About     Contact     Archives     Videos     Events     Hair Transplant

I take propecia, which has halted my hair loss and re-grew some hair at the crown and top. If a better drug or a cell-based/cloning procedure comes along, would that mean I could get off propecia to start the new therapy, or will I always have to take it to keep what I got back?

Thank you

If another DHT blocker comes along with less side effects, you will be able to switch as long as it does block DHT. Dutasteride will retain benefits seen from finasteride (Propecia), but safety is still a concern of mine with dutasteride. Propecia is non-surgical (daily pill), and when hair cloning comes to be practical sometime in the future, it will almost be a surgical process of some sort. They’re entirely different processes, and if you stop the blocking of DHT from the drug, you’ll lose those benefits you saw.

Will aderans send out an update on what they are doing or there progress so far with their phase two study? Do they have to keep their trials confidential or are there rules that restrict them from giving out information before the trials are complete?

Update: See this post

I think the FDA frowns upon companies that release information prematurely, which may impact the ability of those companies to get the FDA clearance they need from clinical trials. While I don’t know about legal restrictions, I doubt any company would want to publish such information early. These companies have a difficult task of balancing what their investors want to know (to keep those that supply the money happy), and the need for good science. Revealing too much before the clinical trials are concluded doesn’t seem to be in their best interest, as reading an incomplete study is essentially like watching a movie with the ending cut off. Lots of things could change by the end.

I don’t have any info on Aderans specifically, but here’s their page about Phase 2 study info.

I have seen some videos taken from CBS 60 minutes and another CBS news release that outlines an approach to growing organ parts (see here and here). The challenge of growing an entire organ like hair (which is a complete organ containing skin, glands, fat, nerves, blood vessels, stem cells and special hair growing cells) is more difficult than these video examples of finger tip and heart valve growth. Much of this research has been funded by the U.S. government and military and one has to be careful about taking such early studies and expanding on its greater meaning.

A number of readers recently pointed me to a press release apparently sent out by Drs. Hitzig and Cooley proclaiming they’ve successfully cloned hair using a special powder called MatriStem MicroMatrix. Here’s a part of the press release:

MatriStem MicroMatrix, a product of regenerative medicine innovator, ACell, Inc., is a wound healing powder that promotes healing and tissue growth and has now proven to help regenerate hair in the donor and recipient regions of hair transplant patients. While intended for diabetic ulcers, venous ulcers, pressure ulcers, traumatic wounds, second degree burns, surgical wounds (donor sites/grafts) and trauma wounds, Hitzig and Cooley have found that its properties offer a broader scope of treatment, including hair cloning.

There are some very early ideas on how this might work with hair, but there is no solid research available to support the hair claims. The press release is a bit sensationally written on the hair side, and I’d suspect this was sent out by an overzealous PR agency with a flair for the dramatic, rather than this being a case of these doctors claiming to do something that can’t be done with any consistency.

You can read the full text of the PR here.

Photo source: Associated Press

Given the recent winding up of Intercytex, what hopes for a future cure or improved prevention treatments? Do you know of any new avenues that are being pursued? Has Intercytex’s research been bought by another company or is it dead in the water?

I found an article (requires free login) about Intercytex’s death. Here’s a quote from the article:

“Shareholders at Manchester-based medical firm Intercytex have approved its plans to sell off its assets and leave the Alternative Investment Market (AIM). The shares will be canceled on January 8 and the company’s name will be changed to Regenerative Medicine Assets.”

Bummer. I don’t know where their research has been sold to or if it will continue elsewhere (it’s not mentioned on their site yet). There is much going on beyond what Intercytex had been doing, so all is not lost. With a potential multi-billion dollar payoff, industry is not giving up on cures for balding.

I was curious what you’re views might be on stem cell research legislation and how political decisions might impact future progress, since stem cell therapies seem to hold the best promise for a cure to baldness. From what I have read, restrictions placed on research during the socially right-leaning Bush years have set cures back by years. Again, just wondering how you think the political climate can/will affect a cure or better treatments for things like baldness.

Thank you

Although there’s enough political tension in the news lately to cause me to not want to delve into policy talk, I can avoid this topic fairly easily as I really have no idea about the political climate for stem cells. While it is an interesting question, I don’t even know that stem cell therapies hold the most promise to be first across the finish line in cure development. There’s rumblings from Histogen about their stem cell therapy being available “as soon as” 2013, but it could just be more wishful thinking. I recall people supposedly in-the-know saying, “hair cloning will be available within 5 years” — and that was a decade ago.

Timelines in treatment development are constantly in flux during the early stages and I wonder if some of those target dates are hinging on everything going right on the first try. In a perfect world that might be the case, but the reality is that there is a lot of trial and error and many promising technologies never get beyond the development phase. With all that being said, if I had to guess I’d say better drugs will get us closer to the elusive hair loss cure.

Hello Dr. Rassman,

I was fielding some of the questions about future hair loss treatments, and I’ve noticed all things considered, there are a few (supposedly) options in the pipeline.

My question is out of the prospective treatments (cloning, more effective medication, genetic treatment), which do you think is the most likely to materialize? Or put another way, given your experience, which do you think has the highest probability of reaching the consumer level?

Thanks

You are correct in stating that there really are only a few treatment options available. Medically there is Propecia and Rogaine. Surgically there is a hair transplant procedure. These treatments are not a complete solution in itself, but it does work with its own limitations.

For the future, your guess is probably as good as mine. We all know genetic cloning research is being carried out, yet there is no definite light at the end of the tunnel, so to speak. In my opinion, for something revolutionary to reach the consumer level, I would say it could take another 10+ years (and I only say 10+ years because that’s a time frame that is pretty far for me to think about). Maybe we will see new drugs in less than 10 years. I certainly hope so.

For Dr. Farjo please: Are you still working with Intercytex on trials or have you lost confidence in the project? Based on what Dr. Rassman said (he doesn’t see a breakthrough in cloning/multiplication for at least 10 years) whereas intercytex predicted a product in 2010… Do you think it’s worth putting off a hair transplant for about 2 years if not urgent for something to come out of Intercytex? Or did they fail? I am confused about this because you had said the results were good at some stage… please let me know if something changed your mind.

The following response is by UK-based physician Dr. Bessam Farjo:

Response by: Dr Bessam Farjo United Kingdom

Back in 2007 and early 2008, Intercytex genuinely believed that good news was around the corner. This was based on the very promising results of the laboratory work. What happened was that the positive results of clinical trials were not as efficient as the lab ones. In other words although promising and exciting, not quite good enough to justify applying for a therapeutic product for the public. Since then three things have happened. Firstly the credit crunch hit the biotech sector hard in that major investors pulled out. Secondly, an unrelated Intercytex product did not come up with the goods, which meant negatively affecting the company share price. Thirdly, money aside, Intercytex agreed that the future probably lies in their ongoing lab research of making fully formed hairs from the cloned cells before taking them back to the donor. At this point, I dont know when this work will result in a clinical trial.

At the moment you could say I am in between contracts with Intercytex as there no trials taking place. I was never employed as such by Intercytex.

If your donor hair is good enough for now and the future then I would encourage you to go ahead with transplants if you are a suitable candidate. Hair cloning, when it becomes available, is more relevant where donor hair is a problem. Another point depending on your age, you are probably more concerned about your loss now than you will be in 10 years time. The top doctors in the field will be able to advise you of your suitability and potential future hair loss.

–

Learn more about the author of this article, Dr. Bessam Farjo, on his BaldingBlog profile or at his website.

Hi,

i’d like to ask you if you know the name they are using for their future product from follica. for example Histogen, they are using Regenica and Interctex ICX-TRC, so what Follica is using as a name? and it is known in what stage of their study they are? for example Aderans are in phase 2 of the process.

thanks

Follica hasn’t been too forthcoming with information. I don’t believe anything has been announced as far as a name, though I’d assume there are some codenames at the very least that they use internally. According to their site, “Follica, Inc. is developing novel therapies for conditions and disorders of the hair follicle“.

To me, that indicates that they’re developing multiple products at once… and perhaps they won’t announce a name until one of the treatments progresses further than the rest. That’s pure speculation though!

Dear Dr,

From one of the last posts I saw about hair cloning it appears that there is a real possibility that it will never emmerge. You mentioned that the trials have been underwhelming and are not working how they were expected. Do you think that the compnaies invoved with developing hair cloning will wash their hands of it. Do you think we will ever see it working. Obviously, everyone is waiting for a genuine ‘cure’ for baldness and if it is not going to be hair cloning is there anything else on the horizon that might be it? Surely, we must be getting closer to that day and if so when do you think that day will be? Many thanks for your blog.

I think that hair cloning will be available at some point in the future, but certainly not in the immediate future. I feel like I’m the lone person willing to say that it is not ready for primetime yet (not even close), and I wonder why some people are just willing to believe every press release with a tiny nugget of information.

There are more promising options than just hair cloning alone such as stimulating the stem cells in the skin and epidermis, finding of compounds that are the missing link to hair growth (for example, some medication that might just grow back the follicular units that may be present throughout the bald head). While I think that any one solution is not at hand, the availability of multiple approaches just increases the odds that some solution will someday be at hand.

There are breakthroughs occurring at a rapid rate now on using stem cells to generate entire organs like the kidney, heart, and lungs. Hair is another such organ system that could benefit from such breakthroughs. I am optimistic that one of these breakthroughs will be evident in the next decade or so, but which one? Your guess is as good as mine.

Is hair cloning only limited to the top of the head or are they also working on cloning eyebrows? Hence they grow at the same length and density or are they soley working on head hair because it is of more concern to the majority of people?

When hair cloning is available, it will have a genetic clock that should dictate the hair cycle for each particular hair, hence its length. But saying much about something that is not here now and possibly won’t be available for 10+ years, would be foolish for me at this time. It would be like having a long discussion about flying cars and the speeds at which they travel.