crap...vanished, still so trustful ?
Well, better than nothing to gain 10-15 unpigmented terminal hairs /cm²
Where did the +24 come from? As far as I'm aware it's 5.6 hairs/cm^2, not 5.6 hair follicles/cm^2, or do I not understand?
I think that's why it being a novel MOA is so important. It doesn't have to beat propecia because it can be used concurrently with it. As I'm sure you know, you walk into any dermatologist office and they'll offer you finasteride, min, or both. The hope from Aclaris is JAK is going to be added to that list, and if the study results were as good as the one picture we're talking about, then I think they would have been feeling pretty good about that.
I don't think we've seen anything from Follica that completely changes the current treatment paradigm. Follica's wounding device would be used with the big 3, maybe replacing min depending on the compound they use. I'm excited to see this phase 2 data from Shiseido, but at the end of the day it's very complex science, unprecedented as far as I know from a clinical perspective, so I have a hard time assuming it's going to work indefinitely, and we have no proof that it is going to provide cosmetic growth in the way that you have defined it here. I'm hopeful but those questions remain unanswered.
I think Aclaris will go through with the dose ranging trial. If the results in women stay the same or increase, then I think you might see them bring it all the way to market, and target women who are already using min. Obviously not a blockbuster drug, or what we all want here, but there's probably some money to be made on it.
We're talking about one subject specifically from the study, not the total results.
No, they didn't. You just don't know what you're talking about.
The drugs that they are using are already FDA-approved; we just don't know specifically which ones they are using. They are still developing their own, new compounds. If they were to wait on those, it would surely be years yet.
They also haven't been doing "20 years of trials" but K.
Right now, we're in a thread where people are acting hopeful for something proven to provide sh*t results while dissing Follica while there is a massive, pro-DIY-dermarolling thread where even the most meager improvement is being heralded as "incredible results".
That's the level of unhinged this community is.
- Reaction score
- 1,132
If you're waiting for a new revolutionary topical compound, you can already forget about it, they're gonna use what's already out
So yes, this is glorified dermarolling and minoxidil just like the Dhurat study, nothing more.
The fact that they dramatically changed their website and get rid of half the crap they stated should not be considered as a good sign
You're f*****g delusional, even the chart on their website specify that they're gonna use existing treatments.
And if you read carefully again all their "patents" (between 10 and 20 years of it, my bad !!) about their so-called compound, they just tested all existing treatments that act on different pathways to try to get the best of it, they failed obviously, and even need additional years of pivotal trial just to optimize this compound has their device is already prototyped and patented, so yeah, it better be fuckin' optimized
You can find previous version of their website has they are archived and compare, backward is pretty hilarious and depressing
What a fanboy
They've never patented any new molecule btw, prove me wrong, but you're clearly the professional here
And you're also wrong about the market trend, they're not just asking for regrowth, sure everybody is asking for regrowth, and get rich, and peace across the world, and getting blow by Riley Reid....
But many are also just asking, if regrowth is too hard to achieve, to get at least better treatments that offer sideless maintenance and hair thickening, some real alternatives and not medieval current approaches.
I personaly know some people that strickly refused to take treatments because of their bad press, whether it is misinformation or ignorance that don't change a damn thing about the market, they're just not gonna buy it
Propecia has never been a great market success, now everybody can buy cheap generic finasteride molecule.
In a country like France, just about 30'000 users are registered, and it's an under surveillance treatment as it's may gonna be remove
Last edited:
This cannot be stated clearer:
They have stated, on many occasions, that they are researching future compounds for the treatment.
It will also not be just minoxidil at launch. Their materials have shown that there at least two compounds, to be used at different times. Name me a compound right now that is proven to be more effective at growing hair than minoxidil anyway?
You're literally bitching about them using proven stuff.
and there is yet to be anything shown to be more effective than the Dhurat study short of hair multiplication, so what the actual f*** are you bitching about?
This is just another excuse to be a whiny f*****.
It doesn't actually matter what they use or do, as long as it works to provide cosmetically-desirable results.
We know that wounding can do that, but for some reason, you're being a b**ch about a treatment utilizing said approach, with pretty much all of the experts in that field attached to the project, which has more research into it that field than literally anyone else by this point...and you're doing so in a thread about an obviously-failed drug.
There are not "many" clamoring for that at all outside of these forums, the bulk of this community are complete whackjobs, and again: market research proves this.