follicept - what's this?

[Arashi]

If you guys can really deliver molecules into the skin without them going systematic then why choose some growth factor that nobody had success with? Why not choose a proven cure like finasteride? If people could use fin without sides, that would be a cure for most people.

[serenemoon]

If you guys can really deliver molecules into the skin without them going systematic then why choose some growth factor that nobody had success with? Why not choose a proven cure like finasteride? If people could use fin without sides, that would be a cure for most people.

Because their in vivo trials on mouse models whose hair loss gene was suppressed ended up being successful. Let them run the human trials. They said they will experiment with other compounds too if IGF-1 does not work. Finasteride topical will take at least 5 years of clinical trials, so let's see if they can give us something effective a bit faster. If not, on to the next one.

[follicept]

If you guys can really deliver molecules into the skin without them going systematic then why choose some growth factor that nobody had success with? Why not choose a proven cure like finasteride? If people could use fin without sides, that would be a cure for most people.

Possible in future. 5 year minimum to market. probably $50M in costs to tests and market. If you got it, we'll take it and start tomorrow.

[tom12345]

I think it has to do with the follicle cycles, and creating a positive feedback loop. From my (limited) understanding of what the science team tells me, the IGF-1 receptors are activated, and wake up neighboring ones, which could take time. I believe I copied a response to this on a much earlier post... Thanks!

Devon, I was unfortunate enough to lose hair kind of quickly and during a period of time where I indulged in ephedra for my workouts. I've found that on my scalp, there is hair that grows normally and has normal thickness and so forth. Like hair should be. However, the hair that's thinner on the scalp grows significantly slower. Since you mentioned in a video that you were losing hair, are you experiencing the same thing with certain hair growing normally and others very slow, so we can get an evaluation of how it affects "thin and slow-growing hairs"? I've also got to ask about the hairs in the three pictures on your webpage. Where and on what (i.e. non-human) are those hairs located? It shows hair growing and staying, but they look like vellous hairs without pigmentation (thus without cosmetic value.)

Appreciate your presence (and patience!) on here and look forward to your trials.

[Arashi]

Because their in vivo trials on mouse models whose hair loss gene was suppressed ended up being successful. Let them run the human trials. They said they will experiment with other compounds too if IGF-1 does not work. Finasteride topical will take at least 5 years of clinical trials, so let's see if they can give us something effective a bit faster. If not, on to the next one.

There are tons of effective cures for mice already. We can even get a hairless mouse all the hairs it needs via biogenerating hair follicles in the lab. Yet none of these cures translated to success in humans.

This company supposedly has the cure for hairloss (=fin without sides) yet they don't pursue it. What's Devon even doing on this forum while Merck surely would like to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for a license?

[Arashi]

Possible in future. 5 year minimum to market. probably $50M in costs to tests and market. If you got it, we'll take it and start tomorrow.

Lol just call Merck, tell them you have a vehicle for their finasteride that eliminates all sides, ask them 500 million usd and never look back. Seriously why not do that instead of trying to convince some baldies here of your product?

[tom12345]

There are tons of effective cures for mice already. We can even get a hairless mouse all the hairs it needs via biogenerating hair follicles in the lab. Yet none of these cures translated to success in humans.

This company supposedly has the cure for hairloss (=fin without sides) yet they don't pursue it. What's Devon even doing on this forum while Merck surely would like to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for a license?

Finasteride didn't do shit for me the two years I was on it. I lost hair 10 years ago, can't say I've lost more since, so there was nothing to halt, and it definitely didn't regrow anything. Regrowth is what I'm looking for.

[tf2legend]

If you guys can really deliver molecules into the skin without them going systematic then why choose some growth factor that nobody had success with? Why not choose a proven cure like finasteride? If people could use fin without sides, that would be a cure for most people.

Its obvious you haven't kept up with this thread.

[Swooping]

Injection has only been superior to this point because it was basically the only option. The whole value proposition of our company and technology is transporting large molecules across the skin without needles. So far we have done up to 22kDa.

Let's take the example of insulin (which as you know, we have delivered). Most people inject 20 or more units per day. They create a little reservoir of insulin in the skin/fat/muscle. There is variability from every injection. They get scars and nodules. If they hit a vein/capillary, they can go hypoglycemic, possibly even die from it. There is first pass metabolism of the liver, so much of what they inject never even gets used.

Our technology can deliver drug right to the venous/capillary plexus, which is more efficient, not painful at all, avoids first pass metabolism, eliminates biohazardous waste, and so much more.

You are confusing effectiveness and efficiency. Injection is very effective. It is not very efficient. We are the first to break the rule of 500 like this. Stay tuned. Follicept or not, we are in discussion with major pharma players.

Ho-oh, wait. I'm not talking about your delivery for insulin though. We are talking about intra dermal delivery here. That's a whole different level. We don't even want to to get IGF-1 the same route as insulin needs to go. We want IGF-1 to act on the micro and macro environment of the hair follicle, specifically at the base of the hair follicle right, the bulb? A miniaturized hair follicle lies around ~2.5mm depth a full healthy anagen hair follicle at ~4-4.5. Yes your delivery might have some merits against injections for instance in giving a "continuous" dosage of IGF-1 assuming that the binding kinetics ain't favorable for IGF-1. I didn't study the pharmacokinetics of IGF-1. So yes depending on the compound some delivery methods might be better than injections it depends. But then again you could repeatedly inject IGF-1 too as you mention, to cope with that problem. Furthermore I'm pretty sure you and your team know more in this respective field than me. So I don't want to act ignorant on this.

I think you heavily undermine the implications in Androgenetic Alopecia and hair follicle biology itself though. Thinking that IGF-1 can even come close to a compound like minoxidil is just extremely unlikely really even in the scenario of optimal delivery. It really is. I can say this cause in this field, yes I'm fully aware of every paper around of hair follicle biology & AGA. Estrogen for example the only compound known to cause reversal of AGA to full extent sometimes works on baffling many factors including IGF-1. Minoxidil exactly the same story as I mentioned.

Anyway there will be some scenarios likely and time will tell us what will happen. If you stay objective you will either release or not release the treatment depending on the results.If you then release it and it does work great, awesome I'll even kiss you. If you won't release it then fine too, nice try really.

However if you are going to work with bias like many people and companies have done in the past then you are going to release the treatment no matter what happens and that will lead to huge disappointment under people. That would be a bad thing.

Oh btw I'm surprised that you are discouraged by people like me. You should get powered by guys like me! Skepticism is healthy, I'm not going to dance around like a little kid who wants a candy. If you are going to run your trial now and you will be confident that it works good, I still won't be convinced. I'll be only convinced if independent people attest this. That's the ultimate proof.

[follicept]

Lol just call Merck, tell them you have a vehicle for their finasteride that eliminates all sides, ask them 500 million usd and never look back. Seriously why not do that instead of trying to convince some baldies here of your product?

Quite naive. Not the way the pharma world works. I wish (and we initially thought!) it would be that easy. Companies have structure, bureaucracy, corporate and strategic objectives, such that what seems obvious to us is just impossible for them. Soon enough, they'll all come knocking.

[Keki]

There are alredy working topical finasteride and to some people it gives sides anyway, it's not that simple

[follicept]

Devon, I was unfortunate enough to lose hair kind of quickly and during a period of time where I indulged in ephedra for my workouts. I've found that on my scalp, there is hair that grows normally and has normal thickness and so forth. Like hair should be. However, the hair that's thinner on the scalp grows significantly slower. Since you mentioned in a video that you were losing hair, are you experiencing the same thing with certain hair growing normally and others very slow, so we can get an evaluation of how it affects "thin and slow-growing hairs"? I've also got to ask about the hairs in the three pictures on your webpage. Where and on what (i.e. non-human) are those hairs located? It shows hair growing and staying, but they look like vellous hairs without pigmentation (thus without cosmetic value.)


Appreciate your presence (and patience!) on here and look forward to your trials.

I really haven't studied my hair that much. I know it's going, it bums me out a bit, I i deal with it. Hairless rat. These rats were genetically engineered to have a gene turned off for hair growth. Thus, the hair is white, wispy, spiraled. Not ideal for hair growth model, but ideal for transdermal so you don't have to fight around hair to get the formulation on the skin. To us at least, this is a bit more impressive. Other rats are bred to have very clear, dark, visible hair for testing like this. We'll know on humans soon.

[Arashi]

Finasteride didn't do shit for me the two years I was on it. I lost hair 10 years ago, can't say I've lost more since, so there was nothing to halt, and it definitely didn't regrow anything. Regrowth is what I'm looking for.

Finasteride and minoxidil are the only 2 proven meds in clinical trials. They grow hair and or reduce hairloss for lots of people. Yet the big and horrible sides keep many people from using them. If you have a product that can eliminate those sides you have made yourself hundreds of millions of dollars.

[Arashi]

There are alredy working topical finasteride and to some people it gives sides anyway, it's not that simple

But that's what follicept claims that they have a product that can deliver molecules without going systematic and thus no sides.

[serenemoon]

But that's what follicept claims that they have a product that can deliver molecules without going systematic and thus no sides.

It is not necessarily that the transdermal delivery system gives no sides. I am sure if they used a shit ton of compound you will start seeing some sides. It is that the amount of IGF-1 used/needed is sooo god damn low that chance of it going systemic is really low, and therefore, no chance of sides. Even if it goes systemic, the body won't even feel it. The beauty of the delivery system is that it gets IGF-1 through the skin (or certain other compounds), instead of having to inject large doses. It depends on the compound added to the transdermal delivery system and the dosage used. For Follicept, no sides is the expected case.