Bayer Prolactin Receptor Antibody For Male And Female Pattern Hair Loss

[Dimitri001]

“
This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HMI-115 versus a placebo in pre-menopausal women with moderate to severe Endometriosis associated pain.

The study will have two parts: Part 1 and Part 2. Part 1 will determine the safety and efficacy of HMI 115 at 60 mg, 120 mg, and 240 mg. Only when the safety and efficacy have been evaluated by the Sponsor in Part 1 of the study will eligible subjects (new subjects) be admitted to Part 2 of the study. Part 2 of the study will determine the safety and efficacy of HMI 115 at 480 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) and every 2 weeks (Q2W).

“

ClinicalTrials.gov

clinicaltrials.gov

No mention about Androgenetic Alopecia ‍

From our perspective, at least it's more safety data (even if it's in women).

 

[fashy]

For hairloss, not many people will be lining up to spend 20k+ yearly for a slightly better minoxidil or finasteride. There's more financial risk if the trials don't go perfectly.

Is there reason to assume this treatment would cost 20k+ per year?

 

[trialAcc]

Is there reason to assume this treatment would cost 20k+ per year?

Average annual cost of mAb (same class of therapy) was 96k USD in 2020. 100% of those are covered by insurance providers. The manufacturing process doesn't get cheaper because it's for hairloss, I'm just assuming they will have to take less profits to get people to use it. 20-40k I'd randomly guess.

This is why people should be surprised when they see them pursuing other indications, they likely need one of those to succeed to be profitable with this therapy, hairloss could be a financial dud even if it works extremely well.

 

[RolfLeeBuckler]

Is there reason to assume this treatment would cost 20k+ per year?

In the Monkey studies they have shown that they get a Full Head of hair After 4 Years of waiting. The treatment in the studies was only Done every two Weeks subcutaneos injections For 6 months.
You Can imagine that it is enough For men to do the injections For 6 months and then Are safe For at least 4 years. When minitarization hits in again (Maybe 8 -10 years later) you Can do another injection round.

The Prices Are only speculative at this Point

 

[Zon Ama]

Would it make sense to get a transplant now? I am wondering how this would look (assuming HMI-115 works just as good on humans). If I get my front done, taking HMI-115 would just increase the density then or what can I expect?

 

[jan_miezda]

Average annual cost of mAb (same class of therapy) was 96k USD in 2020. 100% of those are covered by insurance providers. The manufacturing process doesn't get cheaper because it's for hairloss, I'm just assuming they will have to take less profits to get people to use it. 20-40k I'd randomly guess.

This is why people should be surprised when they see them pursuing other indications, they likely need one of those to succeed to be profitable with this therapy, hairloss could be a financial dud even if it works extremely well.

Why do you say that treating hairloss won’t be financial viable? Any balding man will pay for it except maybe 10% who actually like being bald

 

[jayyyy]

hey think you very much For your Insider informations pur of China. Are there Dome other informations Maybe in the Chinese Media about Hope Medicine?
It would be nice to know in which Country they will do the Human trials

There is not much information about Hope Medicine because it is only a start-up company. I just found this from investment company if it helps.
This VC firm（Qiming venture partners ）invested 56 million U.S. dollars to the Hope Medicine.

 

[trialAcc]

Why do you say that treating hairloss won’t be financial viable? Any balding man will pay for it except maybe 10% who actually like being bald

I implied it in my post. Most people wont be able to afford this treatment, so if it doesn't work perfectly it wont be used by many people. What percentage of people can afford 2k+ monthly for injections? What if it needs to be used every 2years or so?

 

[recedingyt]

I implied it in my post. Most people wont be able to afford this treatment, so if it doesn't work perfectly it wont be used by many people. What percentage of people can afford 2k+ monthly for injections? What if it needs to be used every 2years or so?

In the monkeys they only did it for 6 months and the results lasted for 4 years with no other treatments. It maybe lasts even longer than that, that's just when they stopped counting/observing (unless I'm mistaken?)

2k month * 6 months = 12k, I'll be generous and round it up to 15-20k to try to account for the cost of travel or any extra costs for a full course of treatment. That's not that much more than large volume transplant would cost from a good surgeon. And it doesn't deplete donor zones either. Assuming it's similar for humans and the results can be maintained for years afterwards, 15k-20k every 4 years is not that crazy if it is actually transplant level or better results. This is also not considering the fact the monkeys didn't take finasteride or anything like that to stop the cascade of events that lead to hair loss. If you are lucky enough not to get side effects from finasteride and it works as a maintenance treatment for you, you might be able to expect to make the results permanent. That makes the 15-20k price tag even more reasonable.

 

[Zon Ama]

Don't base your decision to get a hair transplant on a speculative treatment that has never been tested in men, and which wouldn't be available for years even in the best case scenario

The numbers on drug development suggest that any new drug has under a 20% chance of being FDA approved for any indication, and 10% for a specific indication

and those represent an upper limit, success rates are even lower for progressive conditions that are widespread in the population like Androgenetic Alopecia

I am not really taking HMI-115 as a basis for getting a hair transplant. I am just asking what would be the expected outcome for someone who had a hair transplant and would use HMI-115 afterwards (in general)

 

[trialAcc]

In the monkeys they only did it for 6 months and the results lasted for 4 years with no other treatments. It maybe lasts even longer than that, that's just when they stopped counting/observing (unless I'm mistaken?)

2k month * 6 months = 12k, I'll be generous and round it up to 15-20k to try to account for the cost of travel or any extra costs for a full course of treatment. That's not that much more than large volume transplant would cost from a good surgeon. And it doesn't deplete donor zones either. Assuming it's similar for humans and the results can be maintained for years afterwards, 15k-20k every 4 years is not that crazy if it is actually transplant level or better results. This is also not considering the fact the monkeys didn't take finasteride or anything like that to stop the cascade of events that lead to hair loss. If you are lucky enough not to get side effects from finasteride and it works as a maintenance treatment for you, you might be able to expect to make the results permanent. That makes the 15-20k price tag even more reasonable.

The macaques didn't recover 100% of their hair after the 6 months of dosing, they were still thin/bald at the hairline. They are also monkeys and not humans. Human dosing could be 1+ year(s), especially for people with advanced balding. Maybe a NW2 could get back to NW0~ with 6 months of treatment from a healthy baseline, but who knows, a NW6 might need 2~ years of dosing to revive all follicles for all we know.

I'm not debating whether it's reasonable or not, because clearly if it brings you from bald to respectable hair then it's worth the price tag for people who want hair. You made my point when you compared it to a hair transplant though, because the percentage of bald(ing) guys who actually spend 15-20k on a hair transplant is incredibly small when compared to the overall pool of guys who are losing hair. The only reason the hair transplant market gained popularity at all is because people started having access to mega sessions for under 5k in Turkey.

 

[fashy]

I'm not debating whether it's reasonable or not, because clearly if it brings you from bald to respectable hair then it's worth the price tag for people who want hair. You made my point when you compared it to a hair transplant though, because the percentage of bald(ing) guys who actually spend 15-20k on a hair transplant is incredibly small when compared to the overall pool of guys who are losing hair. The only reason the hair transplant market gained popularity at all is because people started having access to mega sessions for under 5k in Turkey.

There are other factors that play into this, at least 3 are very important ones. First of all, for a long time there has been (and it still very much exists but now less so) a stigma around hair transplants. Many feel as though artificially correcting their hair would be looked down upon by people or made fun of the fact that their insecurities drove them to do this.

Second, transplants for a long time looked like sh*t unless you knew where to get good ones from. I can attest to the fact that whenever I see someone with a hair transplant in public I instantly recognize it because most of them just don't look right and look silly on the hairline. You can sense that there has been obvious correction. Now, they have gotten better in the past few years, which is why more and more people are taking the plunge.

And third, many people are turned away by transplant surgeons either because their donor hair sh*t and is unreliable or because they haven't stopped balding yet, or because they have lost too much hair for a transplant to make any quality cosmetic difference.

All of this is to say, if a therapy like HMI proves successful (and works in a similar way it did in the macaques) you wouldn't need to really worry about either of those issues and those with the financial means to do this would jump on board in a minute.

 

[coolio]

Most PEOPLE will never spend $20k on hair restoration, let alone most men.

The ideal price number is as low as possible. They biggest profit for the company would be if they could deliver it for $1k or less and hit a very wide pool of buyers.

 

[jan_miezda]

Most PEOPLE will never spend $20k on hair restoration, let alone most men.

The ideal price number is as low as possible. They biggest profit for the company would be if they could deliver it for $1k or less and hit a very wide pool of buyers.

People pay that amount just to fix wrinkles and way more for bigger boobs and asses .

for 20k transplant doctors will be busy every day of the year , when people become educated about the product .

my braces alone cost 8k for straightening my teeth in Canada. Every person my age had them too at my school.

 

[pegasus2]

Don't base your decision to get a hair transplant on a speculative treatment that has never been tested in men, and which wouldn't be available for years even in the best case scenario

The numbers on drug development suggest that any new drug has under a 20% chance of being FDA approved for any indication, and 10% for a specific indication

and those represent an upper limit, success rates are even lower for progressive conditions that are widespread in the population like Androgenetic Alopecia

This is ordinarily good advice, but HMI-115 is different. It's worth at least waiting for phase 2 results before you do something you can't take back

 

[pegasus2]

Most PEOPLE will never spend $20k on hair restoration, let alone most men.

The ideal price number is as low as possible. They biggest profit for the company would be if they could deliver it for $1k or less and hit a very wide pool of buyers.

Propecia was around $4,000 annually when it came out in the 90s, so around 10k in today's dollars. If you don't think a cure will cost more than that, especially a monoclonal antibody, then you must be dreaming. Average cost of an mAb is almost 100k annually. I would expect this to be cheaper because it's not covered by insurance, but it's still going to be over 20k annually

 

[froggy7]

Propecia was around $4,000 annually when it came out in the 90s, so around 10k in today's dollars. If you don't think a cure will cost more than that, especially a monoclonal antibody, then you must be dreaming. Average cost of an mAb is almost 100k annually. I would expect this to be cheaper because it's not covered by insurance, but it's still going to be over 20k annually

Tsuji showed us how much the price will be, Stemson will not be cheaper, Geoff tells fairy tales about helping bald children etc but everyone who has oil in their head can see and hear that the medicine will cost 100K $ + no one will let the poor have a full head of hair

 

[soull]

whether the price of 20k is expensive or not is relative. If this treatment offers the improvements we saw in monkeys for humans then it would not be expensive. A hair graft in Spain for 3k of graft costs about 8k €.

 

[-specter-]

I just want to hear good news about the results of this drug soon

 

[coolio]

Propecia was around $4,000 annually when it came out in the 90s, so around 10k in today's dollars. If you don't think a cure will cost more than that, especially a monoclonal antibody, then you must be dreaming. Average cost of an mAb is almost 100k annually. I would expect this to be cheaper because it's not covered by insurance, but it's still going to be over 20k annually

Yes, and Propecia was overpriced IMO.

A bill for $20k all at once is very different from paying $1k/yr for 20 years. Few people in the general population will pay $20k at once for hair. Guys on baldness forums will do it but we aren't representative.

I didn't say the new treatment will cost $1k. I said that's probably where the biggest profit would be made in the long term if it could be done. I mean the REALLY long term. Cheaper = wider pool of buyers. More buyers = baldness becomes less socially acceptable, which eventually increases the pressure on the remaining men with hair loss to pay up. That's what happens when a cosmetic treatment becomes mass-affordable. It's optional for the first generation but it becomes a requirement for subsequent generations.