- Reaction score
- 984
I think there were 2 Center
HMI-115 PRLR antibody: The Most Promising Treatment Ever
- Thread starter pegasus2
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 479
Yeah like I said I was under the impression you had to retrial different drug vehicles, but Rassman said 13 days ago that for Amplifica they're doing injections for its human trials but releasing it commercially as a cream or topical if the trials are successful. So maybe there's some exception I'm not aware of in this case that lets them skip that step.
ClinicalTrials.gov
classic.clinicaltrials.gov
It was a 16 man trial just at Sinclair Dermatology in Australia. And to my knowledge moeman was never told by the clinical investigators that he was the best responder, so I don't know what this dude is talking about. Think he might just be spouting nonsense unless he provides proof.
I believe we only have information about 2 of the 16 participants. 1. Moeman and 2. Moeman's wife who he claims did not respond nearly as well. Since the Phase 2 trial will only be men, we can assume they're focusing on its superior results in men.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 164
So I guess the current knowledge about HMI-115 is that is probably does you some good and can be combined with finasteride and min in order to attack hair loss from different angles, with the only drawback that it is likely going to be expensive as f*ck?
I am surprised not to see a topic on veteporfin and the trials by dr. Barghouthi and dr. Bloxham. Is there a reason for that?
I am surprised not to see a topic on veteporfin and the trials by dr. Barghouthi and dr. Bloxham. Is there a reason for that?
Topical HMI would be useless. It's almost 100k Daltons in size
- Reaction score
- 479
It's possible that the mechanism behind finasteride and the mechanism behind HMI-115 may be directly related in some way, so they might not both stack effectively. My very very minimal understanding leads me to believe that that prolactin receptors (which HMI-115 targets), and DHT and 5ar (which finasteride inhibits) are both just tiny pieces of the same puzzle of genetic hair loss.
While my understanding of minoxidil is that it's primarily in its own lane with regard to how it promotes hair growth in spite of genetic hair loss.
Obviously that might not be true at all, but if it is then I would suspect that if HMI-115 works, its effects may not compound additively with finasteride.
FCKW36
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 622
These are supposedly the pictures of this moeman from Reddit. The first picture shows before and after study, the second pictures he posted himself 8 days ago. In my opinion you can't compare these pictures at all. I don't see much if any regrowth. I can also make my own hair look that different like in these two pictures by lighting, angle, hair length and how I comb it. You'd all believe I had regrowth but at the end it was nothing. Same with these ones...
Attachments
- Reaction score
- 479
Yeah that's the one confusing thing about those leaked trial photos. Because if it is a before and after pic, which I agree shows zero regrowth and any illusion of regrowth is entirely a difference in the hair length and how it's parted and combed, then how is the before picture in that trial photo and this picture below the same person.
Because this photo appears to show what looks like significantly less terminal hair than the before picture in the trial photo, yet both were supposedly taken before the trial according to moeman. Sunlight can't be causing that big of a difference in appearance.
But comparing the trial photo and the new photo he posted 8 days ago, I agree it's arguable whether there's new terminal hair.
But comparing the photo above to the new photo he posted there's definitely more terminal hair.
So I really don't know.
Moeman replay on Reddit:
“They shaved a 2cm patch at the back. Not my whole head.
Secondly this was a drug safety trial not a dosage trial.
Their priority was side effects not actual dosing effects. So we were dosed exactly the same as the monkeys, this is not taking into account i am a different species or 80kg heavier and it may need to be dosed to body size etc.
120mg in a monkey compared to a human will yield different results and is not an equivalency without keeping the ratio the same.
Hope that helps“
“They shaved a 2cm patch at the back. Not my whole head.
Secondly this was a drug safety trial not a dosage trial.
Their priority was side effects not actual dosing effects. So we were dosed exactly the same as the monkeys, this is not taking into account i am a different species or 80kg heavier and it may need to be dosed to body size etc.
120mg in a monkey compared to a human will yield different results and is not an equivalency without keeping the ratio the same.
Hope that helps“
- Reaction score
- 479
Just a reminder to everyone that the doses they're experimenting with in the phase 2 trials are less than the dose he received, which is contrary to his logic in that comment.
But also his claim that he only used toppik on the 2cm patch they shaved is... hard to believe based on all the available pictures. Because his wedding video has nearly full crown coverage with no scalp showing except a patch at the vertex, but the picture he shared 8 days ago still has very little scalp coverage across the entire crown despite much longer hair. Sure in that photo the hair might be a bit wet which can thin it out, but it still doesn't really make sense. The wedding video also takes place at the same time as the after photo in the leaked trial photos, of which each show drastically different scalp coverage.
Moeman is still a mystery. The hair coverage of the photo timeline doesn't add up.
So yeah it really comes down to what the trial data says unfortunately, because as always people are unreliable.
FCKW36
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 622
On this picture you can't barely aee anything, it's in sunlight, completely different angle, it just doesn't matter. The trial photos matter.
- Reaction score
- 479
He said 8 days ago:
-"I used topik on a bald patch they shaved to count the hairs near the vertex. Nowhere else."
So yeah his photos and words definitely don't add up.
I understand the large impact of sunlight on the appearance of thinning hair, but it still just doesn't make sense.
Because if we are to assume that the trial's before photo and the sunlight pic are the same hair taken at the same time, then since the after photo looks virtually identical to the before photo, then the wedding video, which was taken at the same time as the after photo, would have to also look virtually identical to the sunlight photo. But in the wedding video he has undeniably significantly more hair coverage and density than the sunlight photo.
These images cannot under any stretch of the imagination be the same amount of terminal hair as the sunlight photo. But the other problem is that these photos were taken 6 months before the photo he posted 8 days ago, yet these photos also show significantly more coverage than the recent one.
Toppik is the only thing that would explain it, but he also claimed 8 days ago that he only used toppik on a 2cm patch on the vertex. So again nothing he says makes sense relative to the photos and their timeline.
The only reliable conclusion is that he, while I'm sure is well-intentioned, is an unreliable source of objective reality. Which is a common trait among hair loss sufferers.
Indeed, that doesn't add up. At any rate, he had significant regrowth. I would not expect results to be better at a higher dose. Weight does not matter with mAbs, as it doesn't get disributed to adipose tissue. The dose is also higher than what was used in monkeys when you factor in the different binding affinity between humans and monkeys, along with human equivalent dosing.
maybe the quantity doesn't influence (I think in any case that a minimum influence, given that it is an antibody that works by "capturing" the prolactin molecules), but time certainly does and reversing a baldness of several years perhaps requires the same number of years or a little less. If baldness essentially occurs with progressive cycles of thinning, what makes us believe that a reversal doesn't proceed the same way?
It works by binding the prolactin receptor to block signal transduction. It actually increases the amount of free prolactin. As I said a couple pages ago, macaques do have shorter hair cycles, and the best time to reverse hair miniaturization is during early anagen. That means the patients might just need more time. Don't count on it though.
- Reaction score
- 44
Yes, I have to give a hard agree to everything acbrantin has said. The only before and after photographs I have seen that use similar lighting and angling show significant, but not spectacular results. You can see better results from just googling before and after pictures of finasteride+minoxidil. Although I understand this treatment has generated a particular interest amongst those who can't use or are afraid of the current FDA approved treatments.
I hope it is successful but a photographic assessment of one human subject is not enough to determine any drug's efficacy or safety profile. It very well could be that he's an outlier and the other subjects got much better results, or they could've gotten worse results. We'll only know for certain once we get more clinical data. I hope it happens soon as I'd love to get to the bottom of all of this.
My latest video on this subject in case anyone is interested. As you can see I am skeptical but I am hoping that I can admit I was wrong about this one.
I hope it is successful but a photographic assessment of one human subject is not enough to determine any drug's efficacy or safety profile. It very well could be that he's an outlier and the other subjects got much better results, or they could've gotten worse results. We'll only know for certain once we get more clinical data. I hope it happens soon as I'd love to get to the bottom of all of this.
My latest video on this subject in case anyone is interested. As you can see I am skeptical but I am hoping that I can admit I was wrong about this one.
- Reaction score
- 984
If finasteride Doesnt work for me would HMI-115 also Doesnt work?
I am diffuse thinner. Tried finasteride 2 years 1mg daily. I think it is Androgenetic Alopecia because the only bald in my Family is my grandfather motherside with exactly the same pattern
I am diffuse thinner. Tried finasteride 2 years 1mg daily. I think it is Androgenetic Alopecia because the only bald in my Family is my grandfather motherside with exactly the same pattern
- Reaction score
- 44
Your hair doesn't have time for HMI-115 to hit the market.
Finasteride probably does work for you, it is just that you need stronger 5AR inhibition. I'd give dutasteride a shot.